John Aero

The ancient Frog Proctor Mk. IV/V, is as a stand alone Mk ,not a bad kit in terms of outline shape. However having a totally different fuselage and other parts it cannot easily be transformed in any way into any of the other Gull series as Moa has already mentioned. Somewhere in the archives I have put chapter and verse ( as I see it) on the Gulls, Vegas and early Proctors. I will sit back and enjoy, Moa's fiddling. John

Of course there'll be no flies in the pantry.. They'll all be in the toilet!! John

Superb job as usual Moa. It's actually a favourite of mine and I once did a three view drawing based solely on photos and known dimensions of, such as engine parts and wheels. Later I found a drawing in a 1929 copy of Flight and I was surprised how close I'd got to the shape. I never liked the look of the Pearson ailerons. John

Re Izal, In many an RAF toilet could be found the legend "Airmen are reminded, that it is an offence to use the smooth side of the paper". It being for the exclusive use of Officers. John Modelling Par excellence, Moa

This model was before we supplied some metal parts to Gordon. Now the two props and the Jupiter engine were in my range but they're not my castings as the metal has a dull, high lead content. The other parts we certainly didn't make, but I bet I know who did cast them... John

The stable mate to the Gamecock was the 1:48th Avro Tutor which was a Vacform with metal parts and another speed build hence the overall brush painted Humbrol Yellow. Here it is some 34 years later, untouched but with the exception it's now temporarily on a base. I didn't make this base, as it and the figure were done by my friend Alan Simpson who sent it to me, to spur me into modelling for myself when I retired. The result was my Gipsy Moth diorama in the Classic forum. I now have a mammoth undertaking under way, The Stackton Tressell Aerodrome Project, of which more anon. John

Glen, Yes it should have the undercarriage legs and tail skid. I'll see if there is a possibility of any parts lurking around.. John

Like many others I had a paper delivery round. When I became an art student I had a Saturday bakers round, The baker could never work out why we were always down on French fancies, (that icing was delicious) I then cycled into Nottingham to spend my earnings in the model shops, then on to Tollerton aerodrome or RCAF Langar, plane spotting with my mate Derek Bailey. I then applied for the RAF and as I was only 17, I had to wait six months until I could join at 17 years and six months. in February 1960. However my man's service would only officially start six months later, when I became 18. So the extra six months was added onto the end of my service for my pension.. Talk about Catch 22. It was 22 years and six months! However, to fill in time after leaving Art School, a near neighbor, Johnnie Helgers, who was the stage carpenter at the Nottingham Playhouse took me on as his assistant. So every day we drove into Nottingham in Johnnies bright Red Heinkel Bubble car. It had no reverse gear so we parked in a tiny slot by lifting each end sideways in turn. I thought that 'John' had a strange accent and I then learned his name was Hans and he had been a Me 109.E pilot in Libya, until he was shot down by a Hurricane and captured. he finally came to a camp in England where in 1946 he met his English wife and settled here. Johnnie told me that their main opponents were Gladiators, but a Hurricane kill was the dream prize and the first Hurricane he saw was the one that shot him down, Another story from John was when they were on a POW ship in Alexandria harbor a lone Stuka appeared over the city and all the POW's started to cheer, until the Captain came on the Tannoy with, "Sorry chaps but we borrowed that one" The POW's were shipped via Suez to South Africa then to South America, America then Canada and finally to Wollaton Park in England. So I can truthfully say I have traveled in a Heinkel with a Messerschmitt pilot. John

Assuming that the chassis is a straight 15 cwt van type then the wheels will be the 17" type so using this information, the Morris wheel base will be 7' 6". I printed out the photo to have 34 mm wheels and measuring from the photo the wheel base is near 160 mm. so dividing 160 by 34 gives us a ratio of close to 4.7. so 17" times 4,7 gives us 79.9" which allowing for small errors give us a close wheel base to the Morris chassis of 7' 6" so it's very likely the vehicle was a Morris. The wheel base of the Airflow would be much longer. Again by ratio the height of the bodywork is around 54" which is the standard Morris car height. The illusion of a much bigger vehicle is done by the quite narrower than standard windows. The position and angle of the steering wheel is very odd. John

Dave, I too have seen the comment about the Morris. the vehicle is definitely a Chrysler Airflow. Imperial had a few of them with special body work. It's much higher and longer that a 15cwt Morris van which is a Morris 8 hp chassis. I think that someone got confused with a Morris Series E Van. which has got some flowing lines. I always though it a little odd to park a "modern" streamlined car together with a built in Headwind John

Dave, I too have read the comment about the Morris. I've always understood the vehicle to have been a special bodied Chrysler Imperial Airflow. It's much higher than a 15cwt Morris van which is a Morris 8 hp chassis. I was thinking that someone got confused with a Morris Series E Van. which has got some flowing lines but it didn't come in until around 1936 The Morris chassis used 17" wheels so I'll see if I can do a ratio check on the cars wheelbase.. I always though it a little odd to park a "modern" streamlined car together with a built in Headwind John

The servo tabs on the Overstrand and Scylla are of the normally acting type in that they act in opposition to the rudder, so that it assists in pushing over the rudder and so reduces the load. Most later ones would be built into the rudder trailing edge. The HP 42 type are unusual in that they are acting to assist the rudder over from the front. As I see the action, the Tab/airfoil is hinged on it's trailing edge by the upper strut/rod and the lower edge bearing on the tail plane. The middle strut/rod, of which one end is connected to a bellcrank on the rudder, which projects forward of both the rudder and Tab/airfoil pivot points. The other end connects to the tab/airfoil near to it's leading edge, so that as the rudder moves over it deflects the Tab/airfoil in the same plane, thus relieving some of the rudder load. I agree with Aeronaut in that the top tail plane appears to have variable incidence whilst the lower one is fixed. John

https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1CHBF_en-GBGB776GB777&q=Chrysler+Airflow+with+Imperial+Airways&tbm=isch&source=univ&safe=active&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjKo9y9rbfhAhWSQxUIHcORC7cQsAR6BAgIEAE&biw=1920&bih=969#imgdii=Wi2DeeosvnKMCM:&imgrc=EPiv1XFmzcICiM: John

The Post vehicle is actually a Chrysler Airflow. The outer"rudders" are acting as aerodynamic counterbalances as they are acting forwards of the Rudder hinge line. So as the rudder turns they ad add pressure forwards of the hinge line and therefore reduce pressure on the rudder bar, ala a servo tab. John

Although there has been a lot questions and answers on these Percival subjects of the Dora Wings Vega and Proctor thread on Rumormonger I've recently been asked privately by friends to clarify a few build points for these kits. The wing landing lights on Vega's: Many of the earlier Vega's did not have these fitted as they were probably extras and so not specified. Beryl Markham's Vega did not have them fitted, but both the Green and White and the Red and White Henshaw Vega's did have them fitted, As did the 1936 Kings cup winner. The Vega Gull III's with the rounded screens did have the landing lights. Vega's did not have the external under wing oil cooler as on the Proctors and there is a fairing piece on the sprues. I believe that some Proctor 1's did not initially have the oil cooler either. John