Philbky

Hmm, lets see, it's currently 22.30 local (04.30 BST) here in Houston on April 27. Yesterday I (age 65) and my wife (60) got up in the west of Ireland at 04.00. We drove 75 miles to Shannon and then had to sit on an A320 for an hour before take off due to slot restrictions at Heathrow. We had a 15 minute hold over Woodley before landing. Booked on the 14.35 to Houston, we got on on board time and then had to sit for 65 minutes on the gate before push back due to slot restrictions. A 10 hr 5 minute sector followed. Having cleared customs, I picked up a car, drove 45 minutes to my daughter's and, after a chat and a snack went to bed at 23.30 local (05.30 BST) 25 hours 30 minutes from getting up. I slept until 06.30 local and got up when my excited 3 year old grandson came into the bedroom. Am I tired - a bit, I've been entertaining a 3 year old and a 1 year old most of the day, as well as shopping. Am I jet lagged -no. The crew on the flight were great and decided to let individuals leave their blinds up or down. I certainly didn't stare at the sun for ten hours, neither does anyone else with sense. We are talking here about access to natural daylight during waking, daylight hours. .The brightness of the sun obviously modulates depending on its position in the sky and the position of the aircraft relative to the sun which will change. As for the screens, I watched 2 films, the moving map and a couple of "shorts". Sitting on the right hand side of a BA 777, the four hours plus to Newfoundland had the sun on the left hand side, the 5 hours plus from Newfoundland onwards had the sun on the right, moving along the aircraft as it declined in the sky until sunset about the time we touched down, by which time it had been around 20 degrees to the right of the nose over Alabama, Louisiana and Texas. I certainly didn't have a problem watching the screen. Codeshares do increase long haul transfers, but the bulk of transfers are still from short and medium haul. 40 years ago was 1972. The DC8-62 and the B707-320 were flying from Europe to the US west coast non stop in around 11-12 hours and had been since around 1968. The 747 was being introduced on the same routes as the 200 srs came on stream. The trans-Siberian and "Silk Rd" routes to Japan and routes to Australia were obviously not non-stop but most pax were on board for the duration, often not allowed to disembark at the en-route stops. In the light of this debate I had a chat with the Purser who said closing the blinds is always a difficult question. Generally she let people make up their own minds but she said some crews just want peace and quiet and close the cabin down as soon as they can. Numbers flying has little to do with the debate. Those of us who were flying long haul during the last 40 years for business or pleasure (and working for cheapskate companies and now being retired I've generally flown economy) have seen a remarkable change in the numbers flying but also in the way people behave on board probably leading to crews wanting to keep people quiet. Sorry, but that's a silly comment.

Given the regular timings for Delhi t/f at LHR to a USA destination, there is even more reason for the pax to stay awake on the transatlantic sector. With a late evening/early hours departure ex Delhi the time to sleep is on the sector to London at a time when the pax would normally sleep, spending the transfer time and daylight hours awake. On arrival in the US they can then have an evening meal, go to bed at bedtime local time and get up next morning in tune with their surroundings. To be fit upon arrival you need to be totally in tune with the time at the destination. I've been far more tired after an LHR - Rio 12 hour with the blinds closed for most of the trip,with 7 hours or so daylight available and a 2 or 4 hour time difference, depending on season, than after an LHR- LAX 11 hour with daylight all the way and an 8 hour difference. As for transfer pax, most are transfer from short/medium sectors to long haul rather than long haul to long haul.

Whilst the views can be stunning, far more important is is the amount of daylight let into the cabin and the effect on circadian rhythms. For instance, travelling westbound across the Atlantic, there is less chance of jet lag (which should already be less than on an eastbound sector) if passengers are exposed to the daylight for the whole journey and work with the clock by staying up until normal bedtime on the local time on arrival. The circadian rhythm adjusts far better and quicker that way then the seemingly recent fad for darkening ship as soon as possible and people sleeping for most of the trip. When films were projected from the aisle on narrow bodies then the blinds needed to be down for the film, modern seat back screens are far better at coping with all but the brightest sun. There were always some people who closed their blinds and slept but I can't quite put my finger on when the era of the day time long haul flying dormitory was ushered in - certainly with most airlines during the last 10 or 12 years. For the previous 40 years I can't remember a single daytime long haul trip when the blinds were closed by the crew without a by your leave.

That looks like it's just come out of Park Royal's works.

A vast improvement on the current fades quickly effort. Let's hope they use a decent gloss finish.

Problem with that is that some of FR's sectors are so short the gas would only just have taken effect before the antidote would have to be applied. No doubt MOL would be only too happy to charge £50 per sector for gas masks for those who wanted to remain conscious and would sign a good behaviour pledge - with an "administration fee", of course.

I'm going to have a great weekend. Fly to Stansted Saturday, RIAT on Sunday, Trade Day at Farnborough on Monday, LHR Tuesday and fly back home from Stansted Tuesday night. The best way possible in these islands of celebrating a 65th birthday.

Not missing the point at all. A video screen is a selective view, does not have the same impact on the viewer as a real world view and is not in the control of the viewer. Last year coming back over night from the USA I watched a fantastic light show off the eastern seaboard of the USA for over 400 miles caused by an electrical storm with CBs up to 40,000 feet around 100 miles off our track. I was right down the back and my blind being up didn't disturb anyone. It was one of the most spectacular displays I've seen outside of the Far East. No doubt had the aircraft been devoid of windows the crew would have turned off any outside display "for passenger comfort" and anyway aircraft that are fitted with cameras have them facing forward and slightly down, so I would have missed everything.

Many military transports have few or no windows yet are designed to carry, in some cases, hundreds of troops. The C135, C141, Il76 come to mind, not to mention the C130. I've spoken to some members of various armed forces who have found such aircraft claustrophobic whilst others haven't taken too much notice (perhaps being too focussed on the job in hand). I've been up the back in a C5 where there is a 90 seat windowless passenger compartment in what is the most turbulence affected part of the airframe and wouldn't care to travel very far in it. The RAF, on the other hand, have - C130s apart - kept windows even when converting aircraft from airliners. As for rearward facing seats, when BEA and later BA had the Trident 3 in service they had rearward facing seats at the front of the cabin backing onto the bulkhead and I always tried to get one as they were comfortable, had more leg room and there was little difference, as far as I was concerned, in flying backwards.

Why put windows in passenger aircraft? Firstly spatial orientation and circadian rhythms are important, particularly on long haul flights. I'm about to head off on a 10 hour trip from LHR to IAH and I resent crews who think the best way of dealing with pax on a long haul flight is to serve the meal, darken the cabin, even at midday in the height of summer, and head to the galley to read newspapers and gossip. I'm afraid as a fare paying passenger they get short shrift from me. Another reason for having windows is, if you have a window seat, some of the cloudscapes can be amazing, cities at night from altitude are one of the wonders of the modern world, seeing the vastness of the Amazon jungle, the mountains of Eastern Turkey or the Sahara from the air should be on everyone's bucket list. On this trip I'm looking forward to seeing icebergs - as I regularly do at this time of year and even the road and river systems of the USA can be fascinating to see, even though I've flown over most of the US many times. Boeing, by putting in bigger windows on the 787, obviously realise there is more to windows than just annoying the design and structural engineers.

The truth was that the HP guys didn't do what the Dutch did. Because the HP3 was very much a conventional aircraft the sales effort was much less aggressive than that conducted by Fokker who had to sell both a new aircraft and a new engine in what, to them, was a marketplace they had not been in since the 1930s. Furthermore, there seems to have been an attitude at HP that the Herald was a Reading (i.e. Miles) machine and the company's main effort was concentrated on the Victor.

The first HP3 Herald to fly with Leonides engines was not a one off. Two prototypes were built and flew with Leonides engines, G-AODE on August 25 1955, G-AODE on August 3 1956. Both were converted to HP7 Dart Herald 100 standard with RR Dart engines. G-AODE suffered a catastrophic engine failure of its starboard Dart engine which caused a fire which burned through the wing August 30, 1958 en route to display at the Farnborough airshow. Flown by H G Hazelden DFC, a member of the inaugural class at the Empire Test Pilots' School, the aircraft with 8 passengers, including Hazelden's wife, crash landed in a field - all survived without injury due to Hazelden's "exceptional skill and airmanship". The belly landing in a small field was achieved despite the intense fire burning through the wing, the field being surrounded by 80ft trees, having to fly under power lines and the field being obstructed by a large farm roller. As an 11 year old at the time the story of this accident, in a particularly bad year for British aviation accidents, struck me as being the sort of tale W E Johns might have put together for Biggles. Subsequently the second prototype was re-registered G-ARTC in 1961.

Some more: TEAL (the forerunner of Air New Zealand): Terrifying Electra Approach and Landing. This refers to a strange training procedure where their Electras were positioned over the runway threshold at 140 knots and the power cut. The aircraft would then drop straight down and a dead stick landing would be made. After a total hull loss in 1965 (thankfully with no fatalities or even serious injury) this rather odd procedure was dropped from the training schedule. ACES (Colombia): A Crash Every Season AVIANCA: Always Very Interesting Amounts of Narcotics Aboard SATA (Azores): Service Across The Atlantic ATI: Aviates To Italy ALIA (forerunner of Royal Jordanian) A Little Interesting Airline

The classic airline acronym list from the 1960s/70s/80s when Roger Bacon in Flight magazine got the genre going and others carried it on. Note: These are from the time and may offend some of the PC brigade and some airlines won't be known to the younger generation and some of the European airlines may be unknown to US readers! SABENA: Such A Bloody Experience Never Again QANTAS: Queer Australians Never Travel Alone Sonny SAHSA: Stay At Home Stay Alive ALITALIA: Always Late In Take Off Always Late in Arrival BOAC: Better On A Camel BEA: Back Every Afternoon BKS: Bulganin Kruschev and Stalin SAS: Sexually Attractive Stewardesses TWA: Tin Winged Aircraft TAROM: Tatty Ancient Russian Obsolete Machinery CSA: Communists Socialists and Atheists LOT: Luggage on Tarmac UTA: Unknown Territories Abroad SAA: Spreading Apartheid Around MEA: Might Even Arrive VASP: Viscounts And Scandias Preferred TABSO: Travel Abroad Banned Sod Off TAA: Travelling Across Australia UAT: Unknown African Territories TAI: Tahiti and Indo-China Garuda: Good Airline Run Under Dutch Administration Aeroflot: Aerial Electronic Reconnaissance Over Foreign Lands Or Territories PSA: Passionately Sexy Attendants TAE: Terrifying Aerial Experience TAT: Says it all! LTU: Lanzarote, Tenerife Usually TIA: Troops in Aircraft SAUDIA: Sheiks And Unidentified Desert Inhabitants Airborne LIAT: Lost Independence After Takeover (by Court Line) PSA: Pink, Smiley Airline JAT: Jets Amuse Tito ARCA: Ancient Relics Carrying Armaments TAP: Terror above Portugal PIA: Prohibits Inflight Alcohol LACSA: Lost Above Central South America Some more modern ones: TAM: Total Airbus Monopoly (then someone spoiled it by buying second hand 767s!) DHL: Decidedly Horrendous Livery Air VIA: Always I Recommend Varna, It's Amazing bmi: Bishop's Magnificent Investment UPS: Underdeveloped Passenger Service Etihad: Even Tevez Is Happy at Dubai. ARIANA: After Russia Invaded America Next Attacked GOL: Got Off Late

Sometime around 50 years or so ago I paid 2/6d for this kit. I left it unpainted except for the exhaust which I couldn't get to look like an exhaust should and, by the standards of the time, was otherwise reasonably satisfied with the result ,a result which today would probably be deemed poor - which leads me to my only crit of an otherwise brilliant piece of work by Nobby: In the photos the exhausts seem to have a pinkish caste and to be reflecting too much light - or is that a problem of the camera used and the flash?

So, is that a model of the instrument trainer or are you waiting for Micro Mesh to be invented?

The NFII version of Tamiya's 1/48th offering is reasonably easy to build, though some of the undercarriage cross rigging struts are slightly fragile and the canopy in my box was slightly distorted at the bottom all around the edge. The problem with modelling the breed in its original form comes when trying to replicate the Special Night Black, an appalling concoction which was supposed to be as non reflective as the inside of a camera but rubbed off in the air, on engineers' and crews' hands and overalls, was susceptible to watermarking and, as we will see, was not particularly non reflective. The aircraft were very secret, because of their radar, so photos are few and far between and are only in black and white. Photos of the aircraft I've modelled do exist on the Net prior to squadron markings being applied but they are black and white with poor contrast so no idea of the shading, chalking and water marking that were regularly reported in service can be determined. Given all the effort to make up, apply and keep up the concoction, it seems odd that the fuselage roundels and fin flashes contained so much white and yellow and were not fully matte - neither were the wing roundels. Apart from the visibility, handling and wear problems, the surface finish was, to say the least, rough. de Havilland claimed a 20 mph loss of airspeed over a normally painted Mosquito, although Air Ministry tests showed only a 3 mph loss. The paint, which was applied over semi matte black, would ruck up along leading edges and be blasted off in the airflow, taking the undercoat with it, revealing patches of light grey primer, this also occurring between fixed and moving surfaces. After a short time the whole sorry mess came to an end and semi matte black was applied to the lower surfaces, standard grey and green camouflage replacing it on the upper surfaces. To replicate the Special Night Black I used Vajello Model Colour Black as thick as the airbrush would allow me to spray it. I then sprayed a coating of Galleria Acrylic Matte Varnish in irregular patterns. When thoroughly dry I washed the airframe with Tamiya Weathering Master Burnt Red let down with tap water, applied roughly with a wide soft brush. This was followed with a white chalk wash applied with a stiff brush and, when dry, all was wiped down with a moist paper towel in the direction of the airflow. A final overall even coat of the matte varnish was then sprayed on. The Tamiya decals were originally applied but the roundels and letters didn't take kindly to the surface on which, after so much prep, I didn't want to Klear coat. I sent to Hannants for the sheet from Decals Carpena - and later wished I hadn't. The serial number looks to come as one decal but each digit is a single decal and that isn't apparent until the digits separate in the water. The Tamiya decals didn't slide on the finish and broke up, even with lashings of Microset. The Carpena decals broke up in the water. Each of the code letters detached from the backing paper in bits after only seconds in the water. At least they were happy to slide on the Microset so eventually I was able to reassemble them - though I know the RS on the port side are slightly askew. The roundels were little better so it was with trepidation that I applied Microsol to get the decals around the strake on the starboard fuselage. Once that was over I applied nylon fishing line for the aerials and then got the camera out. Table Top Shot #1 with flash Table Top Shot #2 with flash Table Top Shot #3 with flash Table Top Shot #4 with flash Table Top Shot #5 with flash Natural Daylight Shot #1 Natural Daylight Shot #2 Natural Daylight Shot #3 Natural Daylight Shot #4 Natural Daylight Shot #5 Fuel Tank Detail I then tried to replicate how the aircraft would show up in darkness when hit by a searchlight or a phosphorous flare - in this case the camera flash. Obviously I can't guarantee the accuracy of the black but it's amazing how the decals stand out and they are supposed to be accurate!

Both AeroMexico and Mexicana had the -15 in their fleets. A complete list of DC10 operators up to date to January 2012 and pretty much accurate is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_McDon...DC-10_operators

The DC10-20 was not built. It was a development for Northwest Orient and was further developed into the DC10-40 which is easily visually identified by its over large centre engine intake to take the fan of the Pratt and Whitney JT9D - the engines on the wing are also a different shape. There are literally dozens of DC10-30 schemes. Some of the second and third user schemes - especially freighters from Africa and South America are particularly attractive. Do a trawl on airliners .net or any of the other airline photo sites.

Typical of how, in my experience, the Virgin Group and the airline in particular cares about people. As a Dad who watched his daughter in and out of hospital for painful surgery throughout her teens - though thankfully for something non life threatening - I hope whatever Molly's problems are she thoroughly enjoyed her day and is able to keep smiling as in the photo of her on the steps.

I'm not an expert but I wonder if the picture is of a test aircraft at Westland's and the rockets are weighted dummies. Also note how the props are tied together

Looking closely at your pics - and I don't have a model to look at "in the flesh" - the plate is represented over the opening windows by the fact that the depth is reduced and the radius at the top corners is gone. If you look at the original LT plan here http://www.flickr.com/photos/23875695@N06/4198441242/ you will see the windows are all the same shape and size and the plates have not been drawn in situ but the photos here http://www.aecsouthall.co.uk/rainham/rmf1254_1.htm and here http://www.pbase.com/chrismdigital99/image/51446037 clearly show the plates in place, how they stand slightly away from the window, the reduction of the radius and the visible window. I guess that the plates could not be moulded and finding a simple method of fixing the plates which would have worked for all buyers of the kit would have been difficult. BTW the plates were standard on all LT Routemasters but not the Northern General machines which had sliding openers.

The wind down windows on all LT Routemasters are no smaller in depth than the fixed windows. If you look closely at pictures you will see that there is a plate riveted over the top edge of each wind down window. This is a draught excluder to allow the window to be wound down an inch to ventilate the vehicle without blasting in air or rain. The plates are visible on the model.