PDA

View Full Version : Gaining An R.A.F Pilots Brevet In WW II


Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 [30] 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52

Union Jack
25th Jul 2015, 10:19
I have nothing to contribute to the VV debate.....

.....other than to mention that the name Vengeance is perpetuated in today's nuclear deterrent in the form of HMS VENGEANCE, the Royal Navy's fourth VANGUARD Class submarine.:ok:

Jack

Fareastdriver
25th Jul 2015, 15:09
I was not going to have much free time. I was taking the IREX, the difficult one first and the second, the ATPL Air Law was the day before my return flight to Hong Kong so I wanted to make sure I passed. I only took one day free and that was to drive around Freemantle.

The IREX was the bogeyman of all the exams. Apparently the pass mark had been lowered to 70% because so many kept failing it. It was a mixture of everything; technical, meteorological, procedures and aviation law. I was fairly confident owing to my personal training and it was rewarded with an above average pass mark.

Australian air law is full of whys, wherefores and not withstandings. The flight and duty limitations I never understood. One of my questions was on how long three captains could fly a 757 with the availability of a ‘resting chair’. However with a bit of luck and intelligent guessing, I passed. Off to the licensing office and put in my application.

I should have laid one on that night having achieved a fairly difficult operation but I didn’t, I was too relieved.

The next day I was back in China and the day after that I was doing my Australian Proficiency and Instrument Test.

We used B-7958. I don’t think the Chinese company knew what it was actually being used for. They were told it was just a base check. I was just an ordinary private citizen and we were using, for my benefit, a helicopter which would have cost about US3,000/hr. One could ague that I was probably going to work for them so I would have to do it anyway. There was one slight hiccup. When the forms went through CASA queried the fact that we had used a Chinese registered aircraft. They thought, quite reasonably, that it should have been done in an Australian registered example. However, that was glossed over on the basis that there wasn’t one handy at the time.

Then came the wait for the actual licence; anywhere between a fortnight and a month. I was living in company accommodation so it wasn’t too expensive. After three weeks I had been away from home for two months so I flew back to the UK. The day after I arrived I had a phone to say it had arrived in Shekou. It took a week for CAAC to process the endorsement and then I was airborne again in China.

I was back on contract with the British company. My CAA licence was invalid owing to my age so the G registered aircraft were out of bounds. I was now in a position where I was paid as a pilot by a major British aviation company but I was not allowed to fly their aeroplanes.

Even stranger things were going to happen………………….

Danny42C
25th Jul 2015, 23:58
FED,

Another winner !

"Even stranger things were going to happen…………………. " This is powerfully reminiscent of the war years, when we constantly heard: "That was Yesterday - it's all been Changed !"

As I said a long time ago, if the White Rabbit had come bounding into the Mess, no one would have turned a hair (and he'd have been in the curry that night !). :ok:

Danny.

BEagle
26th Jul 2015, 06:52
"That was Yesterday - it's all been Changed !"

Or, in later years, "Zorbin!".

Blacksheep
27th Jul 2015, 12:21
The CASA reps were fantastic; helpful, informative and full of encouragement. Jeezus! What century did this happen in? :confused:

Fareastdriver
28th Jul 2015, 08:29
It must have been my irresistible charm and personality.




Keeps it on the front page.

FantomZorbin
28th Jul 2015, 10:31
Centaurus


Met. briefing at RAF Wyton: Weather Guesser strode to the lectern, acknowledged the Stn Cdr and said ...
"I see 51 Sqn are here so the weather must be OK!" ... and promptly b******d off to a great cheer from 39, 100 and 360 sqn personnel!!

Danny42C
29th Jul 2015, 19:01
Union Jack (your #7250),

".....other than to mention that the name Vengeance is perpetuated in today's nuclear deterrent in the form of HMS VENGEANCE, the Royal Navy's fourth VANGUARD Class submarine".

Well at least ours was ASTUTE enough to avoid belly-landings !

Cheers, Danny.

Fareastdriver
29th Jul 2015, 20:20
Thing progressed in the normal way. Even as a contract pilot I was rostered on an eight weeks on and four weeks off rota. Come November came another bombshell.

As I had mentioned before, the Chinese Aviation procedures and practices were starting to get in line with Western standards. We had, for decades, flown Chinese registered aircraft on an endorsement to our CAA/CASA licences. CAAC now decided that something else would be brought in line with everywhere else. An endorsement was only valid for six months, after that a pilot had to have a Chinese national licence.

We had six months to get a licence. What about me? On to CAAC again. The answer was simple; pass the exams and the medical and you will get a licence.

It wasn’t only me who had to get a licence, there were five others. None of had a clue what to do and nor did our Chinese pilots because all their exams were in Chinese so they could not help us with the special exams in English for expats. The first thing was the medical. Two parts: The first part in a hospital where they checked the entire body including five blood samples for everything including Aids. A full body Xray and Echograms for all the soft tissue. Resting ECG followed by a stress ECG on a treadmill. The last was easy, the Australians did that too.

We went to Guangzhou for the second part of the medical with the CAAC doctors. Our company doctor came with us and managed to get through a pack of cigarettes on the two hour drive there, a pack whilst we were there and a pack on the way back. There are special CAAC hospitals scattered around China. These are for aviation people and do everything that a normal hospital does purely for aviation employees. We were there on Wannabees Day, gorgeous young u/t hostesses desperately practicing their English on us. One of them had a problem with too low a blood pressure; my suggestion that I should take her into a dark room for fifteen minutes was not taken up.

I went into the eye test. I had never done an eye test IMC in cigarette smoke. Both of the doctors operating the random pointing machine were going full blast. The ENT test room was even worse; they didn’t need to ask you to cough. You have to remember then I was on about 40/day so you can imagine what it was like. However we all passed and on return about two kilometres from the heliport we peeled of to a restaurant for a company funded dinner.

Shortly after this I went back the UK for Christmas. Come January when I expected to return I was advised that I was not needed until the Typhoon Season in April. I was then asked to confirm whether I was still available. When I replied in the affirmative they offered me a slot in the Solomon Islands.

Solomon Islands??????? I thought I knew about the oil industry but Solomon Islands? I was filled in on the details. I was going there on the RAMSI contract so I looked up RAMSI.

In 2003 the Solomon Islands was heading for anarchy so at the request of the Governor General Australian and New Zealand forces effectively invaded the country. They then took over the police and most of the senior civil service. The operation was supported by other countries in the South Pacific and so it was called Regional Assistance Mission to Solomon Islands.

I flew Singapore Airlines to Singapore; night stop, then to Brisbane and Air Vanuatu to Honiara. Another chapter had begun.

Danny42C
29th Jul 2015, 20:55
FED,

We reckoned that war was complicated, but that lot leaves me breathless ! I thought the RAF medical services were pretty good at b#gg#ring you about, but this tops everything. Perhaps it would have been better to learn Mandarin, take Chinese nationality and have done with it !

Btw, did they still have the old blowing-up 40mm of mercury for 60 secs form of torture ? (that used to sort out the 40-a-day chaps !)

So now you're going out among the headhunters. We look forward to your continuing saga. Best of British luck !

Danny.

Fareastdriver
29th Jul 2015, 21:06
I had been with the headhunters in Borneo in 1966. The flying to come was similar to flying over the jungle of Borneo.

Union Jack
29th Jul 2015, 21:39
Well at least ours was ASTUTE enough to avoid belly-landings! - Danny

Goodness gracious how AUDACIOUS! Looks like the ARTFUL Danny has set up an AMBUSH.....:D

Jack

Danny42C
29th Jul 2015, 22:35
cornish-stormrider,

Ju87 or Corsair ? Recognition Feature: the Ju87 has a fixed u/c !

*******

Lyneham Lad and Nutloose,

Lovely pics ! The "Buried Spitfires in Burma" seem to have been fictional, but I can tell you where to find 24-odd Corsairs, brand new, CKD in their crates.

About 30 miles off the Malabar coast at approx 11 degrees N. Lat, they are on the seabed where (as deck cargo) they were bulldozed off an RN escort carrier which was taking them out to Ceylon. (Perhaps the Navy could look up the ship's log [I don't know its name] and find the exact position, do you think, Union Jack ?)

VJ day (15.8.45.) came while they were in transit; as Lend-Lease supplies they had to be dumped as neither the USN or RN wanted them any more. They'll be a bit rusty now, 70 years on.

Should be on the Continental Shelf: all you need is a trawler and a lot of time and dosh.

********

Jack,

But Danny's not casting any ASPERSIONS !

Danny

Union Jack
30th Jul 2015, 00:12
But Danny's not casting any ASPERSIONS! - Danny

Casting NASTURTIUMS? Of course not - I'm just sorry I couldn't work the planned names of AGAMEMNON, ANSON, and AJAX into my earlier post....:sad:

Jack

Fareastdriver
31st Jul 2015, 20:15
I had seen the film ‘South Pacific’. I had also been to Fiji so I had no illusions about lying under palm trees by a golden beach being fanned by nubile dusky maidens in grass skirts. The road to the hotel was as I expected, lines of shelters with makeshift counters displaying various vegetables for sale being fumigated by the smoke from battered minibuses plying their trade. It got better as we approached the hotel with the residential properties either built on stilts or walls so as to keep the living area at first floor level. The hotel was run by Taiwanese Chinese, as were most of the businesses in Honiara. Fairly basic, the rooms had painted breeze block walls and a small balcony overlooking Ironbottom Sound where fairly large ships of the US and Australian Navy had been sent to the bottom by Japanese warships.

Honiara is in the island of Guadalcanal. The battle of Guadalcanal was where the Japanese were finally stopped and forced back during the Pacific war. It was all about an airfield that got the name Henderson Field, latterly Honiara International. The famous watchtower was still there as were the traces of 16 in. shell holes dug by the Japanese bombardments. Still sitting forlornly in the middle of the Honiara River estuary was a Japanese tank that was stopped half way across.

The operation itself was in support of the Australian and Kiwi police that were running law and order. There were new police stations built in various parts of the islands and they had to be supported much in the way that would be expected in a military operation,; ie, being supplied with food fuel and staff changeovers. The other task was SAR cover for the entire nation that was spread over hundreds of square miles. For this the aircraft had to be able to reach any point and return without refuelling. This was enabled by sponson tanks and a 300 litres crashproof tank in the cabin which gave it a 300 mile radius of action. In addition there was a winch, a night sun searchlight and the ability to carry 4,500 kilos under slung. One of the first things I had to do was précis my considerable winching and load carrying experience and send it off to Canberra so that they could add those qualifications to my licence. There were two other Bell 212s belonging to a different company which used to look after the police stations in Guadalcanal itself. We were tasked by a civilian company that was contracted by the various governments to organise transportation for the whole RAMSI project.

Something new for me was GPS approaches. We had GPS for navigation but with a GPS approach there was slightly different equipment.

When one wished to carry out a GPS approach one would select the approach from the route library. The GPS would then check the there were at least four satellites in view during the whole approach and fifteen minutes after. On the final approach the beam bar sensitivity would be increased by a factor of four so that full scale was down to .25 of a mile. There were advisory heights being given to you but as the aircraft was not fitted with a three axis autopilot the Decision Height was as for a non precision approach. There was on airstrip in Malaita where the pattern was in a lagoon with 4,500 ft. hills on the shore. As you flew the crosswind pattern of the leg the top half of the radar would be red with ground returns until you got the command to turn on to the finals heading,

Honiara itself had one effective shopping street. The clothing stores were just a mass of clothing on hangers arranged in some sort of potential wearer’s sex and age. They were again run by Chinese and had a strange system of stock procurement. They would buy bales of clothing, by weight, from Taiwan. When the bale arrived it would be sorted into different items and then placed on the rails. One of the staff would be in a chair almost at ceiling level to ensure that any items were not nicked. Everything was incredibly cheap; a T shirt was about 10p, so there was this continuous rugby scrum until the stock was exhausted. The next day they would start again. There was one civilised coffee shop which was crammed with expats most of the day.

The longest regular trip we did was to Rennel Island. This was about 135 nm. south of Honiara. It had a few roads and an airstrip where the police camp was. They had a huge appetite for diesel and we used to take four of five drums there every week. Because there was no aviation fuel there we had to have round trip fuel plus all their rations and suchlike. This made us quite heavy; in fact, heavier than I had ever flown one before. The normal maximum weight in offshore service was 18,960 lbs. (8600 kg). For this trip we would depart at 20,000 lbs (9100 kg) which was still below its maximum USL weight of 9,200 kg but it was +30 degrees outside. Four or five drums would be in a net on the end of an eighty foot strop so that you could lose an engine up to pulling the load off the ground and still recover. After that I can still remember my brief to the co-pilot.

“If we lose a engine before 45 knots we bin the load and land straight ahead. If we lose the load after 45 knots but before 70 we bin it and fly off. If we lose it after 70 knots we fly over the sea and then we bin it.”

We would hover with about 97-98 % input torque which gave little power to go anywhere. However, talking nicely to the aircraft would persuade it to go in the right direction and once you got decent airspeed you were off. You then had to start a climb to 7,000 ft. get over the mountains to the south of the airfield. A clean aircraft would cruise at 125 knots at 7,000; with this lot hanging on underneath it could only manage 70 knots. Nature would sense which valley you were aiming to go through and would immediately block it with a cumulus cloud. There would than follow this game resembling enormous conkers where you were weaving between clouds and the mountain tops finding a way through. This is where my experience in Borneo paid off; in spades.

Once over the top one could descend to 1,000 ft. and get about 90 knots or so, so it was autopilot in, feet up and have a fag…………………………..

ancientaviator62
1st Aug 2015, 07:48
http://i100.photobucket.com/albums/m19/ancientaviator62/WW2WRECKAGE_zps936adc82.jpg (http://s100.photobucket.com/user/ancientaviator62/media/WW2WRECKAGE_zps936adc82.jpg.html)

Went to Honiara several times when I was on 48 at Changi. Lots of WW2 debris visible then like the pic above.

Danny42C
3rd Aug 2015, 15:17
Seeing that this our "Brevet" Thread is about to slip into the Slough of Despond (Page 2, Military Aviation), I give all and sundry due warning that a New Star is about to burst upon the firmament - Danny is about to open a New Thread. (Advt.)

As the subject matter is of very limited appeal, I expect it to sink quickly into the obscurity it deserves, but it gives me an opportunity to "get it off my chest", and air this bee I have in my bonnet.

Stand by one ! (Rome wasn't built in a day),

Danny42C.

Keeffro
3rd Aug 2015, 16:47
The possibility that this most wonderful thread might slip onto Page 2 has stirred me out of the lurkerdom to which I have most properly confined myself as an earth-bound former part-time cavalryman, from a militarily neutral nation to boot.

Even if the prospect of *cough* unearthing another Danny of comparable narrative skills is slight, there must be two further sources of memories to nudge the thread back towards something approaching its original course.

One is veterans who may lack the computer skills (and/or lifelong learner determination to master them in their 90s) that would enable them to post here in their own name, but whose anecdotes could be written down and posted here on their behalf by some stripling in his 60s or less.

The second is stories told by veterans who are sadly no longer with us, but which are remembered by their families and/or friends.

I have a couple of such anecdotes to share, having heard them at first hand when the person in question was still alive. I'll post them here shortly, but am glad to share the information that I hope to have persuaded his two sons to join the forum and share their much fuller vicarious memories with us. I mentioned the thread to them when I saw both last week: one told me that he had his father's logbook, and the conversation jogged some memories for both of them.

For now, I'll just leave you with a little Dannyesque teaser, by noting that I found this thread many thousands of virtual flying hours ago with a Google search that began by entering the words "Pensacola" and "Catalina".

MPN11
3rd Aug 2015, 19:12
OMG, Danny42C, surely not "Gaining an ATC Certificate of Competency post-WW2"? :cool:

Fareastdriver
3rd Aug 2015, 21:04
Again I wasn’t rushed off my feet. With the SAR standbye it meant that you only flew every third day. For the co-pilots it was not a good appointment. They were all self improvers and, as a first officer, hours gained are most important. In normal offshore environment they would expect to have the requisite hours to obtain a command after five or six years. Here they were only getting ten to fifteen hours a month. One of them told me that after three years he might have enough hours to get a job. It was a three week stint and I averaged less than an hour a day.

I still had my Chinese licence to do so after that I went back to China. Two of us went to CAAC at Guangzhou and did the general ATPL exam. They must have put the contract out to CASA because the exam was so similar to the ones I had taken before; a computer with multiple choice answers. The questions were similar but the answers had been translated from Chinese and some answers were all right and some were all wrong. In this case you called the invigilator over and he told you which one to select. Again, like the Australian programme it flagged up a pass when you had finished.

The first hurdle being over then came the flight check. One of out junior captains had been nominated as the company flight checker. He hadn’t any training as a trainer or checker so he sat on the jump seat whilst my Aussie checker ran another test and then he signed me off.

I then had to do an English Comprehension Test. All expat pilots had to do this even if they were English. The reason why the test had to be taken was that English was the only language allowed in a mixed crew cockpit and some of the South American pilots had severe shortcomings in this department. The test was to be held at Xiaoshangou, close to Chengdu, as there was only one person who could mark the test and that was where he was. Everything was arranged and I was at the company awaiting transport to take me to the airport when the message came through that it had been cancelled for that month. The examiner had decided to go on holiday. Nothing could be done about it so a couple of days later I flew to the Solomons disappointed that I had not finally cleared up my Chinese licence.

I had been a away from home for a couple of months now so it was time to bring the wife out. Always, everywhere I worked, I would bring my wife to see how it was where I lived and worked. I arranged her flight out via Brisbane giving her a full briefing of where to go at Brisbane and she arrived in Honiara on time and in the right aeroplane. I had been there for a week and I planned a week in Honiara and then a week for her on the Brisbane Gold coast. I knew a week was enough because I know how she appreciates foreign countries. I was right. She summed up the Solomons on the first night with.
“Thank Christ I’m only here for a week.”

Strangely this time on completion I was routed Honiara-Brisbane-Sydney-HK instead of Brisbane-Singapore-HK and we met in Sydney terminal as she was enroute to the UK.

Back in China the priority was to clear up the Chinese exam. Whilst waiting for the English test I did the Law Exam. This was a farce. The examiner didn’t speak English I didn’t speak Chinese so one of out senior captains acted as interpreter. Basically I was prompted through the exam. Another hurdle crossed.

Then the time came to fly up to do the exam. I was accompanied by one of our Chinese captains who was doing the same exam as he wanted a Chinese ICAO licence and this exam counted as Level 4. We flew to Chengdu and he organised the taxi to Xiaoshangou and the hotel.

Xiaoshangou was a major PLA Air Force transport training base. The days when the Chinese aviations companies could cherry pick their students had gone. The PLA were now getting some seriously advanced equipment and training costs were being budgeted. They too required English in the cockpit because the Air Force was going international so this was where the test was held.

I had been to Sichuan before. I had friends there so I was familiar with Chongqing, Chengdu and Luzhao. When we went out for lunch we came to this small restaurant. The menu was in Chinese, English not spoken so I asked for my favourite Sichuan dish; Sichuan Boiled Beef.

It is easy to do. A handful of bruised chillies, a handful of bruised cloves of garlic, a handful of finely sliced beef plus a leaf or two Chinese cabbage or choy sum all boiled together for about fifteen minutes. It’s quite spicy. Captain Fei was not from Sichuan and he looked at it in horror. Even the kitchen staff came out not believing that this gweilo could manage it; but I did, easily.

The next day I did the exam. It was an ergonomical disaster. During the vocal bit you were supposed to wait until a blip thing counted down before you started speaking. I wasn’t told so half of mine was not recorded. At the end the machine counted down and I had FAILED. Do not worry, said the invigilator, we shall review it. So they did and two days later came the message that I had passed. I had, at sixty six, got a Chinese ATPL(H).

http://i229.photobucket.com/albums/ee224/fareastdriver/img006_zps6f4a2079.jpg (http://s229.photobucket.com/user/fareastdriver/media/img006_zps6f4a2079.jpg.html)

Union Jack
3rd Aug 2015, 21:36
Clickety-click!:ok::D

Jack

Danny42C
3rd Aug 2015, 22:22
MPN11,

Your: "OMG, Danny42C, surely not "Gaining an ATC Certificate of Competency post-WW2"?

Already been done ! (Gory details on my p.253/#5043). No, this is something else.

Danny.

Danny42C
3rd Aug 2015, 22:54
FED,

(Your #7268) It's quite a feat, failing a test in English in a foreign land, isn't it ! Reminds me of a scrap of dialogue: Visitor to the States is welcomed by a local "And where're yo'all from ?..England ? ....Gosh, yo'all do speak good English !"

"Xiaoshangou" - there's a mouthful !
But can cap it with "Kyathwengyaungywa" (Burma) in my log. Shall we throw the competition open to all comers ? (and I don't want "Llanfair PG", or any other wild welsh names !)

Am quite partial to a bowl of Chow Mein myself. :ok:

Danny.

Fareastdriver
4th Aug 2015, 09:31
The Romanised form of Chinese writing is called Pinyin. The pronunciation is in general similar to English but some are different; especially 'Q' and 'X'.

A common mistake is with Chongqing, the largest city in China. People try to say it treating the 'Q' as in 'Queen' or QANTAS' but the Q is pronounced 'ch' as in child. The locals cannot understand them when they say Chongkwing instead of Chongching.

The 'X' is pronounce 'sh' as in 'she' so a city like Xiamin is pronounced Shiarmin; Exiamin, doesn't work.

Shiao-shan-gou. Simples

FantomZorbin
4th Aug 2015, 11:42
This is a brilliant thread ... we're now on to Chinese pronunciation!! Excellent :ok:

Fareastdriver
4th Aug 2015, 15:36
The there was nothing for me to do. They didn’t need me in China.

This was the reason that I had gone to the Solomon Islands in there first place so I graciously consented to go out there again for another stint. However things had changed.

There was a small riot outside the Government Offices and because of mishandling this broke out into a BIG riot. The rioters turned on to whom they imagined to be the source of all their troubles; the Chinese. They started burning and looting the shops in the main street with the few national shopkeepers hanging signs outside their shops declaring that the shop was owned by Solomon Islanders. After that they went into the Chinese quarter causing general mayhem with our helicopter circling overhead shining its Nite Sun on them so as to assist the police to restore order. In the space of a few hours half of them destroyed their livelihood and the other half destroyed any chance of a job because most of their employers, the Chinese, went back to Taiwan.

Our hotel had been burned down. This gave rise to a priceless article in my possession.

When I had first arrived in the Solomons I looked a bit out of place. I was dressed in white shirt, long black trousers, black shoes and four rings on my shoulders. The other pilots were in company issue Tshirts, with the company name on the back, and shorts. They ordered some for me but that was going to take a week or so.
I had been allocated the chief pilots bedroom as he was on leave and in the corner was a large box of Tshirts. These were the same colour and style as the company ones except the logo emblazoned on the back had Solomon Islands printed on it. The only other difference was that it had the brand name of the local beer on one sleeve. I already had some suitable shorts so I selected one that fitted, left a note that I would pay and went to work in it.
Shock: Horror!
The company had heard about the shirts and on discovering that they had a beer advert on the sleeve went ballistic. They were immediately banned, recalled and the fear of death instilled to any staff that wore one. I was all right, I wasn’t staff, I was contract. However I only wore it for a couple of days before my official one came through.

When the hotel was burned down most of everybody’s possessions, clothes, computers, etc went up with it because they were at the airport manning the helicopter. With it went all the Tshirts. This meant that mine was the only survivor so mine is now totally unique and priceless.

Our new hotel was the other side of town and hadn’t suffered from the riots. It was a slightly better (the staff were quite tasty) hotel but the biggest advantage was that it was just over a breakwater to the yacht club. Whilst I was there there was a sudden influx of the United States Air Force.

On one of the smaller islands somebody had come across a cache of rusting cylinders. He had heaved one into his boat ad presented it to the scrap merchant in Honiara. This one was used to bombs, shells etc of either Japanese, American or British parentage but he had not seen these before. He notified the relevant authorities and research established that they were chemical or gas munitions. The Solomons government asked for help in disposing of them and the Americans answered the call. A small team arrived at Honiara in the back of a C5 Galaxy.

It was the largest aeroplane ever to arrive in Honiara. In fact it was the largest metal object in the Solomon Islands. They had obviously calculated that the runway and apron could take the wheel loads so they were marshalled into the corner of the apron so as not to interfere with the scheduled traffic. All went well and after two or three days the job had been done and everybody was ready to go back to Hawaii. They all got into their C5 and called for pushback.
Pushback?? The airport didn’t have anything that could push back a C5. In fact they didn’t have anything that could pushback anything.
It is possible for a C5 to taxi backwards using reverse thrust. However, there is a high probability of FOD damage doing this in a small apron as in Honiara so they required permission from the Pentagon. This permission was refused. In the end they launched a C17 Globemaster from Hawaii with a large aircraft tug in the back. This landed at Honiara, unloaded the tug which then repositioned both aircraft so that they faced the right way, reloaded the tug and hurled off to Hawaii.

It was my last three weeks in the Solomons and after a spot of leave in the UK I was back on the line in China. The wheels had turned a circle as far as the British part of the operation was concerned. We were down to one G reg aircraft with all the rest being on the Chinese register. More and more Chinese pilots were getting their command requiring less expat pilots, the typhoon season’s extra requirements being made up of myself and pilots from Australia. The company had changed hands and was effectively taken over by an American company and their wheels came out to have a look see at the operation. We didn’t know it at the time but this was going to be a pivotal point of the China operation.

Come January I was off to Australia again, this time to Karratha, on the coast of Western Australia.

Before I could fly offshore on an Australian licence I had to do the Australian Dangerous Goods course and the Huet (Helicopter Underwater Escape Course). I had done both courses in the UK but not flying on an endorsement that didn’t count. The DGC was easy enough and so was the HUET.

I had done my first underwater escape course at HMS Vernon in 1967 or thereabouts. There they used the submarine escape tower which was a tank of seawater about one hundred feet high. The submariners do their tricks at the bottom, helicopter crews do theirs at the top. This one was done at a facility using a swimming poll in Freemantle.

All HUETS are much the same. A facsimile of a helicopter fuselage complete with doors, windows, seats and belts that is immersed in the water. Easy escapes a first culminating with a steep insert and a full rollover. In Vernon’s tank when you roll over you only see an inky black void. Civvy ones are done in swimming pools so you can see the tiling on the bottom so things are relatively easy. On my last rollover at this one my door wouldn’t release as expected. Using my Vernon, not the local, training, I immediately went for the door on the other side where the other pilot had exited. When I surfaced I was immediately ballocked for using the wrong door. I explained that it had jammed and fortunately it jammed on them too.

Everything signed up I flew to Karratha…………….

Pirategh
6th Aug 2015, 10:40
My father was a bomber pilot in WW2, first Wellingtons in the Med, then Lancs in 100 Squadron 44-45. Also had an earlier stint on Halifaxes. So he had a lot of flying experience ( two and a half tours) but couldn't drive a car, unlike my mum.

He (or rather my mum) told me that, when he eventually learnt to drive in the late 50's, he could not get used to stopping on the road to turn right, and automatically did another left, left, left, left circuit until the right turn was clear! He certainly had the circuit and bump mentality.

In fact he became one of the worst drivers I have ever seen. He could never really get used to braking, and frequently scared me compost-less at roundabouts! He was pretty useless with rear-view mirrors too! However his WW2 survival skill or luck held out until 1995, having never actually having a crash (but probably causing a few).

Danny42C
6th Aug 2015, 19:56
Pirategh,

Welcome aboard the finest Thread in the finest Forum in PPRuNe (or anywhere else for that matter) !

We run this as as an old Crewroom in cyberspace, and as almost all the Old Hairies have gone on to the Great Crewroom in the Sky, we are dependent on the next generations to keep up the good work. So if your Dad has left you his logbooks, or any notes or diaries, or there are any tales of his escapades you remember, this is the place to tell us all about them. Who knows ? any snippet of information may be just what somebody else is waiting for to finish the jigsaw for his Dad.

I once had a pilot with me in Burma who couldn't ride a bike !

Cheers, Danny.

We are suffering from elephantiasis of the Page again. Can anyone fix it ?

Fareastdriver
7th Aug 2015, 08:41
AA 62's picture is too big.

ancientaviator62
7th Aug 2015, 10:29
FED,
my apologies but I have resized (or so I thought) all my pics to fit. Anyone else have problems with it ? Does the WW2 vehicle chime with your memories of similar things in Honiara ?

Danny42C
7th Aug 2015, 15:10
aa62 (Anyone else have problems with it ?),

I'll say ! - it's just got bigger !

(No Rabelaisian cracks, please)

Danny.

Danny42C
7th Aug 2015, 21:00
Slow Flyer,

Will put this on on both "Will the real EZ999..." and "Gaining a Pilot's Brevet..." Threads, suggest we use the latter (as the former must surely be on the way out).

When we first heard of you, it was of: "LAC Wayne Brown from 77 Squadron Engine Section at RAAF Base Williamstown, who has specialised on the Vengeance". Now you tell us: "I know I'm due for my bi-annual aircrew medical..." Let's have your story ASAP, please !

Now, as regards EZ999,

As it escaped scrapping, it would seem that you Australians took a more cavalier view of your contractual obligations under Lend Lease, for it would have made no sense to pay good money to the US to buy back an ex-Lend Lease VV (one of the 46 EZs which you got), to be used as an instructional airframe - when at the same time you had your pick of the more than twice as many (123) "British Contract" ANs and AFs (already paid for by the British taxpayer) which had been passed on to you to do as you liked with, and most of which would surely have been in the scrapyards at the same time as the EZs.

Did Harold Thomas ever say anything about this ?

Of course, by the time it got to the Technical College, there would be far more of the later Mk.IV bits lying about than of the earlier Mks.I and II, and the studes went to town with them ! (I don't think you got any IIIs, but we did in India), I flew my first (FB956), after they patched me up, on 8 (IAF) in July,'44, just before they closed our business down for good.

Now it is time to say that the Mks.I to III, (and the 'A's) were all the same aeroplane. The dodging about had nothing to do with it, they were merely flags to show who built the thing, and who paid for it. The US had the right idea: they simply called the whole lot A-31s (and all Mk.IVs A-35s), and had done with it.

The A-31s all looked the same, flew the same, dived the same (I never dived a III, but no reason to think it would be any different), had the same tankage, the same bomb load, and the same armament. The only mechanical change was made very early on, when they put in an EDP for the 20-gallon Trap Tank to replace the electric fuel pump originally fitted.

This was met with general rejoicing, especially by the back seat folk (who now had no more wobble-pumping to do).

Come to think of it, they had nothing else at all to do. Any Pilot with any sense did his own navigation; the gunners had no live training at all on this installation, so it was a mercy that we were never (AFAIK) attacked. But it was nice to have somebody to talk (all right. Shout) to on the trips.

Cheers, Danny.

PS: Cooda Shooda is in your part of the world, I am sure that he and his "Warbirdz" would welcome your input, as a bunch of them are on the (hopeless, IMHO) self-imposed task of looking for enough bits to put another A-31 together (to rival yours ?). Don't think they'll get far, as you will have hoovered them all up yourself already. D.

EDIT: Slow Flyer has popped up on the "EZ999" Thread, there are replies there already, I'll stay with it there TFN. D.

Fareastdriver
7th Aug 2015, 21:08
Karratha hadn’t prospered because of the oil; it had prospered because Dampier, a town next door had prospered exporting iron ore. That started forty years before and so the oil industry was a relative newcomer. There would be enormously long trains shifting iron ore from the large open cast mines inland; even in Dampier the rocks were red with natural rust. For me there were about a dozen or so installations offshore, nothing serious, ninety miles at the most.

The airport was a typical 2nd level airport. A single runway; a hardstanding fairly well populated with light aircraft, a small terminal building and a fire section and ATC complex; both empty. As in Kannanara one had to broadcast ones intentions before taking off and joining the circuit. Despite the fact it had several 737 sized movements a day the fire cover consisted of the volunteer fire brigade in Karratha fourteen kilometres away equipped with a pickup and water dispense trailer. At least you had some fire support which is more than you had at Kanannara.

I knew a fair number of people there; those that had worked in Aberdeen in the eighties plus British pilots who had been sent over to get the Australian arm going and had made the sensible decision to stay. Everybody, except me, was on two weeks on two off the only exception being the office and operations staff that lived locally. We lived in two bedroom detached houses, obviously designed for the job because each bedroom had its own en-suite facilities. Cooking was normally a joint effort much the same as in China. The company sent pilots to where they were needed so there was no guarantee that you would keep going to the same place. The result would be that various occupants would leave their surplus provisions in the larder until next time, if ever. A look though the larder of the house I was in suggested that the company was almost entirely Italian because in the cupboard was every known form of pasta going.

They had just opened a small mall in the centre of town so there was somewhere where you could do some decent shopping and get a coffee. There were a couple of bars and one establishment that good loosely be described as a brothel but Australia is more tolerant in that department. Despite being surrounded by parched bush one could not just charge into it with your pickup just for the hell of it. There was an area set aside for those who wanted to try and wreck their 4X4s. Property prices were eye-watering as is normal in Klondike areas. The town owned the building land and they would auction off parcels after the electricity, water and drainage infrastructure had been completed.

Once airborne you were presented with a kaleidoscope of colours. Another industry in Dampier is salt. This is obtained with very large evaporation pans of seawater of about one kilometre square. As the go through the process they change from deep blue to white and it the distance can be seen mountains of pristine salt. There were several offshore islands, deserted apart from the odd weekend chalet and between them the water was an incredibly deep blue.

I was there in January, the middle of summer, so the temperature was knocking on 40 degrees quite often. To cool down en-route one would climb up to a benign 25 degrees at 5000 ft. This brought into play an instrument that I have only seen in Australia; an Assigned Altitude Indicator. This was basically a manual veeder counter where you dialled in the altitude that you were supposed to be flying at. For example, if you were cleared down to 2,000 ft. you would set this on the instrument before you descended. Good idea? I thought it was a nuisance but when in Oz do as the Ozzies do.

The water was quite shallow around Dampier, when a fully loaded Very Large Ore Carrier was departing its single propeller would stir up the bottom even at high tide. All ships needed piloting and that included the LPG carriers. They are like tankers except that they have three or four huge golf balls on their deck which is used to transport Liquefied Petroleum Gas. They like the others had to come in at high tide and at times the high tide was at 05.00 or 17.00. Guess which one they wanted the pilot landed on.

It was very uncivilised getting up at 03.30 for a 04.45 take off; it was like working for RyanAir. You would look at the weather, pick up the pilot and launch into the gloom. Normally you were lucky and the LPG carrier would light up his tanks with floodlightsbut but sometime not which in case meant that his nav lights looked like every other Tom Dick or Harry’s nav lights. Some years previously a crew doing what I was doing were confidently approaching the helideck when there was a sudden bang and a splash and they were up to their backsides in water. They had flown into the sea without realising it. It is very easy to get disorientated at night so I used to approach crosswind so that I had the whole ship in sight, longways. It also meant that if things went pearshaped at the last moment I could fly through the helideck and out the other side.

I was contracted to be there for six weeks. As I have previously mentioned Australian flight and duty limitations were a complete mystery to me. However I did know enough to point out that as I was on a site for more than twenty eight days I was entitled to a day off, 36 hours, every seven days. We had stacks of cars on site so one day I travelled north and came upon Cossak.

Before somebody thought upon the idea of jamming a speck of sand in an oyster Cossack was an important Pearl fishing area. It was large enough to have a courthouse, school and stone built stores. The original police station is still used as a backpacker’s hotel. The decline of the pearl industry and the unsuitability of its coast line as a port saw it deteriorate until it was abandoned in the 1950s. The courthouse was a time capsule. Absolutely original and one could almost feel the atmosphere of some drunk being hauled up for causing wholesale mayhem the night before.

As my six weeks were coming to an end the word came from China that I was not needed as yet. I got on to the blower to Perth and suggested that I might be available for another six weeks. Within the hour another company roster had been written, printed and emailed to all stations.

I was now doing a twelve week stint at Karratha which in itself was a bit of a record. However with less than a week to go I was told that I was going to Broome for a few days.

I was a bit of a nuisance. I had just bought enough steaks to keep me going until I left so I was going to have to leave them behind. You cannot just travel north from Karratha to Broome; you have to go via Perth. So off I went on a Thursday, night stop in a hotel in Perth and flew up to Broome in the morning but too late to do a flight. Friday night was in the hotel and then on Saturday a flight to a rig 200 miles away to the north. The diversion was Truscott, as I have mentioned before. There was no flying on Sunday and on Monday I flew down to Perth ex contract to fly back to China. I had been halfway around Western Australia just to do a four hour flight.

When I got back to China I continued back to the UK and a month later I set out for Shekou. Just before I left I got a message to contact the base but it was too late so I did not get it until I arrived.

My company was pulling out of China……………………….

Danny42C
7th Aug 2015, 21:33
FED,

"My company was pulling out of China..............."

But you'll be back there, I''m sure !

Danny,

Geriaviator
8th Aug 2015, 16:13
www.royalnavyresearcharchive.org.uk (http://www.royalnavyresearcharchive.org.uk/) has much to interest old salts. When looking back to the ghastly ex-RN transit camp at Croft near Warrington, our home for six months on return from Aden in 1953, I found the wartime memories of Aircraft Artificer 4th Class (Electrical) Laurence Russell, who was posted from Croft to Australia in December 1944. His job at Bankstown was to unpack aircraft from crates or remove their protective coatings and assemble them.

His first story will interest Danny. “The aircraft were Grumman Hellcats and Avengers, Supermarine Seafires, Fairey Fireflies and Vought Corsairs; also a few Vultee Vengeance which we modified for aerial insecticide spraying. After inspection and fixing faults, they were test flown and any further problems were corrected. They were then delivered to aircraft carriers or transport ships at Garden Island.

“When the announcement of the Japanese surrender was broadcast over the PA there was a Hellcat suspended from the crane. The crane driver said 'They won’t be needing this now' and let it down with a run. There were about 700 American Lend Lease aircraft there at the end of the war. The U.S. provided them without charge, or sometimes in exchange for other goods or services. These aircraft evidently had not been exchanged in this manner so they still belonged to the U.S. To prevent them finding their way onto the second hand arms market the U.S. required them to be dumped at sea. This meant the use of aircraft carriers that could otherwise be sent home and paid off.

“Therefore there was some urgency in all this; working round the clock the aircraft were loaded onto semi trailers, taken to Garden Island Dockyard, transferred to aircraft carriers and taken several kilometres offshore. The fuselage was split open with axes to ensure that they sank rapidly, and then they were pushed off the flight deck. You would think that they would never be seen or heard of again. However, many years later newspapers were reporting bits being caught in trawl nets.”

Danny42C
8th Aug 2015, 22:57
Geriaviator,

Thanks ! - This is very interesting to me on two counts:

First, your:

"......also a few Vultee Vengeance which we modified for aerial insecticide...."

Now I was told somewhere that, right at the end, post-war, 110 (H) Sqdn (my old outfit) got hold of a few M.IVs and flew (?) them across to Takoradi (now Ghana) - (or were they there already when they got there ?) to do anti-malaria spraying trials. It was hinted they had a lot of trouble with these aircraft - I have said (p.134/#2680) that they would have been better off with Mk.IIIs, which worked perfectly for me.

It would have been a Hell of a transit - I don't know how they were supposed to have done it, for you would have to get across the Arabian (or Red Sea) at some point (sooner 'em than me !) and work your way across Africa. Never heard of the result of these Trials.

This came after we had pioneered the idea (using the underwing spray tanks from which we had been spraying mustard gas for the last two years). Our "Trial" was so small-scale as to be statistically insignificant; we just learned the best heights and speeds to spread the DDT.

Now, secondly, as to the waste of ex- Lend-Lease material which was heartbreaking, but it was a commercial necessity for the US (otherwise they'd never need to make a panel instrument or a tyre or an aero engine etc for the next ten years !) I've already told the tale of the Corsairs which went over the side offshore from my patch, and I'd to take my three trusty Mk.IIIs to be scrapped (the Wg Cdr had just written-off his Harvard himself, so that was one less to worry about).

Which makes it all the more surprising that the Aussies had all these aircraft in the scrapyard to be picked over, but that seems to be how it was. But why would they pick an EZ (the only Mk.I or IIs which were Lend-Lease), when they had three times as many AFs, ANs and some APs to go at (all bought and paid for already ?)

A week today (15th) will be the 70th anniversary of the Japanese surrender (the USAAC had shot its bolt, there were no more atomic bombs ready on the shelf - but the Japanese didn't know that). We out there (expecting several more years of war, almost certainly culminating in an amphibious assault on Japan, with a hideous casualty list to face) were greatly relieved ("stunned" would be a better word). But how to describe the incredulous joy of our prisoners in Burma (some of whom had survived 3½ years of barbaric treatment [with no end in sight] in Japanese hands, since being taken in Dec '41 after the loss of Singapore ?)

I shall raise a flagon of Guinness on that day. Please join me !

Danny.

Slow Flyer
9th Aug 2015, 12:25
Hi Danny

Let's have your story ASAP, pleaseI have been involved in military aviation maintenance & management for 36 years. Mainly Caribou and assorted Fast-Jets. My experience on big radials led to the request from Harold Thomas to see if I get the VV up and running again. I also co-own and fly a 75yr old former RAAF DH82A for stress relief.

As it escaped scrapping, it would seem that you Australians took a more cavalier view of your contractual obligations under Lend LeaseI believe that the attitude in Australia was much the same as the UK and the goverment was quite fastidious when it came to meeting their Lend-lease obligations. Remember that the actual nominated fate of EZ999 was as a fire fighting training aid for the RAN FAA at Nowra. All the VV that went to Nowra were destroyed on-site reletively quickly (all gone by 1951). I'm unsure what led to the decision of it being gifted to the Tech College, but I'm glad it was and that Harold had the vision to rescue it when the college had finished with it.

There is an interesting old thread over at adf.serials regarding RAAF Lend-Lease aircraft which is worth a read: ADF Serials Message Board -> Lend Lease aircraft (http://www.adf-messageboard.com.au/invboard/index.php?showtopic=2047)

And yes Danny, those electric fuel pumps were hopeless. It was the only item which wouldnt work correctly during the ground runs we performed in the mid-80's on the aircraft.

Cheers SF

mikehallam
9th Aug 2015, 17:10
This extract covering the Vultee Vengeance was found in a book I received as a 78th birthday present this week. It is about the hazards and trials of test flying aircraft, from the early days through to long after WWII.

I thought it would be of interest here.

mike hallam.

'Tests of Character' by Donald Middleton. Pub.1995 Airlife
(from pages 58 & 59)

"The outbreak of war saw the RAF without a dive-bomber. The remarkable success of the Junkers 87 Stuka in the Spanish Civil War and the assault on France and the Low Countires persuaded the British Government that this was an error of omission which should be rapidly rectified. The British aircraft industry was too heavily involved with priority work building fighters and bombers to bother with what appeared to be a fringe design with limited applications at that time. So the British Purchasing Commission in the United States investigated the purchase of an American aircraft. Earlier requirements formulated by the French Government had led to fairly small Vultee Company to design a suitable dive-bomber, the V-72, for which orders were to be placed by the French. Their defeat in 1940 left these orders in limbo so the British Purchasing Commission showed interest. The V-72 was designed with twin rudders and was fully stressed for dive-bombing with slotted surface wing flaps and dive brakes. The Vengeance, as the British version was called, a name also used by the USAAF, reverted to a single fin and rudder and had a 1,700 h.p. Wright Cyclone 18 cylinder twin row radial engine. It became a tough, strong weapon, built like a tank as one pilot described it.
Unusually, the contract specified the test flying procedure by both the contractor's pilots and the RAF Resident Technical Officers. Two prototypes were available at Vultee Field, Downey, and the first one was evaluated by Gp Capt. 'George' Bulman, who was Head of the Test Branch of the Purchasing Commission. W/Cdr Mike Crossley RAF was also involved in the flight test programme. To increase the production facility for the Vengeance the Northropp Corporation was contracted to build the machine in addition to Vultee.
American responsibility for test flying rested with the famous Vance Breese who was responsible for the change from twin rudders to a single one after taxying trials had proved his earlier contention that two rudders would give inadequate control on the ground. In July 1941 Vance Breese made the first flight. He was not satisfied with the dive brakes and recommended that holes should be punched over the surfaces as was done with the Douglas Dauntless. This was rejected by the engineers, but the orientation of the slots was changed. An interesting aspect of the Vengeance programme was that it was almost certainly the first time that telemetry was used to record by instruments on the ground data obtained from the aircraft in the air. During the stalling check it was found that, although the stall was fairly innoccuous and aileron control held it laterally stable throughout, there was a degree of buffeting at high accelerations which caused concern for the integrity of the tail structure. Strain gauges were fitted and the information being transmitted to the ground receiver could be heard in the form of tones in the pilot's headphones. Frank Davis, on the departure of Breese, took over the responsibility for the tests and made one stall for each reading of the strain gauge; he would then manually switch to the next gauge ready for another stall. It required several hundred stalls from 1 G to 6 G to cover all the permutations. The tests proved the integrity of the structure without modification. A problem arose with the rudder control which was considered too heavy for a dive-bomber in which quick and easy directional changes must be made to achieve accurate aim. This was overcome by installing a spring tab at the trailing edge of the rudder. Recovery from a high speed dive was another contentious area. As speed built up the aircraft tended to tuck under and required excessive stick forces for recovery. On one occasion Frank Davis was diving to test an oil system valve for negative G when rudder flutter occurred and the surface tore away behind the hinge line. The balance area forward of the hinge line was still under pedal control but tended to be fully over to one side or the other including yaw. Davis was able to hold it on the stick and the fin gave sufficient directional stability to land safely.
This was another example ot the hazard of fabric-covered surfaces in high speed flight. The rudder was altered to have an all-metal skin. This also solved the problem of heavy pull-out forces from the dive as it was decided to modify the elevators similarly. By the end of 1941 most of the bugs had been eliminated from the new dive-bomber which the RAF was looking forward to operating. Unfortunately for their desires the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour on 7 December 1941 completely altered the situation. The Americans realised that they would need many more aircraft so delivery schedules were completely altered, but that is another story. The 1,200 which were delivered to the RAF gave extremely good service. mainly in Burma, with Hurricanes giving top cover to their attacks."

Fareastdriver
9th Aug 2015, 20:15
It was a shock but not entirely unexpected. The last G reg helicopter had departed some months before and was now wearing an Australian registration. On the pilots side there were the chief and deputy chief pilots, a couple of training captains and three or four line trainers like myself. The chief engineer and a couple of others were in an advisory capacity but only to assist in training new arrivals. There was a big plot between the British and Chinese to set up an international servicing and repair centre catering for the whole of the Far East so our continuing partnership did seem set fair to continue. However, the present operation was set up in 1984 when business practices were different so when our American masters came to have a look they may well have found that the arrangements were not as squeaky clean as Capitol Hill would have liked so they may have thought it was better to drop it.

For the Chinese company it was a nightmare. They had had the rug pulled from underneath them completely. The contracts they had negotiated with the oil companies were won on the basis that the operation was run and supervised to western standards with western personnel and these were all going to be taken away. The company needed some of us and the UK company then agreed to release those who wanted to stay. Some felt that there careers would be best left alone so they were going to depart. The chief and deputy and a training captain who were of an advanced age, who been in China for decades, plus me, elected to stay:

The Gang of Four.

Then came the negotiations regarding the salary. We had been told early on that we were being considered as working in China, not rotating from the UK, so there was no 4X2. How much? They all turned to me because I was on a contract. At the end of the day we negotiated it so that everybody got more than I was getting previously because of responsibility allowances etc. I got much the same with the bonus of continuous employment.

Then we had to tell the staff that they were no longer needed. The UK company had calculated how much redundancy money they were entitled to and so that was put to them. The next day they were all in the chief pilot’s office with a Chinese lawyer who explained that in China you cannot kick long term employees out of the door with a pittance; in fact, quite a lot of money was involved. In the end it cost them several times what they had bargained for. Then came another panic. The girl who ran the spares store was the only person on the planet that understood the company spares computer and they were going to fire her. They had to make her an offer she could not refuse, fix up her visa and give her a job in the company headquarters in the UK.

The changeover came and we carried on as normal except that the rosters were now done by the Chinese admin staff. One week later, when the duty and flying hour records were a complete shambles they had to bring back our previous secretary and roster clerk who insisted on, and got, the same salary as she was getting with us before.

I now had to get an apartment by myself. The one I had been living was a bit tatty, however, I had the option of continuing in it paying the same rent as the company; about HK$ 7,000/month but I decided to look around. There was an apartment that we had given up some six months previously of the same size and in the same building that had been totally redecorated and with a new kitchen. I took it on with a rent of HK$ 4,500 equivalent. An apartment that the company had previously rented for 6,000 was going for 3,500 and that was just the tip of the iceberg.

The Chinese engineers were now totally responsible for our aircraft and how well they came up to the task. The aircraft were immaculate and smooth. Out went the old company tolerances for vibration levels, in came the new; as little as possible. Any snag, however insignificant, was attended to before the next flight. On offshore flying you pick up the passengers rotors running outside the terminal and drop them off there on return before taxiing to a parking spot for shutdown. You then proceed to the line office to attend to the tech log. Now the aircraft’s engineer would climb into the jump seat as the passengers departed and you could discuss any problems taxing back with the option, if practical, of demonstrating the fault. For me it was a new level of co-operation between the two professions.

I had now, because of the new working schedule, more time to be able to explore Shenzhen and other parts of China…………………………

Danny42C
10th Aug 2015, 03:30
mikehallam,

Where to start ? This is wonderful stuff, although I don't know Middleton's "Tests of Character" (and am certainly buying no more books, as they're piled up all over the place as it is !) Peter C. Smith's earlier (1986) "Vengeance!" covers the same ground very well (and has the same publisher) but there's much more here.

My experiences with the Vengeance are in Pages 128/#2552 (when I first set eyes on them) and 129/#2577 (when I first strapped one on) et seq for the next three years. I had 400 hours on Mks. I-III, but never saw a Mk.IV They didn't come out to India while I was there (or at all ?).

A few minor cavils:

"The Vengeance, as the British version was called, a name also used by the USAAF, reverted to a single fin and rudder and had a 1,700 h.p. Wright Cyclone 18 cylinder twin row radial engine"

Vultee called it the V-72; the USAAC # called it the A-31; we called it the "Vengeance"; it had a 14 cylinder Wright Double Cyclone of 1600 hp to start with. (Wright GR 2600 A5-B 1193kW).

Note # : The US Army Air Corps became the US Air Force only in September 1947. They went into blues but kept their Army ranks. We'd done the same in 1918, but invented new ranks for ourselves.

"It required several hundred stalls from 1 G to 6 G to cover all the permutations".

Our experience was that it was very difficult to get a Vengeance to stall at all , for the combination of weight and the enormous drag (even without airbrakes) of its tail-down flight attitude (zero AoI) caused it to "mush" rather than stall cleanly. In fact, there was a sort of seamless progression from flying to non-flying without any point you could call a proper stall. (Might that have tied in with their finding that: "...although the stall was fairly innoccuous and aileron control held it laterally stable throughout...")

??? - I'm no Test Pilot, but the little I can remember is that in a stall you try to keep level with rudder (as aileron may only make it worse).

I note that the Test Pilots say nothing about spins: I couldn't spin a Vengeance (nor could anyone else AFAIK, and I've never heard of an accidental one - the "mush" factor again ?).

This "mush" also made glide landings inadvisable at normal "over the fence" speeds, for although you'd rounded-out correctly, it would just keep going down even though your attitude was correct - and you'd thump down with an almighty bang! The answer was to stick an extra 20-30mph on (and risk going off the other end). Better, drag it in low 'n slow with a fair amount of power, and roll it onto the strip.

With no "G" suits or anything else to help, people pulled as hard as they could on pull-outs from a dive (wouldn't you ?), until "grey-out". I suppose that might have been around 4½ G. How they recorded 6 G, I don't know (they must have been supermen !)

"The Americans realised that they would need many more aircraft so delivery schedules were completely altered, but that is another story".

Not much of a story ! They tried the A-31 and turned it down #. Then they asked for a 4 degree Angle of Incidence, Vultee obliged; they called that the A-35 (our Mk.IV) - turned that down too, and lost interest in it (except for training and odd jobs).

Note #: They decided that all the A-31s (our Mks.1-II-III) should go to Britain, as their pilots couldn't see over the nose and wanted nothing to do with them. Neither could we, but beggars can't be choosers (and we'd already paid in advance for most of the things !)

"The 1,200 which were delivered to the RAF gave extremely good service. mainly in Burma, with Hurricanes giving top cover to their attacks".

Very seldom ! In my 53 sorties, I can only recall three or four occasions when we were escorted in the Arakan. Two Hurricanes gave top cover to our "box", another pair weaved a mile or so behind us to guard our tails. As I have said in some Post or other: "It was a kind thought, but as the Nakajima "Oscar" was so superior to the Hurricane in all respects save firepower and solidity of build, the poor things would have their work cut out to defend themselves - never mind us ! (the bottom pair would often creep up closer to us - to get a little protection from our 12 rear Brownings ?)" As it happened, we were never attacked (which was as well).

But, with these minor quibbles, your quote has been very useful, Mike, and I've learned a lot I didn't know before.

Cheers, Danny.

Wander00
10th Aug 2015, 07:51
"Spraying mustard gas" - on whom?

Fareastdriver
10th Aug 2015, 08:48
It's the tenth of the month; Mess Bill!

Danny42C
10th Aug 2015, 17:55
Wander00 (#7290),

The story starts on this Thread on my Post P.154/#3071. There's miles of it !

Danny.

Danny42C
10th Aug 2015, 18:20
Slow Flyer (your #7286),

Thanks for the link, tried it and got:

"Internal Server Error
The server encountered an internal error or misconfiguration and was unable to complete your request.
Please contact the server administrator, [email protected] ([email protected]) and inform them of the time the error occurred, and anything you might have done that may have caused the error".

All beyond me - Gremlins again !

Now: ".....I also co-own and fly a 75yr old former RAAF DH82A for stress relief"

Another story lurking there. Out with it !

Yes, I can well see that the US would be quite happy to see one go as a fire hulk !

Cheers, Danny.

Fareastdriver
11th Aug 2015, 09:12
When Deng Xiaoping (you all know how to pronounce that) opened up China. Shenzhen, being next door to Hong Kong was a natural choice to be one the first Special Economic Zones and with it came industrial development on a scale only seen before in wartime. With it came millions of migrant workers receiving unheard of wages and with them came the entrepreneurs in the entertainment industry to relieve them of some of it. Immediately by my apartment was a ship, the MingHua, originally MS Ancerville, launched by de Gaulle in 1962. In 1973 it was bought and operated by China where it got its name. In 1983 it was beached at Shekou and was turned into a hotel and entertainments centre. The area is called Sea World and is thick with restaurants of every nationality. There are several couth bars and an expat’s club called the Snake Pit where we reprehensibles would gather to swop stories. Down the road there is what is known as the Dark Side. Small bars where one can be entertained by hostesses for the cost of a few drinks or further entertained at home with money.

Not every project was a success. A few miles east of the heliport was an enormous fairground. It had a largest roller coaster I have ever but it was closed through lack of custom. There were five golf courses within 15 kilometres of Shenzhen; three of them to Championship standard designed by household names. Between Shenzhen and Shekou there were two theme parks. One, called Splendid China, had representations of every part and ethnic race in the country. There was continuous entertainment in one part or the other and the Mongolian horsemen gave a show that would be impossible to see in this country. On of them was a lunatic riding a pair of horses, bareback, standing, with nothing touching them except a rein and two feet going at a gallop all around the football pitch sized arena. In the evening there would be an amazing show of song, dancing and acrobatics to round off the day.

The other was The Window of the World. This was a theme park dominated by a 1/3rd scale Eiffel Tower complete with lifts and viewing balconies. Every continent in the world was portrayed in varying scale. One could travel from Japan, to Australia and walk over a Sydney Harbour Bridge staring at the Opera house and Ayers Rock. Through the pyramids of Egypt and then to Italy with the Leaning Tower of Pisa and the Bridge of Sighs. Onwards, to the Arc de Triomphe and across to London; the Tower Bridge and the Houses of Parliament. North America was represented with the portraits on Mount Rushmore and the passé de resistance, Niagara Falls.

This feature was a semi miniature, about 100 meters across, version of Niagara Falls that used to flow for five minutes every half hour. The amount of water that had to be shifted was amazing; it would be a tourist site by itself if it were natural let alone artificial, As a teaser, this is what it looks like.

http://i229.photobucket.com/albums/ee224/fareastdriver/DSCF0104_zps0m7cwhw1.jpg

Again in the evening there was another show set with a distinctive Greco Roman theme.

The cable TV in the apartment had 100 Channels, satellite TV was yet to come. Apart from the usual overseas one like BBC, CNN and Star Sports there were multitude of Chinese programmes from all over China. Because so many people work far away from their home city they could be virtually be guaranteed to keep up with the home programmes in real time. There were special channels for Chinese opera, sports, historical films and a military channel. This channel had the best looking presenters of the whole lot, all in uniform. Watching this one could trace the whole military history of the PLA from the Chinese side, learn to strip and reassemble an assault rifle, sight and load a105mm howitzer because that was how a lot of the conscripts were taught.

Over the years I was there I was never afraid to go where no gweilo had been before. I had friends that lived in Chengdu, Chongqing, Wuhan and Luzhao. The first time I went to Chengdu they still had the early morning municipal loudspeakers urging the population to make even greater efforts that day. Hotels had to be licensed for foreigners so one could not pick any one. People would stand around a stall watching you buy something and then fall over laughing when they realised how much you had paid for it. You learned to bargain. Open at 30% of the asking price and walk away if they wont come down to half.


My contract was for one year. As time was progressing more and more of the operation was being run by nationals. I had a Chinese captain do my base check and instruments renewal and I was spending more time at home as a spare crew. They then offered me a six month extension. My contract said that it should have renewed on a year-by-year but they said it was a new contract. On that basis I choked an extra US$1,000/month out of them. They renewed my visa and as it was during the build up to the Olympics the visa regulations were draconian and it expired on the last day of my contract. I was starting to have trouble with my Chinese medical especially with my cataracts so I could see that the writing was on the wall.

A nice letter thanking me for the years I had been with them but that was it. The final trip was on a Sunday; a simple trip to the JHN platform and return. My co-pilot flew it out and I flew it back to land the last time. After the passengers had disembarked and the co-pilot went to do the paperwork I did the engine wash and finally shut it down. On an impulse I took a photo of the aeroplane.

http://i229.photobucket.com/albums/ee224/fareastdriver/B%207955_zpsxs8mc45z.jpg (http://s229.photobucket.com/user/fareastdriver/media/B%207955_zpsxs8mc45z.jpg.html)



In the planning room there was just the paperwork waiting for me as the co-pilot had gone home. The line office was empty, they knew that there was nothing wrong with the aeroplane and I signed off the tech log. There was nothing to do in the office except fill in my log book. It was 9th November 2008. My first flight in a Provost T1 at Tern Hill was 28th October 1960 so I had cracked forty-eight years and 17,879.45hrs. My headset I had bought in 1981 so that had at least 12,000hrs. I picked them both up, called up the driver and went through the terminal. Everybody had gone except for somebody I did not know that was beavering in the corner. At the front door I looked back and I could see the windsock the other side of the airfield indicating about five knots down the runway.

Then I closed the door.

MPN11
11th Aug 2015, 10:08
I was starting to have trouble with my Chinese medical especially with my cataracts so I could see that the writing was on the wall.

If you could see the writing on the wall, they couldn't have been that bad! ;)

That was some flying career ... starting with the JP Mk 1 with the spindly legs!

ancientaviator62
11th Aug 2015, 10:30
FED,
a varied career very well told. Mine was totally RAF not as a pliot but flying wise as an ALM and interesting in its own way . My last trip was to Split and back on 24 December 1997 in Hercules XV 196. This 'swansong' was my choice (I was the leader) and gave my troops a headstart for the Christmas break. Back at Lyneham I was met by the boss and a reception committee with champagne. My wife was waiting with the car but the fuel low quantity light was on ! Still we did get home OK.
What memories do others have of their last flight etc. Not too much of a thread drift IMHO for this Emperor of topics.

Fareastdriver
11th Aug 2015, 11:39
starting with the JP Mk 1 with the spindly legs!

I beg you're pardon. I started off with real Provosts; not kiddycars with a vacuum cleaner in the back.

http://i229.photobucket.com/albums/ee224/fareastdriver/Provostcourse.jpg (http://s229.photobucket.com/user/fareastdriver/media/Provostcourse.jpg.html)

I'm there somewhere.

Fareastdriver
11th Aug 2015, 13:04
For those that are interested I posted some pictures of China and Karrathar on Rotorheads around the World. Judging by the horror which people here view helicopters none of you would have looked at the most viewed thread on PPrune.

Some of China and Karrathar here; you have to wind down the page a bit,

http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/292051-rotorheads-around-world-incl-views-cockpit-140.html

and more of China here near the bottom.

http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/292051-rotorheads-around-world-incl-views-cockpit-142.html

Danny42C
11th Aug 2015, 23:33
Chugalug,

I've been mulling over your link (in #45 on the "EZ999" Thread), which is hiding its light under a bushel in P.2 (let it "..only fade away...", as Old Soldiers should). Then we can all go back on "Pilot's Brevet", of which it was only an extension, and on which are all the 2012 Posts on the subject.

I'm quite convinced (by Slow Flyer) that EZ999 is pukka (although God knows what the Tech students have done with it).

Now thank you for a wonderful 6-minutes of YouTube: I've watched it several times, and each time the number of points (14 to date!) worthy of comment grows ! It'll be a day or two before I see light at the end of the tunnel, so please bear with me.

Cheers, Danny.

EDIT: This last time I let the video run on after the VV Section. What a feast of IAF and PAF footage ! Fareastdriver will be as fascinated as I was with the ending sequences of the aerobatic helicopter (but perhaps he's seen it before). I was stunned !

And, rooting about, I found this ## again (having previously forgotten all about it !) Supposed to be cockpit of a VV Mk. I - it's nothing like a Mk. I (A-31). This is the Narellan Vengeance - again ! I still accept that the Museum has got a Mk.I, but those "pesky studes" must have transplanted a whole Mk.IV front cockpit into it (or is it even that, or just a "bitsa" they've cobbled together [complete with double ball] - do you remember the "Stearman Panel" ? - it's the 0.50 gun story again) Slow Flyer will be interested, too. D.

## : Look at this ! (on this Thread)

2nd Jul 2012, 21:52 #2715 (permalink) Page 136 from 682al

D.

Danny42C
12th Aug 2015, 19:57
Chugalug,

Ref my EDIT on my #7299 last night:

"(This last time I let the video run on after the VV Section. What a feast of IAF and PAF footage ! Fareastdriver will be as fascinated as I was with the ending sequences of the aerobatic helicopter (but perhaps he's seen it before). I was stunned !".

Tried now to get back for another look - and it's gone !! (all "the feast" after the 6.14 of the 8 Sqn video, that is, but a whole series of other flying material after it instead).

Please try it, and see what you can get (it beats me) and let me know.

Danny

Danny42C
13th Aug 2015, 00:05
Fareastdriver,

What a story yours has been ! (for I take it, the combination of anno domini and your cataracts (join the club !) must spell the end of your life in the skies - at least in the driving seat ! And I'm sure I speak for all of us in saying a sincere "Thanks" for so entertainingly recording it for one past generation (mine) and for the present and all future ones for whom this matchless Thread of Cliff's will form such a priceless archive.

I must say I feel a tinge of regret when any good thing comes to an end. This cavil doesn't affect that at all; but from an old-timer's viewpoint, it seems a pity that most of the old place names we knew in boyhood have been given up without a murmer of protest. Once it was Bombay and Peking, Madras and Canton and Formosa and Ceylon. Now we must say "Mumbai" and "Beijing", "Chennai" and "Guangdong" and "Taiwan and "SriLanka" (was poor Delhi hiding behind the sofa when the new names were being given out ?)

As I said some time ago: "The good folk of Bombay can call it what they like in Marathi, why should it trouble them what we call it in English ?" The French say "Aix-la-Chapelle", the Germans "Aachen", it's the same place, but nobody bothers. We once lived in Cologne for a while, the Germans around us lived in Köln, we were all quie happy with that.

The most ridiculous example was when "Calcutta" became "Kolkata". Phonetically, it's almost the same word, there was no need for it (except for a perceived need to change for its own sake).

Rant over, now this is long enough (more comment and questions soon).

Cheers, Danny.

Danny42C
13th Aug 2015, 02:22
Chugalug,

Reverting to the 8 (IAF) Sqn YouTube, here are some general comments which apply as far as 2.50 into the 6.14 of it.

1. What on Earth has this to do with an "Australian War Memorial FO 2561" ? The material has almost certainly come originally from Bharat Rakshak website: they have a lot about 8 Sqn in it.

2. Where and when was this taken ? There are no white faces, we "pressed men" from the four RAF Sqns don't appear anywhere. My guess is at their last station before we teamed up with them in Chaara, W. Bengal (24.8.43. in my log, although I didn't fly with them (non-op) until 29.11.43 - you'll recall that we were busy on the ground, settling-in, then compass-swinging and belting-up in that month).

It doesn't look anything like Peshawar (had the VV OTU even started up yet ?) Bt-Rk says they were at Paphamau (Allahabad), in Uttar Pradesh. This is approx 500 mi NE from Calcutta, and a further 400 mi NE to Delhi. I have never known such a huge open landing area as appears here, certainly not in W. or E. Bengal (now Bangladesh) or in Burma.

It is certainly all training in these first few minutes, the only bomb (500lb) looks funny (more later), some a/c have 250lb racks underwing but no bombs, (they would have been about 1,000 milles away from the action in any case). Nor are there any 11½ lb (training) bombracks.

The devil is in the detail ! Enough for now ! More soon.

Cheers, Danny.

pzu
13th Aug 2015, 23:11
Apologies Danny

I had hoped to be able to post a photo of 'Spitfires over Leeming' but 'finger trouble with my daughters camera prevented this

Due time pressures they just flew in from a South Easterly direction (Linton & York) then headed NE to Goosepool

See Spitfires fly over Teesside as part of RAF Battle of Britain Memorial Flight - Gazette Live (http://www.gazettelive.co.uk/whats-on/family-kids-news/spitfires-fly-over-teesside-part-9852820)

PZU - Out of Africa (Retired)

Danny42C
14th Aug 2015, 01:24
EDIT: This link was Posted on "EZ999" Thread by Chugalug, to whom we all owe our thanks for it.

New readers, this is what we're talking about here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b8RqlK1d1_k (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b8RqlK1d1_k)

D.

------------------------------------------------------


Chugalug,

Now from the general to the particular:

0.21

What are these two armourers doing on the wing ? - all they seem to have is a length of empty cottton ammo belting - and in any case we used spring steel clips, not cotton belts ? (as I know to my cost !)

0.22

At first glance, looks like a single gun, and I thought "0.50" for a moment or two, before realising that it's far too small - of course we're looking side-on at a twin 0.303 (you can just see the flash eliminators on the ends - all our guns had them, but I don't think any of the 0.300s did).

But why is this chap stripping his gun down in situ, instead of taking it to the Armoury and putting it on the bench ? (for surely you had to take the block out first to remove the barrel ?) I should know, but at ITW I only had a obsolete Vickers "K" gun to take to bits, and then try to put together again. I never even saw a Browning, as they were all needed in service. And in practice we left all that side of the business to our AGs and the Armourers. All we had to worry about was: would it fire when we pressed the button, or not ? We just flew the aeroplane - and that could be trouble enough.

Are there any (ex) Armourers in the House ? Please come in !

0.37

Now we're really confused. This 500lb GP bomb clearly has the tail twin wing "butterfly" on the end (look in the cylindrical "fin" - btw, these sheet metal "click-on" fins came in a strong fibre- board protective container, which in turn became a potential bar stool). They were only put on the bomb itself at the last moment before bombing-up.

But the "butterfly" was the safety device for the tail fuse (on release, the airflow would spin them away off their loose thread and render the fuse "live" by exposing the detonator). Therefore the tail fuse is in this bomb. These little bits of light metal sometimes speared into the lower wing surface or the flaps after release - no problem, but a nuisance to the riggers, who had to dig them out and patch the little shallow holes they left.

Now look at the nose. There should be either a ring-bolt in (for handling in transit). Or, before use, this is removed, the nose fuse goes in and made safe by another loosely screwed-on cap which has angled vanes machined round the rim, this works the same way as the tail, once off the firing pin and the detonator are in business.

So what have we here ? There's no vaned cap - it's just a plug with what looks like a screwdriver slot in it for removal (look at your car battery). So there's no fuse in the nose ! Make sense of that if you can.

You'll all be pleased to know that there is still more on this bomb to come,:* but this is enough for one Post.

Cheers, Danny.

PS: pzu,

Around teatime daughter came in, said, "Dad", there's a Spitfire just flying overhead".

It so happened that a few seconds earlier something very fast and powerful had come out of the N. York Moors LL area, and was climbing northbound in reheat, so that Danny Mansion was shaking. (This used to happen a lot, but less frequently in recent days).

"Rubbish", said Daddy, "that's no Spitfire ! - that's a chap in a jet, giving it the welly".

Ah, well. :( You can't win 'em all (we don't take the Gazette).

Thanks for the "Head-Up" just the same !

D.

JointShiteFighter
14th Aug 2015, 02:23
A picture really does speak a thousand words. Respect to the 48th Fighter Wing Commander and Coningsby Stn Cdr for taking the time to honour this great man!

https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xft1/t31.0-8/10507105_761794923942143_8144012507106281193_o.jpg

Danny42C
15th Aug 2015, 03:01
It wasn't an empty threat - here we go again !

Possibility: this is just a dummy bomb in training somewhere, no sign of any other military hardware.

Note trunnion band on bomb: the trunnions engage with the forks you see in the bomb bay. These forks are adjusted onto the trunnions by a "turnbuckle" on the prongs. When bomb drops, forks throw bomb out clear of aircraft (otherwise may fall "live" onto front bulkhead, or into prop - either way, Bad Idea).

Ju 87 "Stuka" had same arrangement for the external bomb, same reason.

2.08

This is the hard way for pilot to do it (a/c may have been hours in the sun and hot as Hell). Macaque at 3.27 has right idea (more on him later), but too small to make the next jump onto wing.

Note much smaller white roundel centre in comparison with RAAF ones. And the last (curved) section of perspex over gunner's cockpit hasn't been chucked out yet (they'll learn !)

2.31

Gunner checks "Full and Free movement" (good demo of the rear gun mountings - they were on a pillar on a universal joint at the bottom, so could wobble about quite a bit even with restraining links. Now imagine what it would be like when the Oscars (or [hope not] Kawanishi N1K Kyofu later) are coming in and your Box-of-Six VV is making elephantine attempts to corkscew, and your pilot is slipping and skidding all over the place in his efforts to stay in position ! And remember there's nothing to stop you from shooting your own tail off.

Obvious answer: scatter, dive for the deck and run home through the treetops as fast as you can. [I]Ce n'était pas magnifique, mais c'était la guerre ! (Just as well it never happened).

Note Flash Eliminators on muzzles and the metal clips I'll never forget.

2.37

Rather better built than normal "basha" Briefing Room (?). A Sikh always wears the turban. One clued-up chap has an Aussie Bush Hat, the others will soon be buying replacement Caps SD.

Some are carrying side arms, but think it more for show than operational (or are they just holsters - can't see any lanyards).

2.43

A ground radio truck - ATC ? - if so, the only ATC there ever was in India or Burma in my time.

2.49

It was unusual to paint bomblets (line-shooting ?) - can't make out nose art above (in the Vlad footage, there is a "Hyderabad Tiger" on an IAF VV pulling away from dispersal in a circle that size of picture).

2.55 Free bananas on tap ad lib (Fox 3 to note !)

3.27

Macaque shows how to do it - but can't manage the last bit - Waddling around wearing pilot 'chute was hot and awkward; our technique was: carry your 'chute out onto the wing, then right foot on wheel, left foot on stirrup, scramble up on top, put 'chute into seat, climb in and buckle on in comfort.

3.48

Persistence pays !- backseat man stands (WTF ?) to see what pilot is doing (too rich), donk fires at last and he bobs down. It was probably bad practice to hold down both "Energise" and "Engage" inertia starter switches together (to keep cranking), but when the rest of your Flight is waiting for you to start so's you can pull out onto taxiway in proper order, that's what you do.

Of course one of the first things when you've got it going is to check all hydraulics, but why would you leave the d/brakes out ? There's always the chance that you'd forget and try to take off - but you'd only do that once ! (Vlad shows another one doing exactly the same).

Checked my log book for EZ971 - but never flew it.

4.14

Now this is all Vlad footage. Macaque has got up there at last and gambolling all over the aircraft. Gunner will be lucky if he doesn't get bitten. But now we have rough dates. Sqn Ldr Ira Sutherland (RNZAF) took over from Sqn Ldr Prasad in Feb '44. Oddly I don't remember any pet monkey at all. Boss Sutherland did not strike me as a man who would take much interest in small furry things (except in curries). But I was away from end of February till early June, so the little animal might well have come and gone in that time

5.15

Now we go back to the "wide open space" I mentioned at the start. It is probably Paphamau. Fine shots of VVs landing etc. Note long take off runs (and these aircraft would be at least 2,000 lb lighter than in 'op' trim), and the choking dust in the dry season.

And that's about it. Thanks, Chugalug, for this link which has given us so much interest. Now if you (or anyone else) wants a real hoot, run the little (6.31 on side show) computer-generated offering. The compiler's idea of a VV pilot's instrument panel recalls exactly your comment on your soi-disant "Stearman Panel" ("All the right instruments - but not necessarily in the right order !") This is a real dog's dinner, and the "designer" who has obviously taken immense pains to get the detail right, has based it on the Narellan cockpit. For what else could he find to rely on ? And he's not the only one to have been "led up the Garden Path" in this way. No less than an A.P. (a Pilot's Notes) has fallen into the same trap.

There is a Post to be written about that and I may get round to it.

Cheers, Danny.

Gaudeamus igitur, Iuvenes eramus ! VJ Day today ! Break out the Guinness and make Wassail !

:ok:

Chugalug2
16th Aug 2015, 11:16
Danny, I had not anticipated for a moment that my idle posting/plagiarising of a YouTube video on the EZ999 thread would have given you so much to consider and question. Even less did I realise that the whole shebang had decamped to this thread (though in truth here is where it belongs). So apologies all round for my lack of response.

Having said that, I hope that your questions are not directed at me, for the little I know of the Vengeance, and the Squadrons that flew them, I have all learned from you! It seems to me that you suspect this video to be a bit of a ringer, ie it does not hold true as to what it purports to represent, which is to show an operational squadron at work. My thoughts are much the same, that there is a lot of "playing to the camera", work that would have been done in various workshops by armourers, radio fitters, etc is being done on the aircraft.

Could this be a case of a limited amount of film stock, the limited time to shoot it, and an intention to get everyone (including the monkey) in on the act? A sort of dumbed down version of the famous 'day in the life of Hemswell' video? Just a thought...

Oh, just to add, I am delighted that EZ999 is now given the Danny "Seal of Approval", that the Mark that did the real war work is indeed in preservation. If our long peregrination has achieved aught else, it has at least shone a light onto this RAF/RAAF/IAF "Stuka" and that it did do what it said on the tin, limited in time and place though that might have been.

Danny42C
17th Aug 2015, 06:48
Chugalug,

No, my questions were purely rhetorical (the beauty of this Thread is that there's always the chance of finding someone who really knows the answer). I agree that this looks like some home cameraman's (illicit) wartime record, in the form of a montage of his training days, for private viewing. I never saw an official RAF film camera crew all the time I was out there. Post-war, it probably first passed to Bharat Rakshak and has now surfaced 70+ years after the event. I never thought that any cine film like this even existed (until I found it here).

Now we can lay EZ999 down to rest, for the story is becoming clearer by the day. As I see it, this A-31 (I'm going to use US terms from now on - as we get tangled up in all our Marks) was probably given to the Technical College intact. Specifically, it would have had an A-31 cockpit and panel, and a twin-Browning in the rear. Then the wreckers (sorry, Tech students) got at it - and really went to town !

Away went the guns (where ?), someone fancied the A-31 pilot's panel and had that away, too. In return they put in all sorts of wonderful things (do you remember those coloured signal lights ** under a wing ? - which never flew again anyway - and an optical gunsight ##). Now they (or Harold Thomas when he found it) needed a replacement panel. They couldn't find an A-31 panel, but managed to get hold of an A-35 one (I can't be sure even about that, it might be a complete bodge-up from Lord knows where, bearing no relation to an A-35 or anything else).

Notes:

** mmitch link in 132/2638

## What on earth for ? As I've said, the idea of air combat in a VV would make a cat laugh: you could strafe with them, I suppose, but that task was better left to the more agile aircraft specialised in the job (in our case, the Hurricane IIC and Beaufighter). But the designer of the VV "animation" (the "6.31" thumbnail on the side of the YouTube under discussion) has bought into the idea all right !

Likewise, it needed rear gun(s) to go on display. They can't find any twin 0.300/.303s, but here's an old single 0.50 - stick that in, it'll do (who'll know the difference ?). So the matter rested, and everybody was happy - until some pesky folk on PPRuNE come along and say "Hey-oop something's not right here !"

Then were we all "up the creek without a paddle", for the plain fact seems to be that there are no genuine photographs of the pilot's panel in an A-31 or an A-35 anywhere. Anyone who wants one has to fall back on the "iffy" thing at Narellan. Peter C. Smith uses a photograph of it on Page 3, and a carefully detailed drawing of the same thing appears as the Appendix 5 to his "Vengeance!" - and he would certainly have put other photographs in if he could have found any.

Somewhere on this Thread (around page 131) there is a Post that shows (from a Link ?) an illustration (from a sketchy Pilot's Notes - pukka, has an A.P. number) of the front cockpit of an A-35 (maybe intended for the TT conversions in the UK ?). I know it's in here somewhere, for I've seen it . Can I find it now ? I can not.

Whatever, they have a photograph. Guess what ? (our old pal, again, of course). They have carefully overlaid it (as they do with all PNs) with traces back to identify each item. At least one defeated them: two levers in a quadrant on the right side, roughly opposite to the u/c and flap on the left.

They don't know what these are, I suppose - and I have no idea what they might be. There are other items that have foxed them, but I can't remember now. The trouble is: I can't recall exactly what the A-31 panels looked like (it's been a long time !) but they were sensibly laid out, with the flight instruments laid in the middle in strict RAF "Sperry Panel" order, all the engine clocks on the right and the others on the left, odds like the ammeter and fuel and hydraulic power along the bottom. The switch gear was below.

I've never set eyes on an A-35, so I don't know what it ought to look like, but I bet it was nothing like what's in EZ999 now !

Hipper 129/2579 (May, 2012) may be of interest - but I'm not buying any CDs !

Danny.

Chugalug2
17th Aug 2015, 07:49
Danny:-
Somewhere on this Thread (around page 131) there is a Post that shows (from a Link ?) an illustration (from a sketchy Pilot's Notes - pukka, has an A.P. number) of the front cockpit of an A-35 (maybe intended for the TT conversions in the UK ?). I know it's in here somewhere, for I've seen it . Can I find it now ? I can not.I suspect that the link that you are looking for was posted by me, Danny. I did so for a copy of AP 2024D Vengeance MkIV "Target Tower" Pilots Notes on the Avialogs site. You can "thumb through" the notes online, but to download the .pdf file it requires a paid subscription I'm afraid.

No illustrations I'm afraid, just "Roneo'd" text, but that might include some useful information:-

A.P. 2024D Pilot's Notes for Vengeance IV Target Tower - 2nd Edition (http://www.avialogs.com/index.php/aircraft/usa/vultee/a-35vengeance/a-p-2024d-pilot-s-notes-for-vengeance-iv-target-tower-2nd-edition.html)

No other A-31 or A-35 literature that I can find, but the library is always being added to at Avialogs:-

Avialogs: Aviation E-Library and more (http://www.avialogs.com/)

Edited to add that I haven't found any links to any genuine Vengeance Instrument Panel illustrations either, but Hipper's post #2579/p129 does have links for purchasing a CD from NZ with various Vengeance docs (including the same MKIV Pilots Notes):-

Flight Manuals on CD - Vultee A-35 Vengeance (http://www.flight-manuals-on-cd.com/A35.html)

Danny42C
18th Aug 2015, 03:21
(In Draft on NotePad 17.8.15.)

Chugalug,

Many thanks for the information. I remembered that Avialogs had come into the story in some way and have sent a message on their website system, asking what they've got on the A-31 and A-35. Their Website says they'll "send me an email in a few days". Will wait in hope............

This came today:
Reply: 17.8.15. 1546
Benoit de Mulder,
"Hi,
The Pilot's notes is available here:
http://www.avialogs.com/index.php/aircraft/usa/vultee/a-35vengeance/a-p-2024d-pilot-s-notes-for-vengeance-iv-target-tower-2nd-edition.html (http://www.avialogs.com/index.php/aircraft/usa/vultee/a-35vengeance/a-p-2024d-pilot-s-notes-for-vengeance-iv-target-tower-2nd-edition.html)
You can read it online (like all avialogs manuals) but you can not download it without a subscription.
Best regards, Benoit"

Googled it up, but got no further than a pic of an A-35 and the cover of the PN. (Probably me doing something wrong !). :confused: Will resume hunt through back Posts tomorrow.

Danny.

Danny42C
18th Aug 2015, 04:12
Chugalug,

Hallelujah ! I've found it (p.136/#2715 from 682al). The same old photo, as we surmised !

Search over, RTB. :ok:

Danny.

Three Wire
18th Aug 2015, 06:12
Danny,
you may have been here before, but I will put it up again.

ADF Serials - Vengeance (http://www.adf-serials.com.au/2a27.htm)

this goes directly to the Vengeance page on ADF serials. lots of information herein, and all substantiated from record cards. The mods there do a lot of good work.

Unfortunately all the photos are external shots only.

3Wire:8

Chugalug2
18th Aug 2015, 06:47
http://i924.photobucket.com/albums/ad89/AirMinistry/InstrumentPanelRightSide_small.jpg
http://i924.photobucket.com/albums/ad89/AirMinistry/InstrumentPanelLeftSide_small.jpg
http://i924.photobucket.com/albums/ad89/AirMinistry/PilotsCockpitLeftSide_small.jpg
http://i924.photobucket.com/albums/ad89/AirMinistry/GunnersCockpitLeftSide_small.jpg
http://i924.photobucket.com/albums/ad89/AirMinistry/GunnersCockpitLeftSide_small.jpg
http://i924.photobucket.com/albums/ad89/AirMinistry/RadioEquipment_small.jpg


Well done Danny. I've reposted 682al's images here so that others may view them. He says that the pictures are from AP2024A Vol1, Vengeance MkI Pilots Notes, held at Kew, but I see that your post following identifies it as a MkIV cockpit. Confused? You bet! As to Avialog's response, it merely links to the same RAF Pilots Notes for the Vengeance IV (AP2024D) that mine did, thus no pictures at all.

lasernigel
18th Aug 2015, 07:49
Would love to know as a guy with Electronics training, what exactly did " Switch for destruction of R-3003 radio did"? Short out something?

Bushfiva
18th Aug 2015, 08:33
On other devices of the era, it would start a mechanical clock with a physical explosive charge. I assume this is an IFF box?

Danny42C
18th Aug 2015, 09:01
lasernigel,

The A-31s we had only had a weak R/T set. This thing has a "Radio Telegraph Key", so c/w comms. Presumably all the Oz A-35s were so equipped. Or were they ? How would their Navs and "straight" AGs have coped with a Morse Key ? (it's been a long time since the Navs were at ITW !)

Remember, this Narellan aircraft never flew (apart from a few hours before boxing-up and despatch). This radio gear (no idea, never saw it in my life) might have been only the bright idea of some Sydney Tech stude or instructor (Class Project: Design and build installation of this gubbins ?)

I understand that in UK, certain hush-hush items of radar, etc, were fitted with an internal demolition charge, actuated by the crew (or by an inertia switch in the event of a crash) to prevent the enemy from working out its modus operandi. But I have no knowledge of this.

Danny.

Fareastdriver
18th Aug 2015, 10:36
I don't know about the Victor or Vulcan but the Valiant had a destruct charge just behind the cockpit upper escape exit. That would have had to have been operated by the Navs or AEO. The pilots would have been more sensible and used their MB letdown facility.

lasernigel
18th Aug 2015, 12:10
Whilst in the Army 71-84, none of our radios either on tanks or support vehicles had this facility. Neither did the Sioux or Scout helicopters.
Maybe the Russkies already knew!:eek:

Chugalug2
19th Aug 2015, 12:51
Could those who understand the RAF AP classification system ("scriblies"?) tell us if AP2024A could refer to a different mark of the Vengeance to AP2024D, or would the latter be the same Mark as the 2024A pub but merely a different edition of the PN's for the MarkIV? It might be that both pilots notes (Avalogs and 682al's) are for the A35 version, hence the cockpit illustrations differing from Danny's Mk's I, II, and III.

In addition I suspect that there would be a waiver printed somewhere along the lines that "not all equipment illustrated is fitted in all aircraft". As Danny says, the SW Comms set illustrated would presumably be for use by a trained WOp (and I suspect require the antennae rigged from the wing tips to the radio mast seen on some of the IAF videos).

Of course, if Sir really only wants one slip indicator on his instrument panel then we can accommodate him, but our slogan at Scruggs Aviation is always that "Two Balls are better than one". :E

Danny42C
19th Aug 2015, 23:48
Three Wire (your #7312),

What an enormous treasure trove you've given me ! Already I've found out important things I didn't know before (such as the RAAF having a Chemical Defence Research unit of their own, dropping gas, using A-31s). And the RAAF having a hard time with them in the early days.

I'll analyse this and put it comments (but it'll take a long time - I worked up to entry 675 tonight, then went to the end, only to find that there are 4,000 + more to go). :*

Meanwhile many thanks for the link - it'll keep me busy for weeks !

Danny.

Danny42C
20th Aug 2015, 01:54
Chugalug (your #7319),

We seem to have settled one problem (the identity of the Narellan Vengeance), only to embroil ourselves in another.

First, who writes "Pilot's Notes" (I mean what organisation ?) Boscombe Down ? or who ? Whoever, they * produced this hand-made A.P 2024 for the benefit of the small number of pilots who flew the only A-35s which came to the UK and Australia (for conversion into Target Tugs). Now in all the PNs I've ever seen, they have fully docketed photographs (usually in Page 2 or 3) of the cockpit from all angles.

* Note: "Gage" - the US spelling of the word.

In the UK, they had the A-35s in front of them (also in US). Had nobody got a camera ? Doesn't Consolidated Vultee have a photo ? Appears so, as the A.P. 2024 authors have had to fall back on our old Narellan friend, the panel of which is in the Camden Museum exhibit. And the Museum states the carcase (despite all appearances to the contrary) to be an A-31, and we've all now accepted that because of the full provenance, Slow Flyer's evidence, and the evidence of our own eyes #.

# Note: 12th Aug 2015, #49 on "Will the real EZ999 please step forward ?" Thread:

Danny to BBad,

"Thanks for the links ! - No.2 and No.3 don't add much, but No.1 is the winner! Clear as day on the fuselage sides are the bolt etc. holes for the wing attachments. Even to my unskilled eye, it's plain that there was zero AoI. Proof Positive !"

Who knows what the front cockpit of an A-35 originally looked like ? I've never seen one: all I know is that what is now in the Camden Museum cockpit is nothing like an A-31. Was it from an A-35 ? Dont know - what it is was once an A-31 panel which has passed through the hands of a generation of Technical College students and may now be a one-off like nothing else on earth. (Chugalug, you may remember the "Stearman Pilot's Panel" that came on the market - and which we tore to shreads !)

For the authors of the A.P. to use this in their PNs for an A-35 seems unwise (to say the least). Is there any record of what the Tug pilots found when they climbed into the cockpit with it ? :confused:

Enough already, more later.

Danny.

jaganpvs
20th Aug 2015, 02:01
Danny,

First thank you for all the comments and observations on that Vengeances of 8 Squadron video. it was a delight to go through them . Your analysis of the crew, the ground crew etc bought a smile to my face. I have never observed that the observer was standing up and watching the guy in the front during the start up sequence till i read your post!.

That video is actually from the Australian War Museum collection .. originally from this page https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/F02561/ and as such was an official film and not someone's personal home film.

As you may have remotely guessed, I was the chappie who decided to download the soundless (and soul less) film, upload it to the bharatrakshak youtube account and annotate as much as I can . I had been eyeing that entry in the AWM Catalog for about 15 years now.. and one fine day i saw they uploaded the video...

My intention is to take all the videos with no names and details and populate it with as much information as i can. towards this I use a feature in youtube called "Annotations". Those annotations wont appear on small devices like phones or tablets, but they do appear if you watch the video on a computer. I have a couple of other 'annotated works' in the bharat rakshak channel. Here is another https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QtLwn5sSmsI and one more.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygVsqTVfpWk

I am very much inclined to take some of your comments and annotate the 8 Sqn Vengeance video all over. it would make it even more delightful viewing!

Chugalug2
20th Aug 2015, 07:45
Danny, I had missed the "gage" giveaway, almost certainly these pics had a US provenance. Do I remember rightly, that you were never issued with RAF Pilots Notes for the A31/Mk1, I wonder if they ever existed?

Other than the AoI difference, the main difference is that the A-35 was a USAAF aircraft, the A-31 not (operationally that is). Thus the former had official USAAF Pilots Notes, which might have been reproduced in RAF format for the MkIV. So the AP 2024 illustrations could indeed be of the A-35 cockpit.

Now we come to the very last A-31, EZ999. Was it produced after A-35s were in production? Could it be that the "improvements" (other than airframe) required in the A-35 were incorporated into the end of the A-31 production run? Perhaps EZ999 was used as a prototype for the A-35 'internals' before being knocked down and shipped?

Boscombe Down is indeed involved in the production of Pilots Notes, though whatever specific unit actually publishes them these days is no doubt a different one to that in WWII. It might be of some interest that the Chinook 'Mid Life Upgrade' testing at Boscombe Down used a MkI airframe fitted out with the FADECS etc of the MkII, so there is precedence for such arrangements. It was that very Mk1 that BD grounded because the FADECs was found by them to be "positively dangerous" and they urged the RAF to ground their Mk2's too (which were inexplicably already in squadron service!). The RAF didn't, the following day the Mull tragedy happened, and the aftermath is still with us....

Danny42C
20th Aug 2015, 15:38
jaganpvs,

Thank you for the Post (haven't we met before ?) and the links. The first was before my time in the IAF, but the second <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QtLwn5sSmsI> has a "Chopra" at 2.01

I know that "Chopra" is a not uncommon name, but might this be the ebullient Flt Lt "Pop" Chopra, "A" Flight Commander on 8 Sqdn when I was there ? (The RAF "B" Flight Commander was Flt Lt Bill Boyd Berry), and Sqn Ldr N. Prasad was in command.

Now <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygVsqTVfpWk> shows a lot of earlier Hawker Harts and Audaxes, but if you stay with it, a following series of videos, including "Southern Air Command" and "80 Golden Years of IAF History" (or something like it) comes up.

Tomorrow will try the Vengeance YouTube again, to see if I can find the follow-up I mentioned to Chugalug, to check if I can recover the one on the IAF's modern machinery. Of course, feel free to stick my comments on that one with the monkey - if you'll take any flak that comes up !

Danny42C

CharlieJuliet
20th Aug 2015, 16:50
Hi Danny, According to the history of the RAF Handling Squadron aircraft handling information (Pilot's Notes) was provided from the mid 30s by pilots who flew each new type. Initially parts of CFS were involved, and this task seems to have moved to several different units. In the early days the pilots flew the aircraft and then wrote handling notes, and were given access to the aircraft at the beginning of its RAF service. Notes were written for all aircraft used by the RAF (including aircraft from the USA), and latterly for Army and Naval aircraft. With the advent of Lightnings, Javelins etc Pilot's Notes were considered to provide too little information and so the Aircrew Manual arrived - a much more comprehensive document. At about this time the pilots on the squadron (who were known as 'fumblers') stopped flying the types they wrote about as it was too expensive. So maybe one of these pilots wrote the Notes - with the Phantom we wrote our own Aircrew Manual and didn't use the USN Manual.

jaganpvs
20th Aug 2015, 17:07
I know that "Chopra" is a not uncommon name, but might this be the ebullient Flt Lt "Pop" Chopra, "A" Flight Commander on 8 Sqdn when I was there ? (The RAF "B" Flight Commander was Flt Lt Bill Boyd Berry), and Sqn Ldr N. Prasad was in command.

Danny, spot on - he is the same Chopra - "K H S" or "Kanwar Haveli Shah" Chopra who was Flight commander with 8 Squadron.. and my goodness, when i posted that IAFVR Pilots youtube link, i was hesitant because it has nothing to do with 8 Squadron or Vengeances.. well turns out I forgot this connection..

Yes, we did interact on this thread earlier. though my last post is now about an year old (http://www.pprune.org/military-aviation/329990-gaining-r-f-pilots-brevet-ww11-301.html#post8585601)

Danny42C
20th Aug 2015, 21:29
Chugalug,

From memory, there were sketchy Pilots Notes for the V.72, issued by Vultee. They were not of much use. (I recall that they recommended, in the event of a stuck-up u/c - "reduce speed as far as possible, and use rudder to yaw the aircraft vigorously from side to side" (?? - this struck us as a fair way to induce a spin). But by the time we got them, we could have written much better PNs ourselves. All our knowledge was gained from experience and transmitted by word of mouth.

I'm afraid I don't know if the A-31 and A-35 production overlapped. Peter C. Smith reports that the Vultee V-72 cockpit was originally planned to RAF requirements (after all, we were paying for them !), to become the Vengeance Mk.I. But the Americans took some of the production, called it the A-31, and rearranged the cockpits to their own design. This may have been carried over into the later A-35s. But this is guesswork.

I know nothing of helicopters or their operation, and I do not wish to re-light the old controversy here, but I agree with you that the Mull of Kintyre accident and its consequences leaves a bad taste in the mouth.

I started on a review of the A.P.2024 illustrations, but it became too big to handle now, and I'll Post it another day.

Danny.

Danny42C
20th Aug 2015, 21:51
Charlie Juliet,

Thank you for the detailed information on PNs (YLSNED).

The "Aircrew Manual" long pre-dated the Lightning era, Browsing on the Brazilian River in search of a PN for a Spitfire XVI, I found on offer an Aircrew Manual for the Spitfire as well.

Danny.

Danny42C
20th Aug 2015, 22:09
jaganpvs,

Well re-met !

So I've hit the nail on the head ! "Pop" Chopra (I never ever heard of him called anything else - "Pop" is an affectionate US term for "Father") was always "the life and soul of the party".

Danny.

Danny42C
20th Aug 2015, 22:36
Some time ago on this Thread there was a discussion on the various nefarious ways in which the red dye could be taken out of red diesel and petrol, so that you could run road vehicles cheaply (illegally) on it without much fear of having "your collar felt".

On "Yesterday" Channel (19) 18.8.15., on "Wartime Farm" (1100), there was an incredible demonstration of a method I had never heard of before. A 800 gm loaf of bread was upended, a hollow dug in the end, red petrol poured into this dribbled out the other end gin-clear.

I don't think the programme was a "spoof". Anybody else heard of this (or is prepared to try it ?

Danny42C

Stanwell
21st Aug 2015, 10:01
That's a new one on me Danny but I don't think it'd be a good idea to put any slices in the toaster. :p

Danny42C
21st Aug 2015, 19:18
Stanwell,

No, but the best use for this steam-baked white pap that comes wrapped !

Real bread tastes better.

D.

Stanwell
22nd Aug 2015, 07:34
That's fine, I bake my own.
The Narellan Vengeance discussion has been most interesting.


BTW, looking at the ADF Serials site, I couldn't help noticing how many VVs came a cropper as a result of undercart (and also possibly brake) problems.
What was your experience of that, Danny?

Danny42C
22nd Aug 2015, 09:52
Chugalug,

The "F-35" has its nose in front by 110 Posts now. What else can there possibly be to talk about ? As I see it there are only two questions:

1. Are we going to get it ?...... 2. If we do, will it work ?

There is one sure-fire way of settling "2". Find a war going on somewhere and think up a rationale for supplying a few F-35 to one side. There is nothing like a war for showing what kit works - and what doesn't ! (I've been told the "Sidewinder" was "Road-tested" in this way, but then you hear all sorts of things).

Revenons à nos moutons.

----------------------------------------------------

What we do know is in front of us now. First, what an "embarras de richesses" ! Specifically;

A P 2024A VOL 1 SECN 3

I have listed all the items, and have added comment but just annotated many of them briefly as follows:

"NK" (No knowledge it is simply beyond me)

"##" (This is an item fitted to an A-31, and seemingly carried over to the A-35)

"//" (An item not fitted to an A-31 - but might well be on an A-35)

"DK" (I never heard of any A-31 or A-35 flying at night. IMHO it would be almost impossible, for the flame dazzle from the stacks would compound the difficulty caused by the long nose's restriction on forward visibility. Anyway, it's a Dive Bomber - and "the dog has to see the rabbit !"

"??" What is this ?


Cockpit Spotlight....................DK

Parking Brake Control.............##

Manifold Pressure
Gage Drain Valve....................//

Vacuum Regulator Valve.........??

Tailwheel Lock Control............## A nuisance. Didn't need it, most people kept it unlocked all the time.

Cockpit Heater Control............// Well, they were going to the UK.
^^^^^^^
RIGHT SIDE
-----------------------------------------------------------

Gun Safety Switch.................// Suppose we might have had one, can't remember.

Cowl Flap Control.................## I was about to suggest that for one of the two knobs on the right quadrant (which have foxed the writers - they don't know either).

Optical Gun Sight Rheostat....// Suppose they mean "Reflector Sight" I've already stated my opinion of that whole idea.

Volt Ammeter......................##

Fuel Gage Lamp Rheostat......DK

Switch for destruction of
R3003 Radio and Safety Switch
for same..............................NK

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
PILOT'S INSTRUMENT PANEL FIG 3
LEFT SIDE
-----------------------------------------------------------
Trap Tank Valve Control........// The only "Control" the A-31 Trap Tank ever had was the switch for the original electric pump before that was replaced by an EDP

Fuel Pump Control Panel (includes
pump switches, Trap Tank Test switch
Fuel Pressure Warning Light and
Lamp Test Switch)...............## A-31 had just a row of six switches for the wing tank pumps, plus one for the Trap Tank.

As for the rest......................//

Ring Sight Stowed................// You would have to, or it would be in the way of your Reflector Sight

Landing gear and
wing Flap indicator...............##

Static Pressure Selector
valve..................................##

Hydraulic Pressure Gage......##

Ignition Switch...................## This would have been the standard US 5-position rotary "OFF-BAT-L-R-BOTH"


^^^^^^^
LEFT SIDE

Aileron Trim Tab Control......##

Directional Instrument Lamps
Rheostat.............................DK

Cockpit Lamps Rheostat.......DK

Starter Switches..................## (Powered inertia type) Looks as if two separate "Energise" and "Engage" switches were provided for the A-31. Many other types had only a three-way switch: "Energise-Off-Engage", so you couldn't keep cranking. See Post #7306 at 3.38 into the video.

Electrical Switches for Oil
Dilution..............................//

Primer Pitot Heater............## The A-31 had a Pitot Heater (I think). But what does "Primer" mean ?

Instrument Lamps..............DK

Formation Lamps................DK

Navigation Lamps and
Landing Lamps...................DK

Provision for Optical
Gunsight...........................// This is the hole in the angled panel below the main panel

FIG 3
------------------------------------------------------------

A P 2024A VOL 1 SECN 3

Throttle Warning horn cut-out
switch.................................................//

Left side gun charging
handles................................................// Interesting. Suppose we would say "Cocking Handles". We didn't havethem on the A-31s, so a dud round meant a dead gun. But I'd think it would be a bit of a heave to cock a 0.50 !

Directional Instrument Lamps
Rheostat............................................DK They never flew at night. They must mean the DI. So we're back again with the problem of the Two Balls (I have a theory - Rabelaisian comment not welcome !).

Flight Report Holder........... ..// See the Story of the Form One over the Everglades (in my Posts somewhere !) EDIT: P.119 #2362

Fluorescent Lamps................DK

Mixture Control....................##

Throttle Control with Bomb
Release Switch.....................##

Blower Control.....................## Supercharger gear selector

Propeller Pitch Control..........##

Landing Gear Control............##

Wing Flap Control.................##

Dive Brake Control...............##

Bomb Door Control...............##

Rudder Trim Tab Control.......##

Elevator Trim Tab Control.....##

Bomb Control Panel...............##

Fuel Gages...........................##

Emergency Fuel Pump
Control................................## Pilot's (Dual) Wobble Pump.


A P 2024A VOL 1 SECN 3

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
PILOT'S COCKPIT CONTROL ARRANGEMENTS - LEFT SIDE
FIG 1
---------------------------------------------------------------


A P 2024A Vol 1 Sect 3

Gunners Control Stick (Stowed).................## This fitted into a socket on the gunner's cockpit floor. He had this, a rudder bar and a throttle - but nothing else. In the A-31, there was an ALT and an ASI above the Chart Table. He could fly home with this, but couldn't land. It was useless for the purpose of instruction, but each new A-31 chap had one ride in this with an
"experienced" pilot up front, and then he was on his own.

No problem, for in those days there was no dual Spitfire or Hurricane, you just read the PN, hopped in and flew.

Support for Astro Compass..........NK

Stowage Clips for Signal Pistol
Cartridges.................................##

Gunner's Throttle Control...........##

Cockpit Lamp (hidden by
structure).................................DK

3615 Station Box......................NK

Gunner's Control Stick
(Stowed)..................................##

Mounting Shelf for Aperiodic
Compass...................................NK

Gunners Emergency Fuel
Pump Control............................## This is the dual "Wobble Pump" handle !

But what on earth is that extraordinary hinged structure in the middle of the cockpit floor behind it (just in front of the gunner's seat ?)

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
FIG 1 GUNNER'S COCKPIT AND ARRANGEMENTS LEFT SIDE FIG 1

A P 2024A VOL 1 SECN 3

Gunner's Cockpit Lamp Control Box................NK

Radio Telegraph Key......................................NK

Radio Transmitter - Type 12D........................NK

Chart Board................................................## (On which "Stew", my gunner, banged his nose and lost his sense of smell). EDIT: P.143 # 2860 & P.144 #2878

Mount for Astro Compass..............................NK

NOTE

For views of remainder of radio equipment, refer to Fig 2 of Secn 1 and figs 1&2 of Secn 3


Fig 1.............Radio Equipment..........Fig1


Chugalug (Your #7313)

Confusion worse confounded ! This is my analysis. We know that this A-31 started off with the correct A-31 panel (which doesn't bear the slightest resemblance to what we have here). My guess is that at some stage an A-35 panel * was transplanted into its place. Then the engineering students played with it for 20-odd years, and now we have this. It is the very last thing that the compilers of A.P.2024A should have used in their illustrations, as it may now be a one-off.

Note * Items like the angled extension at the lower end of the panel, the gun cocking handles and the "optical sight" look to me like belonging to a factory-produced A-35 fit. I don't think the Sydney Tech College was responsible for any of these.

And now we come to the problem of the duplicate ball instruments on the panel. Remember we are now concerned with a '40-'45 aircraft, not with modern Heading Instruments (?). Clearly nobody needed them. For years up to the '70s the RAF had the Turn'n Bank, the US the Needle'n Ball. Under the hood we all slaved away on Limited Panel (in my case "Needle-Ball-Airspeed") until our eyeballs were rotating. The DI in the RAF was our old, penny-plain version. Five degree markings (guess anything between) and a locking knob below.

But at the same time an Improved Version seems to have appeared in the US. This had one-degree gradations and a ball below. (Why, when everyone had one [or our "Bank"] next door on the panel already ?). Be that as it may, some manufacturers took them up, Curtis (P-40 for one, I've checked on Google for pics of the panel), the two are there all right - but they are some distance apart, so there could be an argument for two, whereas on the A-35 they are side-by-side).

Did any British manufacturer fit these ? Everything I've flown (including the US BT-13, AT-6, P-47 and A-31 had only one) - and I felt no pain !

Somebody out there has the answer to this.

Danny.

Danny42C
22nd Aug 2015, 10:24
Stanwell,

Yes, they do seem to have had a lot of trouble with the u/cs, particularly in the early days, don't they ? We had very little trouble with ours, the undercarriages themselves gave no cause for concern, and I suspect finger trouble might be at the root of it, but would not have expected that, for surely your people would be in the 250-350 hour bracket when they came to the A-31s.

The electric fuel pumps were our nightmare, having to "wobble-pump" home was an everyday occurrence until they put in an EDP for the Trap Tank. And of course you could not operate with the things until we'd got that sorted out !

Danny.

MPN11
22nd Aug 2015, 10:30
But what on earth is that extraordinary hinged structure in the middle of the cockpit floor behind it (just in front of the gunner's seat ?)
Could that be some sort of cantilever 'seat raising' mechanism to give the guy in the back a better view of proceedings when towing a target?

Chugalug2
22nd Aug 2015, 13:27
Danny, your post 7334 is tribute indeed to your dedication to this thread, and gives us all a quick reference to the differences of the A-31/35 'internals'. Your conclusion sounds to me to be the most likely explanation of the seemingly hybrid nature of EZ999's cockpit arrangements, that it was saved as 'the last of the A-31 line' but the later and better equipped A-35 internals allowed for better instructional opportunities.

Having said that, a couple of points to raise:-

First, are you saying that there was no lighting at all in the A-31, no nav lights, no cockpit lighting, no landing lights, etc? I take the point that Dive-Bombing is a daylight occupation, but the way there or back could be before daybreak or after sunset could it not? OK the aircraft didn't lend itself to night flying but war has a way of inflicting its own agenda (like a delayed RTB due avoiding an enemy fighter?). If the A-31 was so deprived, I think that the USAAF would have required a minimal night/low vis capability in the A-35, wouldn't you?

Secondly, AP 2024A presumably preceded AP 2024D (the Roneoed no illustrations austerity RAF MkIV Pilots Notes). If it was the MkIV 'master reference pilots notes' (one copy for Wg Co Flying only?) it was published with US illustrations of the A-35 generic aircraft and not the much later post-war Narellan fitted panel, modified or otherwise. I suspect that the AP 2024A illustrations are of the A-35 ex-factory gates cockpit, and as 'shoe horned' into EZ999 as you suggest. Do you concur?

Danny42C
22nd Aug 2015, 15:04
Chugalug,

The difficulty is that this saga is so full of "most likely"s. I am rather hoping that we may hear from Slow Flyer, for by all accounts he did much of the engineering work needed to prepare the Narellan Vengeance for display, and though perhaps not an instrument specialist himself, he would surely know something of the history of the cockpit furniture in it. For it is a truly wondrous thing.

If only we could get hold of someone who flew them or in them in their TT role, we could ask him, but the chances of finding any more pilots or engineers of that era are vanishingly slim now, and when you narrow it down to the small number of TT operators, it must be nil.

I am at a disadvantage as I've never even seen an A-35, and my memory of the contents of my A-31s is growing mistier by the year. Of course the A-31 must have had a full kit of night flying lighting, but as I never recall switching my nav lights on even once in the three years I had them, I wouldn't have an idea where to look for the switches. And this specimen has all kinds of coloured lights under a wing and Lord knows what else besides - no wonder the lower panel has such a mass of bolt-on switchgear.

An A-31 certainly had no landing or taxi lights, I'm sure about that. But nobody in India/Burma ever tried to fly them at night: we never even considered the possibility. As for the USAAC, they didn't want the A-35 by night or by day and never attempted to use them operationally.

Certainly the Technical College disposed of the A-31 front cockpit panels early on, and got an A-35 set from another scrapyard, but what went into it after that is anybody's guess. I am satisfied now that EZ999 is an A-31, but the rest is guesswork. Do I concur ? Yes, I do !

MPN11,

Unlikely as it sounds, your idea is the only one in town so far. Or it could be a "clothes-horse" to dry your kit in the monsoon ? Really, the longer I look at it, the more mystified I am. One of the long members has a series of holes drilled in it, obviously to make adjustments - but for what ?

I'm beginning to think that we've learned as much as we shall ever know of the hidden life of EZ999 !

Cheers, both, Danny.

MPN11
23rd Aug 2015, 09:27
Unlikely as it sounds, your idea is the only one in town so far. Or it could be a "clothes-horse" to dry your kit in the monsoon ? Really, the longer I look at it, the more mystified I am. One of the long members has a series of holes drilled in it, obviously to make adjustments - but for what ?
I hadn't been drinking when I posted, so it was just an off-the-hip instant reaction :cool:

The adjustment holes facilitate the TT Operator getting the optimum height for his task? Seems a rather luxurious arrangement, to be sure! But then a built-in clothes-horse would be even more luxurious! ;)

However, as you noted in your post above ... ... but the chances of finding any more pilots or engineers of that era are vanishingly slim now, and when you narrow it down to the small number of TT operators, it must be nil.


Frustrating, innit? :sad:

Geriaviator
23rd Aug 2015, 15:34
I uncovered treasure trove last month, a 1957 copy of Enemy Coast Ahead by Guy Gibson VC, published by Pan and with price 2/6d on the cover. When I first read this book I was still a teenager, and 60 years later if anything it's more gripping than ever.

Gibson was killed in September 1944 and even then was questioning the war which had claimed so many of his comrades.

"The scythe of war, and a very bloody one at that, had reaped a good harvest in Bomber Command. As we flew over the low fields of Holland, past dykes and ditches, we could not help thinking: 'Why must we make war every 25 years? How can we stop it? Can we make countries live normal lives in a peaceful way?' But no-one knows the answer to that one.

"The answer may lie in being strong. A powerful strategic bomber force could prevent and strangle the aggressor from the word Go. But it is the people who forget. After many years they will probably slip and ask for disarmament so that they can do away with taxes and raise their standard of living ..."

Danny42C
23rd Aug 2015, 18:14
Geriaviator,

Gibson was prescient indeed:

Santayana is known for famous sayings, such as:

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it",

(Lifted from Google)

D.

Warmtoast
24th Aug 2015, 11:52
Danny42C

Clearing out my library for disposing of on eBay I found this article about the Vengeance in The Encyclopaedia of World Aircraft (1997). Not sure if It adds anything to what has been on here already, but passed on FWIW.


http://i145.photobucket.com/albums/r231/thawes/Image2_zps65iqad4b.jpg



Vultee V-72 (A-31/A-35 Vengeance)
The Vultee V-72 represented continuing improvement of the basic V-11/V-12 design, and with knowledge of the successful application of dive-bombing techniques in the Spanish Civil War the V-72 was designed to incorporate such capability. This development came at the right moment for a British purchasing mission of 1940 which, with even more comprehensive knowledge of the potential of dive-bombing, placed an order for 700. Built by Northrop and Vultee, the latter having inadequate production capacity, these aircraft were designated Vengeance Mk I and Vengeance Mk IIB, respectively, by the RAF. Following the introduction of Lend-Lease in 1941 the USAAF ordered 300 more aircraft for the UK, allocating the designation A-31, and Northrop and Vultee-built examples of these aircraft had the respective RAF designations Vengeance Mk IA and Vengeance Mk III. With experience of the vulnerability of the Junkers Ju 87 to its own fighters in the Battle of Britain, the RAF realised that the Vengeance was unsuitable for deployment in Europe and used them to equip Nos 45, 82, 84 and 110 Squadrons in Burma where they had considerable success.

When the USA became involved in World War II, the USAAF commandeered 243 of the aircraft in production for the UK and these entered service as V-72s. Vultee then built 99 aircraft designated A-35AB, which differed in armament and equipment, followed by 831 A-35B aircraft with increased armament and the Wright R-2600-13 engine. Of this total, 29 were supplied to Brazil, plus 562 to the UK which designated them Vengeance Mk IV. The RAF transferred a small number to the Royal Australian Air Force and also converted some as Vengeance TT Mk IV target tugs; almost all of the USAAF's aircraft were used in this latter role. Variants included the XA-31A static test airframe, becoming XA-31B when used to test a 2237-kW (3,000-hp) Pratt & Whitney XR-4360-1 Wasp Major engine, plus five XA-31C conversions from A-31s as testbeds for the 1640-kW (2,200-hp) Wright R-3350-13/- 17 Cyclone engine.

Specification:
Vultee A-35B Vengeance
Type: two-seat dive-bomber
Powerplant: one 1268-kW (1,700-hp) Wright R-2600-13 Cyclone radial piston engine
Performance: maximum speed 449 km/h (279 mph) at 4115 m (13,500 ft); service ceiling 6795 m (22,300 ft); range 3701 km (2,300 miles)
Weights: empty 4672 kg (10,300 lb); maximum take-off 7439 kg (16,400 lb)
Dimensions: span 14.63 m (48 ft 0 in); length 12.12 m (39 ft 9 in); height 4.67 m (15 ft 4 in); wing area 30.84 m2 (332.0 sq ft)
Armament: six 12.7-mm (0.5-in) machine-guns, plus up to 907 kg (2,000 lb) of bombs.

Danny42C
25th Aug 2015, 07:26
Warmtoast (your #7342),

This is like the "curate's egg" (good in parts !).

The line drawing of the A-35Bs supplied to the Free French in North Africa is interesting in two respects: the original exhaust stubs have been elongated to release any flame behind the pilot (clearly to assist night flying), our AT-6As in the States were the same for the same reason, (and it allowed for the incorporation of a cockpit heater, the air warmed by a heat-exchanger from the exhaust gases).

And the last two sections of the canopy over the gunner are missing (the curved one over the gun, which we found a nuisance, and threw out), and also the section before it (I don't see the point of this, I suppose it would improve the gunner's all-round field of view - but he would get wet when it rained). From what I read, the French had a lot of engine trouble with these aircraft and didn't do much with them.

The descriptive part is generally in accordance with the known (?) facts. Going through it, I would only take issue with:

The omission of the IAF Squadrons (7 & 8) from the "line-of battle" in Burma.

"...Vultee then built 99 aircraft designated A-35AB, which differed in armament and equipment..." This skates over the major "improvement" (at the behest of the USAAC), which distinguished the A-35 from the A-31: the re-setting of the A-35 wing at a 4° Angle of Incidence (the A-31 was zero). This should have helped in landing, particularly at night, for now the nose problem would be no worse than in any other s/e aircraft of the time.

Now we come to the "Specifications". Oh, dear ! (for we enter a dream world, think of the mfrs mileage figures quoted at the bottom of car advts).

First, I must stress that I've never seen an A-35, much less flown them. But all A-31s and A-35s look exactly alike, have the same dimensions, the same internal tankage and very little difference in power (1700 hp against 1600, a 6% increase). Against that, the A-35 wing loading at max AUW was 49.4 lb/sq.ft, an increase of some 15% over the 43.1 of the A-31.

Here are Danny's Specifications for A-31 (based on 400 hours of operating the beast). I see no reason why an A-35 would be any better.

Max speed level: ca 220mph at sea level, say 260 TAS at 10,000. (Never needed to use it)

Cruise: 160 mph IAS.

Climb (full load, in formation of six) 110-120 mph. To 12,000 ft bombing height, about 20 mins

Terminal velocity with dive brakes out: 300 mph.

Range: 400 miles, which was plenty for the deeper trips in Assam (to the Chindwin villages where Intelligence said were being used as staging posts for Jap stores moving up-river by night)

There is absolutely no reason for a dive bomber to be based more than 50 miles behind the lines of the Army it is supporting (in the Arakan we were about 30-40, you move up [or back !] with them). Anything more wastes fuel: and you increase "turnround" time, which makes you less efficient as you mount fewer strikes between dawn and dusk.

(The range of 2,300 miles quoted for the A-35 can only mean a ferry range. At (say) 160 mph cruise, that would be 14½ hours hand-flown strapped onto a lumpy "K" dinghy. Not an inviting prospect ! Guess a consumption of 55 Imp galls/hr, you'd need 800 galls. Internal tankage was 220 US galls, 185 Imp; that would mean 615 galls in long range tanks in the bomb bay. Say 8lb/gallon for fuel, extra tanks and plumbing, that's another 4920lb extra).

Can't be done, you wouldn't get off the ground :eek: - the figures don't add up. Where did they get them from ? And where on earth are you going to need to ferry them so far ? Put 'em in a box and onto a ship - or on a carrier deck.

An A-35 can have 5x or 7x 0.50s on board, but not 6x. :=

Danny.

Danny42C
25th Aug 2015, 07:39
MPN11,

À propos of the funny thing in the back of the Narellan Vengeance, it strikes me that it looks like a complicated Zimmer Frame (after all, the poor old a/c has had a hard life, and it is 70-odd years old).

Not reached that stage yet, thank God. :*

Danny.

Danny42C
26th Aug 2015, 03:12
Three Wire (your p.366/#7312 and my reply #7320),

I've worked through more of your: "ADF Serials - Vengeance" <www.adf-serials.com.au/2a27.htm (http://www.adf-serials.com.au/2a27.htm)> and realised that the list of comments and questions is going to be far too long to put out on Post, so I'll just copy your link (above) to anyone interested, and draw attention in a PS to the C/N numbers which particularly caught my eye. Once again, thank you for this 'steer' !

Danny.

PS:

What an unrelenting tale of woe ! (we thought we had troubles enough in India/Burma, but.......)

416 417 418 420 435 441 455 457 602 (a real jinx if ever there was !) 603 604 605 627 628 629 632 (I simply cannot account for this explosion) 635 (my line of business on 1340 Flight) 640 643 (Peter C. Smith's "Vengeance") has the full pilot F/Sgt Limbrick's story and pics) 646 651 (bullock on runway !)

EDIT: Note 675, this also happened in India, the fabric covering of the elevators was replaced by metal.

720 (EZ999 our old pal) 4312 (I like the name !) 4341 (Tragic ! The airmen on the wings should have been hanging onto the dive brakes - but could they have been just sitting with legs dangling over the leading edge ?) 5096 (horrific story of the W/Cdr passenger being burned to death in the air)

It just goes on and on !

D.

mikehallam
26th Aug 2015, 21:09
Danny, thanks for the pointers.

I looked at that list, so much information, but a few things I picked out might lead local enthusiasts to dig up more gen. Perhaps being outside the Australian military grip they may have been preserved or stored & provide clues in the quest to resolve the panel configuration, etc.

Namely
A27-247 A31 Mentioned in 2006 at Wangararratta, Victoria (possibly ex Water World, Albany W.A.
A27 256 A31 Sold at Auction April 1947
A27-288 A31 sold 29 June 1951 via R.H Grant to Horsham Foundry.
A27-625 A35 "instruments granted to Bundaberg Aero Club".

I also note some a/c never reached Australia and were repossessed by the USAAF. Again there's a faint chance they may have kept an example ?

mike hallam

Danny42C
27th Aug 2015, 03:14
mike hallam,

The first three quoted are all "British Contract" (two in AF series and one AN), you could do what you liked with them: the British taxpayer had already bought them (ie, as items covered by a US $ loan which was only repaid decades later).

But all A-35s were supplied under "Lend-Lease". The fine print specified that, if the Australians had not "bought them back out of LL" when hostilities ceased, then they must be completely destroyed so that no part of them could come on the market to compromise new US sales.

Instruments would be a prime example of exactly what the US wanted destroyed. The only way in which these could have been "instruments granted to Bundaberg Aero Club" is if the Australian Government had bought the whole aircraft back from the US. Surely not ?

The US does not seem to have kept any (and the Smithsonian Museum has no A-31 or A-35). If Consolidated Vultee had kept one, it would not have been hidden so long. There were rumours that there was one in Pakistan, but, if true, it would surely have surfaced by now. I think we have to reconcile ourselves to the fact that the only example extant is at Narellan. I would discount efforts, however praiseworthy, to build another from bits. It ain't going to happen. :(

Danny.

Danny42C
27th Aug 2015, 07:46
On 30 Mar 2012 on p.124/#3463, harryhrrs made his first PPRuNe Post on this thread, and was warmly welcomed aboard. He was an ex-RAF Armourer of WWII, about my age, and I asked him to confirm what I'd vaguely heard when I first met the Vengeance, namely that the US Browning 0.300s in the rear had been replaced by British Browning 0.303s, in the first place because these had been found to be more reliable, and secondly because ours had been modified so that when firing stopped, the breech block was held back by a "rear sear" (shades of ITW !), whereas the 0.300s stopped forward with one "up the spout".

With these there was a danger that with a vey hot gun, this round would "cook" and go off by itself, whereas the round on our block, held back clear, would not. Not only that, but ours, particularly in a wing mounting, would have cooling ram air flowing through it after firing, but the 0.300 didn't. It seemed an obvious question to ask an armourer, and would help to "break the ice". I asked harryhrrs.

In fact, I could easily have got this informaion from Google/Wiki, but I was an IT sprog then (still am) and it didn't occur to me till long after. We never heard from him again. This was by no means an unusual occurrence, we have ofteh had "birds of passage" like this (and he was 92). But in recent times I have come to wonder if perhaps he resented my question as being an attempt to check his "bona fides" (which it certainly was not - although we have had our share of Walter Mittys), and retired hurt into his shell. I hope it was not so. :confused:

Danny42C.

MPN11
27th Aug 2015, 12:30
Excuse my trivial intervention, but I started skimming through the ADF Serials list (http://www.adf-serials.com.au/2a27.htm) provided by Three Wire and came across a couple of strange entries [I stopped at A27-92].

The following may be a clue to the "Zimmer Frame" shown in Post #7313 from Chugalug2.

A27-7 "Pilot was F/O A L Place Ser#424453, Instructor Pilot W/O W G Barnes and A/Ob was AC1 J O'Brien."

A27-49 "(Pilot) P/O R L Eskerine Ser#419119, Passenger Sgt P West Ser#41360 and (A/Ob) F/O K A Woods Ser#419363. "


Having unveiled what seems to be a 3-seat variant of the VV, perhaps the "Zimmer Frame" in #7313 is indeed a third seat, stowed folded when not in use? Perhaps a local Mod in OZ to suit a specific requirement?

I await incoming from Danny42C, who will undoubtedly deny ever encountering it. But then these 2 were OZ-based (7OTU and 1APU) aircraft, not his operational Jungly ones ;)

Danny42C
27th Aug 2015, 22:58
MPN11,

No "incoming" from me, I can assure you, my dear Sir ! Never having seen an A-35, I cannot be dogmatic about what there was there originally.

We know that the shell of EZ999 (an A-31) is there, but what has been done to it afterwards is anybody's guess. I suppose that if you removed the navigation table, there might be sufficient room to put in a folding "jump seat" in the space just forward of the gunner's seat. But the structure does not look strong enough to provide much anchorage in the event of a crash.
Even so, in view of the ADF Serials (I hadn't spotted the "third man" entries), I think you have hit the nail on the head. Take a bow ! https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRJ0wmGmJIyNthxQ0EjNAlt15HlC6aoMlYBgNjfTbB mOWhubpgWIFWWYz4 (http://www.google.co.uk/url?url=http://photobucket.com/images/take%2520a%2520bow&rct=j&frm=1&q=&esrc=s&sa=U&ved=0CCoQwW4wBGoVChMI4e7Nva3KxwIVFEfbCh2pZgco&usg=AFQjCNEkhZbox-9yD66JtPjv5Q3gCWxVdg)


We never flew with more than a two-man crew. On transit flights, extra passengers sat on the floor behind the Gunner (from memory, no more than two if the guns and mounting were still in, more if they had been taken out - I have heard tell of a dozen, but find this hard to believe. They had no safety belts at all, and so bound to be injured in any but the slightest "shunt"

Danny.

Geriaviator
29th Aug 2015, 17:17
Browsing the www. aviationarchaeology.org.uk website I came across the following in their crash listings:
16 April 1945 Vultee Vengeance TTIV HB456 crashed during unauthorized aerobatics over Burton-upon-Trent. F/S W. Saul was killed. Also killed on the ground were: Ivy Goy (29), Elizabeth Banton (60), Edith Baker (25), Brian Baker (20 months), Agnes Jones (59). Four others were injured.

Danny42C
29th Aug 2015, 19:09
Geriaviator,

As a VV can do aerobatics in the same sense as an elephant can be trained to waltz, I am not surprised that F/Sgt Paul came to grief. He would have been a Target Tug pilot (for that it is all they were used for in UK).

"Unauthorised aerobatics over Burton-on-Trent" - words fail me ! And my deepest sympathy to the unfortunate victims. Even allowing for the exuberance from seeing victory in sight, he should have known better. A F/Sgt had 12 months experience before he got his "crown". :=

Danny.

Slow Flyer
31st Aug 2015, 10:53
Hi Danny and avid Brevet thread die-hards,

I cannot believe that this VV thread continues to run with such vigour. Now regarding the panel fitted to the Camden VV....

From my recollection it is an original (in most elements) VV panel. The obvious new material replacements (added by the Sydney Tech students or by Harold Thomas) were the electrical panel directly above the Aileron Trim and the panel above the Trap Tank selector. Both were approximate reproductions of the original fit items (refer to the photo illustrations in the AP posted by Chugalug #7313).

When I was working on the aircraft 30-odd years ago the panel's wiring and associated fittings appeared to be (mostly) original fit. The AP shows a subtly different panel to EZ999, but it's close enough to state it was the same aircraft mark. The question really rests with; is the illustration in AP2024A an A31 or an A35? From what I have seen of the Camden VV I tend to say the former.....assuming EZ999 was actually assembled with a A31 panel. Remember it spent an extended period at No.2 Aircraft Depot (over 12 months) and there is no record of what was done to the aircraft during that time. I know that's drawing a very long bow, but other than some instruments and the two previously mentioned panels, mostly it looked wartime fit. Why the Oz 1a VV had a different fit-out to the VVs flown by Danny in India has me stumped:confused:

SF out.

Fareastdriver
31st Aug 2015, 14:12
Coz they had to fly upside down.

Danny42C
31st Aug 2015, 22:00
Slow Flyer,

Where to start ! As you say: "The question really rests with; is the illustration in AP2024A an A31 or an A35? From what I have seen of the Camden VV I tend to say the former......"

I flew all the A-31s (Vengeance I - II -III). They all had identical panels, and I can confirm that this panel in AP2024A (whatever it is) is not an A-31 panel. Never having seen an A-35, I have assumed * that it must be (or have started out as) an A35 panel.

There are items in it which I assume * must originally have been there: the angled-out panel at the base of the main (vertical) panel looks like a factory-fitted item, in which a hole had to be cut for the beam of the optical gunsight (the projector seemingly fitted somewhere below). This begs another question: Why put an optical gunsight - or a retractable tailwheel - into an aircraft which needs them as a fish needs a bicycle ? It makes no sense !

Note *: Occam's Razor creeps in !

To summarise: you think the panel is from a A-31, AP2024A says it is an A-35, I don't know what it started as, but it certainly nothing like an A-31 now . The Museum director (see extract from my Post [#12, 4.8.15. on the EZ999 Thread] to Megan below) is unlikely to be of much help:

"Megan,
First, your Museum Director has given you the "Party Line", but appears not to be up to speed on the history. [says] "It did have a 50 cal mounted in the rear pit, but its not known when it was fitted, or by whom, now removed - didn't think to ask, but probably a result of the government gun buy back after the Port Arthur massacre". But we know, don't we ? (ask Wayne Brown, if he still lives, or buy a copy of [PCS] !)"

Danny.

PS: Is there one pilot out there, who has flown in a cockpit with the duplicate ball instruments on the panel, who can tell me the advantage of that arrangement ? AFAIK, it did not appear on British aircraft - at least not on the ones I flew ! :confused:

Fareastdriver
1st Sep 2015, 10:33
PS: Is there one pilot out there, who has flown in a cockpit with the duplicate ball instruments on the panel, who can tell me the advantage of that arrangement ? AFAIK, it did not appear on British aircraft - at least not on the ones I flew !

Have a look at Sgt Copping's Kittyhawk found in the Egyptian desert.

http://http://forum.warthunder.com/index.php?/topic/92382-kittyhawk-fighter-recovered-largely-intact-from-the-sahara-desert/

There appears to be two instruments with a ball incorporated, the lower one has been damaged. As one of them is at a high level near the gunsight one could surmise that it is there so the pilot can ensure that the aircraft is correct in the yaw mode so as to increase the accuracy of fire.

A dive bomber would, I feel, have a similar commitment to accuracy so maybe that is why two slip indicators were incorporated.

One for heads down instruments, one for heads up killing.

Geriaviator
1st Sep 2015, 14:02
I think FED has found the answer, a standard blind flying panel supplemented with an extra ball in line of sight. I once spoke to a former Hurricane pilot who explained the principles of aerial gunnery, in particular the need to avoid yaw. Seat of the pants feel is essential but he took a quick glance at the ball as he was sighting. It must have worked as he had shot down three enemy aircraft.

In exchange for helping dismantle a time-expired Sea Vixen my Naval friends gave me its ball indicator, a stand-alone tube in a small housing like a pocket spirit level. This I mounted above my Tiger Moth crashpad so it was just below my line of vision and found it a great aid to accurate flying. For example, an inverted TM (with engine stopped, gravity fuel feed) requires almost full right rudder to overcome yaw caused by the windmilling prop. In this condition it descends only slightly less quickly :uhoh:

Danny42C
1st Sep 2015, 15:21
Fareastdriver,

Yes, I have seen that sad picture. Poor devil !

Certainly one ball is a help in ensuring that your guns are pointed at what you have in your sights, but why a second one ? It must there for a reason, but what can it be ?

As for dive bombing, the only Vengeances that ever did any in wwII were our A-31s: we only had one (in the needle&ball instrument). In any case we didn't have to use it: our vital actions before dive included: "All trims neutral" (I was told that the fin was mounted without any offset [normally there to counter the "swing" from the prop rotation] - but never read anything to support that). Slow Flyer would know ?

Whatever, after you set 2100rpm and pulled the throttle back to one-third, it went down straight as an arrow. Then any time you could spare from keeping your yellow line on target had to be spent watching the ALT - for obvious reasons ! Thought has just struck me: if the N&B was in a horizontal position, would the ball work ?

Douglas SBD Dauntless Flight Operating Instructions Section 1, Fig 2: shows a single ball instrument on panel (I cannot "lift" that picture), but the Google Image on left shows two, the one on the right, one !

You pays yer penny and yer takes yer choice ! Whichever, they did all right at Midway.

https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRLOtAtx2LN-L_YgjiT2gg0rG2wjHuLCcYwztrOpi0Mue_YFto_EjCKsA (http://www.google.co.uk/url?url=http://pwencycl.kgbudge.com/S/b/SBD_Dauntless.htm&rct=j&frm=1&q=&esrc=s&sa=U&ved=0CBwQwW4wA2oVChMIubeLsYzWxwIVBNSACh1Vngmf&usg=AFQjCNHpOYONokSU5AucJT55HqpWrkewjQ)https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTYlD89jrmVeHavHO11ADe7InsKbmRmkmVDawgQFnN uL-iL3poqMjpn0Kc (http://www.google.co.uk/url?url=http://www.aircraftresourcecenter.com/awa01/501-600/awa537-Dauntless-Bailey/00.shtm&rct=j&frm=1&q=&esrc=s&sa=U&ved=0CB4QwW4wBGoVChMIubeLsYzWxwIVBNSACh1Vngmf&usg=AFQjCNF3F1JgTYvnensQqN7Mq9MtdLQR9A)https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRtIhyvDC7fgQkvhWxlNwa95CRB-wYIZxm-3abBqApdtGWVBynjC_8lYuM (http://www.google.co.uk/url?url=http://www.mnstarfire.com/ww2/history/air/USA/SBD.html&rct=j&frm=1&q=&esrc=s&sa=U&ved=0CCAQwW4wBWoVChMIubeLsYzWxwIVBNSACh1Vngmf&usg=AFQjCNHAJxdxmYtwMiWUtzqFtMaP62LOCg)

Another hare running (pile in, chaps !)

Danny.

Fareastdriver
1st Sep 2015, 18:31
A ball will work in any attitude. Standard technique with air driven instruments is to monitor the ball and T&S when doing aerobatics so as to maintain a uniform pattern. I would say that two balls were useful because in the heat of battle one would like to have the final polish in his line of sight.

Are you sure that there would be no variable yaw effect in a dive? Irrespective of the rudder offset the torque on the engine is going to reduce as the airspeed increases at a constant power setting. The residual roll will be corrected by aileron which will induce yaw. Should this not be corrected then the aircraft will be pointing in a different direction than the line of flight.

As a lowly Pilot Officer I got into a severe argument with some senior navigators during my Valiant conversion course. The party line was that if a bomb was released by an aircraft in a turn the bomb would fly even further off target than it would have done before. I insisted that it would continue at a tangent to the circumference of the turn. My card was noted as being stroppy.

So they sent me to tankers instead of the Main Force.:):):):):):):)

Petet
1st Sep 2015, 18:34
This may be of interest re the Vultee Vengeance:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/8270787@N07/sets/72157605269786717/page3

[Scroll down to near the bottom of the page, or just enjoy all the other photographs in the folder if it has been seen already]

Regards

Pete

Danny42C
1st Sep 2015, 21:38
Geriaviator,

I did not spend much time doing loops in the VV (although it would do them, and barrel rolls, too). But all I did was to look out at the wingtips to make sure that I kept level with the horizon, and never looked at the ball. If you're at the top of a loop in your TM, pulling 1G, does the ball still work ? And didn't a T&B (aka T&S) come with it ?

Don't ever remember trying to fly a VV inverted. I think it would revert to its default (ie brick) mode immediately. Going straight down was what it liked best !


Fareastdriver,

Ah, but how would a N&B work when a VV attained terminal velocity in a vertical dive, and there was no further acceleration ? (it reached 300 mph (brakes out) quite early - around 9,000 ft if you started from 12). But that can only be an academic question, as we would be standing on the rudder pedals on the way down. There was no time to fiddle around with rudder trim. All we could do was to "weathercock", using aileron, to take off any drift and keep line on target. It worked quite well in practice, most people having only a small residual "line error", but a possible larger under/overshoot one if their dive was much less than less than 90° and they hadn't adjusted correctly by "leading" the target with the nose for the last 2,000 ft.

This (hopefully) would bring the "SubVV Point" back over the target at time of release, and we didn't fall for that "throw the bomb off to the side" hoary old fallacy (to adjust for line error) which you correctly (if stroppily !) identified. It's where the aircraft is at point of release that counts - not where the nose is pointed !

Yaw was not much of a problem, as the combination of high speed and an enormous fin took care of it.


Pete,

Thanks for the link, tried it but it won't work as I'm stuck with the Windows 7 that came with the laptop four years ago. Please don't tell me how to fix it - it will be far beyond my feeble intellect - intend to put laptop into hands of friendly local IT wizard soon to MOT it, unship nasties and get it in condition to last me another (?) few years.

Anyway, I think I've probably seen all the VV pictures there are already !

Cheers to all three, Danny.

EDIT:
Can nobody tell me why you would need TWO balls on the panel ? And were any British aircraft so equipped ?

(References to the unfortunate Samuel Hall not needed or wanted).



D.

Geriaviator
3rd Sep 2015, 17:08
Danny,

Yes, the TM does have a turn and slip in the centre of its panel and very well it works. It's fine for learning instrument flying but does require the driver to look down during aeros. I never looked at the slip pointer (I think connected to a pendulum) when inverted.

Hence the Sea Vixen ball which is just that, like a pocket spirit level about three inches long. Mounted atop the cockpit coaming behind the windscreen it was at eye level so could be watched as well as the horizon and showed the slightest slip/yaw in any attitude. This is why I thought the high-level ball might have been an aid to gunnery.

My ex-CFS instructor Desmond set very high standards and admitted there was some improvement in my flying thereafter. He told me that if I couldn't feel the aircraft skidding via my a*** he was glad I could see it in my ball :uhoh:

Danny42C
3rd Sep 2015, 20:52
Geriaviator,

I'm still unconvinced that a ball device (analogous to the "slip" in a T&S) would indicate correctly when the curved tube in which it moves is in the horizontal plane. Gravity works vertically, so I would have thought that it would have no effect on an object able to move only horizontally.

Both my 90° dive N&B and your top-of-loop tube are in that condition, so.......? Whichever way that cat jumps, the Second Ball Question still waits for somebody to take up the gauntlet.

The USAAC in my Stearman days and your Desmond were of the same mind. They put me in a cockpit with no ASI and IIRC, no N&B (we never did any "under the hood" at Primary), and said "Go fly, boy !" Then you learned what "the seat of your pants" was useful for !

Danny.

Fareastdriver
4th Sep 2015, 09:21
They put me in a cockpit with no ASI and IIRC, no N&B

Didn't you have the weighted pointer under the top wing? The one where the weight pulled the pointer to zero but it was then blown into the speed scale by the airflow.

Flying by TSOYP you will be pushed to the cockpit side by the yaw forces when out of balance. The ball replicates this by gravity pushing the ball to one side which is the same effect. As long as the instrument is under positive 'G' it will do this irrespective of which way up it is. Ask any Boeing 707 prototype.

I still think that it was there as a easily seen last check in the panic of battle to get the aircraft in trim for accurate weapon delivery.

Union Jack
4th Sep 2015, 10:50
Sorry FED, I can't resist drawing attention to the following from your associated new thread on the Flight Testing forum entitled:http://www.pprune.org/flight-testing/567158-twin-ball-indicators-ww-ii-aircraft.html

Some older and bolder than me are either in agreement or not convinced:uhoh:

Jack

Fareastdriver
4th Sep 2015, 19:21
Union Jack


Danny.

PS: Is there one pilot out there, who has flown in a cockpit with the duplicate ball instruments on the panel, who can tell me the advantage of that arrangement ? AFAIK, it did not appear on British aircraft - at least not on the ones I flew !

That is why I went to the TP thread. Hopefully one of them may know some wizened old Vultee or Curtis test pilot rocking away on his veranda who can supply the answer.

Danny42C
4th Sep 2015, 22:29
Fareastdriver (your #1 on Flight Testing),

Thank you for widening the net ! But if you needed a second ball to help with gun aiming, the proper place for it would be at the bottom of the sight, wouldn't it ? Not to say that it wouldn't be a bad idea. IIRC there was a case in Burma when a Spitfire came in on a vic of Jap bombers, opened fire on No.3 - and shot down the No.2 on the other side !

(your #7364 here)

Some early TMs (and I suppose the previous Gypsy Moths) had a primitive ASI on a wing strut, consisting of a spring-loaded flap and pointer, which the airflow pushed back over a metal quadrant calibrated in 10mph stages. Your "weighted pointer" under the Stearman upper wing centre section sounds like the fuel contents gauge tube under the tank that lived there.

The Instructor (in front) had a pukka ASI in his cockpit, so there must have been a pitot head somewhere, but I can't remember where it was. The stude in back had none, but then he was ab initio, and what you've never had, you never miss. The Wright brothers got along all right without one.

I know a 707 has been barrel (?) rolled (there are pics to prove it), but when it was upside down its N&B would be in the same horizontal position as Geriaviator's ball in a curved tube. Of course inertia would then play a part, but surely gravity could not affect its behaviour ?

Union Jack,

Thank you for pointing me to FED's Post on "Flight Testing". Old, bold pilots do not (by definition) exist. (Old pilots - and very few bold ones - do). This old one is still unconvinced, but open to reasoned argument.

"Flight Testing" may turn something up. But does anyone know of a double ball in any British fighter aircraft ? Certainly not in Master, Hurricane, Spitfire, Vampire or Meteor. We have plenty of members to speak for their successors.

Cheers both, Danny.

PS: FED, just seen your latest to Jack. D.

Fark'n'ell
5th Sep 2015, 06:00
707 Roll
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AaA7kPfC5Hk

Fareastdriver
5th Sep 2015, 10:02
I have dug up a picture of a Curtiss Helldiver's cockpit.
http://www.photodave.net/2004album/10oct/airshow27.jpg
The aircraft is preserved and some of the instruments are obviously new. On the coaming in front of the pilot is what appears to be a second Turn & Slip. It looks old and original but I cannot positively identify its purpose.

Geriaviator
5th Sep 2015, 11:28
Danny,

Sorry, I should have made clear that my Sea Vixen ball was in a straight tube not curved, and worked perfectly when turned 180 degrees as in inverted flight. Maybe 'flight' is the wrong word for an inverted TM which descends like a brick, but it showed me the need for full right rudder to counteract the windmilling prop, and almost full forward stick to maintain nose-high attitude in the glide.

Desmond my instructor reluctantly agreed that it was difficult to fly by the seat of one's pants when one's backside was half an inch off the seat no matter how tight the straps. It was good training for later graduation to Stampe and Zlin with their inverted fuel systems.

Union Jack
5th Sep 2015, 11:36
Thank you for pointing me to FED's Post on "Flight Testing".

:ok:

Jack

Danny42C
5th Sep 2015, 19:16
Fark'n'ell (your #7368),

Thanks for the link ! Pity they didn't stay with the camera on the flight deck all the way round, but impressive just the same. I suppose there is nothing in principle to prevent you from barrel-rolling anything , but a 747 or an A-380 would be worth seeing.

The follow-up shows a chap in a B-52 enjoying himself hugely, chucking it around like a Spitfire - until he pushed his luck too far, and made a spectacular exit. It's happened before and it'll happen again. :=

Cheers, Danny.

Danny42C
5th Sep 2015, 20:21
FED,

What a nice, neat cockpit ! I could live with that. I don't see another ball anywhere, but I like the combined AH and DI (nicely positioned to the left of the N&B). An early attempt at the Flight Director idea, perhaps ? There is an E2 like compass up top, the thing half obscured by a reflection must be an ASI, I suppose.

But there are sharper eyes than mine on tap !

and:

Geriaviator,

Now you've really got me foxed. If your tube was straight, and the aircraft level, why would the ball stay in the middle ? (Is there an instrument fitter/mech in earshot ?)

I still don't get it. Look at the N&B in the cockpit that FED has just got for us. The ball is in a curved tube, so as it is, gravity takes it to the lowest point. In the same way, a spirit level is slightly curved up, so the bubble must go to the top (same idea as the bubble sextant).

But if the N&B instrument is in the horizontal plane, then as far as the ball is concerned, it's in a straight tube like yours - there is no lowest point to go to ?

Or am I just thick (a distinct possibility !) :confused:

Cheers, both, Danny.

Fareastdriver
5th Sep 2015, 21:31
There has been 396 views of my question about a duplicated slip indicator on 1940s American aircraft. So far, one comment, otherwise no answer.

I will have to punch into the deep recesses of the Internet ether.

Tomorrow.

Danny42C
6th Sep 2015, 03:18
FED,

I've had a look at the Google Cockpit Instrument Images for P-51 (which I have no knowledge of) and Thunderbolt II (P-47), which I flew for a few hours in India in WWII.

In neither case can I see a second ball on the panel, and I cannot remember a second one in the T-Bolt. As the reason offered for such a thing has been to assist the pilot in gun aiming, one would expect it to have been fitted in the (arguably) two most important "pursuit ships" flown by the USAAC in WWII.

What I do remember about the P-47 is the wide track of the u/c, which made taxying over rough ground so easy, and the bliss of a power-operated hood !

Danny.

olympus
6th Sep 2015, 21:29
As a long-time lurker on this thread I wonder if I could be permitted to recommend a book that I have recently read and enjoyed and which certainly falls under the thread title.

The book is A Quest for Wings, From Tail-Gunner To Pilot by G L Donnelly To quote the jacket blurb:-

"The author joined the RAF early in 1937. He first trained as a Wireless Operator (WOp) at RAF Cranwell and subsequently as an Air Gunner (AG) flying in Whitleys and Halifaxes with Bomber Command, and in Sunderlands with Coastal Command.
During this time he was involved in operational raids over Germany and occupied Europe, 1939-42, and anti-submarine operations over the Bay of Biscay 1942-43.
In 1943 he was selected for pilot training and went to Canada where he qualified and was commissioned in 1945. He remained in the peacetime RAF, flying piston-engined and jet-engined types until 1966 when he was invalided out of the service as Flight Lieutenant. During his service Larry flew over fifty different aircraft types".

Lots of interesting detail on service with the pre-war RAF and the route he took from 'Flying Bullet' badge to coveted flying badge. Includes being shot down and getting back to UK via the Comete line, and being awarded the DFM.

pzu
11th Sep 2015, 09:56
Olympus, I thoroughly agree with you re 'A Quest for Wings, From Tail-Gunner To Pilot" :ok:

On another tack, I was going to PM Danny with this link, but it may interest others on here

https://picturestocktonarchive.wordpress.com/2015/09/11/the-thornaby-spitfire-and-the-75th-anniversary-of-the-battle-of-britain/

PZU - Out of Africa (Retired)

Danny42C
11th Sep 2015, 20:05
pzu,

Thanks for the link. I think the "Stockton Archive" picture at the beginning takes us back to the earlier '30s - judging by the "cloche" hats of that era !

I left Thornaby in November '54, 608 Sqdn went to Malta for their '55 Summer Camp, and to Gib in '56: this will have been their last as the Sqdn disbanded in March '57 IIRC. From '48 to early '51 they had flown Spitfire XXIIs: there is a picture of one in the Archive. It was far more elegant with its longer Griffon nose, the Merlin Spits having more of a "pug" nose IMHO.

Somewhere in the Archive ('13) there is a comment by a George Joyce; as I remember he was (possibly) the first ex-NS pilot to join 608 as an Auxiliary at the end of his service. I think he later went on to BA flying 747s.

The Thornaby Roundabout Spitfire is, of course, a fibreglass replica. When Bentley Priory has to make do with a big Airfix model as a Gate Guardian, you can hardly expect Thornaby to have a real one !

Danny.

Danny42C
12th Sep 2015, 02:47
One of the more persistent bees that buzz in my bonnet concerns the loss ("washout") rates of RAF Cadets training in the U.S. Army Air Corps "Arnold" Flight Schools during '41 to '43 in WWII. I quote from:

[A] "The Official Website of - Arnold Scheme
www.arnold-scheme.org/The%20Arnold%20Register.htm?CachedSimilar (http://www.arnold-scheme.org/The%20Arnold%20Register.htm?CachedSimilar)"

and from:

"The Official Website of "The Arnold Scheme (1941-1943) Register™ "

"Unfortunately nearly 50% of British cadets did not successfully complete pilot training under the scheme, being eliminated ("washed out"), usually without the right of appeal. Between 1941 and 1943, some 7,885 cadets entered the scheme and of the 4493 who survived training, most were returned to the UK as Sergeant Pilots, with many being posted to Bomber Command". However, 577 of the graduates were retained for a period of approximately one year as Instructors." (nearly all for the BFTS; we had one P/O MacMillan posted to us at USAAC Advanced School, Craig Field, Selma in early '42; he must have been on 42A Course, graduating in the New Year, and cannot have had more than 8 weeks Instructor's School)

(All entries in italics are from the official websites: all my comments in plain text).

[A] Stats & Facts
______________

Total RAF Intake...............7885 Note [#1]

RAF cadets Eliminated at:
_____________________

Acclimatization Centres...........9
Primary Schools................2687
Basic Schools.....................526
Advanced Schools...............170
Cadets Killed in Training.........81
_______________________________So losses 3313, of which 3232 (97.6%)
......................................................were "washouts".


[Highest Rank achieved by RAF Graduate: Marshall (sic) of the Royal Air Force]
[Highest British Decoration Awarded: Victoria Cross]


Summary Stats by Class
____________________

Class Net Intake Graduated

42A........549........302...............(Reg Levy's Class)
42B........555........327
42C........632........405...............(my Class)
42D........651........399
_____________________________1433 Graduates from 2387 [#2] Net Intake, so 954 losses; 931 assumed "washouts" , (954 x 0.976). (39% of the intake).

42E........749........746
42F........753........747
42G........749..... ..738
42H........758........748
42I.........519........507
42K........507........493
43A........518........504
43B........518........503
_____________________________4497 Graduates from
...................................................5071.[#3] Net Intake,
..................................................so 574 losses; 560
...................................................assumed "washouts".
...................................................(11% of the intake).

Source: Dr Gilbert S Guinn
================

Note [#2] + [#3] = 7458, contrasts with [#1] (7885), a difference of 427 ?

* * *

How is the difference between the overall washout rates from Classes 42A - 42D (39%) and Classes 42E - 43B (11%) to be accounted for ? Any suggestions as to how this circle could be squared ? And even supposing it could, how can this possibly be ? Even with the introduction of a Grading school in the UK before transit to the US, you could hardly expect an improvement of this size. After all, 252 Losses in 42D and only 3 in 42E ? - Come on !!

For the proposal which was put forard was that a Grading School System be introduced in November '41, in which all LACs for Pilot training would do 15 hours dual (probably on a TM) in UK. Here the small proportion of no-hopers could be identified and weeded-out, and the "naturals" passed through at 2-3 hours as soon as their talents had been recognised. In this way a huge wastage of travel time, berth space and costs could be avoided. Good idea, but wouldn't this amount to re-activating the EFTS in wartime in the UK (which the Empire and US training schemes were specifically introduced to avoid ?

In any event, I never met anyone who had been through one of these Grading Courses, and think the idea was quietly dropped,

Some very top brass was concerned with the excessive failure rates in the US. Google-up, and select: "#5 British Flying Training School, Clewiston, Florida":

"The following article gives a short history of the BFTSs in the USA and, in particular 5 BFTS. If you are interested in the full history of all BFTS please click here * for a full article taken from "Air 41" History of the BFTSs in the USA. This is held in the Public Records Office, Kew Gardens, London".

* Click ! Look for: "Summary of RAF training facilities in America as by June 1941". Although this is naturally focussed on the BFTS, there is a useful bit about the "Arnold" Schoools at the end.

I've seen figures for the BFTS (but cannot trace the source again) which shows an overall washout rate of around 3% # and believe this was the ballpark figure for the Empire Flying Training Scheme. harrym, if you're on frequency, how about Canada ? How about Rhodesia ? (Anyone ?)

[B]# EDIT: Further grubbing around in Google turns up a single individual's estimate of 30% at his BFTS, and of course, from our point of view in tne "Arnold" Scheme: "the grass is always greener on the other side of the fence". D.

If we ignore the gross discrepancy between 42A-D and 42E-43B washout rates, a pat answer might be that the USAAC imposed higher standards and consequently had higher failure rates. That would imply that the successful candidates would be of a noticeably higher quality than the rest. As indeed they should be, as we all had 200 hours before "Wings", whereas the others had around 140 (this figure is extraordinarily difficult to tie down, as it varied from place to place and from time to time. I can only record that I never heard any such claim being made after I came back: we were all lumped in together and shared out for the next (OTU) stage of our training.

Danny42C :confused:

Chugalug2
12th Sep 2015, 08:23
Danny, kudos for your information packed post. It is obviously a preoccupation shared with most of us having obtained those revered RAF wings, whenever and wherever gained, as to how come I succeeded when others didn't? You will clearly have more answers to that conundrum re 42C or indeed the entire Arnold Scheme than others here, yet you pose the question. Might I tentatively suggest that there will be no clear answer for you, and theory and speculation will have to prevail.

For myself I can only contribute the trite observation that pilot training involves those doing the instruction and those being instructed. In your case the first were a peacetime nation now coming to terms with being at war, the second had come to terms and simply needed these skills to strike at a cruel enemy ASAP.

Armed Forces are very conservative institutions in peacetime and are only forced to adjust their ways and means under the pressures of war. Looking at your figures, it strikes me that the Arnold Scheme made that adjustment wef 42E. Whether that was so and where those pressures came from I leave to others to say, but I would guess that the RAF would have been alarmed at the high chop/washout rate from the very start. Inertia and resistance would have accounted for the few months delay while adjustments were made. In the event I am impressed at how short a period that was, but then things move fast in war...

Petet
12th Sep 2015, 09:30
Danny

Do you have the start dates for the various Arnold Scheme Courses?

Regards

Pete

Geriaviator
12th Sep 2015, 12:17
Danny,

Sorry I can shed no further light on the Sea Vixen ball which definitely worked in any attitude, except to say that it was filled with oil (?) or similar as it was heavily damped. I see there's a Vixen flying again, maybe someone could take a look?

Some readers of this thread may remember my ramblings about the Khormaksar Kids, growing up in the Aden of the early 1950s. I have heard from Graham, who owned Abdul the land crab. He (Graham that is, not Abdul who was unclean) has lived in Israel for many years and came across this thread when researching his family history. We are both amazed that Prune should travel so widely, and that our memories of RAF life are still so vivid, especially our attempt to convert the Station to Judaism and thereby avoid the ministrations of Padre Ashe :hmm:

Danny42C
12th Sep 2015, 23:54
Pete,

You might suppose that it would be easy to gather this information, and at first I thought that regle (RIP), who was on 42A, would give the start date for that (first) Arnold Course.

"Search" gave me: "......I can tell you what happened with the first course, 42A, that trained in the Southeast Air Training Center, USA and graduated on Jan. 3rd. 1942...." [regle p.75/#1567]. But he didn't give a start date on this, nor on a few of his other Posts before and after #1567.

But we have that date for 42B:

"...On the 17th July 1941, Allan arrived at Woodward Field, Camden, South Carolina, to attend the "Southern Aviation School" for flight training as part of the "Arnold Scheme". He was a cadet of Class 42B, the second class that attended the school. 42B meant that they should graduate in February 1942 (a 6 month course)...." [WW2 Service Record of RAF Pilot Allan Gent (1079136)].

EDIT: This picture of Sgt-Pilot Allan Gent is interesting: it is the first time I've seen both sets of our wings being (unofficially ) worn together ! And look at the RAF Wings (issued to us in Canada when we went back there after the States). The wings are significantly deeper than the British pattern - and no, it's not a RCAF badge.

http://www.andrewgent.me.uk/allangent/allan_gent.jpg

And I can give you 42C:

In the States I first flew on 2nd September '41, my recollection is that were put to work as soon as we arrived at Carlstrom Field. Now we know that: ".....and plans were swiftly put in place to send the first contingent of trainees over in time for the June 1941 intake, with subsequent contingents arriving every five weeks until March 1943...." [The Official Website of the Arnold Scheme 1941-1943].

regle says he graduated with 42A on 3rd January '42. I graduated with 42C on 6th March '42, so I seem to be running three months and three days behind him. The three days are not significant, but three months would put the start of 42A as 1st June '41. But Gent says that 42B started on 17th July, which would be more than six weeks after 42A......?

You pays yer penny and yer takes yer choice !

Danny.

Danny42C
13th Sep 2015, 01:11
Chugalug,

I think that your: "Might I tentatively suggest that there will be no clear answer for you, and theory and speculation will have to prevail" just about sums it up. It really doesn't matter now, and it was so long ago, and most of those involved will be dead.

But I've often thought that many potentially perfectly good pilots were lost to us among the 931 "scrubbed" from the first four Arnold Courses, at a time when we desperately needed them. As you say, there was always a considerable amount of luck in the "scrubbing" process.

Geriaviator,

Now I really think about it, it dawns on me that, even with a flat, stationary tube, and supposing that tube to be absolutely level, the ball (oil-damped as you say) would take up a position where it is normal to the "fall-line" (that all too apt term from the ski slopes !) So I am (reluctantly) convinced at last. Just shows: "Whereof you know nothing, thereof should you be silent" (Wittgenstein).

Now, anyone who has not already seen that priceless Post of yours :D(p.178/#3558 - thank you Google, as "Search" proved useless) must look it up now !

Cheers, both, Danny.

harrym
13th Sep 2015, 12:16
Danny, ref your 7379 grading schools certainly did exist - I myself passed through one at Marshalls (Cambridge) in May/June '43. The 'course' was 12 hours in a TM, mostly dual but a bit of solo came your way if good enough though this was not essential to qualify as a u/t pilot. Cannot recall what the pass rate was, but fancy around 65% or so.

Petet
13th Sep 2015, 14:18
Danny

In an attempt to assist with your conundrum regarding the elimination rates, I am working through the various files I have on Aircrew Training.

I am not sure how much of this you have already, but hopefully it will be of assistance. The following is extracted from AIR41/4 (my comments in italics):

"The first marked difference appeared in August [1941] when the pupils completed the primary stage of instruction. The elimination rate at the Arnold Schools was extremely high varying from 30 to 55% of the total number being trained while the rate of the BFTSs was low, averaging only 10% [The elimination rate at EFTSs in the UK and Canada was about 20%].

The causes were sought and found in the "toughness" of American instruction and the American Army's ruthless weeding out of all but the best on the one hand and in the civilian operators' enthusiastic determination to make BFTS training an outstanding success on the other.

American instructors had no standardised training in how to teach and were not persuasive enough in their methods to get the best out of British pupils. The United States Army could afford to reject all but the most naturally suitable men because it had an abundance of high grade manpower from which to select. British pupils needed time to become acclimatised to American conditions and in any case, compared badly with American pupils in simple common sense over the use of engines and brakes [Please don't shoot the messenger on this aspect!!].

The civilian operators however, added to the financial incentive of having few failures, had a sincere anxiety to help Britain by making the most of British manpower. One of them went so far as to make almost every pupil successful by paying out of his own pocket for whatever extra tuition was wanted.

The disquietingly high elimination rate in Arnold schools had several consequences. It set an awkward problem in disposing of the rejected pupils to other forms of air crew training, it wasted passages across the Atlantic at a time of marked shipping difficulty and it lowered the morale of pupils on their way to later courses in the Arnold Schools.

Arrangements were made for British pupils to have an acclimatisation period of three weeks in the United States at a US Army pre-flight school
[Montgomery] before starting flying training and to get some familiarity with the handling of a motor car during this time". [This was introduced in September / October 1941, presumably increasing the course length from 30 weeks (10 primary, 10 Basic, 10 Advanced) to 33 weeks and possibly improving the elimination rate (hence my interest in the course dates)]

...... more to follow if this is helpful

Regards

Pete

DFCP
13th Sep 2015, 18:56
Re Grading School----Certainly in March 45 "Pass" or "Fail "for a P categorisation seemed to be a function of whims and/or needs of the service.
All on my 16 EFTS course were ex UAS and 1/2 or more got P category and the rest N----not so I believe for ex PACT and General Entry candidates ---very few of them got categorised as P---not sure how many got N but I think A/G, s were in their mix.

ValMORNA
13th Sep 2015, 19:54
Danny,


I don't know if this will help your research, but my Uncle's log book shows him initially at 20 EFTS, Yeadon, in Nov 41.


His flying commenced in the USA on Feb 28th 1942, Course 42H, at Carlstrom. From May 1942 he was at Gunter Field then Turner Field until 30th August. Wings ceremony was on 6th September 1942.


Regards

Danny42C
13th Sep 2015, 23:49
harrym,

So the Grading Schools in the UK did exist after all ! but by '43 I was living the simple life in a bamboo basha with 110 Sqdn in Burma and wasn't giving much thought to Grading Schools back home. One thing is certain, they may have been a good idea, but it couldn't have produced any "Gradees" any earliee than Oct/Nov '41, which is when the extraordinary improvement in loss rates apparently occurred.

Really, 252 Losses in 42D and only 3 in 42E ! Even with all the explanations which have been put forward, there is no way this could have been achieved apart from "creative accounting" on a grand scale (and Dr.Guinn's 427 discrepancy which I noted in my p.369/#7379 does not inspire confidence in his other statistics).

Although the Arnold Scheme was being run-down at the time you were going through your Grading with Marshall's of Cambridge, it would seem that the loss rates in the BFTS and Canada were still such as to justify continuing with the Grading Scheme up to the end in '45.

DFCP, your dates, and ValMORNA (your Uncle's) tie in nicely with mine, and now, ValMORNA, we have the Grading Course start date (Nov '41 - couldn't have been any earlier). Your uncle seems to have been six months behind me in 42H.

My thanks to all, Cheers, Danny

Danny42C
14th Sep 2015, 01:18
Pete,

I must say I rather like the sound of your: "....The causes were sought and found in the "toughness" of American instruction and the American Army's ruthless weeding out of all but the best..." (Brings a warm glow to the heart, it do). And Reg Levy (RIP) did say somewhere that it was "the finest flying training in the World".

But my experience was that, although my Primary School at Carlstrom Field (like all of them), was now an Army Base, it was still manned by the civilian instructors who had formerly instructed there when it was the "Embry-Riddell School of Aviation". They were all in the "kind and patient" civilian mode (otherwise they'd have had no pupils and wouldn't eat). In particular, I shall always be grateful to Bob Greer (a quiet and unflappable young man from the Carolinas), who guided and encouraged me in my first, faltering attempts to get off the ground and (more importantly) get down again. His is the only one of my instructor's names that I can still immediately recall without reference to my logbook (and that says something !)

Basic and Advanced Schools had always been Army Bases; all instruction was from Army 1st and 2nd Lieutenants, almost to a man "creamed off" from Flight School. Whether this was good for their peace-time careers, I know not, but from Pearl Harbor onwards they had the frustration of seeing their former classmates going off to Europe and glory. while they were kept back in the States until the end of their instructional tour. Needless to say, we felt the difference ! :(

Even so as only 5% of our "scrubs" were at Advanced, 16% at Basic and 79% at Primary, we seemed to have taken this in our stride.

More tomorrow, Danny.

Danny42C
14th Sep 2015, 08:30
Pete,

Your: "...to have an acclimatisation period of three weeks in the United States at a US Army pre-flight school [Montgomery] before starting flying training". [This was introduced in September / October 1941, presumably increasing the course length from 30 weeks (10 primary, 10 Basic, 10 Advanced) to 33 weeks....]"

Not exactly, we had three eight-week sessions, I flew (PT-17s) 2 Sep'41-30 Oct in Primary at Carlstrom, 6 Nov-4 Jan'42 Basic at Gunter (BT-13s) and 13 Jan-4 Mar Advanced (AT-6s) at Craig Fields. The intervening periods were, of course, packing-up, transit and settling in at a new base. They totalled 14 days (which the BFTS avoided as all instruction was in one place).

The three-week "Acclimitisation" Course was just stuck on to the beginning of the flying Courses (as they'd be all classroom, how would you manage to fail ? - but nine of our chaps did !) Did the BFTS have this "Acclimitisation" ? (I would think not).

Gunter Field was at Montgomery, Ala - "The Cradle of the Confederacy" - the very heart of the Deep South. Surely they would have run these Courses there (where they would have us to talk to, and hear the real 'gen' from ?, but we never met any (or in town). Odd, that.

"Hazing" is often put forward as a reason for our perceived poor performance, but it could only affect the first Class (42A), as all the rest would be one RAF Class following another. And 42A's failure rate was 37% - better than the average of 42A-D at 39%.

As for: ".....compared badly with American pupils in simple common sense over the use of engines and brakes [Please don't shoot the messenger on this aspect!!]...", it should be remembered that at that time American teenagers had grown up with, and had much more access to cars, and could get driving licences much younger, than we in the UK, where cars were comparitively scarce luxury items. (I got my first licence a week after my 17th birthday, but that was atypical and may have influenced my selection at RAF Padgate in '40).

Given the same opportunities, our lads would have been just as good on the road, and every bit as handy with a spanner as their transatlantic counterparts, of that I'm certain !

Cheers, Danny.

Chugalug2
14th Sep 2015, 08:34
Danny, what was the mechanism by which people were "washed out" at the various schools? Did it require a check flight by the CFI? Who "sacked" you? I would suspect that it would not be your own QFI, though of course it would be on his reports that such action was taken.

Looking at your figures, of the mass cull at Primary School level, I suspect that "creative accounting on a grand scale" is the key. Presumably the USAAC had limited provision in accommodation, aircraft, and instructors, at the basic and advanced levels, requiring the thinning out at primary that 42C suffered, being overstocked to ensure a high standard of graduating students. The answer from the British point of view was of course to rapidly increase that limited provision. Indeed that might have been the plan from the very start but the pump was primed at the primary level and capacity expanded to reduce the wastage of competent students that you describe in later courses.

It is all very impersonal and Big Brother of course, but that is how you might rapidly get a pilot training scheme going in a foreign country by a foreign air force. The priority was the output which produced crews in profusion and in short order. That is what we needed to conduct war and that is what we got.

As I said on thread many posts ago. it was an amazing scheme, reproduced world-wide, and should be better promulgated by the media. Cue for a new TV series?

Petet
14th Sep 2015, 09:30
As promised, the following is the remaining text from the AIR41/4 section on Arnold Scheme:

“Another marked difference between Arnold and BFTS training appeared when the Arnold pupils went on to the basic stage and came under US Army discipline.

The American Army schools had a custom of reducing new pupils to order and putting them in their place by a rigid system of “cadet rules” calculated to produce a rather juvenile sense of deference and the “hazeing” of this process infuriated the British pupils to whom it was applied.

The custom was largely relaxed when its unfortunate effects on RAF pupils were realised.

By contrast, BFTS pupils carried on with the basic stage of training at the same “all through” school and there was no disturbance caused by a sudden tightening up of discipline in an uncongenial way.

The higher elimination rate at Arnold Schools persisted.

Over the whole course (ie to the end of advanced training) it was nearly 50%, whereas the BFTS rate was about 20%. Nevertheless, it was considered that the pilots turned out from Arnold Schools were not materially better than those from the BFTSs; they had greater natural aptitude for flying and more manual dexterity, but the BFTS methods of instruction made up for these basic differences.

In December 1941, the length of BFTS courses was increased to 28 weeks (14 weeks primary [91 hours flying] and 14 weeks basic [with 109 hours flying] At about the same time the length of Arnold courses was reduced from 30 weeks to 27 weeks (9 primary, 9 basic and 9 advanced)” [I am not sure if the three week "acclimatisation" period was added to make it back up to 30 weeks in all]

I will add more information from other documents as and when practical

Regards

Pete

Petet
14th Sep 2015, 09:36
Danny

Re your post #7391

When I originally typed the text relating to the Arnold Scheme I left out part of a sentence as I did not think it relevant. However, your feedback on the motor car put the sentence into context so I have added it into my original posting (in red) and I have added the complete sentence here:

Arrangements were made for British pupils to have an acclimatisation period of three weeks in the United States at a US Army pre-flight school [Montgomery] before starting flying training and to get some familiarity with the handling of a motor car during this time".

Regards

Pete

Petet
14th Sep 2015, 11:05
The following information is taken from an AHB document on Aircrew Training:

Wastage Rate

"It was soon apparent that the wastage rates were not going to be far short of those planned by USAAC (General Arnold had pointed out that the USAAC wastage rate was nearly 50% of the intake) - 36% during primary training, 8% during basic and 1% during advanced - giving an overall elimination rate of 45% which compared very unfavourably with those at RAF Schools"

Course Dates

Course No 1 commenced on 7th June 1941
Primary School Course No 1 passed out 16th August 1941

Advanced Course at Albany from 5th November 1941 to 3rd January 1942
Advanced Course commenced at ***ham (replacing Albany) on 17th December 1941 [the forum replaces three of the letters with *** for some unknown reason]

Course Intakes

Due to the high wastage rate the primary school intakes had to be increased from 550 to 750 commencing with No 4 Course [Think this should be No 5 Course] starting 4th October 1941

Acclimatisation Problems

British pupils needed time to acclimatise to American conditions. The climate was very hot in summer; the American food, because of its richness compared with the normal RAF diet, tended to make pupils airsick; difficulties were experienced at first in understanding the American instructors whilst flying owing to the minor differences in dialect and the slow southern drawl. British pupils also compared unfavourably with the American cadets (most of whom had already driven cars) in simple common sense over the use of engines and brakes

Acclimatisation Course

The acclimatisation course started with No 5 Course on 4th October 1941 (Replacement Centre, Maxwell Field [then Turner Field with effect from 24th January 1942]. Instruction lasted five weeks and consisted of drill, physical training, customs of the US Army, American History and Geography, American terminology used in flying. Pupils were also given experience in driving motor cars to make up for their short comings in mechanical knowledge. They were subjected to the strictest form of American discipline based on that of the military academy at West Point, and although it had its merits, it was found most irksome by the RAF trainees.

Help to alleviate initial problems

From 1st November, it was arranged that cadets selected for training in the US should be drawn from pupils at EFTS who had completed up to 15 hours of flying and who were reported as likely to be good. The first course to arrive in America with previous flying experience was No 7 Course which started training at the Replacement Centre on 18th December 1941

Ian Burgess-Barber
14th Sep 2015, 11:58
Pete
Am delighted to find in your researches of AIR41/4 part 1 & 2, corroboration of many of the issues that I raised (from page 276 on) in posts 5506 5509 5519 and 5526.

Your - "British pupils needed time to become acclimatised to American conditions and in any case, compared badly with American pupils in simple common sense over the use of engines and brakes." [Please don't shoot the messenger on this aspect!!].

To this, I give you this quote from Doug Moore (a U.S. cadet in Course 18 at Clewiston). " There was a running joke among the U.S. cadets who dealt with the Brits' seeming inability to cope with technical problems. What do you look for when something breaks down? If you are a Yank, you look for a pair of pliers and some wire. If you are a Brit, you look for a telephone". (To call for maintenance).

Re Grading School my post 5647 page 283 refers to my Dad's 12 hours 10 at No. 3 E.F.T.S. before being sent to Florida No. 5 B.F.T.S.

Ian BB

Danny42C
15th Sep 2015, 00:20
Chugalug (your #7392),

As far as I could see, in the "normal" case it seemed to depend on how many hours you had clocked up before solo. Eight seemed average, nine - and you were looking shaky, over nine and the Chief Instructor would take you for a "check" ride. In a very few cases he might give you a second chance with a new instructor, but for most people it was the chop. (In the little batch of printed name cards they gave you for your name badge, there were two or three blue (UpperClassman), two or three red (LowerClassman) - or vice versa - and a solitary white (Washout). They thought of everything !)

I must say that, when we moved on to Basic and Advanced Schools, we did not find that there was much spare space on our Courses. Indeed, I would think that, if anything like 100% of the Primary intake had passed through, they would have been hopelessly overcrowded. I have an unworthy suspicion that the final numbers required for graduation had been decided in advance, and "washout" rates tailored to that end. The fact that (as Petet has noted), the fail rate for USAAC Cadets was much the same as ours points in that direction.

Of course, it would make sense from their point of view. They needed (in peacetime) a certain number of new pilots every month; this was a way to skim off the better half from the expected intake and get quality with the required quantity. But I must empathise that that is merely my suspicion, I know of no evidence to support it.

It would be interesting to see a TV series on the subject: I suppose they could get hold of enough old film footage to show Stearmans and AT-6s in numbers (or get hold of two or three, as there are plenty of them still flying, spray them up in WWII training colours, and multiply-up with CGIs). I am prepared to offer my services as technical advisor (only joking !) Who shall we have as the Top Gun ?

And now it is the 15th September, the 75th anniversary of the climacteric day (a Sunday) of the BoB. At the time, it was claimed that the RAF had downed 185 Luftwaffe aircraft on land (plus an unknown number in the sea and others who did not make it back to their bases in N. France). The H.M.S.O. "Battle of Britain" publication referred to "a battered and beaten Armada". In fact, the figures were hopelessly exaggerated (Wiki has a very good entry), but the rest of the world at the time (which had mostly "written off" Britain as a lost cause), suddenly realised that we were still in with a fighting chance.

Predictably, our "meejah" is largely disinterested in a day which ranks with Trafalgar and Waterloo.

Danny.

Danny42C
15th Sep 2015, 04:50
Pete,

IMHO, the "bugbear" of different American military discipline is much overstated. As in all Armies, if you try to "buck" the system, it will "buck" you. If you obey reasonable orders (and nearly all were), you'll get along just fine together.

Infractions of Camp rules were rewarded by the award of "Demerits"; when you had accumulated a certain number of these, you had to work them off by hours of punishment drill under the blazing sun ("walking the ramp") outside the Admin Building, where the Officer of the Day and his Master Sergeant could keep an eye on you. At Carlstrom, any careless mistreatment of a parachute seen was rewarded by having to carry it right round the mile-square of the Field (with flying in progress, so you dare not go too far in from the fence, or cut the corners).

Breaches of flying discipline were never tolerated (or refusal to obey an order): the offender would be on the next train back to Canada, his dream of becoming a military pilot dashed for ever.

When in Rome, do as the Romans do ! If they want you to learn their Foot and Arms drill, then learn it. It is just as easy to march to "Hup!-two-three-four" as to "Left-right-left-right!" "To the Rear, March!" turns you round just as well as "About Turn!" (but in a different way).

"Hazing", as I have said, was a problem only for one Class (42A). Admittedly, it was abhorrent to them, and in some cases violently resisted: there are examples quoted in early Posts on this Thread, and I have told the (unsupported) story of the mass riot at Carlstrom (between the last American Course and the first British). I can see the the USAAC point of view, the young American cadet had grown up in much more of a free and independent society than his British counterpart (more disciplined and naturally deferential to authority as we were then).

So they had to break him down in humiliating, pointless and soul-destroying ways before starting to train him up into an effective and disciplined soldier. Hazing was an essential part of that process, for it set senior cadet against junior (with the positions reversed at every stage), so that they had periods of giving orders alternating with others of obeying them. Of course, that would never work with us. Although there was always friendly rivalry between successive Courses and many practical jokes were played, if Higher Authority imposed stupid and unneccessary rules, all students would sink their differences to form an united front against their tormentors.

An interesting feature of the BFTS system was that they were required to take 10%(?) USAAC Cadets (for comparison with the US training system). But the Arnold Schools took no further US Cadets after the last US Class had passed through. I have reported that, at my Advanced School, Craig Field, Selma we had one "creamed off" Pilot Officer posted in as an instructor. I would think that he would have been a "one-off", for the idea was that any such would instruct at a BFTS (where he would be under RAF command) rather than at an Arnold school (a US Army Base). See:

The British Flying Training Schools in the USA 1941-1944 - BBC
www.bbc.co.uk/history/ww2peopleswar/stories/17/a7189617.shtml‎CachedSimilar (http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ww2peopleswar/stories/17/a7189617.shtml‎CachedSimilar)
"Altogether, some 18,000 RAF cadets passed through the BFTS and Arnold Schemes. Another 1,000 USAAF cadets were also trained at the BFTSs".

From this I deduce that the BFTS intake would be 10,000, but the Arnolds only operated June'41-Mar'43, whereas the BFTS worked from June'41- early'45.

More later.

Danny.

Petet
15th Sep 2015, 15:30
The documents I have do not show intake figures (only pilot output figures) so I can't add anything to the wastage figures.

I have total output figures of:

Refresher: 598
Arnold: 4370
Towers: 1784
BFTS: 6921

The document adds that 558 American Cadets were trained at BFTS (1943/1944) and that 2081 Fleet Air Arm pilots were also trained under Towers.

(Note: I have not included the figures for observers or WOP/AG's trained at PAA or under Towers)

I have a year by year breakdown of these figures if they are of use.

I am not sure if any of this information is helping you solve your conundrum but I hope it is useful input which may enable you to draw conclusions at some stage in the future

Regards

Pete

Chugalug2
16th Sep 2015, 10:12
Petet:-
Towers: 1784I am coincidently reading "Carrier Pilot" by Norman Hanson (ISBN 0 7088 1951 6) in which he attends the aircrew training scheme in Florida devised by Admiral Towers USN. Interestingly it took RN/RAF entrants in the ratio 30/100 per month, the RAF element learning seaplane and flying boat operation.

USN stations involved (for FAA pilot training) were Pensacola (Chevalier, Curry, Saufley, and Ellyson fields) and Opa Locka. The a/c (USN designations) were; N3N-3, O3U-1, OS2U-3, SNJ-3 (Harvard), F-2A (Buffalo). His time on course 8 months (1941/42).

He seems to have enjoyed the rather frenetic experiences vis a vis the local population. Caught returning from Key West (a restricted area anyway), having done up to 100 mph in a rented Oldsmobile on the Florida Keys Highway (speed limit 25mph!), the RNVR gold braid on their uniforms got he and his friend off the rap by "Joe" and "Charlie", with the advice to mention their names to "Harry" and "Duke" if the same thing happened leaving Key Largo! With the parting advice to "Go get them Krauts" they proceeded on their lawful occasions...

Fareastdriver
16th Sep 2015, 18:11
RAF element learning seaplane and flying boat operation.

My father was part of that scheme. He was quite old (30) and an ex brat with a wife and two kids. My mother used to say that he was like a cripple with two left feet on the dance floor when he left but was like Fred Astaire when he came back.

He may have been intended to go on boats but he went to met. recon. Halifaxs in Coastal Command.

Added My father's first flying log book was made up by a US Navy Rating; as was the fashion in the US Navy

Danny42C
16th Sep 2015, 19:23
Chugalug (your #7400),

During our time at Carlstrom, we had very little knowledge of what was going on in other parts of the US. As I remember, we may have heard a bit about the BFTS (which had been set up at the same time as the Arnold Scheme), but it was only after I got back that I heard about "Towers", and even now Wiki knows far about that Scheme than ever I did.

Of course, we were divided by the breadth of Florida, they were over on the East Coast, we on the West. And we were thinking of little more than surviving to get as far as Basic School (for we'd heard [which was true] that if you got past Primary you were pretty well sure of your "wings").

Off we went into the Wide Blue Yonder (but long, long ago !) :ok:

Danny.

Danny42C
17th Sep 2015, 01:11
Pete (your #7399),

"I have total output figures of:
Refresher: 598
Arnold: 4370
Towers: 1784
BFTS: 6921

The document adds that 558 American Cadets were trained at BFTS (1943/1944) and that 2081 Fleet Air Arm pilots were also trained under Towers".

The BFTS opened from 9 June'41 and closed in November'44 (41 months). The Arnold Scheme (intakes) ran from 7 June'41 to May'43 (22 months). From this it appears that both Schemes were turning out pilots at roughly the same rate: just under 200/mth (if you include the US Cadets trained at BFTS). The Towers Scheme must have been of vital assistance to the Royal Navy.

If you total Arnold and BFTS, you get over 11,000 pilots trained for the RAF. Guessing that, of the 55,000 deaths (plus 10,000 POWs) suffered by Bomber Command, something like a seventh (9,000) would be pilots: it illustrates what an enormous gift had been given to us by Roosevelt and General Arnold. And it should be remembered that this was all planned and put into effect six months before Pearl Harbor, when the US was officially a "neutral".

Now coming to the final chapter of your researches (your #7395), I can only add:

"Wastage Rate"

The fact that their US Flight Cadets were "scrubbed" at more or less the same rate as ours, gives support (as I have said to Chugalug in my #7397) to my suspicion that this was in fact a deliberately planned rate.

"Course Dates"

I've come to the conclusion that we shall never be able to pin this down after so long (your query #7381 refers). And again, Chugalug in his #7380 (in another context) says: "Might I tentatively suggest that there will be no clear answer for you, and theory and speculation will have to prevail".

Now, I finished my six months Course (with 42C) at the end of February'42 (wings day 6 March'42). I would assume 42H would come in at the beginning of March'42 (6 Courses after me, but after I finished).

ValMORNA (his #7388 about his uncle) tells us: "His flying commenced in the USA on Feb 28th 1942, Course 42H, at Carlstrom. From May 1942 he was at Gunter Field then Turner Field until 30th August. Wings ceremony was on 6th September 1942". (exactly six months to the day after mine).

Bingo ! All we have to do is to assume that the Arnold Courses came in at the beginning of successive months, and we can't be too far wrong.

"Course Intakes"

Yes, something like that, I suppose - but they'd have to expand the ITW output in UK to match, wouldn't they - or open new one(s) - or re-route LACs destined for Canada or elsewhere ? (Let's not go there).

"Acclimatisation Problems"

I would say that it wasn't the Mess chow that produced the airsickness: more probably a surfeit of Coke (5c) and Hershey Bars (we had just come from a chokkie-rationed Britain !) And in most cases it cleared up in a day or so.

"Acclimatisation Course"

Your #7395:

"The acclimatisation course started with No 5 Course on 4th October 1941
(Replacement Centre, Maxwell Field ......" (Montgomery, Ala.) Why not Gunter (also at Montgomery, where they could weep on our shoulders, and learn form us ?) No room at Gunter ? (See my #7397).

"......Pupils were also given experience in driving motor cars to make up for their short comings in mechanical knowledge......"

(we've covered this already - my #7391).

"........They were subjected to the strictest form of American discipline based on that of the military academy at West Point, and although it had its merits, it was found most irksome by the RAF trainees".

Poor boys ! (The heart bleeds). I suppose many of us trainees found RAF discipline "most irksome" too. When in Rome, do as the Romans do. If they want you to learn US foot (and, later Arms drill), then learn it. It is no more difficult to march to "Hup, two, three, four" than to "Left, left, left-right-left".
"To the rear, March" will turn you round just as well as "About Turn". Brought up, as we were, on a diet of Hollywood films, we had little difficulty in understanding our instructors - we were quite fluent in "American".

"You're in the Army now!
You're not behind a plow"

"Help to alleviate initial problems"

Already covered.

I am beginning to think that all this is ex post-facto rationilisation: the "washout" policy had already been decided (for both US and British cadets), all they needed was this smokescreen. Could be wrong.

That about wraps it up, I would suggest.

Danny.

[B]EDIT: Your "...ham" has been niggling me, but all I can come up with is GOTHAM - and that doesn't take us far. We must throw this open to our transatlantic cousins: Wanted, a six-letter US town (or WWII airfield ?), of which the last three are "HAM", and which has some connection to the Arnold or BFTS Schemes ?

D.

Chugalug2
17th Sep 2015, 08:14
Danny:-
The Towers Scheme must have been of vital assistance to the Royal Navy.Indeed, but it was of three times more assistance (in aircrew) to the RAF, according to Hanson (see my 7400). I found that very surprising. Even if they didn't all finish up on 'boats, presumably they did all finish up in Coastal Command. So were all Coastal Command pilots trained thus, or only those trained in the USA, or only some of those trained in the USA?

Excellent post, Danny. I think that you have summed up brilliantly. Your take, as against the semi official summary of under-nourished, technically challenged, bolshie Brits, illustrates the massive advantage we have in getting our gen direct from the horse's mouth (if you'll excuse the term).

Chop/washout rates that reflect the required number of graduates rather than their competence are nothing new. They certainly happened in the RAF in my day, and I suspect still do.

Petet
17th Sep 2015, 09:23
I will try typing it like this to see if it works D.O.T.H.A.M.

Fingers crossed .... and bingo

Ormeside28
17th Sep 2015, 09:38
I understand that those R.A.F. Pilots on the Towers Scheme trained at Pensacola on the Stearman, then the Vultee "Vibrator" and then the Catalina..from Pensacola they went to the General Reconnaissance course at Summerside (Nova Scotia?) and back to U.K. And Oban for Catalinas or Sunderlands. I stand to be corrected, but I met people who had entered Gods Own Command this way. Greetings all!

Danny42C
17th Sep 2015, 10:35
Chugalug,

Great Minds think alike ! We can lay the Arnold Washouts to rest (but it was hard luck on the "victims" all the same).

This horse is getting "a bit long in the tooth", I'm afraid !

Pete,

Brilliant - so Dothan (in the Florida "panhandle"). The place is/was full of Navy and Air Corps Fields. (At "Advanced" we did a fortnight's air/ground gunnery with our AT-6s at Eglin Field. Didn't hit much). Presumably, Dothan was an RLG for one or more of them.

And now I come to think of it, the two RAF "experts" who were supposed to have come out to us in India to teach us how to dive-bomb had reputedly "done a Course" at Pensacola.

EDIT: Sounds like another Cola ! (we had CocaCola, PepsiCola ("Twice as much for a nickel, too") and the unhappily named Royal Crown Cola (abbreviate "Royal Crown", then say it quickly!) Pensa-Cola would just be another one.

You may recall that one speared in on his first demo (or so the story went). His mate lost all credibility; we learned to dive-bomb our way. (All this is hearsay, and absolutely not to be relied on).

Ormeside,

Good to hear from you ! (Good men are scarce - there aren't many of us left !). The "Vibrator" (Vultee B-13) handled in the air much as the Catalina handled on the water, I would think. Not my favourite aircraft ! :(

Cheers to all, Danny.

Union Jack
17th Sep 2015, 11:14
Brilliant - so Dothan (in the Florida "panhandle"). - Danny

Doing some lateral thinking, I had just come up with

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dothan,_Alabama#Airport and

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Napier_Field,_Alabama

only to find that Petet and Danny had beaten me to it - no change there then!:ok:

Jack

Chugalug2
17th Sep 2015, 17:03
Danny:-
And now I come to think of it, the two RAF "experts" who were supposed to have come out to us in India to teach us how to dive-bomb had reputedly "done a Course" at Pensacola.Just possible that they went on to Opa Locka to learn that bit, Danny. Wiki tells us that there:-
Training in fighter, dive-bombing and torpedo bombing skills took place at various times during the base's operation and aircraft used included the Brewster F2A Buffalo (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brewster_F2A_Buffalo) fighter, SBD Dauntless (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SBD_Dauntless) dive bomber, TBF Avenger (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TBF_Avenger) torpedo bomber,You'll recall that Hanson learnt to be a fighter pilot there on the Buffalo following training at Pensacola. Interestingly the field and the town were named by Glen Curtis, after he retired from making aircraft and became a property developer:-
In 1926 he founded the City of Opa-locka (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opa-locka,_Florida), naming it Opa-tisha-woka-locka (quickly shortened to Opa-locka), a Native American name that translates into the high land north of the little river with a camping place.I imagine that getting your teeth around that lot while climbing into a taxi after a night out had much to do with its foreshortening to Opa Locka!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miami-Opa_Locka_Executive_Airport

Danny42C
18th Sep 2015, 06:15
Chugalug,

Your: ".... Opa-tisha-woka-locka (quickly shortened to Opa-locka), a Native American name that translates into the high land north of the little river with a camping place...." recalls the Welsh practice of compressing a whole sentence in to a single long placename. The best known of these is the Anglesey village of "Llanfair P.G.", which, I think, runs to 36 (?) letters. The Germans are good at long compound words, too.

What's in a name ? Quite a lot, as it happens. A classic case is that of one of our first contingents arriving in Canada, when they learned that they would be going on to a British Flying Training School for six months in "Miami". Bubbling with enthusiasm for the prospect of sun, sea, and starlets ahead, it was only when someone noticed that their train was heading West - not South! - that the truth dawned. They were bound for Miami all right, but for 3 BFTS at Miami, Oklahoma ! (that mid-west dust-bowl made famous in Steinbeck's "Grapes of Wrath"). Still, they met the welcome and generous hospitality there that was enjoyed by all our BFTS cadets. Their schools were all in or near towns, whereas many of the US Army Bases used in the "Arnold" Scheme were "right out in the sticks", making social contacts difficult. The fact that we were uprooted every two months, and moved on, didn't help, either.

Some stayed there permanently, in the Grand Army of the Republic cemetery a mile North of their former School:

AC2 Dennis M. Mitchell
AC2 Frederick D. Beverley
AC2 Cecil J. Riddell
AC2 William G.M. Mann
LAC James Boyd
AC2 Kenneth Raisbeck
LAC Walter E. Elliott
LAC William C. Speirs
LAC Ralph K. Price
LAC Donald A. Harfield
LAC Herbert H. Hacksley
LAC Harold A. Burman
LAC Alan Brown
LAC Peter McCallum
LAC Fred Tufft

["Tulsa Tour 2000
Copyright © 2000-2002, Scott D. Murdock"] (whom I trust will pardon this breach of his copyright).

The text states that all were "students", but I think that the first six would probably be "admin" (the BFTS were wholly RAF-administered). And all successful RAF candidates from ITW were promoted LAC at that time.

Your: "....and aircraft used included the Brewster F2A Buffalo fighter, SBD Dauntless dive bomber, TBF Avenger torpedo bomber...."

I would very much have liked to get my hands on a SBD "Dauntless", to see what difference in dive handling resulted from the (almost universal then) trailing edge dive brake idea. I still don't think the (much later) A-31 "Vengeance" system could be bettered, as our brakes were exactly over and under the CoG of the aircraft, causing no change of trim, whereas the Dauntless brakes must "pull" the nose down, exactly as normal flaps do.

Reading the (Wiki) Specifications, I'm rather puzzled. A smaller, lighter and much less powerful aircraft than our A-31 (only 1200hp against our 1600), it is credited with a bomb load of 2250lb against our 1500, and again a range of 1115 miles. At (say) 3mi/US gallon, this would imply 372 US gallons fuel load. We only had 220 - and could only get 400 miles comfortably with that ! The performance stated was much the same as ours. Seems the RAF and RN got a dozen for testing, it would be interesting to see what we thought of it.

Danny

smujsmith
19th Sep 2015, 20:37
Danny,

Digressing slightly, something I have pondered since beginning to follow this thread, what sort of news were the trainees given of what was happening back home, during their time in training. I think I for one would get the impression that trainees were expected to forget "home" and get on with learning to fly. Forgive me if I'm wrong but I would have thought that regular news regarding the home front would be a spur to young men, training to become part of the defence of democracy back then. No doubt censored letters were one thing, but I'm wondering if any formal news was ever passed to "our lads" in the colonies. I know for sure that I would want to know what was happening back home.

Smudge :ok:

Danny42C
20th Sep 2015, 02:11
Smudge,

Strange, I have been thinking about that very thing myself lately. Partly because, as you say, we were for six months completely wrapped up in the 24/7 struggle to survive the Course. We had no newspapers; the only real time news that we could have been getting would be from local radio stations: (Arcadia ? - don't think so - Sarasota (possibly) Tampa or Miami (certainly). Of course, copies of "Life" and "Saturday Evening Post" magazines would be going around. Don't think "Tee Emm" got out there. Was there an Air Corps magazine ? Can't remember one.

Letters from home would only be about day-to-day family matters. Yet in some ways we kept up to date with the war news, by a process of osmosis.

Danny.

Chugalug2
20th Sep 2015, 09:52
Good point, Smudge. I recall that the local news in Singapore in the '60s was well, very local. The reliable news came in via the BBC World Service (via the "The Changi Broadcasting System" cable service around the station, and by a loudspeaker outlet in the Temple Hill Officers Mess in my case. Once you heard the distinctive playing of Lillibullero played by the The Royal Marines Band (a recording that became "worn out" in the '70s but miraculously reappeared unscathed after howls of protest around the globe following an insipid rendition deemed more PC) you knew that the real world was going to be spelled out without let or hindrance (well, mostly).

I believe it was previously the BBC Overseas Service, but whether "Overseas" extended to the south-eastern United States, and if indeed the means of reception (presumably SW receivers) existed in the USAAC barracks that Danny inhabited, he alone can say. It was of course famously tuned into on illicitly hand built receivers in many of the POW camps housing captured British and Commonwealth service men around the World.

On a more personal basis, I still have a school atlas with which my mother kept track of all the unfamiliar place names that appeared in the newspapers about far off battles and deployments world wide.
The news was of course heavily censored, but it gave an insight into the global conflict that raged, and no doubt gave a topic of conversation while queuing for the rationed basic commodities necessary for everyday living.

As Danny says, the important news was of one's loved ones and of their welfare. If that was good news then that was news enough for most.

smujsmith
20th Sep 2015, 18:04
Gentlemen,

Thank you both for your response to my question. What triggered the question was my own memory of joining the RAF as a Halton apprentice in 1969. I had never been away from home for more than one night, and suddenly, well, you know what I mean. Now that was 1969, and personal comms had hardly improved by GW1, when home news was sparse at best. My thoughts went to how those in training in the early war years, prior to US involvement, might well have been given a sanitised version of what was happening back home. In an era where we are bombarded with sensationalism disguised as fact, my interest is if the feedback you chaps had was nuanced one way or another. Also of course, the fact that the potential was there.

Smudge :ok:

Neptunus Rex
21st Sep 2015, 00:07
Danny,

The success of the Finnish Air Force in WWII is not well known.
The Brewster B-239E fighter aircraft was never referred to as the "Buffalo" in Finland; it was known simply as the "Brewster."
In Finnish Air Force service, the B-239s were regarded as being easy to fly, a "gentleman's travelling plane." The Buffalo was also popular within the FAF because of its relatively long range, and also because of a good maintenance record. This was in part due to the efforts of the Finnish mechanics, who solved a problem that plagued the Wright Cyclone engine by inverting one of the piston rings in each cylinder which had a positive effect on reliability. The cooler weather of Finland also helped, because the engine was prone to overheating as noted in tropical Pacific use. The Brewster Buffalo earned a reputation in Finnish Air Force service as one of their more successful fighter aircraft. In service from 1941 to 1945, Buffalos of Lentolaivue 24 (Fighter Squadron 24) claimed 477 Soviet Air Force warplanes destroyed, with the combat loss of just 19 Buffalos, an outstanding victory ratio of 26:1
:ok:

Danny42C
21st Sep 2015, 01:01
Chugalug,

Your: ".....if indeed the means of reception (presumably SW receivers) existed in the USAAC barracks that Danny inhabited, he alone can say....."

Now I come to think of it, how did we manage to hear any "wireless" at all ? We certainly didn't have any "portable" (or any other) radio sets in the barrack rooms. The PX would certainly have a radio set blaring. Over the "Tannoy" ? - certainly not. Was it possible to receive the BBC at all ? Not to my knowledge. So what did we do with our spare time ? - What spare time ?

From colour-hoisting parade at dawn to lights-out at "taps" we were "on the go". Flying and Ground School all day. In the evenings, "bulling-up" our (luxurious by RAF standards) quarters, so that they would pass muster with the Officer of the Day next morning. My log shows that, of the 58 days I was at Carlstrom, I flew on the first 22 consecutively (so weekends had gone "out of the window" - for a war goes on 24/7), had a 3-day break 5-6-7 0ct (half-way through - this must've been when we went over to West Palm Beach) and a 2-day one 25-26 Oct (I think this may have been the time of the hurricane).

Our only recreation was a swim in the tepid open-air camp pool- but you kept your mouth shut, for the local water, though safe, was brackish. The CocaCola machine did a roaring trade ! We were grateful to tumble into bed at the end of every day, I can tell you.

We were effectively in purdah, and had little time to keep up with news of the outside world. The life of a US "Kay-det" was not an easy one - nor was it intended to be.

Smudge,

Your: ".....if the feedback you chaps had was nuanced one way or another....." No, I don't think so. The BoB had been won the year before, and there was no danger of an invasion of Britain, but there was no attempt to disguise the grim time we were having with the U-boats in the N.Atlantic, and we had not been doing too well in the Mediterranean in Crete and N.Africa that summer, either.
The victory of El Alamein was still a year in the future - and even that would be balanced by the catastrophe in SE Asia.

Danny.

smujsmith
22nd Sep 2015, 19:39
Danny,

I think I recognise your situation, and can equate it to one of my own. As a young 21 year old in the very early 70s, and single, I was posted to Akrotiri. Half way through I was married, and my new wife joined me in our hiring in Limassol. Within 3 months a coup de tat had happened, the Turks had invaded and I was now serving on a married unaccompanied tour (SWMBO having been freighted home on a VC10 heavy lifter). With all of that going on, I completely missed a part of British history that, to this day, mates say I must remember. The three day week, I wasn't here, and there was so much going on where I was, that UK news seemed insignificant. I still have to chuckle when I see articles on news or documentary programmes about the three day week.

Smudge :ok:

Union Jack
22nd Sep 2015, 22:16
With all of that going on, I completely missed a part of British history that, to this day, mates say I must remember. The three day week, I wasn't here, and there was so much going on where I was, that UK news seemed insignificant. I still have to chuckle when I see articles on news or documentary programmes about the three day week.

And I still have to chuckle when I recall that a friend of mine did not discover that England won the World Cup in 1966 until someone mentioned it in a bar up the Gulf - in 1969!:eek: Mind you, he was Scottish.....:E

Jack

Danny42C
23rd Sep 2015, 04:41
Smudge and Jack,

How true that was ! We were solely concerned with the here and now: events in Europe or N. Africa were so remote that that we didn't bother about them much day to day.

Conversely the "Forgotten Army" (and the forgotten Navy and Air Force that went with it) out there, were largely out of the thoughts of the folk back home, who had plenty on their own plates to worry about without losing sleep about ours.

Danny.

Warmtoast
24th Sep 2015, 23:04
Radio and News from Home


At 5 FTS (RAF Thornhill) S. Rhodesia in 1951-52 each of the Airmen's billets was supplied with a PSI Radio as seen here.

http://i145.photobucket.com/albums/r231/thawes/RAF%20Thornhill/Thornhill%20-%20PSI%20Radio_zpshuhovnyz.jpg

As well as the BBC Overseas Service on short-wave, one of the favourite radio stations was the commercial English language short-wave station “The Radio Club of Mozambique” broadcast from Lourenço Marques in the (then) adjacent Portuguese colony of that name. The broadcast style and format was a bit like 1950’s Radio Luxembourg and was in sharp contrast to the very stuffy, BBC-like Rhodesia Radio.

A favourite performer on broadcasts from The Radio Club of Mozambique was South African singer/comedian Al Debbo. His outrageous Afrikaner songs were memorable and brilliant hits, even to us Brits, and I remember them to this day!

Danny42C
25th Sep 2015, 01:43
Warmtoast,

All right for some ! A lot seems to have happened in ten years, and much of it for the better.

Of course, in our case: "Don't you know there's a war on !" stilled all complaints; we grumbled and put up with it, whereas I don't think you were fighting anyone in particular out where you were in '50-'51 (or were you ?).

Danny.

MPN11
25th Sep 2015, 07:50
Oh, the happy days of hard-wired Unit broadcasting! I was a DJ/announcer on Tengah Broadcasting Service in the late 60s, where apart from links to BFBS [somehow, our programme controllers managed that somehow] we used a HUGE library of 33rpm and 45rpm records covering all genres from the Classics to The Goon Show :)

A happy band of volunteers, mainly airmen but with a couple of officers on the roster too. I still have my Selangor Pewter farewell tankard, suitably engraved and presented at a 'dining out' at the cinema complex in Orchard Road [the one with the car turntable at the main entrance].

Fareastdriver
25th Sep 2015, 09:10
There was nothing like a new hotel or shopping centre opening in Orchard Road. Six foot diameter rolls of firecrackers would be draped down the whole frontage from about the sixth floor level. When they were fired up the whole of Orchard Road would go IFR in decibels and red paper.

Chased the devils away, though.

Harry Lime
25th Sep 2015, 14:32
20th March 1974 Andrews AFB

Whilst overseeing the refuelling of Herc XV188, the bowser driver said to me "Are you Guys really on a three day week? Geez, I wish I was over there wid'yas!"

Dusk was falling and it was raining and miserable. For a few seconds I empathised with the man.

mmitch
25th Sep 2015, 17:46
Danny,
As a footnote on your comments about the training drop out rates. I have been reading Brian Trubshaw's autobiography (the Concorde test pilot) He joined the RAF in 1942 and went to No. 4 British Flying Training School at Falcon field Mesa, nr Phoenix Arizona. He said the drop out rate was ' over 50% for various reasons' They were required to solo in 5 hours otherwise a check ride would usually result in being rejected. They were trained on PT17A and then AT6 aircraft.
mmitch.

Warmtoast
25th Sep 2015, 20:59
Danny 42

I don't think you were fighting anyone in particular out where you were in '50-'51 (or were you ?)On arrival in August 1951 we new arrivals were warned that when in Gwelo (the local town) for a Saturday night out we should be on our guard, because the young local farmers of Afrikaner origin considered it a duty to have a Saturday night punch-up with any Brits who they met in town. We called these Afrikaners "Yarpis", or perhaps it was a name they called themselves.
Not far from Gwelo was a town (Enkeldoorn) whose population was reputed to be 100-per cent Boer/Afrikaner and we were told if we went there we would be unlikely to come back. I didn't test this theory!

Ref my post #7420 where I mentioned South African singer Al Debbo, one of his songs I remember from my time in Rhodesia 64-years ago is "Alibama" which can be listened to here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fAdMvOq41LA

Union Jack
25th Sep 2015, 22:44
We called these Afrikaners "Yarpis", or perhaps it was a name they called themselves.

"Jaapje", pronounced a la Warmtoast, probably comes from the Dutch pet name for "Jakob".

Jack

Danny42C
26th Sep 2015, 00:05
mmitch,

As many as 50% failures on a BFTS Course ? That really surprises me, but I wouldn't question an authority such as Brian Trubshaw. Even so, to expect solo on a PT-17 after only 5 hours ab initio would be ridiculous. Perhaps the UK Grading Schools were up and running when he finished ITW, and his Class had already had 5-10 hours on Tigers before they went out. My memory of the PT-17 is that, as heavier and more powerful than the TM, it flew much the same but without the "float" on landing.

The BFTS two-stage syllabus points up what I've written long ago: that the third USAAC "Basic" stage of training was superfluous, although all flying experience is valuable and we had an extra 70 hours. But no noticable improvement in the end product was ever claimed or observed.

Danny.

Chugalug2
26th Sep 2015, 06:36
We had a South African pilot/captain on 48 Squadron. His nickname was Yarpie also. Wiki says:-

From Afrikaans (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afrikaans_language) japie (https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/japie#Afrikaans), short for plaasjapie (https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=plaasjapie&action=edit&redlink=1) ‎(“farm-boy”), referring to any person who grew up on a farm and is unfamiliar with city life, and hence naive and unsophisticated.
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/yarpie

mmitch
26th Sep 2015, 12:33
Danny.
He started in the RAF at Lords Cricket ground where he mentions 'square bashing' and ground school subjects. He was then sent to several places for 'battle training' before 5 hours on Tiger Moths (in the UK) and graded . Those not passing could be selected for navigator or air gunner.
mmitch.

Danny42C
27th Sep 2015, 01:32
mmitch,

Before he went to Grading School (which is, as we surmised, the reason for the 5-hour "hurdle" at BFTS), he must have gone to an ITW somewhere. I think Lords Cricket Ground was just a Reception Centre (but could be wrong).

Danny.

Petet
27th Sep 2015, 09:06
Danny, you are correct to say that the ACRC, Regents Park, which included the requisitioned parts of Lords Cricket Ground, was a reception centre where recruits were kitted out, medically examined and introduced to the ways of service life.

I am guessing that the "battle training" references relate to his time at ITW.

One other point that I noted was that the "wash out" trades are listed as Navigator or Air Gunner. I am wondering if that should read "Air Bomber"

Regards

Pete

Taphappy
27th Sep 2015, 19:15
Danny 42, Petet.
My recollection from early 44 was that after aptitude tests at ACRC you were allocated your aircrew trade,. in my case Nav/W. If it was Pilot you then went to Grading school then to ITW. If you didn't make it at Grading School you were then remustered as Navigator or Bomb Aimer.
John

mmitch
27th Sep 2015, 19:25
Danny.
His step daughter (who co wrote the book) remarks in an epilogue that he rushed through the first part because he was really interested in writing about the test flying. So maybe some details were missed out?
Well worth a read incidentally, I found it in paperback.
mmitch.

Ormeside28
27th Sep 2015, 22:08
Hi Danny et al. At the risk of repeating myself. A school friend and I, both 18 in March 1942, and forbidden by our fathers, both 14/18 vets, to volunteer until our 18th birthdays, volunteered for Aircrew at Shrewsbury. Big hold ups in the training meant that we did not get our papers until November. We left with another school mate on 23rd November 1942 for ACRC, Lords. It must have been a very busy day as we were inducted, inoculated, maths rested, given night vision tests at Abbey Lodge. Then collected all our kit and "marched" to Grove Court which had been taken over by the RAF . We were shown how to make up our beds, then "marched to a similar establishment on Hall Road. The garages under the flats were used as an enormous mess hall, and the food was surprisingly good.back to Grove Court and we had to scrub the (very clean) floors of our rooms. We thought that this was very cruel, but I suppose it helped the inoculations to course around our bodies. Our Corporad Gartside had us drilling next morning in cavendish Avenue. We were not allowed to wear our uniforms until the tailor (s) had made sure that they fitted. Once we were considered not to be a shower, we were marched at Light Infantry pace around. St Johns Wood and to lectures at Seymour Hall. We were posted to No 8 Initial Training Wing at Newquay on 16th January 1943 living in commandeered hotels.pay fears tree shillings per day less 1 shilling for our national insurance , which ensures that I get a pension in my old age!
After three months and exams we were now Leading Aircraftmen at seven shillings and three pence per day. When I left Barclays Bank the previous November I was paid thirty shillings a week, so I was over a pound a week better off and all found.
Because of the delays in the training system, Grading School was delayed and the time was taken up with more navigation sand lots of clay pigeon shooting and lots of drill and PT. no hardship with sea sand and good company.
Grading School started on 10 thJune at Wolverhampton where we shared the airfield with Boulton Paul. We were bussed to a satellite airfield some twenty miles to the north. We were to fly twelve hours, with a seven hour check by the flight commander. I didn't do too well at seven, but at my 12 hour with the Squadron Commander I was allowed to go off solo! What a thrill!!
Then it was off to the Aircrew Despatch Centre at Heaton Park, Manchester and Liverpool and the Mauretania to New York and on to Moncton.
Arrived Moncton 2 nd September 1943, and No 1 B.F.T.S Terrell, Texas,
4th October. 18 Course.
Started flying Stearman 9 th October, soloed 20th after 8.30 Last trip was on 1st December and did 70 hours on the Stearman. Weeks leave, then the mighty AT6A or Harvard or Texan!!
started on AT6A on 7 December 1943. 8 hours cockpit drill, first flight was on
11th December. Solo after 5.15. Got mumps on my 20th birthday, put back to 19 Course and awarded Wings on 18th June 1944. Hours on AT6A 140.

Petet
27th Sep 2015, 22:18
Taphappy

As part of my project on air crew training, I was doing further research on the ACRC today and, as you say, by 1944 it had taken on the role of classification of aircrew.

This change resulted in the introduction of a further ACRC based at Scarborough.

The standard 3 week course (kitting out, medicals and introduction to service life) had been extended so that a series of aptitude tests could be undertaken. These included General Test (intelligence, education), mathematics, mechanical comprehension, instrument comprehension, observation, co-ordination and auditory morse code.

Results from these tests were sent to a central classification section (No. 54 Group) where they were analysed and each cadet was assigned to an aircrew trade based on his test results.

Cadets were informed of their categorisation during the last week of ACRC (I am assuming that this is when the "You are going to be a ....." pamphlets were handed out); they were then posted to the appropriate ITW, which by now were specialising in a specific aircrew category.

The information I have suggests that Navigators were posted to Bridgnorth (after 1st June 1944) but I don't know whether your dates were earlier.

Regards

Pete

Petet
27th Sep 2015, 22:27
Ormeside

You may be interested to know that the intake at the ACRC on 23/11/1942 was 537 civilians and 195 serving airmen (Total 732), which was well below the weekly capacity of 1700. My information (which is taken from the ACRC Operations Record Book) shows that you were 1 of 43 cadets posted to 8 ITW on 16/01/1943.

Unfortunately, it does not show the number of vaccinations / inoculations that were given for your ACRC intake but some of the numbers I have are quite staggering. As an example, on 22/07/1941 1242 cadets were vaccinated and 1219 were inoculated. At some stage, I need to work out the difference between vaccination and inoculation and document what cadets were vaccinated against and what they were inoculated (against?) whilst at the ACRC.

Regards

Pete

Taphappy
28th Sep 2015, 14:22
Petet,

Interesting to know how the aptitude test results were dealt with.
i was at Scarborough ACRC and IIRC was there for 6weeks and as a prospective Nav/W was then posted to ITW at Bridgenorth.
Regards
John

Petet
29th Sep 2015, 15:43
John

I have done quite a lot of research on the Regents Park ACRC but not much on the Scarborough one.

Any information you can provide on HQ, training locations etc would be most helpful.

Regards

Pete

Danny42C
29th Sep 2015, 23:45
Reference:

"RAF Aircrew Trade/Branch | Military History Forum www.militarian.com (http://www.militarian.com) › The Wars › World War 2 "Officially, the role of Observer was split in mid-1942. However: 1) many of those who had trained as Observers continued to wear their 'O' after this date, even though they would have been re-assigned as either a Air Bomber or Navigator. Their arguement was that they trained hard for that role and so would resist any official attem,pts at taking taht away. 2) Though officially the change was supposed to occur in mid-1942, it didn't really occur practically until very early 1943, so many of those undergoing training for most of 1942 were presented with the O wing rather the B or N "

Kyt, Jul 2, 2009 (Cited from: RAF Aircrew Trade/Branch | Military History Forum (http://www.militarian.com/threads/raf-aircrew-trade-branch.5374/))

------------------------------------------------

mmitch (your #7430),

" Those not passing could be selected for navigator or air gunner ". Sounds as if the Bomb Aimer option had not yet come in. In late '40 I was enlisted in the VR as "u/t Pilot/Air Observer", although there were plenty of Wop/AGs around (but I don't think any "straight" AGs until later). These were certainly in by March'42, as our group of newly hatched Sgt-Pilots were under the (nominal !) Command of an equally sprog Pilot Officer AG in a Transit Camp (and none too happy about it).

And Pete (your #7432):

" One other point that I noted was that the "wash out" trades are listed as Navigator or Air Gunner. I am wondering if that should read "Air Bomber " raises the same question.

-------------------------------------------------

Taphappy (your #7433 to Danny42 and Petet),

" My recollection from early 44 was that after aptitude tests at ACRC you were allocated your aircrew trade,. in my case Nav/W. If it was Pilot you then went to Grading school then to ITW. If you didn't make it at Grading School you were then remustered as Navigator or Bomb Aimer ".

So by early'44 the Bomb Aimer had joined the crew.

--------------------------------------------------

mmitch (your# 7434),

Yes, by the time he was testing Concorde, ITW must have seemed a long, long way back in the past. In my memory it stands out as the best organised Course of all the ones I attended during my years in the RAF. Danny.

--------------------------------------------------

Petet (your #7436),

I suppose I was "categorised" at my Selection Board (late'40) and enlisted in the VR as a "u/t Pilot/Air Observer". I do not remember being "assessed" as to my suitability for further employment at any stage of my training. Except that, at the end of Primary School, my instructor told me that he had recommended me for "Pursuit Ships" (the FJs of the time) rather than "Bombardment Ships" (although perhaps on the basis that, as a single-seater, I could only kill myself and not an entire crew !)

Thereafter, we were packed off en bloc to the same Basic and Advanced Schools; there was never any option to go for multi training (although in the end that was what the RAF would need).

(Your #7437),

AFAIK, "Vaccination" is for smallpox, we got "inoculated" for everything then known to medical science. There was a suspicion that some of the u/t Nursing Orderlies on the production line were just practising their "jabbing" skills on us with syringes full of sterile solution (instead of on oranges, then unobtainable).

------------------------------------------

Ormeside (your #7435)

"..... We were not allowed to wear our uniforms until the tailor (s) had made sure that they fitted...."

The RAF had changed since I started two years before ! After having been roughly "sized" in the Clothing Stores at Reception Centre, you were stuck with what you'd been issued with (in my case a "part-worn" jacket) unless the SWO thought the result was too ridiculous and authorised an exchange.

Being a stock size, my kit more or less fitted me, and I kept it until I went out to India in '42 (and was commissioned out there, and handed my blues in). Often wondered what happened to the original wearer of the jacket - he'd written his service no. on the label, but I didn't take a note of it. A pity, as it might have been possible to trace him now.

"..... We were posted to No 8 Initial Training Wing at Newquay on 16th January 1943 living in commandeered hotels.pay fears tree shillings per day less 1 shilling for our national insurance....."

I went there on 1st June'41, we were billeted in the Trebarwith Annexe (the Trebarwith Hotel had been requisitioned for the RAF HQ, and we had our Airmen's Mess and lecture rooms there). I was paid 2/- a day net (less 6d "Sports Subscription" [sounds like a nice little earner for someone] and any barrack damages). After finishing the Course, we went up to 5/6 a day as LACs.
Like you, I'd started in the Civil Service (aged 16) at 30/- a week, and wouldn't have been earning much more at 19 when I enlisted.

"..... and did 70 hours on the Stearman. Weeks leave, then the mighty AT6A or Harvard or Texan!!...."

I think it probable that you had Harvards (the "Canadian Car & Foundry" were building them out there). AT-6As would have had the forward-firing single 0.300 Browning; none of the Harvards I flew later were armed. But at least you were spared the experience of the Vultee BT-13, which might have been designed with the object of demonstrating just how bad an aircraft can be and still fly.

Cheers and regards to you all, Danny.

Danny42C
30th Sep 2015, 19:56
Pete (your #7437),

"My information (which is taken from the ACRC Operations Record Book)"

My IT skills are not equal to the task, could you please try to get hold of the F.540 for the "1340 (Special Duties) Flight" in India '44 - '46 for me ?

Wiki has practically nothing on it, and you may be turned away, as it was established to serve the C.D.R.E out there, which was itself an offshoot of Porton Down and so rather hush-hush.

Let me know if you have any success, as it might be better to put anything you get on PM.

Danny.

Petet
30th Sep 2015, 21:40
Danny

There is a file for the 1340 Special Duty Flight, Cannanore, India at the National Archive (AIR 29/865), but is has not been digitised, which means that you either have to view it at the National Archives (for free) or get one of the commercial bulk copiers to copy it for you (I use one of these to get large files for me).

I obviously do not know the size of the file and therefore I can't estimate the cost but I can ask my copier to look at the file next time he is there and give you a rough price. You can then decide if you want to invest.

Alternatively, if you want something very specific and know what you are looking for I have a colleague who I am sure would be happy to look through the file and copy a page or two for you next time he is there (I just need to ask him nicely!).

Let me know if you would like to pursue either of these options

Regards

Pete

Petet
30th Sep 2015, 22:13
Danny

My research shows that the selection / categorisation process changed significantly during the war.

Initially the ACSBs selected candidates using the old school method of "he seemed like a good sort", primarily because they had no standard tests that they could utilise to judge each candidates ability in a particular aircrew role. Your board clearly classified you as a "good sort" and your continued input into this thread demonstrates that they were correct!

The information I have is that board members preferred the "impression" method over the "new fangled mystical scientific devices" even when tests were available.

A survey carried out in 1942 showed that there was a significant amount of wasted training effort due to misclassification by the boards

As the war progressed, the Bartlett Test and the SMA3 co-ordination test were introduced, followed by the later introduction of the battery of aptitude tests that were in place when John went through ACRC to be classified.

Regards

Pete

Danny42C
1st Oct 2015, 02:41
Pete,

There have already been far too many good things said about me on this Thread (most of them undeserved !) to last me the (fag end of) a lifetime. But thanks all the same.

I'll take your first kind offer (to ask your Copier for an estimate for the lot), please, but don't be upset if I don't buy. For a start I am a devout skinflint, and in any case it's just idle curiosity on my part. I wrote most of the final year's entries myself, and also invented those relating to the last few months of my predecessor's incumbency ("Red" McInnis, RCAF), who'd gone home to Canada, leaving a few (?) loose ends for me to tidy up. It would be interesting to see what rubbish I'd written (for I've forgotten it all now).

As to "selection", after the first Board in the early years, I think there was little of it, and what little there was was mostly done with a pin. The basic problem is: there is no way of finding whether a young man is going to make a good military pilot other than putting him in an aircraft and seeing what happens.

Anybody with a good School Certificate in Maths should make a Navigator, a ground Fitter (Engines) is tailor-made for Flight Engineer, all small boys of my time were wizards on "wireless sets" from crystal and cat's whiskers upwards, Bombing and gunnery are just practice, practice and more practice.

Volunteers had poured in in the immediate aftermath of the BoB, and the Selection Boards were able to indulge their hunches. All applicants wanted to be pilots, of course, but I think only 2% of them would actually make it.

I lived in "Interesting Times" (old Chinese Curse). :ooh:

Danny.

harrym
1st Oct 2015, 14:58
Ormeside-

On arrival at ACRC in April 43 I was allocated to Empress Court (?), a large block of (once!) luxury flats fronting Regents Park, from where we were moved after a week or so to Hall Road for no apparent reason – probably just to give us something to do, as much effort seemed to be devoted to keeping us occupied doing nothing much other than wasting time under supervision. There was one bright interval however when an outbreak of some infection (can’t remember what) necessitated the Hall Road flats being closed for fumigation, its occupants being sent home on leave for a few days – an unexpected bonus!

Ah yes that mass inoculation parade at Lords - over a hundred of us in line with upper arms bare, facing a long tunnel of grinning fiends holding large syringes with long needles who attacked us mercilessly as we shuffled along. I seem to recall about six separate jabs – smallpox, cholera, typhoid, tetanus, plague, maybe yet another and somewhere in the process I think a blood sample was taken as well – the guy in front of me passed out completely, as did one or two others, the only plus point being that we were allowed the rest of the day off.

Danny42C

The wearing of Observer brevets continued for some time after the war, though the number inevitably diminished as time passed; the last one I can recall being a navigator on 10 Sqdn in the late sixties.

Wander00
1st Oct 2015, 18:38
Had an OC Admin at Watton in the later 60s with an "O" brevet, and the boss of 1094 City of Ely ATC Sqn was an "O" brevet from Blenheims! That was early 70s

MPN11
1st Oct 2015, 18:44
Likewise an ATCO at Manby in 65-67 with an "O" brevet ... and North-West Frontier medal and GSM preceding his wartime collection ;)

Pom Pax
1st Oct 2015, 18:56
Fast forward to Feb. '57, the procedure does not seem to have changed much. Lined up in single file to be attacked on both sides by syringe wielding orderlies using the same syringe on each fresh customer (government sanctioned syringe sharing!).
The list is the same mentioned by harrym with addition of paratyphoid, (interestingly "wiki" suggests there is no such separate inoculation) however I recall having to fill in our own record of vaccination/inoculation cards with a list of all the jabs. These being handed in at the end of the line up and duly signed by the M.O.
These cards undoubtedly still exist in some darked archive because when researching my Father's WW1 service one of the documents produced was one written in his own hand stating his birth date, home address and next of kin. So if something written in 1917 still exists something from forty years later must be nearer the top of the pile.

smujsmith
1st Oct 2015, 22:58
Pom Pax,

Jab central for me was 1969 and sounds astoundingly close to your description. Halton medical centre had steps leading to the second floor, which we new apprentices were marched up, in vests and told to place both hands on hips. There followed a procession through the medics who attempted to replicate a pincushion in each of us. As I recall the procedure was repeated three times over a six week period, with those of us who failed various tests (Schlick test ?) being required to return for further puncturing. I wonder if our modern RAF uses the same technique with recruits. As a follow up, I well remember being sent to a field hospital in Riyadh during GW1 to receive my "protective dose" against all the ills Saddam could throw at us. Saddam never threw anything to my knowledge, but the twitch I inherited as a result of the cocktail is with me to this day :eek:

Smudge :ok:

Danny42C
2nd Oct 2015, 01:20
harrym (your #7445) and others,

Thanks, and now what I would really like to find was the date the "Air Bomber" speciality was introduced, and why. It appears to have been about '42, and that would fit in nicely with the arrival of the "heavies" and A.M. Harris's take-over at Bomber Command. Before that, it seems to have been the task of the Observer/Navigator, who would have to leave his position and wriggle forward into the bomb aimer's station in the nose. Clearly this was done in the "Wellington", but how practicable would it be in a Stirling, Lancaster or Halifax ?

Whatever, I believe the "Bomb Aimer" was primarily the front-gunner until they neared the target, and then he would go down into his position below the turret. It is difficult to see how much work a front- gunner could expect at night, for the pilot and f/e would have almost as good a view ahead and I can hardly visualise a head-on attack from a night fighter ! (I was out of the country from autumn '42 till the end, so have only a layman's knowledge of bomber 'ops').

The original "Air Observers" were very proud of their "flying a***'oles", and seemed to have been allowed to hang on to them to the bitter end. There were still a few around (mostly in ATC) when I retired at the end of '72.

Pom Pax (your #7448),

There was certainly a "T.A.B." (Typhoid and para-typhoid A and B). It came in two stages, as I remember, and you got them a few days apart. I was "jabbed" with it several times: it produced no more than the usual sore arm, but on one late occasion in the '50s it produced a violent reaction which laid me low for a couple of days. It may have been a bad dose of vaccine, the M.O. was quite worried. :(

Cheers to all, Danny.

ancientaviator62
2nd Oct 2015, 07:36
The copy of the log book I have of a chap who qualified as an Air Observer in 1941 Has entries for air navigation, bombing and air gunnery courses. A total of 18 hours flying was all that is recorded to the bombing and gunnery phases.
His log book records his trips with Bomber Command as Navigator until he becomes OC 10 Sqn when they are logged as Air Bomber. When he goes out to India after 10 converted to the Dakota he logs his trips as Co Pilot.

Taphappy
2nd Oct 2015, 13:31
Petet.

The RAF had taken over most of the big hotels in South Bay and I was billeted in what was The Prince of Wales Hotel which is now a block of flats.
I think HQ was in The Grand Hotel.
Square bashing and such like drills were carried out in the streets around the hotel often much to the amusement of the locals.
Kitting out FFIs and medical procedures were done in what was previously a school off Filey Road and as there were playing fields there that is where sporting activities took place.
The aptitude tests were conducted in the Spa Ballroom and IIRC took a whole day to complete.
I don't recall receiving any "You are going to be --- leaflets:.

John

Petet
2nd Oct 2015, 16:36
At a Chief of Air Staff's conference in March 1942 it was agreed that the title observer should be changed to navigator and that a "Bombardier" should be introduced.

The name Bombardier was changed to Air Bomber at a later conference in April 1942

I have yet to find a date when the first air bombers completed their training but I am guessing it was during the summer / autumn of 1942.

The air bombers role was(*):

"To guide the aircraft over the target, to identify the aiming point and to place the bombs accurately on it.

When not in the close vicinity of the target he was needed as a member of the navigation team, which also included the pilot and the navigator. With the latter he worked in the closest collaboration, providing him with visual pinpoints, and with astro or radar observations on the journey, in this way acting as the eyes of the navigator.

In addition to this secondary function, the air bomber helped to complete the meteorological report during the flight and it was his job to set up (and read) the astro compass.

If attacked by enemy aircraft he manned a gun, usually in the forward turret, and became part of the defence team"

Regards

Pete

(*) Source: WWII flying training monograph

Petet
2nd Oct 2015, 16:42
John

Thanks for your feedback on Scarborough; I will incorporate it into my notes on the subject.

I will see if I can work out when the air ministry introduced the "You are going to be a ........ " pamphlets

Thanks again for your help; it is very much appreciated.

Regards

Pete

Danny42C
2nd Oct 2015, 18:40
Pete,

Thank you for the 'gen' on the Air Bomber. Even at that early stage we were being influenced by the US terminology ("Bombardier" is their name for him). I'm slightly amused by "...If attacked by enemy aircraft he manned a gun, usually in the forward turret...." And how long would that take ? (from the Nav station behind the pilot right forward into the Nose ?).

They seem to have been thinking of daylight raids like those of the 8th Air Force B-17 formations, which were often under sustained attack from fighters, whereas at night our "heavies" had to contend with sudden attack from a night fighter, which might last only for a few seconds. He'd hardly have time to get his head out of the astrodome before it was all over (one way or another).

I think it more likely that he would have a "roving commission" to rest the other two gunners (for it must have been impossible to keep up an intense lookout hour after hour without a break). But what am I theorising for ? There are people on this Thread who were there. Let's hear from them - or from their writings.

Cheers, Danny.

Chugalug2
3rd Oct 2015, 07:21
Was not the vital challenge of the night bombing campaign that of navigating to the target and then, having found it, putting the bombs on it? Unlike the US daylight raids, when you stayed in visual formation, followed your leader, and then "toggled" off your bombs in reaction to his drop, each night bomber was its own bomber leader, often unable to see other bombers though painfully aware of their close proximity.

It seems likely that is why Navigators and Bomb Aimers were invented. The Nav could concentrate solely on getting his aircraft to the target and then back to base. The Bomb Aimer could help him in that task, passing fixes, drifts, etc en-route, until able to perform his prime function of putting the bombs onto the target (the whole point of the entire mission). Manning a gun turret, his own or anyone else's, would have been a low priority in comparison. Certainly head on night attacks, to be dealt with by the forward turret, would have been very rare I suspect.

Of course electronic aids such as H2S, Oboe, Gee, etc, aided navigation as the campaign progressed, but counter measures and inexperienced crews still meant that simply finding the target and accurately bombing it was a challenge to the very end.

Danny42C
4th Oct 2015, 01:41
Track Shortener and Chugalug,

Speaking as an outsider, it seems to me that the trouble was that they were operating with seven-man crews. The essential minimum to "work the ship" was four: (Pilot, F/E, Nav and Signaller), that leaves three others. There are three gun turrets.

So if one of the remaining three men is a Bomb Aimer, either he has to spend 99.9% of his time freezing in a turret (for he can only function at his primary task when the bombing run is in progress), or accept the fact that the front turret is likely to be of little or no use in night ops, leave it unmanned, and generally make himself useful as the Nav's helper and general factotum.

Of course, if "Shräge Musik" had been anticipated, it might have been possible to squeeze in a ventral gun position as well as a H2S in the little space left after the long bomb bays - but he would have to spend all the time in that for it to have been in any use.

How we must have envied the Americans, who were able to provide two pilots for all their multis, a separate Bombardier (what did he do in his spare time ?) and gunners for all their guns ! (having said that, they certainly needed them !)

It begs the question: what use was our front turret at night (apart from helping to part-balance the equally heavy rear turret, which had a much bigger moment of force as it was further from the CoG).

Danny.

ICM
4th Oct 2015, 10:51
Just jumping to say that the Halifax did not have a nose turret. One of the versions of the Mk II had a single .303 mounted in the nose for a while, but I understand that this was not thought to be of great value by crews.

And further to AA62's mention above of Wg Cdr A C Dowden, OC 10 Sqn from late January 1945, the Air Bombers stayed on after the end of the war in Europe when 4 Group squadrons were transferred to Transport Command for service with Dakotas in India. They flew as 2nd Pilot/Map Reader until 'proper' pilots could be provided. 10 Sqn deployed east in September 1945 and, by the end of November, had its full complement of the latter - one of the Flt Cdrs noted that "over half of them are glider bods who haven't flown since Service school and who were put onto gliding when they returned to England." At that stage the Air Bombers presumably went home if ready for Demob, but some certainly appear to have been posted to other duties in-theatre whilst waiting to go home.

DHfan
4th Oct 2015, 11:22
The Mk 1 Halifax had two .303s in a nose turret.
It was deleted in later variants as part of the search for improved performance.

According to wiki, a Lancaster Bomb Aimer just had to stand up to man the front turret.

The drawback to the American policy of extra crew, guns and ammunition was it was at the expense of bombload.
On a mission to Berlin, the B.17 only carried about 500lb (or 50lb, depending on whose book you read) more than a Mosquito.

Chugalug2
4th Oct 2015, 11:25
Danny, quite agree about the urgent need for a ventral gun position, seemingly not possible in the Lanc because of the H2S radome taking up the room, though provision was made in the early Halifax ISTR. The mid-upper was famously removed for weight reasons by 617 Sqn of course. The only turret that really justified its weight (and moment arm!) was of course the rear turret, in which I have had the privilege of a 20 min flight (in PA474, over Newcastle for its 900th anniversary). The loneliness of that crew position was enhanced by my having no intercom headset to wear. Once those turret doors closed behind you were alone, to confront whatever came out of the dark (more NE murk in my case as two Spitfires suddenly slid in on either wingtip for the flypast). I would not have been a safe pair of eyes to stand watch in that vital defensive position!

I read somewhere that there was constant lobbying to remove one or more of the turrets throughout the night bombing campaign, always for it to be quashed (by Harris?) because of the supposed effects on morale. The weight saved could have been traded for ceiling, range, and/or bomb load of course.

DJFish1
4th Oct 2015, 16:24
Sirs,
Firstly congratulations on an amazing thread, I've read it from start to finish, mainly on night shifts when I was supposed to be working in the lofty heights of what used to be Adastral House, now long since gutted & refurbished.
How emotive to think some of the contributors of this great thread have occupied the same space, albeit during significantly different circumstances.

Your superb recollections have also prompted my to do some research into my Great Uncle who was a Bomb Aimer on Lancasters.
Sadly, like many he's not around to share his memories but since you're discussing air bombers I'll post the details of his training and his time in Canada, I hope it's of some interest and please feel free to delete if it isn't.


5/6/41 Enlisted RAF Volunteer Reserves
22/9/41 no 1. Aircrew Reception Centre, St John’s Wood.
11/10/41 Initial Training Wings: No 4 Bexhill on Sea and Paignton
18/3/42 Pool ???
13/5/42 31 RAF Personnel Depot Moncton, New Brunswick, Canada. ATTS
20/2/43 33 Air Navigation School, Hamilton (Mount Hope), Ontario
3/4/43 31 py/3 IPY ???
5/6/43 No. 7 Personnel Reception Centre, Harrogate, later Market Harborough
22/6/43 1(0) Operational Training Unit Abingdon, Night Bomber Training
24/7/43 29 Operational Training Unit, North Luffenham, Night Bomber Training
10/11/43 1654 Heavy Bomber Conversion Unit RAF Wigsley
25/11/43 Attached to 51 Base at RAF Scampton
5/12/43 Posted to 57 Base /1654 CU
13/1/44 Posted to 51 Base/5 LFS (Lancaster Finishing School)
5/2/44 Posted to 44 Sqdn.
14/4/44 Posted to 617 Sqdn.


Would his log book have more details of his time in Canada if I were able to track it down?

smujsmith
4th Oct 2015, 20:43
DJFish1,

Welcome sir to a thread that knows no bounds, I'm sure Danny, our incumbent "senior man" will be along shortly to welcome you aboard. Your post has hit the bullseye in my opinion and any further information on your great uncle's experiences through training and operations, certainly log book extracts, would fit very nicely with the intent of this thread. As a coincidence, my father in law finished his war service as Groundcrew on 617 Squadron, and may have come in to contact with your great uncle. Post all you have, there are many here who will read, assimilate, and perhaps even open new lines of information to you.

Smudge:ok:

Chugalug2
4th Oct 2015, 23:13
Hello DJ Fish 1, a very warm welcome to the thread. I can only reiterate smudge's comments that anything relating to your Great Uncle's record will be of great interest and perhaps some more light may be shone on it here.

You have already uncovered a wealth of detail from his service, and the sequence of units before his operational squadrons are many and interesting. I would suggest (though Danny will be the arbiter) that 31PY might refer to Moncton, which was 31 PD (Personnel Depot) through which it seems all RAF aircrew trainees in Canada passed before and after training. In 1945 it became RCAF No 1 Y Depot. It might be that the Y prefix preceded the RCAF takeover. There is talk here of a Y Depot at Moncton in 1943:-

No.31 Personnel Depot, Moncton - and it's successors (http://www.rafcommands.com/forum/showthread.php?14738-No-31-Personnel-Depot-Moncton-and-it-s-successors)

Danny42C
5th Oct 2015, 01:38
DHfan (your #7460),

".....The Mk 1 Halifax had two .303s in a nose turret. It was deleted in later variants as part of the search for improved performance." I would think they'd have to put a block of concrete up front (à la "the blue circle fighter") to balance the aircraft !

".....According to wiki, a Lancaster Bomb Aimer just had to stand up to man the front turret...". That would make good sense - but if he were further aft around the Nav position, it would take longer - and when you want a gunner, you want him quick !

I remember reading somewhere that three of the engines had individual hydraulic pumps, each supplying one turret, so that loss of one engine would not render all turrets inoperable. But I can't find (after a cursory Google search) anything to back it up. Anybody know whether this was true ?


Chugalug (your #7461),

".....A small number of early Lancasters were also equipped with a ventral turret on the bottom of the fuselage fitted with two .303s, but this turret was phased out from 1942....." (Wiki: "Rose Turret"). But this was well before the introduction of "Schräge Musik" in mid-'43. And then, as you say, the H2S "bagged" the space.

".....I would not have been a safe pair of eyes to stand watch in that vital defensive position!... " But a very lucky pair to be standing there then ! I would have given my eye teeth (if I had any) for your 20 minutes ! (or, better yet, to be poling along one of the Spits !) Very recently someone put a link on here (?) to a short YouTube taken from a camera behind the right shoulder of a W/Cdr in a BBMF Hurricane as he is turning to tuck-in on the left wing of the leading Spitfire. You get a good view of the RH side of the Sperry Panel; the Climb/Descent is all over the place as it is very bumpy, but the pilot has the "bank" needle stuck nicely at 6 o'clock all the time.

".....I read somewhere that there was constant lobbying to remove one or more of the turrets throughout the night bombing campaign, always for it to be quashed (by Harris?) because of the supposed effects on morale. The weight saved could have been traded for ceiling, range, and/or bomb load of course.....".

I would've thought (never having been there !) that it wouldn't worry them too much (at night) if the front turret had gone, but then you'd have the CoG problem as before.

Cheers both, Danny.

Danny42C
5th Oct 2015, 02:24
DJFish1,

Thank you for the kind words about "our" Thread. Reading it "from start to finish" must rate with reading "War and Peace" right through ! (did anyone ever finish it ?) Smudge and Chugalug have put it admirably: a hearty welcome into the good fellowship of this, the best of Threads on all PPRuNe (at least, we think so).

I liken it to an old Crewroom in Cyberspace, housed in a leaky and rattly wartime Nissen hut, shabby and untidy, where all, from Groupies to erks may cluster round the old coke stove in broken-down armchairs, and natter about everything under the sun. Where are all free to question, correct, argue about and learn from each other, always provided no harsh word be spoken between friends.

As its title implies, it was set up by Cliff Leach (RIP) some seven years ago for those of us who qualified as "Drivers, Airframe" in the war, to tell our stories (for no two war stories are alike), then the rest of aircrew, then all those without whom (as PPRuNe puts it), "nothing would get off the ground", then just about anyone with an interest in aviation..

The "old hairies" being incorrigible, our wise Moderators sat back and let them ramble on (as the old tend to do), and suddenly found they had the most popular and well-loved Thread of all on their hands. Sadly the old generation, like Cliff, are nearly all "RIP" (for to be "qualified", we must be 92+ now), and only three of us are left. But then came their families with tales which had been passed down to them, their logbooks, diaries and notes.

Of course we're not going to delete your Great Uncle's record of service !! The more, the merrier ! Get his logbook(s) if you can. It may have details of his training flights, but do not be disappointed if you get a string of "Ex.16", "Ex.32"s and the like. But the meat in the sandwich is from 22.6.43. to 5.2.44. ("51").

The last entry is "14.4.44." ("to 617"). Then nothing ? - was that the End ?

Again welcome, Danny.

jeffb
5th Oct 2015, 13:28
Dad did feel the front turret on his Lanc was of no value for night ops- in 19 ops he never fired the guns in anger, nor even saw anything to fire at! As pointed out, his duties as Bomb Aimer only lasted for about 15 minutes preceding the actual dropping of bombs. During the trip, he assisted the Nav in observations and navigation, or was a general dogsbody when something was needed throughout the aircraft ie oxygen problems.
That being said, I did read once about how a front gunner did actually shoot down a night fighter. The enemy aircraft was unaware of the Lanc, and cruised past just a hundred yards or so parallel to the Lanc. The mid upper became aware of it as it was abeam them, and notified the front gunner. When the fighter got in a position slightly ahead of the Lanc, the front gunner shot it down! There may have been other instances, but I am sure they were certainly few and far between.

Chugalug2
5th Oct 2015, 14:06
Gun Turrets were indeed a complex and arcane technology, the manned ones eventually giving way to barbettes, operated from a central fire control position, to eventually disappear entirely in the West with the removal of the tail-mounted 20mm M61 Vulcan Cannon from the B-52H in the early '90s. As Danny points out, a major disadvantage was their weight and the moment from the CoG, especially given that their most effective location was in the extreme tail of the a/c.

For anoraks and historians alike, a fascinating thread on the Lancaster's turrets is here:-

Lancaster Turret (http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/weapons-systems-tech-/lancaster-turret-4834.html)

Danny42C
5th Oct 2015, 16:22
DHfan,

I wrote:

"....I remember reading somewhere that three of the engines had individual hydraulic pumps, each supplying one turret, so that loss of one engine would not render all turrets inoperable. But I can't find (after a cursory Google search) anything to back it up. Anybody know whether this was true ?...."

A bit more digging has turned up:

<British Power-Operated Gun Turrets - Page 2 - Axis History Forum
forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=20042&start=15>

"....The electro-hydraulic power unit was mounted behind the gunner, giving a maximum rotation speed of 35 degrees/sec...."

So the turret movement had its own power supply (and presumably its own hydraulic reservoir), and was not dependent on the main engine-driven hydraulic system.

Which wraps it up nicely ! Danny.

Danny42C
5th Oct 2015, 16:42
Chugalug,

Followed the link you gave us - a truly encyclopedic work on the Lancaster Turret !


http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/attachments/weapons-systems-tech-/32504d1299767491t-lancaster-turret-upper___lower_barbettes.jpg (http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/attachments/weapons-systems-tech-/32504d1155584062-lancaster-turret-upper___lower_barbettes.jpg)



Nice pic of a Lanc with ventral turret:

Thanks, Danny.

Chugalug2
5th Oct 2015, 17:25
Danny, I think that picture shows the UK's brief dalliance with the barbette, as compared to a manned turret. Both mid upper and ventral were controlled from the glazed position shown at the rear of the a/c. Brief, as:-
The prototype barbettes were completed and despatched to RAE Farnborough in early 1944, where they were fitted to Lancaster (LL780G). Some trials took place, but it was thought that hostilities would probably be ended by the time the system was ready for operational use, and the project was terminated in autumn 1944. They both packed twin 20mm Hispano Cannon which would have made someone's eyes water! Perhaps their use by Tiger Force would have been compromised by the weight, and hence range, implications for operations in the Far East.

http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/attachments/weapons-systems-tech-/32505d1299767491t-lancaster-turret-layout_of_the_bp_remotely_controlled_defence_system.jpg

Danny42C
5th Oct 2015, 18:25
Chugalug,

Of course ! Silly me ! I was wondering what that glasshouse on the end was all about. The occupant doesn't seem to have had much in the way of protection, I must say. :*

Danny.

Danny42C
5th Oct 2015, 19:01
jeffb (your #7467),

There might have been cases where the fighter, closing rapidly on its prey on a firing pass, would overshoot the Lanc after firing and appear in point-blank range of the front guns, having ignored the advice (on a poster put out by SEAAC):

"After attacking, go DOWN when you break -
Or the Jap rear gunner will make no mistake !"

And in the case in which Flt.Lt. (later Wg.Cdr.) Nicolson won his VC (I've told the story here long ago), it is surmised that the same thing happened.

I think you're right, the Bomb Aimer was a "dogsbody" for most of the trip.

Danny.

Tall Bird
5th Oct 2015, 22:17
The copy of the log book I have of a chap who qualified as an Air Observer in 1941 Has entries for air navigation, bombing and air gunnery courses. A total of 18 hours flying was all that is recorded to the bombing and gunnery phase.
His log book records his trips with Bomber Command as Navigator until he becomes OC 10 Sqn when they are logged as Air Bomber. When he goes out to India after 10 converted to the Dakota he logs his trips as Co Pilot.

Gosh, aa62 a pleasant surprise to see Wg Cdr ACD mentioned. He and his wife were close friends of my parents.

DJFish1
6th Oct 2015, 01:27
Gentlemen,
Thank you for the warm welcome and your interest in my research into my Great Uncle.

As suggested the first date in question is probably a return to Moncton before returning to the UK.
The other date I cant make head 'nor tail of is the entry toward the bottom of the page at ?.6.44, possibly some kind of special leave as his crew flew without him on 8.6.44, I suppose that's the joy of handwritten notes.
http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b285/DJFish/3e7a0523-ce2c-4cca-9821-76a2ad324484_zpsepdzxvat.png~original


The next step is to send everything I've got off to my Aunt in Scotland and my Great Uncles in Australia to see if I can track down his log book.

Thanks to the wealth of information available online about 617 Sqdn. I've been able to read about some of the missions he flew, sadly his last flight was returning from the 11.09.44 raid on the Tirpitz.
Due to the distances involved, Yagodnik in Russia was used as a staging post and the aircraft crashed in Norway during their return flight to the UK on 17.09.44
The crew are buried in Nesbyen churchyard in Norway, here are a couple of links relating to Nesbyen.
https://tihlde.org/~ktsorens/flyvrak/syningen.html
http://wingmutt.********.co.uk/2007/05/on-behalf-of-617-thank-you-all.html


I'll come back & post any more information I manage to uncover,
Kind regards
Dave

ancientaviator62
6th Oct 2015, 06:51
TB,
welcome. I came by my copy of his log book via his grandaughter who was my stepson's girlfriend for many years. Sadly they parted and we have lost touch. He flew many trips with W/C Guy (later Sir) Lawrence on 78 Sqn.
I understood that he died of a stroke at about the age of 50.
If you look in the book 'From Hell hull and Halifax' there is I believe a pic of him in what looks like an officer's mess along with several crew members.

Fionn101
6th Oct 2015, 11:38
please forgive a slight thread drift but I wish to find out more about my uncle Archie who served with the RAF from the late forties through to 1960's . I do know he was out in ITS Isle of Man in 1951.

Can someone tell me where would be the best place to post and ask about him and his service years ?

Danny42C, Sir , I hope all is well with your good self , can you tell us more about the rebuilding effort of England's major cities post war ? how was such a monumental task achieved ? or had the bombings eased off a little by late 1944 ? did they use soldiers or private companies to do the rebuilding ?

no doubt your answers will give me more questions !

Until then, stay safe,
Fionn

MPN11
6th Oct 2015, 18:59
hello, Fionn101 ... I've always been fascinated by how German cities were recovered post WW2. They were significantly more damaged than the UK ones, but both angles are an interesting topic.

Perhaps a new thread? "Rebuilding Cities Post-WW2"?

My late father-in-law, a Civil Engineer by profession, managed to work his way out of his 'reserved occupation' to become a Navigator on Sunderlands ... yes, NS-Z of 201, as it happens, and he attended the 'unveiling at the RAF Museum at Hendon! But in '44 he was dragged back into civvy street to apply his skills to rebuilding Britain.

Petet
6th Oct 2015, 20:05
DJFIsh

The line for ??.06.1944 states that he was admitted to hospital (but I can't read the name of the hospital) with the following line showing his discharge date.

Regards

Pete

Fareastdriver
6th Oct 2015, 20:28
The difference between Britain rebuilding and Germany rebuilding was that in Britain everybody was taxed to the hilt whereas in Germany overtime was tax free.

Tall Bird
6th Oct 2015, 21:17
aa62 Thank you for the info and book reference.

The Dowdens were senior members of a group of young couples in Nottingham. Money was tight post war but the group had a great community spirit and the remaining members are still in touch. ACD's children, who were a lot older than us, ran what we called the OK Kids Corral. :) He died in his late 50s so I don't remember him that well. I do remember Sprog the dog and ACD's favourite sayings: up yer pipe and never mind chaps, press on. Both children died relatively young.

Will send you a pm.

Danny42C
6th Oct 2015, 22:08
Fionn101,

I have no professional competence in these matters, but I would first agree with MPN11 that the Germans put us to shame in this respect. The speed with which they rebuilt their cities (and the care they took to replicate their medieval architecture) were truly impressive. When I first went out there in '54, they were rebuilding night (under arc lamps) and day; when we lived in Cologne in '60, the city had been completely rebuilt, although it had been utterly destroyed by our bombing, only the battered spires of the cathedral left above ground.

At home, in contrast, much commercial property was left derelict for years ("Bombsites"), for the first priority had to be repair of the war-damaged housing stock. Post-war housing was terribly short. Friends of ours in Liverpool, who had been "bombed-out" in the '41 Blitz, did not get their property repaired (at Govt. expense) until '49. All the work was done by civilian contractors, much for Local Authorities and the rest for private householders. The Army certainly didn't do any of the work - in any case they had another war on their hands in '51 (Korea). One attempt to ease the housing shortage was the aluminium "prefabs", little metal bungalows which must have been freezing cold in winter, but better than nothing for newlyweds with nothing else in prospect.

I have not tried, but Google should turn up something on the subject.

Danny.

Danny42C
7th Oct 2015, 00:25
DJFish1,

The document you've copied to us is enough to keep anyone busy for a week ! I can only put in odd comments as follows (and am open to be shot down at any point):

Line 1, he enlists (in the RAFVR) on 5.6.41., after acceptance by a Selection Board at Weston-super-Mare (?) Is sent back home on "Deferred Service" (with a nice little "RAFVR" lapel badge), for 3½ months until recall on 22.9.41. to No.1 Aircrew Reception Centre (wherever that was).

Next move is to 7 ITW on 11.10.41.; does his six weeks there, then kicks his heels at "50 Ground (?) Pool" (some sort of Transit Camp ?) till 18.3.42. Even allowing for these six weeks, and a couple of weeks at Blackpool getting prepared for the voyage, there's about four months idle time. What a waste !

On 17.5.42. he lands in Canada (Moncto[w]n). Here a bell rings. When I went out to the States in August '41, I had to paint "ATTS TRAIL" on my kitbags for the voyage to Halifax (But I had to go through Moncton on my way home six months later).

Now, it's puzzling. The earliest of several dates for 33 Air Navigation School is 20.2.43. This has to be the date he finished ANS. 6.4.43. to 8.6.43. sees him back in UK at 7 Personnel Reception Centre (more delay). On 22.6.43, he is at 1 (Observers) ? Flying Unit, but he doesn't get to 29 OTU until 24.9.43., so there must have been serious instruction at 1(O)F.U. (whatever that was) to take three months.

From then on, it's fairly straightforward. "1654 Conversion Unit" ("Heavy Conversion Unit" [?] would be when he went onto the Lancs/Halifaxes). An odd thing now is his reference to "Bases" The RAF had Stations, the USAAF had Bases. Perhaps the RCAF had adopted the US term, and he'd picked it up there.

He gets to his first Squadron (44) on 3.2.44., two years and five months after he donned uniform at Reception Centre. I reached 110 on 2.1.43, one year and seven months after I polished my first button. So, although he enlisted only six months after me, he was almost a year later becoming operational. How did the RAF manage to "lose" so much valuable time, when every day counted in Bomber Command ? It beggars belief !

So it was THE End (may the crew RIP).

Danny.

MPN11
7th Oct 2015, 08:00
An odd thing now is his reference to "Bases" The RAF had Stations, the USAAF had Bases. Perhaps the RCAF had adopted the US term, and he'd picked it up there.
The RAF had 'Bases' later in the war, usually comprising a major airfield and 2-3 satellite airfields, with numerous large squadrons, all under one overall commander (Air Cdre).

http://www.raf-lincolnshire.info/bombercommand/bombercmd.htm

Petet
7th Oct 2015, 08:15
DJFish1

Just to add to Danny's post on the service record:

1 ACRC (Aircrew Reception Centre) was the one based at RAF Regent's Park (London) [see recent posts on this matter]

50 "Ground Pool" should read "Group Pool"

1 (O) AFU was the advanced flying unit where he would have been "acclimatised" to UK flying conditions (weather, terrain, blackouts, barrage balloons) after learning his trade overseas

The term "Base" was used for a cluster of airfields where Heavy Conversion Training was carried out. I am away at the moment so I do not have access to my reference books to enable me to advise you on which airfields were designated as 51 and 57 Base

Regards

Pete

Chugalug2
7th Oct 2015, 08:23
The Bomber Bases are listed here:-

Bomber Bases_P (http://www.rafweb.org/Organsation/Bases.htm)

They were indeed commanded by AOC Air Commodores. I seem to remember that the famous film made by the Station Commander of RAF Hemswell required the approval of his Base Commander. 51 base became No.75 when 7 Group took over all those bases that housed HCUs on 3.11.44.

MPN11
7th Oct 2015, 08:41
A better "Bases" link than mine, Chugalug2 :ok:

... my excuse is that breakfast was being served!!

Chugalug2
7th Oct 2015, 09:29
On the contrary MPN11, the two are complementary to one another. Yours for instance emphasises that the two figure identifier for a Base signified both the Group and the ID of the Base (hence the need to change 51 Base to 75 Base when moved to 7 Group from 5 Group). It also tells us that originally the Bases were identified by the name of their principal Station together with function, ie Swinderby Training Base before the numbering system made it 51 Base.

As we find repeatedly in this thread, the devil lies in the detail and the value of the "by the way..." snippets that Danny often treats us to.

MPN11
7th Oct 2015, 10:44
My 'criticism' was the large gaps relating to other Groups, I suppose, but the explanatory text in indeed good. Whereas yours has a more comprehensive/detailed listing.

As you say, complementary documentation.

Danny42C
7th Oct 2015, 17:11
Chugalug, and MPN11,

And Danny must put on his dunce's cap again (you're never to old to learn !)

MPN11
7th Oct 2015, 18:58
You are obviously forgiven, Danny42C ... you were not in BC, and were also abroad at the time! :cool:

Chugalug2
7th Oct 2015, 19:29
Danny, I've learned far more about the Indonesian Confrontation against Malaysia in Borneo, Malaya, and Singapore, than I ever did by being there in the mid 60's, simply by trawling the internet and by belonging to the RAF Historical Society.

Which allows me a shameless plug for the Society. The subscription (presently £18 pa) gets you three bound books per year of the Society's various presentations, plus the opportunity to attend a symposium at RAFM Hendon, and the Society AGM at the RAF Club, which includes a presentation by a guest speaker.

I'm off to Hendon on the 21st October to learn all about "Aspects of RAF Maritime Air Since WWII" a bargain at £20 all in, including coffee, a buffet lunch, and a glass of wine:-

RAF - RAF Historical Societyrafhistoricalsociety (http://www.raf.mod.uk/history/rafhistoricalsocietym.cfm)

Don't tell anyone though, it's supposed to be a secret...

Fareastdriver
7th Oct 2015, 20:44
Danny doesn't need to be in an Historical Society; he knew them all.

Danny42C
7th Oct 2015, 22:18
FED,

True, but Danny has forgotten all their names !

Eheu, fugaces........

D. :confused:

smujsmith
8th Oct 2015, 19:38
A stab in the dark gentlemen, my late father in law served for some time as Groundcrew on 71(NZ) squadron at RAF Mepal in Cambridgeshire. My wife is trying to expand her family tree on her dads war service. Can anyone shed any light on that particular station or squadron ?

Smudge:ok:

Pom Pax
8th Oct 2015, 20:47
A slight correction 75(NZ) squadron, Mepal was home to "75 (NZ) from its opening in June '43 until the end of hostilities in Europe in '45.
https://75nzsquadron.wordpress.com gives a good coverage of the operational side of "75".
There is a Friends of 75 (NZ) SQUADRON RAF ASSOCIATION UNITED KINGDOM and also a fairly active facebook page https://www.facebook.com/75nzsquadroncom and also at https://www.facebook.com/groups/213227175365096/?fref=ts

Chugalug2
9th Oct 2015, 19:20
Some information about Mepal itself, the units based there (75 Sqn seems to have been the main one), links to a Google Earth image (not much left now!), and to the image of the Watch Office (since demolished) here:-

Stations-M (http://www.rafweb.org/Stations/Stations-M.htm#Mepal)

We used to use Mepal as a joining fix for Oakington (5FTS) in 1962/3, given its location near the end of the "Twin Canals".

Chug

ValMORNA
9th Oct 2015, 19:42
Ref the posts 7475 and 7479 regarding Service record.


The unidentified hospital refers to No 4 RAF Hospital Rauceby near Sleaford.


There is a brief but interesting Wiki link under 'Rauceby Hospital' which mentions that it was a 'crash and burns unit'.


Guy Gibson's 'lady friend' was Corporal Maggie North, a WAAF nurse, stationed at Rauceby who was among the staff who attended Group Captain Gus Walker at Syerston when he was involved in an explosion which caused him to lose an arm.

smujsmith
9th Oct 2015, 21:28
Pompax #7496,

Thanks so much for those links in your post, I feel sure that we might glean some more information on my wife's fathers time at Mepal, and maybe even find someone who remembers him. I'm off for an explore anyway.

Chug,

Thanks for the reference, looks like somewhere we can go and still see where her dad spent his war years.

Smudge:ok:

Chugalug2
10th Oct 2015, 08:47
Smudge, just in case you haven't navigated around the Royal Air Force Organisational History (http://www.rafweb.org) site, here is its entry for 75 (New Zealand) Squadron:-

Sqn Histories 71-75_P (http://www.rafweb.org/Squadrons/Sqn071-75.htm)

The site itself is a treasure trove of people, places, and organisations, obtainable in full only to members but a great deal is open to all via the quick menu:-

Site Map_P (http://www.rafweb.org/Menu%20Quick.htm)

http://www.rafweb.org/Sqn_Badges/075Sqn.jpg