Gaining An R.A.F Pilots Brevet In WW II
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guest
Posts: n/a
Stanwell (#8641),
As to the "Gift", I anticipated some new goodies, but it was an old friend. Four years ago, in one of my Posts, I mentioned it. I cannot trace it now (or, to be exact, neither PPRuNe [predictably] nor Google can trace it), so from memory, here goes:
.
Note that I did not say that I had actually seen this 'talisman', for I had not. What I had written in those early days, I declared to be be "Hearsay", saying "I had no means then, and have no means now of verifying the truth of what I'm writing" (or words to that effect). I'd never even heard of Wikipedia then !
So now I can say that I had never seen the magnificent cabinet that now (presumably) houses this relic (why didn't they open the doors and display it ?). How come the white ants hadn't eaten that as well ? (the speed at which white ants [termites] can demolish wood is quite impressive).
As for the chaps, they look vaguely familiar...but cannot put a name to any.... So many names, so long ago.....
Thanks, Danny.
...Re topgas's second picture...
While we're waiting for the full answers to your questions, perhaps I could shed a little light on two of them:
What was the gift?
The gift from the Nizam was a complete squadron of Airco DH.9As.
They entered service with 110 Sqn around June 1918.
What is the significance of "No 6" ?
That inscription panel displayed in the frame would have been cut from 'Aircraft No 6' of that gift before it went to the boneyard...
While we're waiting for the full answers to your questions, perhaps I could shed a little light on two of them:
What was the gift?
The gift from the Nizam was a complete squadron of Airco DH.9As.
They entered service with 110 Sqn around June 1918.
What is the significance of "No 6" ?
That inscription panel displayed in the frame would have been cut from 'Aircraft No 6' of that gift before it went to the boneyard...
"The Nizam of Hydrabad, reputedly the richest man in the world had stumped up out of petty cash enough to buy a whole squadron of DH9s for the R.F.C. in WW1. In return, his crest, a tiger's head, was painted on their plywood sides.
The artist had endowed the animal with a mournful expression; the troops called it "The Constipated Tiger".
One such crest had been cut out of a crash and was carried round everywhere by the Squadron as a sort of talisman. ... As to the "Tiger" panel, it must be stored somewhere still if the white ants didn't get at it"
The artist had endowed the animal with a mournful expression; the troops called it "The Constipated Tiger".
One such crest had been cut out of a crash and was carried round everywhere by the Squadron as a sort of talisman. ... As to the "Tiger" panel, it must be stored somewhere still if the white ants didn't get at it"
Note that I did not say that I had actually seen this 'talisman', for I had not. What I had written in those early days, I declared to be be "Hearsay", saying "I had no means then, and have no means now of verifying the truth of what I'm writing" (or words to that effect). I'd never even heard of Wikipedia then !
So now I can say that I had never seen the magnificent cabinet that now (presumably) houses this relic (why didn't they open the doors and display it ?). How come the white ants hadn't eaten that as well ? (the speed at which white ants [termites] can demolish wood is quite impressive).
As for the chaps, they look vaguely familiar...but cannot put a name to any.... So many names, so long ago.....
Thanks, Danny.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Savimosh01 (#8645/6),
Thank you !
"Topper" all right - don't know Dave Cummin at all (would not forget a chap of such striking appearance). Bit puzzled by the uniforms, though (don't they look smart ! - get those creases on the slacks). First thought: they're in blues. But no belt, so must be tropical tunics. Who ever saw KD as smooth as that? Could they have become "Gabardine Swine" ? (another old story).
And of course, dear old Reg Duncan, my old mentor, who sent me off in a VV after a twenty minute ride in the back (but I had stick, rudders and a throttle, but little else). Looks younger than I remember.
Danny.
EDIT: Savimosh, In my haste to get my part in this Tread up to date, I've unpardonably overlooked your #8640.... Horror ! So F/O Robertson (Nav) was the back seat victim. As P/O Robertson, he flew as my crewman on my three first ops over Akyab (Akyab Jail, Narigan bridge and Bume radio station) in May '43. Nice chaps both (RIP).
And that was "what was wrong with Khumbirgram" !
Reverting to your shot of "Topper" and Dave, what have they got in their right hands ? My guess - pipes (we all sported them in those days, thought they made us look more relaxed and debonair !)
D.
Thank you !
"Topper" all right - don't know Dave Cummin at all (would not forget a chap of such striking appearance). Bit puzzled by the uniforms, though (don't they look smart ! - get those creases on the slacks). First thought: they're in blues. But no belt, so must be tropical tunics. Who ever saw KD as smooth as that? Could they have become "Gabardine Swine" ? (another old story).
And of course, dear old Reg Duncan, my old mentor, who sent me off in a VV after a twenty minute ride in the back (but I had stick, rudders and a throttle, but little else). Looks younger than I remember.
Danny.
EDIT: Savimosh, In my haste to get my part in this Tread up to date, I've unpardonably overlooked your #8640.... Horror ! So F/O Robertson (Nav) was the back seat victim. As P/O Robertson, he flew as my crewman on my three first ops over Akyab (Akyab Jail, Narigan bridge and Bume radio station) in May '43. Nice chaps both (RIP).
And that was "what was wrong with Khumbirgram" !
Reverting to your shot of "Topper" and Dave, what have they got in their right hands ? My guess - pipes (we all sported them in those days, thought they made us look more relaxed and debonair !)
D.
Last edited by Danny42C; 5th Jun 2016 at 14:47. Reason: Add Text.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,812
Received 137 Likes
on
64 Posts
Fareastdriver ... sadly I suspect many fine old Squadrons with distinguished records disappeared into oblivion back then. Perhaps it's only now, in the 21st C, that some of us are realising what was lost.
Looking forward to topgas giving us the full story.
A bit more digging on the IWM website for the first picture, of the Vengeance in action, has revealed that it is a "Still from film shot by the RAF Film Production Unit, showing Vultee Vengeances of No. 110 Squadron RAF dive-bombing targets near a railway bridge over a river in Burma. The extended dive-brakes on the wing of the aircraft from which the film was shot." Now, if that film was still around, it would be worth seeing. There is also refernece in the archive to a film made in late 1944 of 8 Sqn IAF
A couple more photos from the IWM archive
[/url]ROYAL AIR FORCE OPERATIONS IN THE FAR EAST, 1941-1945.. © IWM (CI 334)[/url]IWM Non Commercial Licence
Completed Vultee Vengeance Mark Is await the fitting of airscrews after assembly at No. 1 (India) Maintenance Unit, Drigh Road, India. The nearest aircraft, AN796, eventually served with No. 110 Squadron RAF.
AMERICAN AIRCRAFT IN ROYAL AIR FORCE SERVICE, 1939-1945: VULTEE MODEL 72 VENGEANCE.. © IWM (ATP 12042F)IWM Non Commercial Licence
Vengeance Mark II, AN609: instrument panel and pilot's controls.
Thanks topgas for those splendid photographs.
Whoops, here we go again ..... the (still unresolved) Mystery of the Two Balls .... which has much intrigued me, although I recall thinking that Beagle was pretty close to the money with his earlier observation on this teaser.
(Ducks behind tea-swindle table to escape hail of small missiles incoming from around the stove).
I'll offer my own two-penn'orth later, when the supply of ready-use ammunition has dwindled ...
Whoops, here we go again ..... the (still unresolved) Mystery of the Two Balls .... which has much intrigued me, although I recall thinking that Beagle was pretty close to the money with his earlier observation on this teaser.
(Ducks behind tea-swindle table to escape hail of small missiles incoming from around the stove).
I'll offer my own two-penn'orth later, when the supply of ready-use ammunition has dwindled ...
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Secret Lincolnshire Airbase
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Saying that, it would have had to had made it there in the first place - I opened a random filing cabinet the other day hunting for some maps and found about 30 pewter tankards from 1943-44. Next drawer down had assorted squadron sporting trophies from the 1920s!
There was and maybe still is. I think the policy in recent years is to offer it around what's left of the RAF. I do not want to believe it but I was told the rest was disposed of.
A story I was told that after the WWII when hundreds of squadrons were disbanded their silver was stored in a hangar at Mildenhall. One day some NCOs turned up with a couple of three tonners and a requisition order. They loaded a fair amount in the back and went on their way. A couple of days later two war surplus three-tonners were found abandoned in a field-minus silverware.
A story I was told that after the WWII when hundreds of squadrons were disbanded their silver was stored in a hangar at Mildenhall. One day some NCOs turned up with a couple of three tonners and a requisition order. They loaded a fair amount in the back and went on their way. A couple of days later two war surplus three-tonners were found abandoned in a field-minus silverware.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,812
Received 137 Likes
on
64 Posts
The great silver store was at RAF Quedgeley (7 MU) ... where it went after closure in 1995 I have no idea.
Guest
Posts: n/a
topgas (#8651),
Now you've really given me something to get my teeth into !
Started researching Pic 2. soon found myself in way over my head !
What wonderful clarity in the pics ! Nitpicks as follows:
First Pic:
Correct (I thought they were assembled at Mauripur, but that's only a few miles down the road from Drigh Rd (Karachi). Peter C. Smith tells me that they were Vultee built under British Contract (ie, we'd paid for the things at around $63,000 each - they were not Lend-Lease).
Checked log, never flew it. What's that thing sticking out of stbd leading edge ? No, not gun but blast tube down which gun (well back in wing) fired. Why is it not back in wing where it belongs ? Don't know. (There is a possible explanation: it had been test fired, the gun mountings were not up to the job, the gun started to dance about, first sign was rounds clipping side of tube, edging it out. If this sign was ignored, rounds started coming out all over leading edge. Not good).
Second Pic. Oh, boy!"
Vultee built under British Contract (P.C.S) as before. Or rather would be if it were AN609 - but it ain't ! This is no Mark II panel. I am well familiar with the panels in Mks. I-III; they were all the same (they were US A-31s). They were nothing like this.
This nightmare of a panel crops up all over the place, with minor alterations. It (or a close cousin) appears in Peter C. Smith's "Vengeance" in Page 3, and in his Appendix 5, in which a drawing appears of the thing. (This does not inspire confidence, as the index to the Appendix makes no mention of any Manifold Pressure Gauge !) Long time ago some kind soul on this Post turned up (cf P.366 #7309, in which we were trying to trace it) for us a a copy the Pilot's Notes of the panel in the Mk.IVs (US-35s) supplied to the RAF and RAAF for conversion into target tugs. There it was again !
I believe it to be the panel in the Camden Museum specimen (can any Sydney reader have a look for us and check ?)
I have never even seen a Mk.IV (A-35). I do not know what the panel looked like. On the basis of the fact that it looked nothing like a Mks. I-III (A-31) panel, I declared it must be a Mark IV. I think the truth of the matter is that nobody alive knows what a Mk.IV panel looked at; this is the only picture available, so it is trotted out on every occasion.
Some of you may recall that we have reluctantly accepted that EZ999 (in Camden) is, or at least started out as, a pukka Mk.I. But it spent most of its life as a training fuselage for the engineering students at technical college, obviously they pulled the panel out, the trainee instrument mechs did their worst with it, then it was stuck in a corner and forgoten for years until the Camden rebuild started. Then they found the sorry wreck, stuck in all sorts of bits willy-nilly, and voila ! - a Mk.I panel.
All this was worse confounded by the Museum, which having found a genuine Mk.I carcase, then went to considerable trouble (eg fitting a 0.50 with matching end section of a canopy, instead of the 2x 0.303s which were the right Mk.I fit) to disguise it as a Mk.IV - and caused Posters on this Thread no end of hard work to unscramble the facts.
Clear, so far ?
Now we can have a good look at your brilliant pic. Like the rather basic way in which they've "wired-off" the standard US 5-position ignition switch (shackle it to the altimeter setting knob !) At least what looks like the manifold pressure and rev. clocks are in the right place - but look at the triple gauge (down on the right). The two little dials at the bottom (fuel and oil pressure) show one at max and t'other at zero. This is scrap !
I cannot account for the clearly bolt-on rig at the bottom of the panel (with a hole in the middle for the beam of a reflector gunsight to pass through) and a whole lot of switches on the left. And of course, our old pal the "double ball" (WHY ? - if there's one instrument on the panel, which can't fail, it's the "ball").
I feel eyes glazing over,
Danny...
EDIT: PS: Yes, dogle - the two-ball argument is alive and well !
Now you've really given me something to get my teeth into !
Started researching Pic 2. soon found myself in way over my head !
What wonderful clarity in the pics ! Nitpicks as follows:
First Pic:
...ROYAL AIR FORCE OPERATIONS IN THE FAR EAST, 1941-1945.. © IWM (CI 334)[/url]IWM Non Commercial Licence
Completed Vultee Vengeance Mark Is await the fitting of airscrews after assembly at No. 1 (India) Maintenance Unit, Drigh Road, India. The nearest aircraft, AN796, eventually served with No. 110 Squadron RAF...
Completed Vultee Vengeance Mark Is await the fitting of airscrews after assembly at No. 1 (India) Maintenance Unit, Drigh Road, India. The nearest aircraft, AN796, eventually served with No. 110 Squadron RAF...
Checked log, never flew it. What's that thing sticking out of stbd leading edge ? No, not gun but blast tube down which gun (well back in wing) fired. Why is it not back in wing where it belongs ? Don't know. (There is a possible explanation: it had been test fired, the gun mountings were not up to the job, the gun started to dance about, first sign was rounds clipping side of tube, edging it out. If this sign was ignored, rounds started coming out all over leading edge. Not good).
Second Pic. Oh, boy!"
...AMERICAN AIRCRAFT IN ROYAL AIR FORCE SERVICE, 1939-1945: VULTEE MODEL 72 VENGEANCE.. © IWM (ATP 12042F)IWM Non Commercial Licence
Vengeance Mark II, AN609: instrument panel and pilot's controls...
Vengeance Mark II, AN609: instrument panel and pilot's controls...
This nightmare of a panel crops up all over the place, with minor alterations. It (or a close cousin) appears in Peter C. Smith's "Vengeance" in Page 3, and in his Appendix 5, in which a drawing appears of the thing. (This does not inspire confidence, as the index to the Appendix makes no mention of any Manifold Pressure Gauge !) Long time ago some kind soul on this Post turned up (cf P.366 #7309, in which we were trying to trace it) for us a a copy the Pilot's Notes of the panel in the Mk.IVs (US-35s) supplied to the RAF and RAAF for conversion into target tugs. There it was again !
I believe it to be the panel in the Camden Museum specimen (can any Sydney reader have a look for us and check ?)
I have never even seen a Mk.IV (A-35). I do not know what the panel looked like. On the basis of the fact that it looked nothing like a Mks. I-III (A-31) panel, I declared it must be a Mark IV. I think the truth of the matter is that nobody alive knows what a Mk.IV panel looked at; this is the only picture available, so it is trotted out on every occasion.
Some of you may recall that we have reluctantly accepted that EZ999 (in Camden) is, or at least started out as, a pukka Mk.I. But it spent most of its life as a training fuselage for the engineering students at technical college, obviously they pulled the panel out, the trainee instrument mechs did their worst with it, then it was stuck in a corner and forgoten for years until the Camden rebuild started. Then they found the sorry wreck, stuck in all sorts of bits willy-nilly, and voila ! - a Mk.I panel.
All this was worse confounded by the Museum, which having found a genuine Mk.I carcase, then went to considerable trouble (eg fitting a 0.50 with matching end section of a canopy, instead of the 2x 0.303s which were the right Mk.I fit) to disguise it as a Mk.IV - and caused Posters on this Thread no end of hard work to unscramble the facts.
Clear, so far ?
Now we can have a good look at your brilliant pic. Like the rather basic way in which they've "wired-off" the standard US 5-position ignition switch (shackle it to the altimeter setting knob !) At least what looks like the manifold pressure and rev. clocks are in the right place - but look at the triple gauge (down on the right). The two little dials at the bottom (fuel and oil pressure) show one at max and t'other at zero. This is scrap !
I cannot account for the clearly bolt-on rig at the bottom of the panel (with a hole in the middle for the beam of a reflector gunsight to pass through) and a whole lot of switches on the left. And of course, our old pal the "double ball" (WHY ? - if there's one instrument on the panel, which can't fail, it's the "ball").
I feel eyes glazing over,
Danny...
EDIT: PS: Yes, dogle - the two-ball argument is alive and well !
Last edited by Danny42C; 6th Jun 2016 at 12:48. Reason: Sorry, dogle (#8652).
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello Danny,
Thanks very much for your reply #8648 with regard to the photos (happy you like them). It's very good to have some details about uniforms, etc.
I don't know the names of the attached 110 Squadron airmen. Do you happen to recognize them?
Sara
Thanks very much for your reply #8648 with regard to the photos (happy you like them). It's very good to have some details about uniforms, etc.
I don't know the names of the attached 110 Squadron airmen. Do you happen to recognize them?
Sara
Guest
Posts: n/a
Sara,
This is a tricky one, I think I know know the face of the Sqn Ldr (?) on the right. But who was he ? No idea.
But there are clues. His crewman (?) on the left is a Captain (the shoulder strap has come off, but you can make out the three pips). So a South African. That should narrow it down. Can we identify the aircraft ? Clearly, not a Vengeance, but what ? First thought "Spitfire", but that bulge on the side of the nose doesn't look right. But clearly a Merlin. And we do know where the ground power is plugged in (can't be a Spit XIV, as I think they were all Coffman-started).
Come on, all you budding Sherlock Holmes - go to work on this !
Not much help, I'm afraid.
Danny.
EDIT: Of course, a Mossie (why didn't I think of that ?) Thanks, FED.
D.
This is a tricky one, I think I know know the face of the Sqn Ldr (?) on the right. But who was he ? No idea.
But there are clues. His crewman (?) on the left is a Captain (the shoulder strap has come off, but you can make out the three pips). So a South African. That should narrow it down. Can we identify the aircraft ? Clearly, not a Vengeance, but what ? First thought "Spitfire", but that bulge on the side of the nose doesn't look right. But clearly a Merlin. And we do know where the ground power is plugged in (can't be a Spit XIV, as I think they were all Coffman-started).
Come on, all you budding Sherlock Holmes - go to work on this !
Not much help, I'm afraid.
Danny.
EDIT: Of course, a Mossie (why didn't I think of that ?) Thanks, FED.
D.
Last edited by Danny42C; 6th Jun 2016 at 19:52. Reason: Just read FED's Post
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
110 Sqauadron 1942
Thanks Danny and FED for response to my 8657. That helps - from period 110 Squadron converted to Mosquitos. I know someone who can help me identify.
Another photo for you Danny. Enjoy!
Sara
Another photo for you Danny. Enjoy!
Sara