XH558 gone tech
Join Date: May 2012
Location: London
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not the first time it's happened, so more of a minor disappointment than a disaster. Shame though - that's my afternoon trip to Finningley scuppered... and I missed the Reds fly over earlier too! Grr!
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South
Posts: 257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bit more of a minor disappointment to the 300,000 sat on B/mth beach I can tell you. 
Not much you can do about it though and no-one's fault this time, although to compound the disappointment the Sea Vixen had it's pilot recalled back to military duty so didn't fly either.
That in turn put paid to the five ship Heritage Jet flypast that was due to happen too.
Ho hum, it was a nice idea anyway.
I'd also wager that 558 won't be flying to Leuchars this coming weekend either seeing as the fuel bag has to be sent down to Pompey for repair.
Not much you can do about it though and no-one's fault this time, although to compound the disappointment the Sea Vixen had it's pilot recalled back to military duty so didn't fly either.
That in turn put paid to the five ship Heritage Jet flypast that was due to happen too.
Ho hum, it was a nice idea anyway.
I'd also wager that 558 won't be flying to Leuchars this coming weekend either seeing as the fuel bag has to be sent down to Pompey for repair.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South
Posts: 257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Went down on Friday but avoided the place like the plague on Saturday due to the inevitable crowds, and was only going to go for the last hour or so on Sunday for the old jets and their formation flypast.
Thankfully I heard about the no-shows around 2pm so just carried on watching all the comings and goings from the garden.
Never tire of seeing Miss Demeanour though. Jonathon Whaley displays that Hunter superbly.
Thankfully I heard about the no-shows around 2pm so just carried on watching all the comings and goings from the garden.
Never tire of seeing Miss Demeanour though. Jonathon Whaley displays that Hunter superbly.
Join Date: May 2012
Location: London
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would have thought the Sea Vixen cancellation was as bad as losing the Vulcan. Whilst I have the luxury of having Finningley on my doorstep, the chances of seeing the Vixen are pretty slim in my part of the world. As for the formation flypast, I couldn't help thinking it wouldn't have been anything like as exciting as all the hype that surrounded it. Bearing in mind the distance from the crowd and the loose formation that would have been necessary, I doubt if it would have been all that spectacular in reality!
I suppose one could at least conclude that the flying hours that weren't used on the Vulcan might be valuable for the future, if the plan to fly again next year goes ahead. I just hope the Vixen gets out and about more too!
As for Miss Demeanour, I can't say I've ever been bothered about seeing it. Personally, I can't think of anything more ghastly than a military aircraft painted-up like a circus clown. I used to hate the Sea Vixen in Red Bull colours and I was delighted when it finally re-appeared looking like a Sea Vixen! I'm still not exactly overjoyed at seeing XH558 in her bizarre "one-off" scheme. If I win the Lottery I'll be financing a trip to the paint shop for her!
I suppose one could at least conclude that the flying hours that weren't used on the Vulcan might be valuable for the future, if the plan to fly again next year goes ahead. I just hope the Vixen gets out and about more too!
As for Miss Demeanour, I can't say I've ever been bothered about seeing it. Personally, I can't think of anything more ghastly than a military aircraft painted-up like a circus clown. I used to hate the Sea Vixen in Red Bull colours and I was delighted when it finally re-appeared looking like a Sea Vixen! I'm still not exactly overjoyed at seeing XH558 in her bizarre "one-off" scheme. If I win the Lottery I'll be financing a trip to the paint shop for her!
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South
Posts: 257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know what you mean about Miss D's paintjob but somehow it just really fits in with the whole seaside show thing when it's whizzing around with the sun glinting off it. You can see why they book it for the occasion as it appeals to the average seaside going punter and doesn't really look out of place.
Jonathon puts on such a good display though that it's hard not to enjoy it, and by all accounts he was the highlight on Sunday by putting on a really good extended display to close the show after the Vulcan and Vixen didn't turn up. Have to admit that it would have stood out like a sore thumb in the flypast though, what with the rest all wearing military type schemes.
I fully agree that the Sea Vixen however looks absolutely gorgeous in the current Navy scheme; it should never wear anything else imo. Just wish they'd fly the beggar more often, but it's an expensive beast and pilot availability seems a problem for them. Shame Brian Grant is no longer able to fly it.
I'm in a very lucky position to have still seen it flying multiple times already as it goes in and out of Hurn, but the same can't be said of the Vulcan so my only chance of seeing that this year has sadly gone.
With all the money still needed for VttS to break even this season, a fuel bag to fix and another £400,000 by end of October for an essential wing mod, I'm not all that confident it'll still be flying next year, but I suppose they've been through worse so we'll see.
I'll wager if you win the lottery you'd paint it in the old style camo scheme like this.
Am I right?
Jonathon puts on such a good display though that it's hard not to enjoy it, and by all accounts he was the highlight on Sunday by putting on a really good extended display to close the show after the Vulcan and Vixen didn't turn up. Have to admit that it would have stood out like a sore thumb in the flypast though, what with the rest all wearing military type schemes.
I fully agree that the Sea Vixen however looks absolutely gorgeous in the current Navy scheme; it should never wear anything else imo. Just wish they'd fly the beggar more often, but it's an expensive beast and pilot availability seems a problem for them. Shame Brian Grant is no longer able to fly it.
I'm in a very lucky position to have still seen it flying multiple times already as it goes in and out of Hurn, but the same can't be said of the Vulcan so my only chance of seeing that this year has sadly gone.
With all the money still needed for VttS to break even this season, a fuel bag to fix and another £400,000 by end of October for an essential wing mod, I'm not all that confident it'll still be flying next year, but I suppose they've been through worse so we'll see.
I'll wager if you win the lottery you'd paint it in the old style camo scheme like this.
Am I right?
Join Date: May 2012
Location: London
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's certainly the paint scheme I'd go for, although the forward portion of the radome would of course have to be black It's a blessing that XH558 didn't have to suffer the indignity of that TFR thimble!
It's a blessing that XH558 didn't have to suffer the indignity of that TFR thimble!
Last edited by WH904; 2nd Sep 2013 at 23:03.
Thought police antagonist
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Where I always have been...firmly in the real world
Posts: 1,371
Received 110 Likes
on
77 Posts
" Personally, I can't think of anything more ghastly than a military aircraft painted-up like a circus clown.
You're not Brian Sewell by any chance ?.....colour schemes make no difference to the vast majority of people who watch air displays...they go to see the flying and the aircraft for a day out....that's it.
And, whilst the Hunter is a former military aircraft, it's also now part of a commercial operation.
Can you make the distinction ? .....probably not.
You're not Brian Sewell by any chance ?.....colour schemes make no difference to the vast majority of people who watch air displays...they go to see the flying and the aircraft for a day out....that's it.
And, whilst the Hunter is a former military aircraft, it's also now part of a commercial operation.
Can you make the distinction ? .....probably not.
colour schemes make no difference to the vast majority of people who watch air displays...they go to see the flying and the aircraft for a day out....that's it
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 3,325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh, come on! Why do you think these aeroplanes are so painted? FINANCE! It costs a fortune to support them, and if painting them in Red Bull colours means they fly rather than moulder in a museum, bring on the glitzy paint!
In fact that Vulcan thing (Vulcan to the Skip?) could do with following that course of action - get some real sponsorship behind it instead of rattling the begging bowl several times a year. But I understrand it was a condition of ite lottery grant that it stays in RAF colours. Pity.
In fact that Vulcan thing (Vulcan to the Skip?) could do with following that course of action - get some real sponsorship behind it instead of rattling the begging bowl several times a year. But I understrand it was a condition of ite lottery grant that it stays in RAF colours. Pity.
If we are discussing paint schemes for the Vulcan and it is always being described as a "Cold War Bomber" then it should be in overall anti-flash white with pale markings.
Join Date: May 2012
Location: London
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Krystal, underscoring a word doesn't make the assertion true, although you're probably correct to state that the majority of air show spectators don't care what colour an aircraft is painted. But that rather misses the point, doesn't it?!
Obviously, the majority of air show spectators are completely clueless. They'd watch anything if it performed a loop or trailed some smoke. They don't care, as they've simply turned-up for some entertainment.
But from the viewpoint of an enthusiast, or indeed anyone who has an understanding and appreciation of classic aircraft, colour schemes and insignia are very important. True, there are those that simply appreciate seeing the aircraft no matter how it looks, but there are many others (myself included) who really cannot see the point in restoring/retaining an classic aircraft and then tarting it up in some ludicrous paint scheme. It simply makes the aircraft look ridiculous.
What I can never understand is why anyone would want to spend huge sums of money flying a warbird, and not invest a bit more time ensuring that it looks precisely as it did whilst in military service. I mean, if you don't care about such issues, then why not buy/fly something cheaper like a clapped-out biz jet, or an L-39 or whatever?
I agree that most air show spectators don't care about such issues, but it begs the question as to what the aircraft is restored and operated for. The amusement of Joe Public or the enjoyment and appreciation of those who actually have a clue about what they're looking at?
It's quite remarkable to see just how much difference a truly authentic paint scheme can make. For example, there are various Jet Provosts flying around that look vaguely convincing but they are let-down by slightly dubious colour application, and awful serial transfers that are a completely wrong font. Minor matters maybe but they spoil an otherwise great restoration. On the other hand, T5 XW324 (that displayed at Bournemouth) is pretty-much perfect and looks magnificent. Did the crowds notice? No, of course not, but isn't it a good thing that some owners make the effort to do things right for those of us who do care?
It's a bit like painting a London bus yellow, or a pillar box blue. It's completely at odds with the object's history.
I accept that XH558 was inherited with a bizarre one-off scheme applied at Kinloss, even though I (and lots of my colleagues) hated it from the day it was done. The need to apply a protective and "cleanable" coat for air shows made good sense, but whoever thought applying a wrap-round camouflage scheme to a maritime Vulcan, and then giving it a gloss finish so the colours are completely different those worn by the handful of other Vulcans painted the same way (in matt finish), was utterly bonkers. But repainting the aircraft is obviously an expensive proposition so I can't blame TVOC for sticking with what they've got. It's frustrating that so much of the airframe has now been repainted, albeit on a piece-by-piece basis. If it had all been done at once, we could have said goodbye to the silly colours once and for all.
Naturally, I accept that Joe Public has no interest in colour schemes and insignia. But then I couldn't care less what Joe Public thinks. Krystal seems to be implying that aircraft are restored and operated purely for air show performances. That's not entirely true, and even if we presume that displaying for the public is the main motive, then surely the whole point of restoring and operating a classic type is to demonstrate and illustrate the aircraft as it was, rather than simply amusing a crowd of dimwits who just want some noise and spectacle?
I kind of agree with Hurn in that Miss Demeanour is evidently a popular attraction and doubtless looks good, performing at the seaside. A Hunter is a Hunter after all, but regardless of how many air show punters like it, I think it looks ridiculous. Likewise, as all my colleagues know, I'm a devoted Vulcan fanatic, but XH558 still looks seriously odd, at least to me. I tend to look at it like this - XH558 was in RAF service for a while in the colours and markings it now wears, so one could say that it does at least represent a period in the aircraft's history. Whether it was a good period however, is another story!
Obviously, the majority of air show spectators are completely clueless. They'd watch anything if it performed a loop or trailed some smoke. They don't care, as they've simply turned-up for some entertainment.
But from the viewpoint of an enthusiast, or indeed anyone who has an understanding and appreciation of classic aircraft, colour schemes and insignia are very important. True, there are those that simply appreciate seeing the aircraft no matter how it looks, but there are many others (myself included) who really cannot see the point in restoring/retaining an classic aircraft and then tarting it up in some ludicrous paint scheme. It simply makes the aircraft look ridiculous.
What I can never understand is why anyone would want to spend huge sums of money flying a warbird, and not invest a bit more time ensuring that it looks precisely as it did whilst in military service. I mean, if you don't care about such issues, then why not buy/fly something cheaper like a clapped-out biz jet, or an L-39 or whatever?
I agree that most air show spectators don't care about such issues, but it begs the question as to what the aircraft is restored and operated for. The amusement of Joe Public or the enjoyment and appreciation of those who actually have a clue about what they're looking at?
It's quite remarkable to see just how much difference a truly authentic paint scheme can make. For example, there are various Jet Provosts flying around that look vaguely convincing but they are let-down by slightly dubious colour application, and awful serial transfers that are a completely wrong font. Minor matters maybe but they spoil an otherwise great restoration. On the other hand, T5 XW324 (that displayed at Bournemouth) is pretty-much perfect and looks magnificent. Did the crowds notice? No, of course not, but isn't it a good thing that some owners make the effort to do things right for those of us who do care?
It's a bit like painting a London bus yellow, or a pillar box blue. It's completely at odds with the object's history.
I accept that XH558 was inherited with a bizarre one-off scheme applied at Kinloss, even though I (and lots of my colleagues) hated it from the day it was done. The need to apply a protective and "cleanable" coat for air shows made good sense, but whoever thought applying a wrap-round camouflage scheme to a maritime Vulcan, and then giving it a gloss finish so the colours are completely different those worn by the handful of other Vulcans painted the same way (in matt finish), was utterly bonkers. But repainting the aircraft is obviously an expensive proposition so I can't blame TVOC for sticking with what they've got. It's frustrating that so much of the airframe has now been repainted, albeit on a piece-by-piece basis. If it had all been done at once, we could have said goodbye to the silly colours once and for all.
Naturally, I accept that Joe Public has no interest in colour schemes and insignia. But then I couldn't care less what Joe Public thinks. Krystal seems to be implying that aircraft are restored and operated purely for air show performances. That's not entirely true, and even if we presume that displaying for the public is the main motive, then surely the whole point of restoring and operating a classic type is to demonstrate and illustrate the aircraft as it was, rather than simply amusing a crowd of dimwits who just want some noise and spectacle?
I kind of agree with Hurn in that Miss Demeanour is evidently a popular attraction and doubtless looks good, performing at the seaside. A Hunter is a Hunter after all, but regardless of how many air show punters like it, I think it looks ridiculous. Likewise, as all my colleagues know, I'm a devoted Vulcan fanatic, but XH558 still looks seriously odd, at least to me. I tend to look at it like this - XH558 was in RAF service for a while in the colours and markings it now wears, so one could say that it does at least represent a period in the aircraft's history. Whether it was a good period however, is another story!
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South
Posts: 257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As far as Hunters go, for me it doesn't get any better than XE601 in the ripple scheme.
The pure lines of a single seater, a beautiful paint scheme and the best blue note I've heard from a display aircraft of the type.
It's probably colourful enough and authentic enough to keep both the average punter and purists happy. Just a bloody shame it's not displaying in the UK anymore!
With regards to the Vulcan, it's scheme is what it is, and there's not much VttS can do with finances what they are. However I think the recent topside repaint does improve it's looks and gets rid of those odd looking bits on the wings where panels were removed and repainted during restoration.
This is from the FAQ's on the VttS website regarding repaints and sponsors, although at this stage it's not ever going to be an issue that needs addressing.
The pure lines of a single seater, a beautiful paint scheme and the best blue note I've heard from a display aircraft of the type.
It's probably colourful enough and authentic enough to keep both the average punter and purists happy. Just a bloody shame it's not displaying in the UK anymore!
With regards to the Vulcan, it's scheme is what it is, and there's not much VttS can do with finances what they are. However I think the recent topside repaint does improve it's looks and gets rid of those odd looking bits on the wings where panels were removed and repainted during restoration.
This is from the FAQ's on the VttS website regarding repaints and sponsors, although at this stage it's not ever going to be an issue that needs addressing.
VTST feels strongly that XH558 should remain in her military colour scheme in recognition of her heritage importance, however if a significant sponsor asked if the colour scheme could be changed then the request would be seriously considered. Re-painting XH558 in a new scheme would be very expensive - estimates are in excess of £400,000 - and we would only agree if there was a commitment to restore XH558 to her original colour scheme at the end of the sponsorship. The Heritage Lottery Fund has indicated that whilst they wish us to maintain XH558 in her military colour scheme, they would permit us to change it as long as the original scheme was restored at a later date.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 419 Likes
on
221 Posts
But then I couldn't care less what Joe Public thinks. Krystal seems to be implying that aircraft are restored and operated purely for air show performances. That's not entirely true, and even if we presume that displaying for the public is the main motive, then surely the whole point of restoring and operating a classic type is to demonstrate and illustrate the aircraft as it was, rather than simply amusing a crowd of dimwits who just want some noise and spectacle?
Join Date: May 2012
Location: London
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But the "dimwit Joe Publics" are usually the people ensuring the preservation of the aircraft, by paying to attend the airshows, or in the case of XH558, paying directly by their contributions.
Yes, they are to some degree, but I don't quite see how that has any influence on how an aircraft is finished and presented. The two points have no relationship.
Would you prefer the Vulcan to be painted in a colour scheme using the last of the preservation funds, then parked up for ever, never to fly again?
No, but then I never said that I did.
If you read what I said, my point was that Joe Public will watch anything, so it's irrelevant what aircraft are displayed for the public. They simply don't care. The people who do care are enthusiasts (ie those who know what they're looking at). So it seems reasonable to assume that if a classic aircraft is restored and displayed, it's being presented primarily to enthusiasts, even if it's the wider public that is paying for it. So surely, it makes good sense to complete the restoration properly and finish the aircraft in a proper paint scheme? If you don't then surely it's not a complete restoration?
I've heard the points made by Shaggy many, many times and I'm afraid I just don't accept them. A Sea Vixen that flies in Red Bull colours is pointless. Yes, Red Bull enables the aircraft to fly, but why waste money (and fatigue hours) on flying the Vixen if it doesn't look like a Vixen? It might as well be any random cheap jet that happens to be available. I mean, what is the point of flying it if it's dressed-up like a tart?
Likewise, I also heard the claim that HLF insisted that the Vulcan should retain its paint scheme without any ugly additions. Whether that's strictly true I don't know, but if they did make this stipulation then good for them. It illustrates precisely what I was getting at. If the aircraft is to be restored and flown, then it should indeed be displayed in its proper colours and markings, otherwise don't bother flying it. Aircraft such as the Vixen and Vulcan are far too valuable to be squandered on grotesque advertising.
I think one of the problems with the Vulcan is that there are lots of Vulcan "fans" who don't really have much understanding of the aircraft or what it was all about. In essence, they just think it "looks pretty" and it makes a lot of noise. That's all well and good, but it's a bit of an insult to anyone who really does have an interest in the aircraft, when people say "paint it any colour you like." It's a free country of course, but if we adopt the attitude that any aircraft can be finished in any colours or markings, it just wipes away a lot of the aircraft's history for a lot of us. If the comments from VTTS are indicative of their position, I think they should be ashamed of themselves. If they ever accepted money to paint the aircraft in fancy colours, I know for certain that a huge proportion of the people who gave money to the project would be wanting a refund. They paid for a restoration, not a travelling billboard.
I agree with Hurn that XE601 was/is a great loss. True, it looked nice in its earlier grey/red scheme but it was a real pleasure to see a unique Hunter continue to fly in civilian hands without any changes to its operational paint finish. Agreed, it sounded magnificent too! I can confidently say that given a choice between seeing Miss Demeanour or XE601, I know which one I'd be ignoring!
Yes, they are to some degree, but I don't quite see how that has any influence on how an aircraft is finished and presented. The two points have no relationship.
Would you prefer the Vulcan to be painted in a colour scheme using the last of the preservation funds, then parked up for ever, never to fly again?
No, but then I never said that I did.
If you read what I said, my point was that Joe Public will watch anything, so it's irrelevant what aircraft are displayed for the public. They simply don't care. The people who do care are enthusiasts (ie those who know what they're looking at). So it seems reasonable to assume that if a classic aircraft is restored and displayed, it's being presented primarily to enthusiasts, even if it's the wider public that is paying for it. So surely, it makes good sense to complete the restoration properly and finish the aircraft in a proper paint scheme? If you don't then surely it's not a complete restoration?
I've heard the points made by Shaggy many, many times and I'm afraid I just don't accept them. A Sea Vixen that flies in Red Bull colours is pointless. Yes, Red Bull enables the aircraft to fly, but why waste money (and fatigue hours) on flying the Vixen if it doesn't look like a Vixen? It might as well be any random cheap jet that happens to be available. I mean, what is the point of flying it if it's dressed-up like a tart?
Likewise, I also heard the claim that HLF insisted that the Vulcan should retain its paint scheme without any ugly additions. Whether that's strictly true I don't know, but if they did make this stipulation then good for them. It illustrates precisely what I was getting at. If the aircraft is to be restored and flown, then it should indeed be displayed in its proper colours and markings, otherwise don't bother flying it. Aircraft such as the Vixen and Vulcan are far too valuable to be squandered on grotesque advertising.
I think one of the problems with the Vulcan is that there are lots of Vulcan "fans" who don't really have much understanding of the aircraft or what it was all about. In essence, they just think it "looks pretty" and it makes a lot of noise. That's all well and good, but it's a bit of an insult to anyone who really does have an interest in the aircraft, when people say "paint it any colour you like." It's a free country of course, but if we adopt the attitude that any aircraft can be finished in any colours or markings, it just wipes away a lot of the aircraft's history for a lot of us. If the comments from VTTS are indicative of their position, I think they should be ashamed of themselves. If they ever accepted money to paint the aircraft in fancy colours, I know for certain that a huge proportion of the people who gave money to the project would be wanting a refund. They paid for a restoration, not a travelling billboard.
I agree with Hurn that XE601 was/is a great loss. True, it looked nice in its earlier grey/red scheme but it was a real pleasure to see a unique Hunter continue to fly in civilian hands without any changes to its operational paint finish. Agreed, it sounded magnificent too! I can confidently say that given a choice between seeing Miss Demeanour or XE601, I know which one I'd be ignoring!
Last edited by WH904; 3rd Sep 2013 at 11:52.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 419 Likes
on
221 Posts
Speaking from my ex-military pilot's point of view, it's the actual sight and sound of the aircraft in the sky that counts, not authentic colour detail.
If it's possible to do both, all well and good. But if the original paint scheme has to be changed as a compromise to keep the aircraft in the air, either to please the public, a sponsor, or for advertising reasons, I see that as far better than the aircraft spending many sad decades as an aluminium edifice sitting in a dusty museum - or even worse, rotting outside. You can go to Hendon or elsewhere to see many authentic paint jobs getting dusty.
Adrian Swire's Hunter was bright shiny red - it looked fantastic, even though it bore no resemblance to it's earlier history. Especially the day it flew past me inverted.
If it's possible to do both, all well and good. But if the original paint scheme has to be changed as a compromise to keep the aircraft in the air, either to please the public, a sponsor, or for advertising reasons, I see that as far better than the aircraft spending many sad decades as an aluminium edifice sitting in a dusty museum - or even worse, rotting outside. You can go to Hendon or elsewhere to see many authentic paint jobs getting dusty.
Adrian Swire's Hunter was bright shiny red - it looked fantastic, even though it bore no resemblance to it's earlier history. Especially the day it flew past me inverted.
Join Date: May 2012
Location: London
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think it is an issue that divides people neatly into two camps and I know which one I'm in!
Thing is though, you can indeed see aircraft in authentic colours and markings in lots of places. But on that basis one could paint-up any of these aircraft in silly colours and it wouldn't really matter much, whereas flying an aircraft uses money and fatigue hours that could be used when the aircraft actually looks like it did when it was in military service. Like I said before, if one doesn't care about authenticity then one may as well fly any old plane, surely?
I agree G-HUNT did look great and it was a real thrill when it first appeared. But the thrill soon wore off when more Hunters re-appeared, and most wearing their proper military paint schemes. Suddenly, a red Hunter just seemed like a bit less interesting
Thing is though, you can indeed see aircraft in authentic colours and markings in lots of places. But on that basis one could paint-up any of these aircraft in silly colours and it wouldn't really matter much, whereas flying an aircraft uses money and fatigue hours that could be used when the aircraft actually looks like it did when it was in military service. Like I said before, if one doesn't care about authenticity then one may as well fly any old plane, surely?
I agree G-HUNT did look great and it was a real thrill when it first appeared. But the thrill soon wore off when more Hunters re-appeared, and most wearing their proper military paint schemes. Suddenly, a red Hunter just seemed like a bit less interesting
Last edited by WH904; 3rd Sep 2013 at 14:24.