John B (Sc)

Yep, I agree that's fine if there is time and room to do all that. Might be possible in a Chipmunk or a Bulldog. In, say, a Stampe, there is not enough space available to get the chute out first - and I am fairly slim. The only way is to ditch the straps (both sets - the ones attached to the seat and the ones attached to the airframe) and push yourself out head first, as hard and fast as you can. Of course the really cool way to do it would be to roll inverted and push the stick forward to bunt yourself out, but that sort of implies a working aeroplane, and why leave that? I haven't had to bail out from anything yet, fortunately. though have come near it.

I seem to recall being told that some of the F2As had 'gold' coloured undercarriage legs and bays. That PX32 or whatever would explain it. John B

Actually, quite a few of the older aerobatic light aircraft are set up for seat type packs - Tiger Moth, Stampe and Jungmann aircraft typically had seats with deep buckets to allow for the parachute pack. As well as avoiding fore and aft squash, it makes emergency exit easier, since the pack will be last out, not tending to jam your exit. Like Antti K, I was taught to dive out head first and splay arms and legs if any delay in opening was likely. Look down. pull D handle and in theory hang onto to handle and ripcord for maximum boasting points ! The chutes typically have a spring loaded drogue chute which pops out first. dragging the rest of the canopy with it and the cords follow., They are generally stowed in horizontal zigzags on the back of the pack, held in by rubber bands, and as said by others they feed out to join into the risers which end up either side of your head. John B

Haha - my timing was bad, though perhaps just as well given the attractive force from that 1/32 Lancaster ! My lady would not have been impressed...

Just back from an excellent trip to the Scale Model Show at Perth. Like 'John' above I had a nice chat with the Sovereign Hobbies team - a family affair - and picked up some items I'd ordered. Had a look at Black Mike Models a couple of times but it was very busy so I didn't stay to yak. (Sorry Duncan) My wife and I did find John Adams (of Aeroclub fame) with his 'Stackton Tressle' aerodrome scene - I'm sure I've misspelt that - and had a superb post-Covid general catch up as well as finding out what has been added to the diorama. Have come back with books, kits, paints, fillers & glues enough to keep the modelling turning over slowly. The stash is still gaining on me, net, despite new ideas for builds and grouping ideas. Too many interests, too little time... John B

'Tis ever thus - all the best 'military secrets' get exposed quickly once used in action ! It certainly seems that rather more of Russia's kit is going AWOL for re-use or examination than they might have hoped!

That would be super, Alan, thanks = yes please ! I have two or three Heller Rapides tucked away - that would make a fine project.

Just for balance, my copy of SAM arrived as normal this month., so evidently the changed postal distribution process didn't affect everywhere. I agree - excellent issue & a nice tribute. John B

I have just finished reading 'Air Power Supremo', a biography of Sir John Slessor, Marshal of the Royal Air Force. Superb book, well worth reading. 'Jack' Slessor was a pilot during the First World War, became a senior commander during the second, including a spell I/C Coastal Command and finished his career as Chief of the Air Staff and is the man who pushed the 'V' force into existence. He was an impressive theorist and also an early advocate of air interdiction before and during WW2. Written by Willian Pike and published by Pen & Sword - in my view this one is highly recommended for anyone who has an interest in the RAF and the development of its strategies.

Thanks for that, wez. I was aware that the lower cannon fit was instead of the missile pack, yes. So no missiles in the four cannon version. If that potential four cannon fit remined an option throughout, then there would certainly be no need for the belly tank gun fit! (I thought the F2A lost the upper cannon, just as the F6 had, must chgeck my old sources! ) I was also told the F2As were overall rather better than the F6s. Must have been quite a beast. John B

KT, The F Mk 1A and F Mk 2 did have two 30 mm cannon, mounted in front of the cockpit, above the intake either side of the upper nose. The F Mk 3 did not have any cannon armament and that was felt to be a mistake. The early FMk 6s did not have 30mm cannon. This was missed, so a later modification produced the oddity of two cannon mounted in the front part of the ventral fuel tank - and unusual location to choose ! I think that the F Mk2s converted as F Mk 2As ( Mk 6 equivalents) did not at first have the belly cannon but were later retrofitted. It may have been these, used mostly in RAF Germany that pressed for the restoration of cannon, which made sense for the more direct QRA challenge & interception of doubtful aircraft as likely to be needed in West Germany. The early Lightning weapons options included a rocket pack in place of the missile fit and I seem to recall there being a lower twin 30mm cannon pack option, which could produce a 4 cannon Lightning. Whether that was ever used in service operation or was simply a manufacturer's option, I don't know/can't remember.No doubt someone on here will know! It was suggested, probably in a 'What-If', that all this implied that theoretically a six cannon Lightning could have been produced - two in upper nose, two in place of the missile pack, two in the belly tank. Now that would have been some firepower ! (Given the way the simultaneous firing of all 4 x 30mm Adens rattled the Hunter, I imagine the engineers & maintainers would not have liked that idea!)

Thanks lasermonkey, I hadn't seen that. Shall wait with ~patience

A question slightly off the main topic. I have been trying all day to get on to the Model Hobbies website. The site keeps telling me I need a password and refuses to accept the one I believe I've had for several years. Has anyone else had problems? Sp far, I have not had any adverse issues with Model Hobbies, so would very much like to be able to at least see their merchandise ! Thanks, John B

Interesting. Why was that Selwyn? Did the higher power of the Mk6's Avon mean more heat and hence more space needed between the jet pipe and rear fuselage fairing? (That's the only obvious thing I can think of.) John B

Thank you Michael (spaceranger) and Dave particularly for adding so much more information to my initial rather short & simple reply. Michael, that is a superb explanation of basic paint chemistry for modelling - always great to read the proper detail; I have notes somewhere from discussions with a paint chemist years ago - I think your synopsis means I don;'t need to keep hunting for them ! John B

There are several different formulations offered on that site. I'd stay well clear of the 2K paint, unless you have a full BA set up - and anyway we don't need that sort of durability, nor what I suspect is a fairly thick paint coat ! The 1K enamel might be acceptable, as would the cellulose, if you use an acrylic primer. Something like Hycote's white or grey acrylic primer used first, which adheres well on plastic and will act as a barrier to prevent reaction with cellulose, or with the carrier. I have sprayed cellulose direct onto plastic but it needs to be very light whiff coats or crazing and orange peel reactions can develop. I don't know anything about the 1K synthetic. If you are using any of these spray can products, please make sure you have plenty ventilation, and ideally wear a face mask as a minimum protection. John B

Thanks Muzz. It might well be quite a large contract at Nellis, which they'd be sorry to lose. Interesting.

I think it is their (Draken) name for the Aero Alca, flown as single seaters. An interesting (read slightly odd) choice, given that I think the USAF has just decided not to renew and that they shut down some previous work in the UK quite abruptly, according to some ex-staff. Whether they were unsatisfactory in some way or the USAF has another supplier or process available I don't know. It may be the USAF wants higher capability than the Draken kit allowed. I recall reading that another contract they have is/was in jeopardy, in which case this contract will be even more important to them. Presumably this is supposed to replace 100 Sqn and provide service for both RAF and Navy. Great shame - I believe we are now scraping the barrel in terms of numbers and retained expertise. Previously in-house capabilities replaced by commercial contractors. Can they operate to the levels the services themselves produced? Are they allowed to? - civil ops being held to different standards. Hmm. Discuss !

I agree Moggy that the 'noise' is often what makes a forum topic interesting. For me there is still benefit in both online and magazine information, I use both. My preference for a magazine build article is one which describes both the good and bad in a kit. Ideally it should mention any oddities. oversights or errors in the kit moulding and instructions and suggest how the author dealt with those. Some WIP shots to add interest to completion photos are good. I find simple stick part A to part B efforts tedious; I can read the instructions myself. Nor do I care for interminable yap about which shade of this or that proprietary paint was used. I'd rather hear more about what the writer thinks shows the model kit in its most realistic manner - often worn or faded schemes are appropriate, How to do those can be intriguing. I also like to read of a writer's occasional mistakes - and see some less than perfect models. It heartens me = I'm not the only idiot out there ! Done with humour it can be entertaining.

I believe Bulgaria only has around a dozen Mig29s operational, so adding 8 F-16s will make a big difference. The two seaters are operationally capable as well as providing training aren't they?

I tend to agree 'wafu' - I thought that listing pathetic and actually the whole 'list' notion stupid. Why a Wessex, not only of the wrong mark but the wrong service. What about Humphrey, there are plenty easily available photographs of that machine. Missing out the battlefield helicopters & the Chinook was sadly typical, as was overemphasizing the Vulcan sorties. (Yes, they helped, mostly psychologically). In terms of value and sheer guts, the low level sorties by the unarmed Nimrods off the Argentinian coast checking for Argentinian ships surely deserves more credit. It's all been kept very quiet still, bit I suspect at times they were actively searching, which made it much more dangerous for possible interception. (Mind you, re-reading the Sea Harrier saga really annoys me even after all this time. The premature withdrawal from service of one of the most effective fighters (and the last all British fighter) followed so soon by the light blue mafia betrayal of the entire Harrier operation was an appalling waste. Grrr !)

The Ka6cr used to be a popular machine, though the slightly later Ka6e was higher performance. Nice wooden sailplanes, becoming rare to see now because some of the older Schleicher machines have had glue problems recently. Various types of glues were used at different times, so test have had to be done to ensure integrity. The costs of those, especially costs of post investigation restoration, have increased the retirement rate. Pity, because they are very pleasant handling aircraft, a delight to soar in. I like the colour scheme though seeing an unattended machine with its canopy open makes me twitch - a gust of wind and that canopy could easily be damaged. A fine looking Glasflugel 304 in the earlier picture. I have a share in a Glasflugel Mosquito, which is nice, though my real favourite was the Glasflugel Libelle my wife and I shared. Flew beautifully, could rig & be ready to fly in around five minutes from arriving at the airfield, handled well and although a 15 metre span she always looked to me like a model of the real thing. I did once check to see if competition number 172 was available - guess why! The DG808 has the benefit of being a self launcher I think, which means if conditions stop being soarable it can return without a field landing & raod retrieve - very handy ! Karl - I flew quite a lot of hours on Bocians, mostly instructing in wave which was great fun, also of course some thermal and ridge work. We had a Bocian1e from new in 1972 I think, though I also some flew 1d variants. Most of them have been withdrawn from use by now sadly. dovs comment amused me - and I agree, aerobatics are interesting & good experience for handling and for confidence building; when the Bocians were new they were rated fully aerobatic in Europe (though I think 'officially' semi-aerobatic in the UK). We had a lot of fun with that. Sigh - those photos are very evocative Paul - thanks - , since Pawnees and Grob 109B time also appears in my logbook. Roll on the better weather... John B

Nice pictures Paul. Like Kari, I have time at both ends of the rope, some in the same type of machines as you show there. I think Kari is right, that looks to be a 180HP Super Cub, which would explain the impressive climb rate on tow with a K21. Personally I preferred the 150HP Super Cub for handling, but the 180HP is good for pulling heavy sailplanes. Yes, that 'head up display' of the yaw string is a vital assist for accurate turning ! Enjoy your gliding. It fits well with modelling, especially radio control flying, and with sailing or wind surfing - there are 'cross overs' between all these sports. The Revell 1/32 ASK-21 is a very nice model, as is the Revell 1/32 Super Cub, which comes in several variants incidentally. (Kari, you say still snow on the ground. Where are you - one of the Baltic countries perhaps? We had snow on the ground briefly here in Northern Scotland last week, but all melted away now.) John B

Superb shots, thanks. What air force was the low wing turboprop from please - a Pilatus perhaps ?

Something of a nightmare to mask ! Having just finished a kit in the Condor current scheme, this amused me. Immediately, my work is out of date !