Gaining An R.A.F Pilots Brevet In WW II
I've always had a hankering for a little grey Fergie myself.
I have absolutely no use for one, and never have had, so I've never really understood why.
Re the pellets in the fuel tank. When leaded fuel was effectively abolished*, the classic car buffs were understandably concerned about their engines.
An official organisation of some sort, I forget which one, tested a good number of the proprietary "solutions" and proved they were indeed largely snake oil.
The Advertising Standards Authority then banned most if not all of the catalytic systems as being cobblers.
There are half a dozen or so approved liquid octane boosters but as far as I know nothing else has ever been proven to work.
*Not quite abolished but if you find one of the few garages that stock it, the price is astronomical!
I have absolutely no use for one, and never have had, so I've never really understood why.
Re the pellets in the fuel tank. When leaded fuel was effectively abolished*, the classic car buffs were understandably concerned about their engines.
An official organisation of some sort, I forget which one, tested a good number of the proprietary "solutions" and proved they were indeed largely snake oil.
The Advertising Standards Authority then banned most if not all of the catalytic systems as being cobblers.
There are half a dozen or so approved liquid octane boosters but as far as I know nothing else has ever been proven to work.
*Not quite abolished but if you find one of the few garages that stock it, the price is astronomical!
Guest
Posts: n/a
Snake Oils, etc.
harrym, (welcome back, we 90+s were getting a bit worried - send not to to ask for whom the bell tolls - it tolls for thee, etc !) and DHfan,
Quite a few hares running here.
harrym, your tale of the old despatch rider's 350 Royal Enfield brought back memories. It was the only motorbike I ever tried (in India) during the war. It had the quadrant gearshift on the RH side of the tank, and I didn't fall off, and that's about as far as I can remember. Never had a m/bike before or after that (if you count out the BSA "Winged Wheel", which hardly qualifies, I suppose).
As for methanol, you can produce it cheaply and abundantly from vegetation (sugar cane in Brazil, I think, is fermented and distilled to produce the methanol on which all their cars are modified to run); it is the feedstock of choice. Didn't ICI at Billingham find a microscopic lichen which loved the stuff, and could be harvested by the ton into a greenstuff packed with protein and said to be suitable for human consumption. Never heard what became of it after that (but I sometimes wonder when looking at the exotica along the supermarket shelves).
In your case, why not keep the methanol in the tank when going to RAFVR training? Does it smell different, or is it detectable in some other way? Was it available in any quantity "off ration", in '47, if so where from, and what did it cost in comparison with the evil, rationed "Pool" stuff? (We're not talking about methylated spirit here, are we ?), for that was certainly available but very expensive (compared with the 9d/gallon domestic paraffin which you could get at any garage or ironmongers) and which was the dilutant of choice to eke out your "Pool" ration.
Even your ingenious gravity-fed dual-fuel arrangement was not without copiers. Somewhere in the tale of my Valley days ('50-'51), we had a chap on 20 Sqn with a big old Bentley "Green Label" open tourer. Clearly there was no good putting his meagre monthly ration (2½ galls?) into the cavernous tank, where it would simply vanish into the rust, sludge and water on the bottom. So he decanted it into old lemonade bottles, and like you, stuck them up in the folded hood at the back, and gravity fed the three huge carbs by a system of rubber and plastic tubing. It worked fine, and he always kept a couple of full lemonade bottles under the back seat.
And we all benefited, for the whole bachelor element of us could be crammed into the huge boat-like body for a sortie to the "Tatty" club in Rhosneigr, or for what passed for a pub in those parts. Naturally, we all contributed, from time to time, a bottleful to our benefactor, for fair's fair, after all
Even the "Amals" are mutual friends, although mine were tiny (W/Wheel) or small (Isetta), and all I ever did was pull the top off to free a stuck needle-carrier block (having learnt, early on, that it was no use messing about with the needle setting - leave it where the maker has put it!) And you had to be careful not to bend the needle.
DHfan, tin globules functioning as a catalyst was a bit far-fetched, I suppose, but when unleaded petrol came in, the old banger I was running (can't remember which one) did all right on one of the proprietary additives. What was happening to the valve seats, I knew not, neither did I much care, for the whole thing rotted out before that became a problem.
I was told that the unleaded petrol idea originated in the US, the theory being that lead particles in the air were degrading the intelligence of the little ones, their noses being closer to the ground and so to the exhaust pipes than adults. After a generation of lead-free petrol (less efficient and therefore worse for the environment), they looked for the promised improvement in IQs - and found none. The little dears were just as thick as before - but we were stuck with unleaded petrol for evermore.
Happy days ! Danny.
Quite a few hares running here.
harrym, your tale of the old despatch rider's 350 Royal Enfield brought back memories. It was the only motorbike I ever tried (in India) during the war. It had the quadrant gearshift on the RH side of the tank, and I didn't fall off, and that's about as far as I can remember. Never had a m/bike before or after that (if you count out the BSA "Winged Wheel", which hardly qualifies, I suppose).
As for methanol, you can produce it cheaply and abundantly from vegetation (sugar cane in Brazil, I think, is fermented and distilled to produce the methanol on which all their cars are modified to run); it is the feedstock of choice. Didn't ICI at Billingham find a microscopic lichen which loved the stuff, and could be harvested by the ton into a greenstuff packed with protein and said to be suitable for human consumption. Never heard what became of it after that (but I sometimes wonder when looking at the exotica along the supermarket shelves).
In your case, why not keep the methanol in the tank when going to RAFVR training? Does it smell different, or is it detectable in some other way? Was it available in any quantity "off ration", in '47, if so where from, and what did it cost in comparison with the evil, rationed "Pool" stuff? (We're not talking about methylated spirit here, are we ?), for that was certainly available but very expensive (compared with the 9d/gallon domestic paraffin which you could get at any garage or ironmongers) and which was the dilutant of choice to eke out your "Pool" ration.
Even your ingenious gravity-fed dual-fuel arrangement was not without copiers. Somewhere in the tale of my Valley days ('50-'51), we had a chap on 20 Sqn with a big old Bentley "Green Label" open tourer. Clearly there was no good putting his meagre monthly ration (2½ galls?) into the cavernous tank, where it would simply vanish into the rust, sludge and water on the bottom. So he decanted it into old lemonade bottles, and like you, stuck them up in the folded hood at the back, and gravity fed the three huge carbs by a system of rubber and plastic tubing. It worked fine, and he always kept a couple of full lemonade bottles under the back seat.
And we all benefited, for the whole bachelor element of us could be crammed into the huge boat-like body for a sortie to the "Tatty" club in Rhosneigr, or for what passed for a pub in those parts. Naturally, we all contributed, from time to time, a bottleful to our benefactor, for fair's fair, after all
Even the "Amals" are mutual friends, although mine were tiny (W/Wheel) or small (Isetta), and all I ever did was pull the top off to free a stuck needle-carrier block (having learnt, early on, that it was no use messing about with the needle setting - leave it where the maker has put it!) And you had to be careful not to bend the needle.
DHfan, tin globules functioning as a catalyst was a bit far-fetched, I suppose, but when unleaded petrol came in, the old banger I was running (can't remember which one) did all right on one of the proprietary additives. What was happening to the valve seats, I knew not, neither did I much care, for the whole thing rotted out before that became a problem.
I was told that the unleaded petrol idea originated in the US, the theory being that lead particles in the air were degrading the intelligence of the little ones, their noses being closer to the ground and so to the exhaust pipes than adults. After a generation of lead-free petrol (less efficient and therefore worse for the environment), they looked for the promised improvement in IQs - and found none. The little dears were just as thick as before - but we were stuck with unleaded petrol for evermore.
Happy days ! Danny.
Last edited by Danny42C; 14th Jun 2015 at 00:28. Reason: Got it wrong way round !
What's your tipple?
Whatever its virtues or otherwise, unleaded petrol had expensive effects on aviation as well. From around the mid-60s (I think - usual memory caveats) we used 80-octane and 100LL, supposedly Low Lead. The 80 stuff was used in the Gipsy Majors (TM, Auster, Chipmunk) and low-powered Continentals/RR in C150s etc while the 100LL was to the liking of Lycomings and would you believe Merlins? When Spitfires came on display visits they quenched their awesome thirst with 100LL apparently without harmful effect except to the bank account.
Today's Avgas has no lead content and soon knackered the valve seats on early 1a Gipsies with bronze heads, the later 1c having aluminium heads with steel seats and slightly more power. The solution was to fit 1c heads at an expense you can guess at. The Chippy has Major 10 with alloy heads and some 20% more power so I think was OK. Maybe Smudge can remember more?
Today's Avgas has no lead content and soon knackered the valve seats on early 1a Gipsies with bronze heads, the later 1c having aluminium heads with steel seats and slightly more power. The solution was to fit 1c heads at an expense you can guess at. The Chippy has Major 10 with alloy heads and some 20% more power so I think was OK. Maybe Smudge can remember more?
For a classic car, hardened valve seats are a common and cost effective solution. I haven't looked at prices for some time but they used to start at around 25 quid a seat.
I guess for aviation use, by the time you've sourced aviation approved materials, a qualified organisation to do the job, and got it past the CAA, it would be cheaper to buy a new aeroplane.
I guess for aviation use, by the time you've sourced aviation approved materials, a qualified organisation to do the job, and got it past the CAA, it would be cheaper to buy a new aeroplane.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Fairford, Glos
Age: 99
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Alternative fuels
Danny, given its stick shift gears your R/Enfield must have been fairly ancient; I think the pedal-operated box became general in the mid to late 1930s, certainly my specimen had the foot change common to most bikes produced from then on.
The reasons for using petrol for the 50 mile return ride to my RAFVR sessions were (a) petrol coupons were obtainable for such a purpose, and (b) it worked out cheaper than methanol – plus the fact that my range on methanol was somewhat limited, given an approx 40 mpg and the limited capacity of the can containing it.
As for Ronsonol, when ‘basic’ was reintroduced just after VE day I eked out the last few days of my embarkation leave using the stuff to keep my ancient Francis Barnett on the road; our local tobacconist (remember them?) had a good stock, and the old 2-stroke was quite happy to slurp it. The bottles it came in were not very big, but half a dozen (at around a bob or two a go) went quite a long way though I'm sure you certainly needed larger ones (and more of them ) for that old Bentley!
Glad to be back, but then I have not really been away; I keep a close eye on this thread, and will always contribute if I think there is anything interesting to say.
All the best, to all......
harrym
The reasons for using petrol for the 50 mile return ride to my RAFVR sessions were (a) petrol coupons were obtainable for such a purpose, and (b) it worked out cheaper than methanol – plus the fact that my range on methanol was somewhat limited, given an approx 40 mpg and the limited capacity of the can containing it.
As for Ronsonol, when ‘basic’ was reintroduced just after VE day I eked out the last few days of my embarkation leave using the stuff to keep my ancient Francis Barnett on the road; our local tobacconist (remember them?) had a good stock, and the old 2-stroke was quite happy to slurp it. The bottles it came in were not very big, but half a dozen (at around a bob or two a go) went quite a long way though I'm sure you certainly needed larger ones (and more of them ) for that old Bentley!
Glad to be back, but then I have not really been away; I keep a close eye on this thread, and will always contribute if I think there is anything interesting to say.
All the best, to all......
harrym
Geriaviator,
As A rigger (airframe trade) my knowledge of the fuel requirements of the Gypsy Major engine is a little limited. I do know that when I served on University Engineering Flight at Abingdon 77-79, all of our aircraft were fuelled from the same bowser, which contained 100LL. Oxford and London UAS with their Bulldogs, and 6 AEF with the Chipmunk all seemed to get along fine on the stuff. I can only assume that 6 AEFs chippies had the required mods. Now, a small diversion.
I was sent to RAF Topcliffe to help RN EFTS push through a backlog of students, due to the imminent arrival of HRH Prince Andrew. The only bonus was being able to claim fuel mileage back to Abingdon at weekends. In an attempt to help the meagre allowance, my car was "conveniently parked" to accept the ullage from the 100LL bowser on a Friday lunchtime. As the four of us from Abingdon had travelled together in my Triumph Herald Convertible, I was on a sure fire winner
On the third weekend, halfway home down the A1, the engine blew, big time, with something metal coming through the bonnet and just missing my mates in the back seats. I have no doubts now of the error of my ways, and hopefully the statute of limitations prevents my prosecution on the abuse of aviation fuel front. I never "borrowed" fuel from Aunty Betty again during my career, but I know a few gliding clubs who found a blend of Avtur and OM15 to run their winches.
Smudge
As A rigger (airframe trade) my knowledge of the fuel requirements of the Gypsy Major engine is a little limited. I do know that when I served on University Engineering Flight at Abingdon 77-79, all of our aircraft were fuelled from the same bowser, which contained 100LL. Oxford and London UAS with their Bulldogs, and 6 AEF with the Chipmunk all seemed to get along fine on the stuff. I can only assume that 6 AEFs chippies had the required mods. Now, a small diversion.
I was sent to RAF Topcliffe to help RN EFTS push through a backlog of students, due to the imminent arrival of HRH Prince Andrew. The only bonus was being able to claim fuel mileage back to Abingdon at weekends. In an attempt to help the meagre allowance, my car was "conveniently parked" to accept the ullage from the 100LL bowser on a Friday lunchtime. As the four of us from Abingdon had travelled together in my Triumph Herald Convertible, I was on a sure fire winner
On the third weekend, halfway home down the A1, the engine blew, big time, with something metal coming through the bonnet and just missing my mates in the back seats. I have no doubts now of the error of my ways, and hopefully the statute of limitations prevents my prosecution on the abuse of aviation fuel front. I never "borrowed" fuel from Aunty Betty again during my career, but I know a few gliding clubs who found a blend of Avtur and OM15 to run their winches.
Smudge
Guest
Posts: n/a
Who to Believe ?
harrym,
I would have thought that the best course would have been to take the petrol coupons and the mileage allowance. As late as '54 we were paying our Auxiliaries 4.25p/mile for coming in for training with their cars, and the same to one bright spark who had a PPL (or was it still an "A" Licence?) and occasionally flew in with a Gypsy Moth from Greatham to Thornaby; don't remember what a m/bike would get. And then use your methanol for the trip to get the best of both worlds!
Ronsonol would have been far too expensive to use in any quantity, although, as I have related in a Post long ago, it was a vital factor in firing-up my old ('31) Standard Big Nine from dead cold, but of course I only needed a little (say 25ml) to fill the tiny float chamber for each cold start.
Smudge,
I cannot understand the relatively recent PlumbPhobia which has sprung up. From the days of the Romans, we have drunk from lead cisterns, aquaducts and through lead pipes, and through all the following centuries until almost the present day. Infants sucked on their lead soldiers for generations and no one came to any harm, as far as I could see.
Many old soldiers lived out to a good old age in spite of having musket balls lodged in them somewhere where it was too dangerous for the surgeon to try to remove them. In our households, we drank our morning tea from water (sometimes acidic, as it is in this area) that had remained stationary in the lead pipes all night.
The consensus of medical opinion now is, that Tetra Ethyl Lead is injurious to humans, although it has a beneficial effect in internal combustion engines (and of course it is death to exhaust catalysts). All I can say is, that my generation lived (from the '20s through to the '90s), through the age of an enormous increase of road traffic (and a highly motorised war in ground and air), during which leaded fuels were the norm, and the expectation of life has increased considerably over the same period (I myself am a case in point).
That the use of leaded petrol has added to the existing risks from the water supply and other sources may be incontrovertible, but only to a very limited extent, IMHO.
Cheers, both, Danny.
I would have thought that the best course would have been to take the petrol coupons and the mileage allowance. As late as '54 we were paying our Auxiliaries 4.25p/mile for coming in for training with their cars, and the same to one bright spark who had a PPL (or was it still an "A" Licence?) and occasionally flew in with a Gypsy Moth from Greatham to Thornaby; don't remember what a m/bike would get. And then use your methanol for the trip to get the best of both worlds!
Ronsonol would have been far too expensive to use in any quantity, although, as I have related in a Post long ago, it was a vital factor in firing-up my old ('31) Standard Big Nine from dead cold, but of course I only needed a little (say 25ml) to fill the tiny float chamber for each cold start.
Smudge,
I cannot understand the relatively recent PlumbPhobia which has sprung up. From the days of the Romans, we have drunk from lead cisterns, aquaducts and through lead pipes, and through all the following centuries until almost the present day. Infants sucked on their lead soldiers for generations and no one came to any harm, as far as I could see.
Many old soldiers lived out to a good old age in spite of having musket balls lodged in them somewhere where it was too dangerous for the surgeon to try to remove them. In our households, we drank our morning tea from water (sometimes acidic, as it is in this area) that had remained stationary in the lead pipes all night.
The consensus of medical opinion now is, that Tetra Ethyl Lead is injurious to humans, although it has a beneficial effect in internal combustion engines (and of course it is death to exhaust catalysts). All I can say is, that my generation lived (from the '20s through to the '90s), through the age of an enormous increase of road traffic (and a highly motorised war in ground and air), during which leaded fuels were the norm, and the expectation of life has increased considerably over the same period (I myself am a case in point).
That the use of leaded petrol has added to the existing risks from the water supply and other sources may be incontrovertible, but only to a very limited extent, IMHO.
Cheers, both, Danny.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Just found the "Song of the A 25" on Google (All True Blues to note). Had to copy this verse as it exactly describes the clamour of the Wright "Cyclone" power plant. Double Cyclones (ie, two of 'em stuck back-to-back), which in former times dragged me round the Burma skies, just sound twice as bad !
Without further ado, then, and with full acknowledment to the anonymous composer (to the tune of 'Toodle a Roodle a Roodle a Ray')
"I swing down the deck in my Martlet Mark Four,
Loud in my ear-'oles the Cyclone's smooth roar:
"Chuff-clank-clank, chuff-clank-clank, chuff-clank-clank-clink!'
Away wing on pom-pom, away life in Drink"
(Chorus)
"Cracking Show ! - I'm Alive !
But I still have to render my A 25 "
For the benefit of the puzzled, the "A 25" was the Form the unfortunate Fleet Air Arm Pilot had to fill in after a prang (you know the sort of thing: "Who, why, when, where, what for ?") - the RAF equivalent was/is (?) "Form 765c" .
And I'm sure Geriaviator (and many others) will appreciate:
"I came back to England and much to my wrath
They gave me some dual in an old Tiger Moth,
Which does fifty-five knots or something fantastic,
Which is bloody good-o on some string and elastic".
And I cannot leave out:
"When you come o'er the round-down and see Wings' frown
You can safely assume that your hook isn't down.
A dirty great barrier looms up in front,
And you hear Wings shout, "Switch off your engine, you fool!"
Just thought it might amuse.
Danny.
Without further ado, then, and with full acknowledment to the anonymous composer (to the tune of 'Toodle a Roodle a Roodle a Ray')
"I swing down the deck in my Martlet Mark Four,
Loud in my ear-'oles the Cyclone's smooth roar:
"Chuff-clank-clank, chuff-clank-clank, chuff-clank-clank-clink!'
Away wing on pom-pom, away life in Drink"
(Chorus)
"Cracking Show ! - I'm Alive !
But I still have to render my A 25 "
For the benefit of the puzzled, the "A 25" was the Form the unfortunate Fleet Air Arm Pilot had to fill in after a prang (you know the sort of thing: "Who, why, when, where, what for ?") - the RAF equivalent was/is (?) "Form 765c" .
And I'm sure Geriaviator (and many others) will appreciate:
"I came back to England and much to my wrath
They gave me some dual in an old Tiger Moth,
Which does fifty-five knots or something fantastic,
Which is bloody good-o on some string and elastic".
And I cannot leave out:
"When you come o'er the round-down and see Wings' frown
You can safely assume that your hook isn't down.
A dirty great barrier looms up in front,
And you hear Wings shout, "Switch off your engine, you fool!"
Just thought it might amuse.
Danny.
Last edited by Danny42C; 17th Jun 2015 at 22:05. Reason: Addn (Insert Chorus)
Just thought it might amuse.
It certainly did Danny - despite a certain variation in the second verse quoted when compared with the Fleet Air Arm Song Book......
Jack
It certainly did Danny - despite a certain variation in the second verse quoted when compared with the Fleet Air Arm Song Book......
Jack
Just thought it might amuse.
Danny old friend, indeed it does ... as always! From someone who had to wind up the elastic at the front before every trip
Danny old friend, indeed it does ... as always! From someone who had to wind up the elastic at the front before every trip
Guest
Posts: n/a
Absent Friends,
Geriaviator and Warmtoast,
Beautiful picture of the dear old "Tiggie" in full cry ! Although I got quite to like them in the end, my first experience of them was not one of my better days.
Coming from the Meteor, and not having flown them before (my ab-initio was on the much heavier "Stearman"), I came in low and fast, put it on the ground and expected gravity to hold it there. Oh, dear!.....Oh, dear, oh dear, oh dear..... I shall draw a veil over the scene which followed.
It was quite some time before I cottoned-on to the fact that you have to let it stop flying before it will settle down (not unlike a Spitfire, come to that). But I had been spoilt by things which only needed to be "wheelbarrowed" onto the tarmac and would stay down.
Will now see if I can find "The Song of the Barracuda" (perhaps Union Jack can help?) to complement the "Song of the A 25". I have long since put in the only verses (AFAIK) written about the Vultee Vengeance, but from memory:
(I must confess that I have just added the last couplet myself, to round it off).
Beautiful picture of the dear old "Tiggie" in full cry ! Although I got quite to like them in the end, my first experience of them was not one of my better days.
Coming from the Meteor, and not having flown them before (my ab-initio was on the much heavier "Stearman"), I came in low and fast, put it on the ground and expected gravity to hold it there. Oh, dear!.....Oh, dear, oh dear, oh dear..... I shall draw a veil over the scene which followed.
It was quite some time before I cottoned-on to the fact that you have to let it stop flying before it will settle down (not unlike a Spitfire, come to that). But I had been spoilt by things which only needed to be "wheelbarrowed" onto the tarmac and would stay down.
Will now see if I can find "The Song of the Barracuda" (perhaps Union Jack can help?) to complement the "Song of the A 25". I have long since put in the only verses (AFAIK) written about the Vultee Vengeance, but from memory:
"You always were an ugly brute
Of that there can be no dispute
From you an Angry Elephant
Would take the Palm for Elegance"
Of that there can be no dispute
From you an Angry Elephant
Would take the Palm for Elegance"
"But yet you'd aways give the Boost
To bring us safely Home to Roost"
And tho' you'd sooner flop than fly
I found it hard to say Good-Bye"
To bring us safely Home to Roost"
And tho' you'd sooner flop than fly
I found it hard to say Good-Bye"
(I must confess that I have just added the last couplet myself, to round it off).
Cheers, Danny.
Hi Danny
I have noticed a recent article in a local Warbirds magazine that someone is trying to rebuild a Vengeance to flying condition.
They apparently have two other airframes that may end up as static restorations. As this is in the Antipodes, I assume they are all Mk IV's.
The article also mentioned the Mk IV at the Cambden Museum and summarized operations in India/Burma, with your old Squadron getting meritorious mention.
I have noticed a recent article in a local Warbirds magazine that someone is trying to rebuild a Vengeance to flying condition.
They apparently have two other airframes that may end up as static restorations. As this is in the Antipodes, I assume they are all Mk IV's.
The article also mentioned the Mk IV at the Cambden Museum and summarized operations in India/Burma, with your old Squadron getting meritorious mention.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Warmtoast,
Re: Your quote from Geriaviator's: "had to wind up the elastic at the front before every trip".
A better solution had been found with the "Stearman". A mech had to put a crank into a hole in the left side of the nose about two feet behind the prop, then laboriously wind up an inertia starter flywheel for about 40 secs to store sufficient energy to kick-round the shaft of the 220 hp radial "Continental". If an inept stude didn't "catch" the engine with throttle first time, he'd to do it all again - and it's still hot in Florida in September !
CoodaShooda,
It is good to hear that someone is trying to resurrect a flyable one, but it won't be easy. As you say, most of the survivors will be from the Mk.IVs that came out at the end; it is hard to imagine that there will be much left of the Mks.I and II, (the only ones which we and, I believe, the RAAF) went on 'ops' with in the War. We got Mk.IIIs in India when it ended, but they only did odd jobs. I don't think you got any IIIs at all.
The only useful reference book I know is: "Vengeance!" The Vultee Vengeance Dive Bomber by Peter C. Smith, Airlife Publishing, 1986. The Brazilian River has one at £7.49 (your $15.05) at the moment.
Wiki still says that the Camden Museum one is a MkIA (US A31), but I think it's a Mk.IV (US A35), as it has that massive 0.50 "cannon" at the back, which is the hallmark of the Mk.IV (all the others have 2x 0.300/303s).
The clincher would be if your warbird mag chap could check the wing: if there's a 4° Angle of Incidence, it's a IV: if zero, not! - and the airframe no. on the fuselage is a fake (although the paperwork may be genuine, this is not EZ999 EDIT: I flew EZ993 on 24.2.43, it was the end of the VV, but we, fortunately, lived to tell the tale). Be that as it may, it looks all there and should be capable of getting into flying condition. The test pilot will have no trouble, it's just a big old pussycat.
Good luck with it ! Danny.
Re: Your quote from Geriaviator's: "had to wind up the elastic at the front before every trip".
A better solution had been found with the "Stearman". A mech had to put a crank into a hole in the left side of the nose about two feet behind the prop, then laboriously wind up an inertia starter flywheel for about 40 secs to store sufficient energy to kick-round the shaft of the 220 hp radial "Continental". If an inept stude didn't "catch" the engine with throttle first time, he'd to do it all again - and it's still hot in Florida in September !
CoodaShooda,
It is good to hear that someone is trying to resurrect a flyable one, but it won't be easy. As you say, most of the survivors will be from the Mk.IVs that came out at the end; it is hard to imagine that there will be much left of the Mks.I and II, (the only ones which we and, I believe, the RAAF) went on 'ops' with in the War. We got Mk.IIIs in India when it ended, but they only did odd jobs. I don't think you got any IIIs at all.
The only useful reference book I know is: "Vengeance!" The Vultee Vengeance Dive Bomber by Peter C. Smith, Airlife Publishing, 1986. The Brazilian River has one at £7.49 (your $15.05) at the moment.
Wiki still says that the Camden Museum one is a MkIA (US A31), but I think it's a Mk.IV (US A35), as it has that massive 0.50 "cannon" at the back, which is the hallmark of the Mk.IV (all the others have 2x 0.300/303s).
The clincher would be if your warbird mag chap could check the wing: if there's a 4° Angle of Incidence, it's a IV: if zero, not! - and the airframe no. on the fuselage is a fake (although the paperwork may be genuine, this is not EZ999 EDIT: I flew EZ993 on 24.2.43, it was the end of the VV, but we, fortunately, lived to tell the tale). Be that as it may, it looks all there and should be capable of getting into flying condition. The test pilot will have no trouble, it's just a big old pussycat.
Good luck with it !
Danny.
Last edited by Danny42C; 17th Jun 2015 at 22:20. Reason: Addn.
Danny,
I suspect I am going to appear the "class numpty" here, but I noticed a comment on the VV, re the difference in respect of the four degree angle of incidence, how did that affect the dive performance of the aircraft, and was the Mk IV a better or worse proposition to fly ? I apologise if you have already explained this, as former ground crew, I claim my right to catch up the "drivers airframe" slowly
Smudge
I suspect I am going to appear the "class numpty" here, but I noticed a comment on the VV, re the difference in respect of the four degree angle of incidence, how did that affect the dive performance of the aircraft, and was the Mk IV a better or worse proposition to fly ? I apologise if you have already explained this, as former ground crew, I claim my right to catch up the "drivers airframe" slowly
Smudge
Tiger Moths and hand swinging of props.
Watching the fitters in the dispersals at 5 FTS hand-swinging Tiger Moth props IMHO a dangerous but necessary practice. Was being hit by a prop on start-up an occupational hazard with casualties perhaps?
Watching the fitters in the dispersals at 5 FTS hand-swinging Tiger Moth props IMHO a dangerous but necessary practice. Was being hit by a prop on start-up an occupational hazard with casualties perhaps?
Last edited by Warmtoast; 19th Jun 2015 at 08:57.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Smudge,
Always ready to advise, my dear chap, and catch up as slowly as you like (for when the Good Lord made time, He made plenty of it).
In a word, the four-degree Angle of Incidence made it a better aeroplane, but a worse dive bomber. I never got a Mk.IV to fly, never mind dive. All I have to go on is this:
Captain Eric (Winkle) Brown RN tested a VV (in UK) and thought that it was inferior to the JU-87 "Stuka" in a vertical dive. We suspect that it was a Mk.IV he got for testing, for I don't think any of the earlier Marks came to Britain. It stands to reason that a zero angle made the earlier Marks far steadier in pitch during the dive, which was why it was designed in in the first place.
The American Army got the earlier Marks I-II (A-31); their pilots couldn't see over the nose, and rejected it (neither could we, but we had to live with it). They demanded an AoI, got it (A-35), then decided that they didn't like it at all anyway. The Mark IVs (A-35s) were then palmed off to us (we took them to the UK and used them as target tugs), the Free French in N.Africa and (I think) to the Brazilians.
It is almost impossible to distinguish the four-degree wing from the zero in photographs, but fortunately all the A-35s (Mk.IVs) have a 0.50 Browning in the back in place of the 2x .300/303 in Mks.I-III (A-31). This sticks out like a sore thumb !
Warmtoast,
It was potentially dangerous, but the technique used (to walk past across the nose, take the tip of the lower blade in the nearer hand and pull it after as you continued to walk away, made it fairly safe.
In days of old, when they had big old props , they had a Ford driven device called "Hucks Starter" which did it mechanically. Could have designed a smaller model for the TM, I suppose, but they never did.
Danny.
Always ready to advise, my dear chap, and catch up as slowly as you like (for when the Good Lord made time, He made plenty of it).
In a word, the four-degree Angle of Incidence made it a better aeroplane, but a worse dive bomber. I never got a Mk.IV to fly, never mind dive. All I have to go on is this:
Captain Eric (Winkle) Brown RN tested a VV (in UK) and thought that it was inferior to the JU-87 "Stuka" in a vertical dive. We suspect that it was a Mk.IV he got for testing, for I don't think any of the earlier Marks came to Britain. It stands to reason that a zero angle made the earlier Marks far steadier in pitch during the dive, which was why it was designed in in the first place.
The American Army got the earlier Marks I-II (A-31); their pilots couldn't see over the nose, and rejected it (neither could we, but we had to live with it). They demanded an AoI, got it (A-35), then decided that they didn't like it at all anyway. The Mark IVs (A-35s) were then palmed off to us (we took them to the UK and used them as target tugs), the Free French in N.Africa and (I think) to the Brazilians.
It is almost impossible to distinguish the four-degree wing from the zero in photographs, but fortunately all the A-35s (Mk.IVs) have a 0.50 Browning in the back in place of the 2x .300/303 in Mks.I-III (A-31). This sticks out like a sore thumb !
Warmtoast,
It was potentially dangerous, but the technique used (to walk past across the nose, take the tip of the lower blade in the nearer hand and pull it after as you continued to walk away, made it fairly safe.
In days of old, when they had big old props , they had a Ford driven device called "Hucks Starter" which did it mechanically. Could have designed a smaller model for the TM, I suppose, but they never did.
Danny.
Thanks for that Danny,
I rather expected that with an increased angle of incidence on the mainplane, the required dive angle would have seemed well beyond what "felt" normal. Perhaps towing targets was the best way it could be employed.
Smudge
I rather expected that with an increased angle of incidence on the mainplane, the required dive angle would have seemed well beyond what "felt" normal. Perhaps towing targets was the best way it could be employed.
Smudge