Read the forum code of contact
By: - 24th September 2008 at 17:08 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Great job!
Am I right in assuming, that this is the static from Hendon?
By: - 24th September 2008 at 17:13 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
For some reason the video won't load for me - anyone know when it's supposed to move back into Hendon? I'll be heading back down there sometime over Christmas/new year
By: - 24th September 2008 at 17:16 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Yes it is the Static one from Hendon. I think it mentions on the video something about next month possibly?
By: - 24th September 2008 at 17:34 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Looks good, can't wait to see her again.
Dave
By: - 24th September 2008 at 20:42 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Good to see the old girl is making progress, and is going to be as good as new when she departs for Hendon.
This aircraft has some sentimental value for me and my family. L5343 was in the first batch of Battles that made the crossing from the UK to the newly built airfield of Kaldadarnes on the south coast of Iceland. They arrived in loose formation over the airfield, and a young girl watched them come in to land absolutely terrified. She thought they were German machines sent to bomb the peaceful country side. That young girl is now my mother in law, and she lived about 3 km from the airfield. She also told me how she watched the last plane in the gaggle "fall from the sky" and crash short of the runway. It was left where it ended up standing on it´s nose and was used for target practice. The (used to be bent) prop blades of that machine where later dug out of the bog, and now adorn L5343.
My mother in law, though absolutely terrified of flying, got interested in aircraft as objects (and the handsome young men flying them!;) ) and that interest rubbed on to her daughter, who is now my wife!
There is a slight error in the commentary. The wreck of the aircraft was not blown apart. What they did, was to use what little fuel remained to dose the cockpit area, and then used a Very pistol to set it a light. Their hope was that the aircraft would be burnt to ashes. Fourtunately that didn´t happen, so with a donor center section from Canada, L5343 was whole again.
By: - 25th September 2008 at 07:05 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Hope they changed the rudder and cowling. Both were terribly wrong when she was at Hendon.
The rudder structure and design that it had then was that of the prototype, quite different from the production version.
RJC
By: - 25th September 2008 at 08:41 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
How big is the pilots cockpit for the aircraft?
When you think how small British aircraft cockpits normally are the Battle cockpit looks like something designed by..................well the Yanks if im honest.
The workmanship on the Battle looks stunning. Wonder what they will be sprinkling their magic dust over next.
By: - 25th September 2008 at 09:07 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Were there really only two parachutes, for three crew, on the Battle?
By: - 25th September 2008 at 09:32 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Were there really only two parachutes, for three crew, on the Battle?
Can't see why, or where that would come from. The bomb aimer was intended to be able to move to lie prone, so may have had a detachable rather than seat type.
Great to see the Medway guys work their magic - again!
This story of the prototype rudder and nose - can you elaborate / illustrate, airart?
By: - 25th September 2008 at 10:43 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Were there really only two parachutes, for three crew, on the Battle?
Possibly this thought was brought about by the fact (I think) that the Battle was only originally intended to have a crew of two??
I am currently reading "Strike Hard, Strike True" (Ralph Barker, 1963) and in the chapter "The Maastricht Bridges" P/O Davy's aircraft caught fire (after dropping their bombs) and Davy ordered Paterson (Gunner) and Mansell (Observer) to jump....
"Patterson was the first to go. He struck the tail fin and broke his ankle and wrist, but landed safely. Mansell followed and made a safe exit. The space of half a minute between their exit times meant the difference between five years in a POW camp for Patterson and escape behind the allied lines for Mansell." With the fire beginning to die down Davy managed to make a successful force-landing in a field near Amifontaine.
Roger Smith.
By: - 25th September 2008 at 12:36 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Possibly this thought was brought about by the fact (I think) that the Battle was only originally intended to have a crew of two??
Thanks, Roger. To be honest, I'm not sure when 'originally' would refer to, although I'm sure that you are right! Certainly I can't see that full kit, including a 'chute would be omitted when the concept was upgraded to three crew - and IIRC, the Battle was always a three seater in service, albeit occasionally used with just two aboard...
By: - 25th September 2008 at 13:28 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Fairey Battle restoration
I came across this link and thought it was too good not to share. Hat's off to MAPS for their excellent restoration of such a rare aircraft as the Battle!
I seem to remember a Battle being preserved in Scotland years ago, part of the Strathallan collection, is there any connection to this one?
Graham
By: - 25th September 2008 at 14:19 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I seem to remember a Battle being preserved in Scotland years ago, part of the Strathallan collection, is there any connection to this one?
No. That one went to Charles Church, and then, via Duxford, to Belgium, where they (Belgian Aviation Museum) are restoring it to complete & static.
By: - 25th September 2008 at 15:32 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Hello JDK,
See below: Prototype rudder at left, rudder as fitted when the Battle was at Hendon at centre, and production rudder frame at right. Note that the production rudder had a higher trim tab, count three frames from the bottom and not two. Cowling panels had the wrong shape. I'll try to find comparative views.
RJC
By: - 26th September 2008 at 10:54 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
This is the best I can do with the nose section. Even a glance will show that the cowling panels are very different. Note how curved the top cowling is on the Hendon Battle, and how flat is the bottom bath compared to the real thing. The top curve should start further forward as indicated with the red line. Again, like the rudder, the nose is closer to that of the prototype which was faired to match the spinner, rather than that of the production version.
P.S. the pic on the right has been flipped on purpose, for comparison with the that of the Hendon Battle.
RJC
By: - 26th September 2008 at 13:47 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Were there really only two parachutes, for three crew, on the Battle?
Yes.
I have been told that it would have been near impossible for the bomb aimer to get out with a parachute on and so they were not issued with one.
By: - 26th September 2008 at 15:01 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Yes.I have been told that it would have been near impossible for the bomb aimer to get out with a parachute on and so they were not issued with one.
The passage from the book I quote in my post above suggests they both exited the same way - from the Gunner's area. Not having been in a Battle is this feasible?
Roger Smith.
By: - 26th September 2008 at 15:11 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The passage from the book I quote in my post above suggests they both exited the same way - from the Gunner's area. Not having been in a Battle is this feasible?Roger Smith.
Hi Roger,
I have been in the Battle and I can tell you it would be tricky, and this is without the fuselage fuel tank that would normally be there.
Its not something I would like to try lets put it that way.
I'm not saying I'm right and I'm willing to be proved wrong, all I'm saying is that in my view it would be really difficult.
By: - 26th September 2008 at 17:58 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Yes.I have been told that it would have been near impossible for the bomb aimer to get out with a parachute on and so they were not issued with one.
Excellent pics on their website, but it looks like the nose cowling will
stay as it was.
Excellent workmanship though
Cheers
Cees
By: - 26th September 2008 at 18:02 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The passage from the book I quote in my post above suggests they both exited the same way - from the Gunner's area. Not having been in a Battle is this feasible?Roger Smith.
The Battle had a hatch in the floor specifically to allow the bomb aimer to bail out.
Best wishes
Steve P
Posts: 10,169
By: Peter - 24th September 2008 at 16:59
I came across this link and thought it was too good not to share. Hat's off to MAPS for their excellent restoration of such a rare aircraft as the Battle!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/7630410.stm