Gaining An R.A.F Pilots Brevet In WW II
The Hastings heating system was very much along the lines described by camlobe for aircraft of that vintage. Pilots Notes state that;-
"Engine exhaust heat exchangers, two on each engine, supply warm air for aircraft heating, drawing air from the intakes inboard of each engine. Additional cold air, which mixes with the hot air from the heat exchangers, is supplied from the intakes on each inboard engine. The proportion of hot and cold air is adjusted by mixer valves. The air is then circulated, by electrically driven fans, through ducts to the cockpit and cabin."
Those were the days! No doubt today such a system would be digitally controlled and the description would fill a volume (As that pertaining to my car radio does!).
"Engine exhaust heat exchangers, two on each engine, supply warm air for aircraft heating, drawing air from the intakes inboard of each engine. Additional cold air, which mixes with the hot air from the heat exchangers, is supplied from the intakes on each inboard engine. The proportion of hot and cold air is adjusted by mixer valves. The air is then circulated, by electrically driven fans, through ducts to the cockpit and cabin."
Those were the days! No doubt today such a system would be digitally controlled and the description would fill a volume (As that pertaining to my car radio does!).
Guest
Posts: n/a
Pennies from Heaven.
Fareastdriver,
(Your #6033) Reminds me, that when "Challenger" exploded in '86, there was a huge cloud of ice crystals at some 50,000 ft which persisted for several minutes.
As for the "Concorde" whimsy, I seem to remember that, a long time ago, there was an airliner coming in to LHR (?) It had been high, the structure was very cold. The effluent from galley and toilets had frozen to the bottom of the fuselage - until it came to the warm air below !
Then an unpleasant "ice lolly", weighing about a half-cwt, became detached, went through a roof somewhere in W.London, and (I think) came to rest on a bad (luckily unoccupied). A veil must be drawn over the rest of the story !
Danny.
(Your #6033) Reminds me, that when "Challenger" exploded in '86, there was a huge cloud of ice crystals at some 50,000 ft which persisted for several minutes.
As for the "Concorde" whimsy, I seem to remember that, a long time ago, there was an airliner coming in to LHR (?) It had been high, the structure was very cold. The effluent from galley and toilets had frozen to the bottom of the fuselage - until it came to the warm air below !
Then an unpleasant "ice lolly", weighing about a half-cwt, became detached, went through a roof somewhere in W.London, and (I think) came to rest on a bad (luckily unoccupied). A veil must be drawn over the rest of the story !
Danny.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Smujsmith,
(Ref your #6038)
I don't think much attention was paid to the comfort of Halifax/Lancaster crews. I remember the flying kit they issued to me at ITW in '41, which consisted of an inner brown rayon (?) kapok-filled "Growbag", an outer canvas "Sidcot" suit, and three pairs of gloves (silk inner, then wool, then leather gauntlets on top). They gave me a pair of Moreland "Glastonbury" suede flying boots, and (I think) string vests and "long-johns". No sign of an "Irvin" jacket ! (I never wore any of it, except the boots).
I suppose the idea was that, swathed in that lot (on top of your battledress), you'd be able to generate your own internal heat, so they didn't need to bother about any heating in the aircraft.
Danny.
(Ref your #6038)
I don't think much attention was paid to the comfort of Halifax/Lancaster crews. I remember the flying kit they issued to me at ITW in '41, which consisted of an inner brown rayon (?) kapok-filled "Growbag", an outer canvas "Sidcot" suit, and three pairs of gloves (silk inner, then wool, then leather gauntlets on top). They gave me a pair of Moreland "Glastonbury" suede flying boots, and (I think) string vests and "long-johns". No sign of an "Irvin" jacket ! (I never wore any of it, except the boots).
I suppose the idea was that, swathed in that lot (on top of your battledress), you'd be able to generate your own internal heat, so they didn't need to bother about any heating in the aircraft.
Danny.
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Stoke-on-Trent
Age: 91
Posts: 366
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lancaster heating
I'm pretty sure that I once heard that the heating was poor except for the W/Ops position, where he overheated. There again, it may be a product of my imagination; put it down to the effects of increasing age.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Crew Co-operation.
Chugalug,
Sounds as if your (Hastings) Central Heating system would keep your "dicky" busy for the greater part of his time - indeed it's a wonder they didn't introduce a new specialty of aircrew ("Environment Master" ? - single wing with "H&C" in mixed red 'n blue wreath).
Then your faithful slave would be left free for more important tasks - like organising the Captain's coffee and bikkies, for example !
Cheers, Danny.
Sounds as if your (Hastings) Central Heating system would keep your "dicky" busy for the greater part of his time - indeed it's a wonder they didn't introduce a new specialty of aircrew ("Environment Master" ? - single wing with "H&C" in mixed red 'n blue wreath).
Then your faithful slave would be left free for more important tasks - like organising the Captain's coffee and bikkies, for example !
Cheers, Danny.
Lancaster Heating
Guest
Posts: n/a
Keep the Home Fires Burning !
camlobe,
This shows the evergreen value of PPRuNe ! Whatever subject is broached, sooner or later up comes a real expert to tell us everything we need to know about it: you couldn't have a clearer demonstration of that than your Post #6040 !
(Your):
"The original short exhaust outlet pipe is replaced by a much longer unit. This extended pipe is then shrouded by a jacket made of stainless steel or a similar heat resistant metal."
This is exactly what I remember on my AT-6s at Craig Field. But the thing we've been discussing with Warmtoast et al seems to show a rig where the hot-air pipe runs inside the exhaust pipe - exactly the opposite idea, and I wondered how enough air got into the front of the (narrow bore) pipe to make much of a difference at the cockpit end. Although the exhaust shown had been ripped apart by the partly-severed engine, the front bit seems to have two bits of broken-off small bore pipe sticking in opposite directions - what part would they play ?
"Due to the increased length of the exhaust pipe, the noise signature is considerably reduced and the sound is of a deeper note."
A contributor to "Tee Emm" (IIRC), once spoke of the "Sonor Harvard-orum and Eu-ti-orum" (from S. Rhodesia, I think).
"Seriously, most of this type of aircraft employ heaters that burn fuel from the aircraft supply,......"
Serious ? - it's terrifying ! You're telling me that they actually engineered fires on board to keep themselves warm! So my choices appear to have been (1) Freeze (2) perish by CO poisoning, or (3) burn to death ! (Why didn't the Recruiting Officer tell me all this before he let me sign up ? - I'd have changed to something safer, like bomb disposal). (Nervous Pax, can I please join your Club ?)
Recalls an apocryphal tale once heard (or read about): Load of pilgrims en route to Mecca. Smoke creeps into Flight Deck. F/O goes aft to investigate. Finds his pax have built a fire in the middle of the centre aisle and are busy cooking evening rice !
(Couldn't be true, surely ?)
Joking apart, thanks for a most instructive Post on a subject most of us take for granted.
Cheers, Danny.
This shows the evergreen value of PPRuNe ! Whatever subject is broached, sooner or later up comes a real expert to tell us everything we need to know about it: you couldn't have a clearer demonstration of that than your Post #6040 !
(Your):
"The original short exhaust outlet pipe is replaced by a much longer unit. This extended pipe is then shrouded by a jacket made of stainless steel or a similar heat resistant metal."
This is exactly what I remember on my AT-6s at Craig Field. But the thing we've been discussing with Warmtoast et al seems to show a rig where the hot-air pipe runs inside the exhaust pipe - exactly the opposite idea, and I wondered how enough air got into the front of the (narrow bore) pipe to make much of a difference at the cockpit end. Although the exhaust shown had been ripped apart by the partly-severed engine, the front bit seems to have two bits of broken-off small bore pipe sticking in opposite directions - what part would they play ?
"Due to the increased length of the exhaust pipe, the noise signature is considerably reduced and the sound is of a deeper note."
A contributor to "Tee Emm" (IIRC), once spoke of the "Sonor Harvard-orum and Eu-ti-orum" (from S. Rhodesia, I think).
"Seriously, most of this type of aircraft employ heaters that burn fuel from the aircraft supply,......"
Serious ? - it's terrifying ! You're telling me that they actually engineered fires on board to keep themselves warm! So my choices appear to have been (1) Freeze (2) perish by CO poisoning, or (3) burn to death ! (Why didn't the Recruiting Officer tell me all this before he let me sign up ? - I'd have changed to something safer, like bomb disposal). (Nervous Pax, can I please join your Club ?)
Recalls an apocryphal tale once heard (or read about): Load of pilgrims en route to Mecca. Smoke creeps into Flight Deck. F/O goes aft to investigate. Finds his pax have built a fire in the middle of the centre aisle and are busy cooking evening rice !
(Couldn't be true, surely ?)Joking apart, thanks for a most instructive Post on a subject most of us take for granted.
Cheers, Danny.
Danny,
Your Mecca pilgrim story brings to mind a similar story of a C130 taking Ghurkhas home to the Far East. As I heard it, the Captain agreed to allow smoking when the Loadmaster reported that the troops were cooking their curry lunches on Hexi block stoves, in the freight bay
Smudge
Your Mecca pilgrim story brings to mind a similar story of a C130 taking Ghurkhas home to the Far East. As I heard it, the Captain agreed to allow smoking when the Loadmaster reported that the troops were cooking their curry lunches on Hexi block stoves, in the freight bay
Smudge
Harvard Exhaust Pipe
Danny
Another photo (and enlargement). One single tube through the middle of the exhaust fed by ram air, sufficient at 100+ Kts I'd have thought to provide a suitable draft of warm air into the cockpit.
But the thing we've been discussing with Warmtoast et al seems to show a rig where the hot-air pipe runs inside the exhaust pipe
Danny
Horses for Courses - In the early days of Hastings ops AQM's (Air Quarter Masters - later ALM's Air Load Masters) made the tea to keep the captain and the rest of the crew happy and PAX as well. ISTR the AQM's station on the Hastings was a VERY small cabin on the port side behind the captains or W/Ops seat - CHUGALUG will confirm this I think.
Sounds as if your (Hastings) Central Heating system would keep your "dicky" busy for the greater part of his time - indeed it's a wonder they didn't introduce a new specialty of aircrew ("Environment Master" ? - single wing with "H&C" in mixed red 'n blue wreath).
Then your faithful slave would be left free for more important tasks - like organising the Captain's coffee and bikkies, for example !
Then your faithful slave would be left free for more important tasks - like organising the Captain's coffee and bikkies, for example !
Warmtoast,
you are correct the AQM galley was just aft of the Signaller's radio stack on the Hastings. When I visited TG 528 when she was at the now defunct Syfame Museum at Staverton a young chap showed me around. When we got to the galley I put my hand down the soundproofing and produced a stick of paper cups and a pad of trimsheets . He was dumfounded until I explained that was the normal stowage for these items !
you are correct the AQM galley was just aft of the Signaller's radio stack on the Hastings. When I visited TG 528 when she was at the now defunct Syfame Museum at Staverton a young chap showed me around. When we got to the galley I put my hand down the soundproofing and produced a stick of paper cups and a pad of trimsheets . He was dumfounded until I explained that was the normal stowage for these items !
Danny:-
Danny, we did indeed have such a specialty crew-member as you describe, the Flight Engineer. Busy monitoring his engines, propellers, and the various aircraft systems, especially the fuel system and its required selection of tanks, booster pumps, fuel valves etc, he was ever at hand to tweek the flight deck and cabin temperatures to 'just right'. This he did by motoring the port and starboard mixer valves via a pair of HOT AIR and COLD AIR push buttons (one of each for the port and starboard systems) and observing the movement of the valves on two indicators above the push buttons.
The dicky, or co-pilot, was not qualified for such vital duties nor even that of crew sustenance . There was yet another specialist for that important work, the AQM (later ALM) who had a galley behind the signaller (as Warmtoast and ancientaviator correctly state).
The co-pilot's job was to:-
and we know a song about that as well, don't we boys and girls?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3aWC32gjO4
Sounds as if your (Hastings) Central Heating system would keep your "dicky" busy for the greater part of his time - indeed it's a wonder they didn't introduce a new specialty of aircrew ("Environment Master" ? - single wing with "H&C" in mixed red 'n blue wreath.
Then your faithful slave would be left free for more important tasks - like organising the Captain's coffee and bikkies, for example !
Then your faithful slave would be left free for more important tasks - like organising the Captain's coffee and bikkies, for example !
The dicky, or co-pilot, was not qualified for such vital duties nor even that of crew sustenance . There was yet another specialist for that important work, the AQM (later ALM) who had a galley behind the signaller (as Warmtoast and ancientaviator correctly state).
The co-pilot's job was to:-
Pull up the gear, drop it, and standby to feather
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3aWC32gjO4
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,814
Received 141 Likes
on
65 Posts
The dicky, or co-pilot, was not qualified for such vital duties nor even that of crew sustenance . There was yet another specialist for that important work, the AQM (later ALM) who had a galley behind the signaller (as Warmtoast and ancientaviator correctly state).
Sadly, from his POV, he was dragged back to his civilian profession as a Civil Engineer to assist with reconstruction efforts. Although he was invited to the 'unveiliing' of NS-Z at Hendon as a former crew member/chef
Guest
Posts: n/a
Feel the Difference.
camlobe and Warmtoast,
Warmtoast, I think that all of your photographs would almost certainly be of Harvards, and there is a tendency to think that the Harvard was just a yellow AT6A with roundels, but that is not the case. They were slightly different aircraft.
The main difference was that the AT6A was armed (a 0.300 Browning mounted with cocking handle on top right of front cockpit panel, firing through the prop, whereas all the Harvards I later flew were not.
And it may well be that it was also fitted with a different heater (or no heater) along the lines described by camlobe (external sleeve of warmed air), and which I seem to remember, rather than the internal pipe design so clearly shown on the photos.
Wiki gives me:
"Canada's Noorduyn Aviation built an R-1340-AN-1-powered version of the AT-6A, which was supplied to the USAAF as the AT-16 (1,500 aircraft) and the RAF/RCAF as the Harvard IIB (2,485 aircraft").
Two points spring out: the USAAF recognised it as different, and called it an AT-16 (would they have bought them from Canada for supply only to the BFTS schools, whereas their own Advanced Schools all used their AT-6A ?).
The 2500 Harvard IIBs would have equipped all the Empire Flying Schools, and would be, post-war, spread all over the RAF as runabouts.
That about sums up the Harvard Heater story. Some poor Harvards had None:
I give you:
Belgian Air Force T-6G
Cheers, Danny.
Warmtoast, I think that all of your photographs would almost certainly be of Harvards, and there is a tendency to think that the Harvard was just a yellow AT6A with roundels, but that is not the case. They were slightly different aircraft.
The main difference was that the AT6A was armed (a 0.300 Browning mounted with cocking handle on top right of front cockpit panel, firing through the prop, whereas all the Harvards I later flew were not.
And it may well be that it was also fitted with a different heater (or no heater) along the lines described by camlobe (external sleeve of warmed air), and which I seem to remember, rather than the internal pipe design so clearly shown on the photos.
Wiki gives me:
"Canada's Noorduyn Aviation built an R-1340-AN-1-powered version of the AT-6A, which was supplied to the USAAF as the AT-16 (1,500 aircraft) and the RAF/RCAF as the Harvard IIB (2,485 aircraft").
Two points spring out: the USAAF recognised it as different, and called it an AT-16 (would they have bought them from Canada for supply only to the BFTS schools, whereas their own Advanced Schools all used their AT-6A ?).
The 2500 Harvard IIBs would have equipped all the Empire Flying Schools, and would be, post-war, spread all over the RAF as runabouts.
That about sums up the Harvard Heater story. Some poor Harvards had None:
I give you:
Belgian Air Force T-6G
Cheers, Danny.
Harvards & Machine Guns
Danny
The Harvards used by you in WW2 weren't the only Harvards to be fitted with machine guns.
As the Rhodesian Air Training Group was run down before being closed in late 1953 Harvard IIBs from Thornhill were fitted with bomb racks and a machine gun before being despatched to Kenya to be used in the fight against the Mau Mau.
From Flight Global 17th July 1953
According to Flight Global dated 18th September 1953
Harvard IIBs of 'F' Flight at Thornhill of the type fitted with bomb racks and a machine gun for use against the Mau Mau.
However, another more recent research paper published in the RUSI Journal says the ex RATG Harvards only used bombs against the Mau and Machine guns were NOT used - most confusing! See here:
https://www.rusi.org/downloads/asset...1_Chappell.pdf
The Harvards used by you in WW2 weren't the only Harvards to be fitted with machine guns.
As the Rhodesian Air Training Group was run down before being closed in late 1953 Harvard IIBs from Thornhill were fitted with bomb racks and a machine gun before being despatched to Kenya to be used in the fight against the Mau Mau.
From Flight Global 17th July 1953
In ten weeks up to July 9th, Harvards operating against the Mau Mau in Kenya, flew 183 sorties
against 85 targets, dropping 1,096 bombs and firing 96,000 rounds of ammunition.
Interrogation of prisoners, it was stated, suggested that the measures had proved effective, particularly on the
morale of gangs in the prohibited areas.
against 85 targets, dropping 1,096 bombs and firing 96,000 rounds of ammunition.
Interrogation of prisoners, it was stated, suggested that the measures had proved effective, particularly on the
morale of gangs in the prohibited areas.
THE R.A.F. contingent from Rhodesia attached to the security forces combating the Mau Mau in Kenya are operating from an improvised air-strip 8,000 ft up in the Kenya mountains, at Mercians Farm.
Six Harvards, each fitted with a machine gun and racks for eight 20 lb. bombs, are piloted by officers from the Rhodesian air training schools under the command of W/C. R. Johnstone, D.S.O., D.F.C.
Six Harvards, each fitted with a machine gun and racks for eight 20 lb. bombs, are piloted by officers from the Rhodesian air training schools under the command of W/C. R. Johnstone, D.S.O., D.F.C.
Harvard IIBs of 'F' Flight at Thornhill of the type fitted with bomb racks and a machine gun for use against the Mau Mau.
However, another more recent research paper published in the RUSI Journal says the ex RATG Harvards only used bombs against the Mau and Machine guns were NOT used - most confusing! See here:
https://www.rusi.org/downloads/asset...1_Chappell.pdf
Guest
Posts: n/a
Warmtoast,
The plot thickens ! Thanks for the photos, but one small cavil: why not buy half a dozen AT-6s from the US, rather than take on the considerable engineering job of retrofitting a gun into a Harvard, whose (Canadian) designers had never contemplated such a thing ?
(Possible answer: with their deep-rooted anti-colonialism stance, the US would not release them for that purpose).
The 20lb bombs would be no trouble. The 4x11½lb practice bomb rack should take one or two of them with a bit of tinkering. (Was there a multiple 20lb rack on inventory - thinks Hawker Harts, etc, on the old NW Frontier).
I cannot help thinking that such a weapon might be more use against Isis in Irak (if you could base it out there) than (say) a F-18 with one 2000lb.
I'm grateful for the link - but all I could tease out of it was "..... Therefore, only the Harvard’s 20 lb bombs were authorised and its machine gun was not...." 41. So there must have been a machine gun (hand-held Bren or Sten poked out from back seat ?) Is there an Armourer in the house ?
Danny.
The plot thickens ! Thanks for the photos, but one small cavil: why not buy half a dozen AT-6s from the US, rather than take on the considerable engineering job of retrofitting a gun into a Harvard, whose (Canadian) designers had never contemplated such a thing ?
(Possible answer: with their deep-rooted anti-colonialism stance, the US would not release them for that purpose).
The 20lb bombs would be no trouble. The 4x11½lb practice bomb rack should take one or two of them with a bit of tinkering. (Was there a multiple 20lb rack on inventory - thinks Hawker Harts, etc, on the old NW Frontier).
I cannot help thinking that such a weapon might be more use against Isis in Irak (if you could base it out there) than (say) a F-18 with one 2000lb.
I'm grateful for the link - but all I could tease out of it was "..... Therefore, only the Harvard’s 20 lb bombs were authorised and its machine gun was not...." 41. So there must have been a machine gun (hand-held Bren or Sten poked out from back seat ?) Is there an Armourer in the house ?
Danny.
Harvards & Machine Guns
Danny
A little research leads me to the following.
Photo of a Harvard with bomb racks in an article here:
RAF in Africa :Bob Aitken
Article also states (Guns (or Gun) was carried close to the wing root in the starboard wing in training roll for target practice on the ranges).
Also mentioned in piece from book "Britain's Small Wars"
..and finally a line drawing of an AT-6C with machine gun mounted behind the rear cockpit. Here:
http://www.skytamer.com/NAA/AT-6C(side).jpg
Enough for today as my other half says I should be outside picking beans, which I'm off to do!
A little research leads me to the following.
Photo of a Harvard with bomb racks in an article here:
RAF in Africa :Bob Aitken
Article also states (Guns (or Gun) was carried close to the wing root in the starboard wing in training roll for target practice on the ranges).
Also mentioned in piece from book "Britain's Small Wars"
1340 Flight was commanded by Sqn Ldr CG StD Jeffries, DFC, operated out of Nanyuki Airstrip 1953-54 (and possibly later). Equipped with Harvards modified to carry 4 x 19lb bombs and with one wing-mounted .303 machine gun. The flight had 8 - 10 of these aircraft which had been used for second-stage flying training in Rhodesia, and initially the pilots were made up from the flying instructors.
The flight operated in a local variation of 'close/tactical support' carrying out recces and ground attack missions against Mau Mau gangs in the 'Prohibited areas', mainly the Aberdare and Mount Kenya forests. Such attacks were usually made on information from ground forces or the Kenya Police Air Wing, a section of which also operated out of Nanyuki.
The flight operated in a local variation of 'close/tactical support' carrying out recces and ground attack missions against Mau Mau gangs in the 'Prohibited areas', mainly the Aberdare and Mount Kenya forests. Such attacks were usually made on information from ground forces or the Kenya Police Air Wing, a section of which also operated out of Nanyuki.
http://www.skytamer.com/NAA/AT-6C(side).jpg
Enough for today as my other half says I should be outside picking beans, which I'm off to do!
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: sleaford
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Early Post War Navigator Training
My Dad is Master Navigator John Lennard. Back in July I posted an item on my father’s service history including his navigator training between 1946 and 1948. Coodashooda asked if Dad could provide more information about his flying training.
During the war he was a teenager living in the Suffolk coastal village of Hollesley (not far from RAF Bawdsey and RAF Woodbridge). He was a member of the local ATC Squadron.On a regular basis he cycled the 13 miles over to RAF Martlesham Heath and scrounged flights in the Ansons based at the airfield. It was during these flights he noticed that the Navigators appeared to be busy all the time and he decided that is what he wanted to become when he joined the RAF.
In early 1946, aged 17, he attended the aircrew selection centre at RAF Hornchurch for two days of tests. Out of approximately 150 applicants, he and three others were the only ones to be selected for Pilot, Navigator and Bomb aimer training. He selected Navigator as his first choice. He accepted the King’s shilling and joined the RAF Volunteer Reserve. As an ATC Cadet he was able to wear a white flash in his forage cap indicating he had been seleted for aircrew training. In June 1946 he was called up for the “duration of the present emergency”. He was kitted out at RAF Padgate and did his square bashing at RAF Wilmslow.He was then posted to RAF Ibsley and RAF Sopley, prior to commencing his flying training. During his time at Sopley he was instructed on the use of Radar which was to prove useful later.
In April 1947, he was posted to No 1 Air Navigation School RAF Topcliffe to join the No 1 All Through Course, the first post war Navigators course to be held, at the time Navigators were still being trained using the one year wartime syllabus.The new course were to be nearly two years long, the training at Topcliffewas to be 18 months in length, 6 months ground school, 6 monthsbasic flying in Ansons followed by 6 months flying Wellingtons. The average length of a training flight in an Anson was about three hours with the maximum time being about 4 hours.The average length of a Wellington Flight was about 4 hours with the longest flight being over 6 hours.The flying phase totalled about 250 hours. The aircraft used were not training marks of the aircraft or even converted but war weary early marks. The Anson’s turret had been removed but the void was just covered in canvas.During take-off and landing in the Wellingtons the crew had to assume crash positions. My father’s position was braced behind the main spar. Nearly all the training flights were around the north and midlands of England although one trip was to Northern Ireland but without landing. His pay for an Aircrew cadet was 4 shillings a day rising to 6 shillings when he started flying. After successfully completing the course he was awarded his navigator brevet and given the rank of Nav IV. His pay rose to 10/6 a day.
In September 1948 he was posted to RAF Swinderby for the advanced Nav course, still on Wellingtons. This is where all the aircrew trades were to come together and form crews but the pilots and signallers all through courses had been postponed and had been replaced by wartime trainees. His pilot at Swinderby was a Polish Flight Sergeant called Jurczyczysn. They did a ground loop on their first take off from Swinderby. In January 1949 he was posted to the Coastal Command OCU at RAF Kinloss for a course on Lancaster ASR 3s. In April 1949 he was promoted in Nav 111.
On September 1st 1950 the aircrew ranks were abandoned and he was promoted to Sgt on 22/6 a day. Dad continued flying until 1970 and retired from the RAF in 1983.
During the war he was a teenager living in the Suffolk coastal village of Hollesley (not far from RAF Bawdsey and RAF Woodbridge). He was a member of the local ATC Squadron.On a regular basis he cycled the 13 miles over to RAF Martlesham Heath and scrounged flights in the Ansons based at the airfield. It was during these flights he noticed that the Navigators appeared to be busy all the time and he decided that is what he wanted to become when he joined the RAF.
In early 1946, aged 17, he attended the aircrew selection centre at RAF Hornchurch for two days of tests. Out of approximately 150 applicants, he and three others were the only ones to be selected for Pilot, Navigator and Bomb aimer training. He selected Navigator as his first choice. He accepted the King’s shilling and joined the RAF Volunteer Reserve. As an ATC Cadet he was able to wear a white flash in his forage cap indicating he had been seleted for aircrew training. In June 1946 he was called up for the “duration of the present emergency”. He was kitted out at RAF Padgate and did his square bashing at RAF Wilmslow.He was then posted to RAF Ibsley and RAF Sopley, prior to commencing his flying training. During his time at Sopley he was instructed on the use of Radar which was to prove useful later.
In April 1947, he was posted to No 1 Air Navigation School RAF Topcliffe to join the No 1 All Through Course, the first post war Navigators course to be held, at the time Navigators were still being trained using the one year wartime syllabus.The new course were to be nearly two years long, the training at Topcliffewas to be 18 months in length, 6 months ground school, 6 monthsbasic flying in Ansons followed by 6 months flying Wellingtons. The average length of a training flight in an Anson was about three hours with the maximum time being about 4 hours.The average length of a Wellington Flight was about 4 hours with the longest flight being over 6 hours.The flying phase totalled about 250 hours. The aircraft used were not training marks of the aircraft or even converted but war weary early marks. The Anson’s turret had been removed but the void was just covered in canvas.During take-off and landing in the Wellingtons the crew had to assume crash positions. My father’s position was braced behind the main spar. Nearly all the training flights were around the north and midlands of England although one trip was to Northern Ireland but without landing. His pay for an Aircrew cadet was 4 shillings a day rising to 6 shillings when he started flying. After successfully completing the course he was awarded his navigator brevet and given the rank of Nav IV. His pay rose to 10/6 a day.
In September 1948 he was posted to RAF Swinderby for the advanced Nav course, still on Wellingtons. This is where all the aircrew trades were to come together and form crews but the pilots and signallers all through courses had been postponed and had been replaced by wartime trainees. His pilot at Swinderby was a Polish Flight Sergeant called Jurczyczysn. They did a ground loop on their first take off from Swinderby. In January 1949 he was posted to the Coastal Command OCU at RAF Kinloss for a course on Lancaster ASR 3s. In April 1949 he was promoted in Nav 111.
On September 1st 1950 the aircrew ranks were abandoned and he was promoted to Sgt on 22/6 a day. Dad continued flying until 1970 and retired from the RAF in 1983.