By: Bob
- 10th May 2012 at 23:34Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
He was going to taxi it back to base?
New
By: Anonymous
- 10th May 2012 at 23:34Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
2 + 2 = 187...
Looks like a classic case of a journo on the Metro picking up the story from elsewhere in various sources where it is already in the public domain and re-writing it - but getting the story very firmly wrapped around his neck in the process.
(Just for the record, and in case my "quote" at the end of that piece might give this impression, I have never spoken to anyone from the Metro or anyone writing for them!)
By: TonyT
- 10th May 2012 at 23:42Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I knew it couldn't of been you Andy, cause you only said it once, all of the TV programmes you have been on of late you repeat it over and over, so they can pad the show out.. ;):o:p
Tried to fix the engine, Lol! Of course there s the slight issue of the gear no longer being on it, the prop also no longer being on it...... Oh and the slight fact he ended up there because he had ran out of motion lotion.
By: LCskibird
- 10th May 2012 at 23:47Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
LCskibird
have you found any of the small airframe plates on the aircraft. Or at least a Model H-87/P-40E-1/P-40M etc
That way we may have a chance to ID your aircraft
Buz
No data tags included by the recovers in Russia, it is a short tail so presuming it could be an -E....there are not many large pieces as most of the sheetmetal is unusable.
John
By: ozjag
- 10th May 2012 at 23:58Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I loved this comment on the daily mail article the most,
"When he knew the aircraft wasn't gpoing to make it to an airfield, he must still have been a few thousand feet up; so he could see a lot of desert, and probably some villages / oases. At 2,000 feet up you can see for some 60 miles. Wonder why he doidn't try and glide his machine to within a few miles of one of these locations, so he could have walked to safety - Batman, Newport, Shropshire, 10/5/2012 17:27"
So all we need to do to find the pilot is wander over to the nearest oasis and pry him away from his harem where he has been living in luxury for the last 70 years... What a laugh.
By: battle
- 11th May 2012 at 02:50Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
P40 ID
Hi all , just a quick question , on the P40s there is a data plate on each main u/c leg which carries the a/c serial no. and same on the tail wheel oleo strut , i can confirm this as these parts i have had in the past have carried the a/c serial no. stamped on them .
I had the tail wheel oleo strut from A29 113 that now sits the the Aust. War Memorial , the strut had the USAAF serial stamped into it , i recovered it and other parts from its first post war owner who purchased the P40 from RAAF Laverton as scrap.
Would this A/C carry these data plates or was it a direct purchase before lend lease , if it were a direct purchase would these plates at least carry a construction number or a RAF serial?
As the tail wheel is extended should be easy to check.
By: ozjag
- 11th May 2012 at 03:09Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Hi Walshlee
In regards to the latest version of events that day I feel it a little hard to believe that Sheppard took off 30 min later and followed Copping in the wrong direction, why?, even if he was travelling twice as fast (say 150 and 300 mph?) it would still take 30 min to overtake Copping and Sheppards plane was damaged too, you would need to know a very accurate bearing to follow to catch up to someone at this distance - even 1 degree out would put you a long way apart at that range, just seems dodgy to me but I wasn't there so anything could have happened.
Your account also contains the phrase "I recall...." who is it that recalls this incident, can you let us know if it was a pilot, ground crew etc and their name.
By: H-87A-2CU
- 11th May 2012 at 03:30Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
No data tags included by the recovers in Russia, it is a short tail so presuming it could be an -E....there are not many large pieces as most of the sheetmetal is unusable.
John
John
If a Short tail then you have the choice of three models, being P-40E-1CU, P-40E-CU or P-40K-1CU.
Is there any other details on the wreck that may help, i.e engine type, Paint scheme (not the Russian, but anything that may be underneath), or anything else that may narrow the model down. Right at this point in time I am leaning towards a P-40K-1CU model, but if you have any additional data from the above questions it would be helpful.
By: shepsair
- 11th May 2012 at 09:22Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
P40
Hi Ozjag,
I would also be interested in knowing more about this from Walshlee.
I can add...
1) Copping was flying this aircraft the night before and nearly put the landing gear through the wings on landing. Landing into the sun and late evening he may have had problems seeing the strip and nearly crashed this a/c. Hence the locked to u/c the next day.
2) Copping left the next day without Sheppard and headed south of the LG with his gear locked down as the AMEs had done so in order to fly the a/c. I recall Sheppard leaving 30 mins later and caught up to Copping. He flew along side him on both the starboard and port sides trying to contact via R/T and hand signals, the flew in front and dropped his gear. Copping didn't follow Sheppard to the east and continued flying in a S/SW direction. Hence the aircraft being were it is, nearly due south of the LG.
The published events don't and may never reveal what really happened and they may not even appear in his RAF records. Remember Hanbury was killed a while after this accident over the English Channel. Only his surviving family have access to these accounts (if they appear) and are held in the AHB.
I have not heard that the hard landing before - is this in the squadron records? Will check Saturday when I look at 260Sqn, Wing and 53RSU records.
Nothing is mentioned in the Hanbury log book about the Copping/Sheppard flight on 28th.
I am checking with author's who have been in contact with the Hanbury family previously to see if there is any other records in relation to the above statement.
AHB are looking at there archive to see if they have anything from Hanbury as well as they were mentioned.
The son of Hanbury lives close so I will have to try and arrange to pop in and see him.
Walshlee, can you confirm this is from a letter, diary, publication etc?
By: currawong
- 11th May 2012 at 10:52Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The heavy landing is backed up in the account I have.
Not necessarily definitive but has proven fairly accurate so far.
It also states S/Ldr Hanbury was lost in the Bay of Biscay, in transit. Seems the aircraft he was a passenger in was intercepted by a Ju-88. This did not become known untill after the war ended and German records became available.
By: SimonDav
- 11th May 2012 at 10:55Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The heavy landing is backed up in the account I have.
Not necessarily definitive but has proven fairly accurate so far.
It also states S/Ldr Hanbury was lost in the Bay of Biscay, in transit. Seems the aircraft he was a passenger in was intercepted by a Ju-88. This did not become known untill after the war ended and German records became available.
it wasn't the same DC3 that Leslie Howard was shot down over the Bay of Biscay in by a Ju-88 was it?
By: DaveF68
- 11th May 2012 at 10:58Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
2 + 2 = 187...
Looks like a classic case of a journo on the Metro picking up the story from elsewhere in various sources where it is already in the public domain and re-writing it - but getting the story very firmly wrapped around his neck in the process.
(Just for the record, and in case my "quote" at the end of that piece might give this impression, I have never spoken to anyone from the Metro or anyone writing for them!)
Metro's news stuff is supplied on contract basis (e.g. in SCotland, it's provided by the Daily Record/Mirror Group)
By: LCskibird
- 11th May 2012 at 11:34Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
John
If a Short tail then you have the choice of three models, being P-40E-1CU, P-40E-CU or P-40K-1CU.
Is there any other details on the wreck that may help, i.e engine type, Paint scheme (not the Russian, but anything that may be underneath), or anything else that may narrow the model down. Right at this point in time I am leaning towards a P-40K-1CU model, but if you have any additional data from the above questions it would be helpful.
Buz
I do have a few photos of bits of the wreck, however I am careful to post them as some parts of the wreck are still forthcoming and I am careful to divulge too much until it is secured. Especially given whats happened to the Egypt HSB. I could say more in direct emails. Having said that, all the difficult to find parts are included, full set of landing and tail gear. full engine mount(one good truss). Many castings and forgings. flight controls and/or parts. My builder believes what isn't included this, can easily be or has been reproduced. He also believes it to be an -E model or a -K. The visible paint is almost certainly early RAF with a hand painted red star point still visible.
Cheers
John
New
By: Anonymous
- 11th May 2012 at 11:37Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
We are told that the RAFM are "on the case" (or, possibly, are dealing with this at the highest diplomatic level) and that is all well and good. However, and whilst the RAFM's reticence to hitherto talk about the case very openly is understandable,the fact of the matter is that the story is now out there and widely in the public domain.
Since we know that RAFM watch the forum, and are doubtless monitoring this thread, then might one ask when the RAFM propose to issue any kind of meaningful statement about what plans they might have? Clearly, issues relating to the pilot and any input by AHB/JCCC must be paramount, although as the days and hours slip by, so the security of this site, the aircraft and, potentially a missing pilot, slip away too. We are now at a stage (and have been for a while!) where the hours count - let alone days.
Surely we are at the point where all might be lost unless there is something pro-active done. Certainly, the difficulties are monumental on every level and that is understood. Those difficulties will also shortly be compounded by the searing and unworkable heat of the comings. However, is there a credible plan to effect any localised search for the pilot and to seek the recovery of the P40 from the desert?
Surely, it is not an unreasonable question to ask at this stage?
Posts: 3,566
By: Bob - 10th May 2012 at 23:34 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
He was going to taxi it back to base?
By: Anonymous - 10th May 2012 at 23:34 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
2 + 2 = 187...
Looks like a classic case of a journo on the Metro picking up the story from elsewhere in various sources where it is already in the public domain and re-writing it - but getting the story very firmly wrapped around his neck in the process.
(Just for the record, and in case my "quote" at the end of that piece might give this impression, I have never spoken to anyone from the Metro or anyone writing for them!)
Posts: 442
By: Dobbins - 10th May 2012 at 23:39 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Speaking of taxiing, someone on another forum mentioned State of Division...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sstU7qvLw7Q
Posts: 2,766
By: spitfireman - 10th May 2012 at 23:42 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Where on earth did they come up with that?:rolleyes:
Posts: 8,983
By: TonyT - 10th May 2012 at 23:42 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I knew it couldn't of been you Andy, cause you only said it once, all of the TV programmes you have been on of late you repeat it over and over, so they can pad the show out.. ;):o:p
Tried to fix the engine, Lol! Of course there s the slight issue of the gear no longer being on it, the prop also no longer being on it...... Oh and the slight fact he ended up there because he had ran out of motion lotion.
Posts: 4
By: LCskibird - 10th May 2012 at 23:47 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
No data tags included by the recovers in Russia, it is a short tail so presuming it could be an -E....there are not many large pieces as most of the sheetmetal is unusable.
John
Posts: 8,983
By: TonyT - 10th May 2012 at 23:50 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Would be suprised if some of the removable panels do not have the aircraft number on it.
Posts: 282
By: shepsair - 10th May 2012 at 23:51 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
P40
Before long it is going to be "Kittyhawk found at Apollo landing site"
.....and these guys (and gals) get paid to write this stuff.
Never put your name to anything Andy!! :D
Some of the comments on Daily Mail made me laugh as well, as well as picking up on front undercarriage. Will have to remember that one.
Mark
Posts: 832
By: ozjag - 10th May 2012 at 23:58 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I loved this comment on the daily mail article the most,
"When he knew the aircraft wasn't gpoing to make it to an airfield, he must still have been a few thousand feet up; so he could see a lot of desert, and probably some villages / oases. At 2,000 feet up you can see for some 60 miles. Wonder why he doidn't try and glide his machine to within a few miles of one of these locations, so he could have walked to safety - Batman, Newport, Shropshire, 10/5/2012 17:27"
So all we need to do to find the pilot is wander over to the nearest oasis and pry him away from his harem where he has been living in luxury for the last 70 years... What a laugh.
Paul
Posts: 318
By: battle - 11th May 2012 at 02:50 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
P40 ID
Hi all , just a quick question , on the P40s there is a data plate on each main u/c leg which carries the a/c serial no. and same on the tail wheel oleo strut , i can confirm this as these parts i have had in the past have carried the a/c serial no. stamped on them .
I had the tail wheel oleo strut from A29 113 that now sits the the Aust. War Memorial , the strut had the USAAF serial stamped into it , i recovered it and other parts from its first post war owner who purchased the P40 from RAAF Laverton as scrap.
Would this A/C carry these data plates or was it a direct purchase before lend lease , if it were a direct purchase would these plates at least carry a construction number or a RAF serial?
As the tail wheel is extended should be easy to check.
cheers dave
Posts: 832
By: ozjag - 11th May 2012 at 03:09 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Hi Walshlee
In regards to the latest version of events that day I feel it a little hard to believe that Sheppard took off 30 min later and followed Copping in the wrong direction, why?, even if he was travelling twice as fast (say 150 and 300 mph?) it would still take 30 min to overtake Copping and Sheppards plane was damaged too, you would need to know a very accurate bearing to follow to catch up to someone at this distance - even 1 degree out would put you a long way apart at that range, just seems dodgy to me but I wasn't there so anything could have happened.
Your account also contains the phrase "I recall...." who is it that recalls this incident, can you let us know if it was a pilot, ground crew etc and their name.
Regards
Paul
Posts: 17
By: H-87A-2CU - 11th May 2012 at 03:30 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
John
If a Short tail then you have the choice of three models, being P-40E-1CU, P-40E-CU or P-40K-1CU.
Is there any other details on the wreck that may help, i.e engine type, Paint scheme (not the Russian, but anything that may be underneath), or anything else that may narrow the model down. Right at this point in time I am leaning towards a P-40K-1CU model, but if you have any additional data from the above questions it would be helpful.
Buz
Posts: 282
By: shepsair - 11th May 2012 at 09:22 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
P40
Hi Ozjag,
I would also be interested in knowing more about this from Walshlee.
I can add...
1) Copping was flying this aircraft the night before and nearly put the landing gear through the wings on landing. Landing into the sun and late evening he may have had problems seeing the strip and nearly crashed this a/c. Hence the locked to u/c the next day.
2) Copping left the next day without Sheppard and headed south of the LG with his gear locked down as the AMEs had done so in order to fly the a/c. I recall Sheppard leaving 30 mins later and caught up to Copping. He flew along side him on both the starboard and port sides trying to contact via R/T and hand signals, the flew in front and dropped his gear. Copping didn't follow Sheppard to the east and continued flying in a S/SW direction. Hence the aircraft being were it is, nearly due south of the LG.
The published events don't and may never reveal what really happened and they may not even appear in his RAF records. Remember Hanbury was killed a while after this accident over the English Channel. Only his surviving family have access to these accounts (if they appear) and are held in the AHB.
I have not heard that the hard landing before - is this in the squadron records? Will check Saturday when I look at 260Sqn, Wing and 53RSU records.
Nothing is mentioned in the Hanbury log book about the Copping/Sheppard flight on 28th.
I am checking with author's who have been in contact with the Hanbury family previously to see if there is any other records in relation to the above statement.
AHB are looking at there archive to see if they have anything from Hanbury as well as they were mentioned.
The son of Hanbury lives close so I will have to try and arrange to pop in and see him.
Walshlee, can you confirm this is from a letter, diary, publication etc?
regards
Mark
Posts: 37
By: currawong - 11th May 2012 at 10:52 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The heavy landing is backed up in the account I have.
Not necessarily definitive but has proven fairly accurate so far.
It also states S/Ldr Hanbury was lost in the Bay of Biscay, in transit. Seems the aircraft he was a passenger in was intercepted by a Ju-88. This did not become known untill after the war ended and German records became available.
Posts: 151
By: SimonDav - 11th May 2012 at 10:55 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
it wasn't the same DC3 that Leslie Howard was shot down over the Bay of Biscay in by a Ju-88 was it?
Posts: 1,777
By: DaveF68 - 11th May 2012 at 10:58 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Metro's news stuff is supplied on contract basis (e.g. in SCotland, it's provided by the Daily Record/Mirror Group)
Posts: 37
By: currawong - 11th May 2012 at 11:00 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Not according to this. It was a Hudson piloted by a G/Capt Yaxley.
All the pax were experienced and ranking personnel, quite a severe loss.
Posts: 4
By: LCskibird - 11th May 2012 at 11:34 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I do have a few photos of bits of the wreck, however I am careful to post them as some parts of the wreck are still forthcoming and I am careful to divulge too much until it is secured. Especially given whats happened to the Egypt HSB. I could say more in direct emails. Having said that, all the difficult to find parts are included, full set of landing and tail gear. full engine mount(one good truss). Many castings and forgings. flight controls and/or parts. My builder believes what isn't included this, can easily be or has been reproduced. He also believes it to be an -E model or a -K. The visible paint is almost certainly early RAF with a hand painted red star point still visible.
Cheers
John
By: Anonymous - 11th May 2012 at 11:37 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
We are told that the RAFM are "on the case" (or, possibly, are dealing with this at the highest diplomatic level) and that is all well and good. However, and whilst the RAFM's reticence to hitherto talk about the case very openly is understandable,the fact of the matter is that the story is now out there and widely in the public domain.
Since we know that RAFM watch the forum, and are doubtless monitoring this thread, then might one ask when the RAFM propose to issue any kind of meaningful statement about what plans they might have? Clearly, issues relating to the pilot and any input by AHB/JCCC must be paramount, although as the days and hours slip by, so the security of this site, the aircraft and, potentially a missing pilot, slip away too. We are now at a stage (and have been for a while!) where the hours count - let alone days.
Surely we are at the point where all might be lost unless there is something pro-active done. Certainly, the difficulties are monumental on every level and that is understood. Those difficulties will also shortly be compounded by the searing and unworkable heat of the comings. However, is there a credible plan to effect any localised search for the pilot and to seek the recovery of the P40 from the desert?
Surely, it is not an unreasonable question to ask at this stage?
Posts: 3,566
By: Bob - 11th May 2012 at 11:49 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Dig out the KD and pith helmets, some camel riding experience preferred - aircraft guards required by the RAFM....