WHAT, WHERE and WHEN
Gnome de PPRuNe
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Too close to Croydon for comfort
Age: 60
Posts: 12,675
Received 330 Likes
on
183 Posts
I wonder if you are using the "insert link" icon (the globe with the chainlink) to post your pic rather than the "insert image" icon (mountain with stamp - well, looks like that to me!) Virgo? That might be the answer...
Treadders
PS keep the pics (or links!) coming, great stuff! I can hear those Griffons and props making that wonderful Shackleton sound! Or is it the tinitus...?
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Nottingham UK
Age: 85
Posts: 5,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Virgo. Possibly the wing designed for the Avro Ashton?
Regarding your difficulties in posting pictures. When you paste in the URL details into the image box, check that http:// is not entered twice. Delete the second http:// so it reads http://i74 etc. (click on the photograph treadigraph has posted and then read the properties you will see how the URL should appear)Otherwise the photograph will not appear.
Mel
Regarding your difficulties in posting pictures. When you paste in the URL details into the image box, check that http:// is not entered twice. Delete the second http:// so it reads http://i74 etc. (click on the photograph treadigraph has posted and then read the properties you will see how the URL should appear)Otherwise the photograph will not appear.
Mel
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: sussex
Posts: 347
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for the posting tips.............done all that - correct "insert image" symbol, only one "URL" ...........but I'll keep trying !
Answer to the Shackleton MR3 wing..............it was actually the Argosy wing with the tip tanks added - which is maybe why the MR3s were all withdrawn before the MR2s, due to wing fatigue problems (being used in turbulent low-level conditions ????)........and of course why the older 2s were converted to AEW rather than the MR3s
Answer to the Shackleton MR3 wing..............it was actually the Argosy wing with the tip tanks added - which is maybe why the MR3s were all withdrawn before the MR2s, due to wing fatigue problems (being used in turbulent low-level conditions ????)........and of course why the older 2s were converted to AEW rather than the MR3s
virgo:
"It was actually the Argosy wing...."
Now that is very interesting for when I did the Argosy manufacturer's course at Baginton in 1962 with Whitworth Gloster we were told that we had a Shackleton wing!
"It was actually the Argosy wing...."
Now that is very interesting for when I did the Argosy manufacturer's course at Baginton in 1962 with Whitworth Gloster we were told that we had a Shackleton wing!
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Nottingham UK
Age: 85
Posts: 5,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by JW411
virgo:
"It was actually the Argosy wing...."
Now that is very interesting for when I did the Argosy manufacturer's course at Baginton in 1962 with Whitworth Gloster we were told that we had a Shackleton wing!
"It was actually the Argosy wing...."
Now that is very interesting for when I did the Argosy manufacturer's course at Baginton in 1962 with Whitworth Gloster we were told that we had a Shackleton wing!
At page 311 of Oliver Tapper’s book it states:-
“Considerable design and development time was saved by the fortuitous fact that the design parameters of the Argosy’s wing were found to be almost exactly the same as those of the existing Avro Shackleton. This basic wing design was therefore adopted for the new aircraft with such modifications as were necessary to allow for the different engine spacing, the mounting of the tail booms, the incorporation of thermal de-icing in the leading edge, and the fitting of large double-slotted flaps.”
He continues at page 315:- “The task of designing and manufacturing the Argosy was, to some extent, shared among other member companies of the Hawker Siddeley Group. As already noted the wing of the aircraft was derived from that of the Shackleton and it was, therefore, natural that the Avro Company should undertake the design and construction of this component.”
It is noted that the first M.R.3 WR970 first flew 2nd September 1955, first A.W Argosy G-AOZZ was rolled out for engine runs 21st December 1958 and flew on the 8th January 1959.
Mel
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: sussex
Posts: 347
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I must defer to MReyn..........obviously if the Shack MR3 flew some three years before the Argosy, I guess the wing was designed for the Shackleton - but at least the two aircraft types were correct !
Another similar story is that to speed up production of the Caravelle, Aerospatial bought the entire forward fuselage from DH and grafted the Comet nose onto their fuselage ?
(Please don't tell me DH bought a fuselage from Aerospatial and grafted their own fuselage onto the cockpit bit !!!!!)
But this is what A,H & N is all about, isn't it ?
Another similar story is that to speed up production of the Caravelle, Aerospatial bought the entire forward fuselage from DH and grafted the Comet nose onto their fuselage ?
(Please don't tell me DH bought a fuselage from Aerospatial and grafted their own fuselage onto the cockpit bit !!!!!)
But this is what A,H & N is all about, isn't it ?
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Nottingham UK
Age: 85
Posts: 5,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
virgo
You are a Gent. At least you did establish a link between the Shack and the Argosy. I didnt even know that they were linked it was only after JW411's comment I did some reading. As you say "But this is what A,H & N is all about, isn't it ?" It certainly is not a case of scoring points.
Regards
Mel
You are a Gent. At least you did establish a link between the Shack and the Argosy. I didnt even know that they were linked it was only after JW411's comment I did some reading. As you say "But this is what A,H & N is all about, isn't it ?" It certainly is not a case of scoring points.
Regards
Mel
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: sussex
Posts: 347
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK, I'm trying Speechless Two's advice.................if it works, on the basis of What. Where and When, have a go at this.
The What and Where is pretty easy but the When is a bit more difficult, but I think the historians should be able to pin it down within a few years ?
The What and Where is pretty easy but the When is a bit more difficult, but I think the historians should be able to pin it down within a few years ?
Gnome de PPRuNe
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Too close to Croydon for comfort
Age: 60
Posts: 12,675
Received 330 Likes
on
183 Posts
I think it's Lossiemouth with those Shacklebombers? I'll chuck a dart at the late 1950s...!
Gnome de PPRuNe
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Too close to Croydon for comfort
Age: 60
Posts: 12,675
Received 330 Likes
on
183 Posts
Doh! I meant Kinloss... Honest!
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: sussex
Posts: 347
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yep ! Kinloss.
A couple of interesting things......the photo shows four types of hangars - anyone know the identity of them ?
Secondly, the aircraft are either GR 1s or T4s, with no mid-upper turrets, with the post-1958 colour scheme, a squadron LETTER identification, rather than the unit number and no evidence of other squadron use of the airfield.
All rather confusing but I expect someone will be able to untangle it and place a year on it ? (My personal stab would be 1958 )
A couple of interesting things......the photo shows four types of hangars - anyone know the identity of them ?
Secondly, the aircraft are either GR 1s or T4s, with no mid-upper turrets, with the post-1958 colour scheme, a squadron LETTER identification, rather than the unit number and no evidence of other squadron use of the airfield.
All rather confusing but I expect someone will be able to untangle it and place a year on it ? (My personal stab would be 1958 )
