melvyn hiscock

I still have a large pile of Aeroplane Monthly and Flypasts that are going to the tip unless someone wants them. They are near Portsmouth and would need collecting or I can meet you somewhere (I am at Dunsfold this weekend) Issue one, in both cases, lots of 1970s issues from Aeroplane and some complete years. lots of complete years of Flypast and a lot of more recent ones. I need these gone so..... I would put a photo up but dn't know how post-photobucket Melv

One XIX is in deep maintenance, the other is on a 50 hour check as I understand. The problem is being investigated to see if it is likely to be occurring across all Merlins

One thing that is becoming apparent is that some of the crowd distances quoted as unnecessary by airshow goers are not imposed by the CAA. Display lines. although sometimes realigned, are not a lot further out but pilots are displaying further away. I have been at shows where the organisers have been trying to get pilots to come in further towards the line. Whether this is fear of being red carded I (which is done by the show organiser, not the CAA) or because they are practicing less is unclear. Even if they do come closer and too close to the line, that is not an immediate red card, but they would be told and asked to move out a little. As for Old Sarum, there were a lot of discussions and the CAA were being very helpful. There was a clear problem at the 2015 display as the numbers of people freeloading on adjacent hills were a big problem. Although the Vulcan cancelled, we were told it would not attend if there were significant people on the hills. Therefore, even without the mechanical failure, it would have not been there. There was a will to make this happen with the CAA but there were other factors that came in that made it impossible for the show to go on and they had nothing to do with roads, the CAA, freeloaders or display lines. I was at Newcastle Co Down last weekend. We had several acts that were too far out, one in particular. All were briefed to come in and use the shape of the bay, not the jet line. We also had a CAA visit and were thoroughy and fairly inspected. The discussions after were fortright and helpful and the points raised were easy to deal with and all very sensible. It is a different world than it was three years ago but it is not as onerous as some are suggesting. There were problems that needed addressing and there were some knee jerks, but in the main they are being dealt with. So far in my experience the MAA were being far more of a problem than the CAA. One more point, most of the people that attend airshows are not enthusiasts but the general public who are interested, and whose one mainly pays for it all. There are enthusiasts attending but we now see a lot more 'professional' (sic) photographers that appear to demand closer access and are, in the main, the people complaining about display lines being too far out. This is a development of the last few years. Going back ten years or so photographers used film and 200mm lenses. They now want to photograph the nose hairs of the pilot, the only thing you need to ask is if this is necessary and whether the organisers are responsible for facilliitating this, and whether the critiicism of the CAA is just coming from a select few Ask yourself when was the last time you just watched an aeroplane for the enjoyment of it. It is actualy a lot more fun than some people seem to think!

Interesting to see the top catapult picture. I think that one is at Leuchars but there was another at Gosport. The Grotsport one was a cordite catapult and they used to operate a Swordfish ro two and Sea Hurricane as part of the catapult training flight. In the morning of the first day, the first trainee pilot would stand in the rear cockpit of the Swordfish looking over the pilot's shoulders and hanging on for dear life (probably literally). He would watch and then they would land, the Swordfish would be cfraned back onto the cat and the trainee would have his go. He would be watched by the second in the course and he byt the third person and so on. It does make you wonder about the problems of accelerated mistakes, a rubbish piece of info passed on early in the course could get worse! They would then stop for lunch and in the afternoon there would be a Hurricane on the cat for the 'Advanced' course. This time, of course, there was no hanging on and watching, it was in at the deep end. Did I say 'on the first day? Ah, there wasn't a second......

On a slighlty oblique tack... Robert Smith Barry. He saved hundreds of lives by inventing the system of flying training that is stil the basis of what is used today. Every fighter pilot since about mid 1917 owes a large part to RSB

You should try making the real thing!

Your comments about the fingerprint on the canopy made me laugh. When I was restoring the Rearwin Cloudster I used to joke that it was going to have a big gluey fingerprint on the canopy like to many Airfix models I had made!

ffs

There is some dubious opinions posted there sometimes.

I have a quantity of Airfix magazines going back to about 1969. They are not in great condition with missing covers, but the inners are pretty much all there and there is some great (old) stuff in there. Free to a good home. If you want them sent it will be at cost which would be under a tenner Or, you could collect them from sunny Stubbington, near Fareham, close to Lee on Solent and where it is always 1974. PM me of you want them and we can arrange collection. I also have a LOT of Aeroplane Monthy and Flypast for disposal too, this is on a separate thread. Melvyn Hiscock

Perhaps, but it is about as good as you are likely to get. Paul wrote some of the first 'proper' articles on the DR1 in the Airfix Magazine in 1969. I have known him for about thirty years and he is a good researcher and genuinely a DR1 expert. Personally I would listen to him before some of the other experts. Just my opinion. If you only by One DR1 book, it should be this one.

I picked up my copy of Paul Leaman's overwhelmingly excellent book on the Dr1 today from my summer palace. The V4/V5 is more complicated than would first appear. The V4 was originally ordered as a biplane but was re specified as a triplane. (work no 1661) Originally destined to be demonstrated to the Austro Hungarian forces as a biplane Powered by a 120hp Le Rhone when converted to the triplane is had no interplane struts V5 Work No 1697 120hp Le Rhone, first true triplane. Modified through its life. Interplane struts and, originally, longer span wings. Curved leading edge to tailplane and square balanced elevators. Rebuilt as first true triplane with shorter span wings. This was numbered F1 101/17 and used in static load and flight tests Work numbers 1729 and 1730 were also known as V5 and were F1 102/17 and F1 103/17 This is an excellent book and well worth reading

Sgt, I gave you one job and...........

I wondered if you saw the pictures of the original parts. I am over there in a few weeks and will ask some questions. We may well have photos of things that have not been published. We do get access to some great stuff!

Sadly the link that I put up didn't like to the Voisin page on the Memorial Flight page but the index. There are photos on there, and photos of the original before restoration, that show brown and green paint.