Anyone able to add anything to this picture?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Worcester
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anyone able to add anything to this picture?
Folks.... this picture regularly crops up on our local history FB group (the Hurricane is above the Gillette factory, on the Great West Road Hounslow). Is it genuine or a clever early style cut and paste?
Looks genuine enough to me.
Hurricane I L1683, presumably photographed while it served just up the road with the Northolt Station Flight, hence the absence of squadron marks.
Hurricane I L1683, presumably photographed while it served just up the road with the Northolt Station Flight, hence the absence of squadron marks.
Gnome de PPRuNe
Looks real to me too - prop blur is what I look at and I can't spot any obvious cut out. Wonder what it was shot from?
Looks Kosher to me -
Presumably the photo was taken on the same sortie as this pic,interesting photo as one can see the Wing Fabric Panting/Ballooning and also the original gap between the Prop Spinner and Cowlings
Presumably the photo was taken on the same sortie as this pic,interesting photo as one can see the Wing Fabric Panting/Ballooning and also the original gap between the Prop Spinner and Cowlings
Join Date: Sep 2020
Location: Under the stairs
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I go for the 'cut and paste' option.
The tip of the prop is clearly visible on the lower blade, but not even a hint of it for the upper blade - in fact the houses below are very clear where it should have been shown.
The tip of the prop is clearly visible on the lower blade, but not even a hint of it for the upper blade - in fact the houses below are very clear where it should have been shown.
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 233
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shouldn't the first picture be turned 90 degrees clockwise?
It doesn't seem to be a paste-and-cut photo, the shadow of the (setting?) sun thrown on the fuselage is in the same direction as the shadow of the rectangular wall on the ground.
It doesn't seem to be a paste-and-cut photo, the shadow of the (setting?) sun thrown on the fuselage is in the same direction as the shadow of the rectangular wall on the ground.
My money is on "genuine", for exactly that reason.
With focal-plane shutter moving from top-to-bottom on the camera, the lower edge of the image is always taken a few centi-seconds before the upper part, which is why props "of that era" often appear to be bent.
On the S&L photo, the lower blade is captured at an acute angle in its (RH) rotation, so appears short and has a high rate of movement relative to the camera, so is more blurred. By the time the upper part of the image is captured, the prop has moved on, the upper blade is more perpendicular to the camera, and has a lower rate of movement so is less blurred.
In the original, "climbing", image, my guess is that it is shown rotated by 90 deg anti-clockwise, so "up" is actually to the left of the frame as displayed. (Imagine how you would be holding the camera to capture the image from the student-seat of the training aircraft or station-hack that the subject is formating on). Hence, the apparently-right side of the image is taken earlier than the left, which accounts for the apparent bending. As the camera is now front-and-right of the subject, and due to the pitch of the blades, the right-hand blade is also relatively flat to the camera so is clearly seen whilst, by contrast, the left blade is leading-edge on, so is less clear.
With focal-plane shutter moving from top-to-bottom on the camera, the lower edge of the image is always taken a few centi-seconds before the upper part, which is why props "of that era" often appear to be bent.
On the S&L photo, the lower blade is captured at an acute angle in its (RH) rotation, so appears short and has a high rate of movement relative to the camera, so is more blurred. By the time the upper part of the image is captured, the prop has moved on, the upper blade is more perpendicular to the camera, and has a lower rate of movement so is less blurred.
In the original, "climbing", image, my guess is that it is shown rotated by 90 deg anti-clockwise, so "up" is actually to the left of the frame as displayed. (Imagine how you would be holding the camera to capture the image from the student-seat of the training aircraft or station-hack that the subject is formating on). Hence, the apparently-right side of the image is taken earlier than the left, which accounts for the apparent bending. As the camera is now front-and-right of the subject, and due to the pitch of the blades, the right-hand blade is also relatively flat to the camera so is clearly seen whilst, by contrast, the left blade is leading-edge on, so is less clear.
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Mordor
Posts: 1,314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This pose of shot was pretty common - there are similar ones of many aircraft of this era. EVen in the last few days before we closed Kingston the walls of the front office block (and the mezzanine behind it overlooking the shop floor) had many similar photos of Hawker Furys, Hurricanes, Typhoons, Hunters etc. The aeroplane is an original very early model Hurricane Mk1 because it has the fabric-covered wing (1st 600 aircraft only) and 2-blade fixed-pitch wooden "Watts" propeller (only the first 435 according to Wiki). I was even wondering if it was the prototype K5083, but I don't think so because that seems to have spent its whole life in plain aluminium dope. The top picture doesn't appear to have the ventral fin extension (introduced from 61st airframe to aid spin recovery), but the one in the 2nd picture does have it so if they are indeed the same aeroplane then that laces it somewhere between the 61st and 435th off the line - probably built some time in 1937. It certainly lacks the "battle" modifications like the rear-view mirror.
So I would suggest this could actually be a publicity sortie in which the RAF is showing off its latest high-performance fighter taken some time in 1937/8. The photograph was probably taken from something like a Hawker Hart or Demon - something fast enough and aerobatic enough to do a formation loop but with an open rear cockpit for the intrepid photographist to hang out and get a clean shot.
€0.0003 supplied,
PDR
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Mordor
Posts: 1,314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having just looked that up I discovered that the fabric-covered and stressed-skin wings were fully interchangeable at 1st line, having identical mountings, winging/plumbing and weight/CG. Indeed it seems there were many cases where operational needs to maintain availability resulted in aircraft flying combat missions with one of each because it's what they had in the stores at the airfield - I never knew that.
Every day is a school day...
PDR
Every day is a school day...
PDR
Gnome de PPRuNe
Northolt Aerodrome across the top of the pic with the "Polish War Memorial" roundabout on the A40, as I think it's now known (Bryan Wolfe and the Capital Flying Eye!), top right. Housing Estate under the right wing is early development between Hayes/Hillingdon with Yeading Brook under the nose - I should be walking along there (Hillingdon Trail) some time when I tackle the London Spiral Walk!
Gnome de PPRuNe
Just been looking at the maps a bit more, now realise I'm actually quite familiar with Gillette Corner as I used to regularly visit Westlink House, another classic 1930s Art Deco building a few hundred yards to the east and on the other side of the A4 - we generally got a train to Brentford, but a couple of times I went to Syon Lane instead as it was less far to walk in the rain!
Northolt Aerodrome across the top of the pic with the "Polish War Memorial" roundabout on the A40, as I think it's now known (Bryan Wolfe and the Capital Flying Eye!), top right. Housing Estate under the right wing is early development between Hayes/Hillingdon with Yeading Brook under the nose - I should be walking along there (Hillingdon Trail) some time when I tackle the London Spiral Walk!
Here's the estate on GE (with a few more additions!):
I'm waiting for someone to use the tower shadow to deduce the day and time the picture was taken. The attitude of the aircraft should also be deduced from the wing shadow on the fuselage.
Gnome de PPRuNe
I thought everybody knew what an RAF pilot demolished for breakfast circa 1940. Or even 0700... and none of this hash brown nonsense!
