Comment on "Fly Past" magazine article on Vultee Vengeance in WWII.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Comment on "Fly Past" magazine article on Vultee Vengeance in WWII.
FLY PAST
________
One day in Burma in WWII, General "Bill" Slim addressed his ragged troops of the 14th Army:
And this remains, in general, the position of the British (and the world) media during WWII and ever since. As it may well be that I am the last man alive to have flown the Vultee Vengeance operationally with the RAF in Burma *, I must welcome Sean Feast's extended article in the September issue of "Fly Past" magazine, and intend to add my two cent's worth, and invite comment, amplification and (yes) correction if needed.
Note *: I know nothing of the RAAF operations with them in New Guinea, and cannot comment.
What comes now can only be followed by those who have a copy of the magazine open before them, and it is to these I write.
In order to avoid tedious repetition, "Squadron" will be omitted, it will be "110, 82, 8, etc"
--------------------------
I think it useful to start with my explaining the photograph top left on Page 28, for it maybe that others may plug the gaps in my my memory.
Bear in mind:
The pic was taken in Madhaiganj, not Digri, in the first days of January, 1943. I'd joined just a few days before.
Not all the Flight aircrew are there.
All aircrew named are Sergeants, except where othewise stated.
There are only two officers there - look for the caps.
Names and wings are L to R (looking at pic).
All pilots are standing on wings. All navs and AGs are sitting on wings. Standing on wheels are two ground NCOs.
Erks standing and sitting below. Many faces familiar; names familiar - but cannot put the two together.
..........
On top of cowling is F/O R.C.Topley ("Topper") Flt Commander. His acting Flt Lt has not come through yet, signs as F/O in my log until end of May. Draped on prop boss is "Chiefy" - F/Sgt Darling.
Standing (L to R) Sgt ("?"), think (RAAF); Reg Duncan (RCAF); Self; across to W/O Doug McIlroy (RNZAF); George Davies (RAF); Bud Yates (Yeats ? RCAF).
Sitting Sgt ("?"); P/O Robertson (nav - not the one who nearly lost entire Flight en route to Chittagong !), flew with me on first three (Akyab) ops in May; Duncan's dog "Spunky" #; another Sgt ("?"); across to a hunched figure: Keith Stewart-Mobsby (we'd not "crewed-up" yet). Why was he not with me in May ? Dunno, malaria perhaps ?
Then three more ("?")s. Together with first two ("?"s), perm from Payne, Mills, Turner, Brown, Lewis, and Foster.
Two NCOs standing on wheels, Cpl/(Sgt"?"); Cpl Reavill. (one would have been a Fitter I, t'other a Rigger I.
Sad note *: "Spunky" got extensive and incurable (Doc Pete Latcham did his best) skin infection, fur coming off in lumps, animal was suffering, in March poor Reg had to take his pistol and do the last act of kindness to his (and the whole Squadron's) friend. Everybody broken-hearted.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Fly Past,
Now that we have the dramatis personae sorted out (not a BMI over 21 to be seen), let us have a look at the text of the article. It is clear that the author (Sean Feast) has relied heavily on Peter C. Smith's "Vengeance!" ISBN 0 396393 65 5, particularly in the preamble. This points out the paradox that, when so much has been written about the success of the Ju87 "Stuka", and the Russian Pe-2; the RAF did not want to know about the operational value of this aircraft, which they themselves had commissioned in a panic in the dark days of '40-'41, now wished they hadn't, and that it would just go away quietly.
Many of the illustrations appear in "Vengeance!", but the quality is better and enable me to make useful comment.
The Vengeance was used by the RAF and IAF in India/Burma and by the RAAF in New Guinea. A useful (and only visible) difference is that the RAAF white centre of the blue/white SEAC roundel is larger than the RAF one.
--------------------------------
Now back to the beginning:
PAGE 26 PICS
The "silhouettes" of the three in echelon starboard show the normal wingover entry into the dive.
The one being bombed-up looks to have four ? * gun ports in the wing, two in the centre section(normal fit) and (judging by the masking) another two in the outer section, with one port visible. I think some later Mk.IVs did have an eight-gun installation, but the only picture available to me ("Vengeance!", page 117), clearly shows a Mk.IV used on 'ops' by the French at Agadir, Morocco). It has the trademark single 0.50 in the back, but only two masked ports in the wing.
The RAAF did get some Mk.IVs later on, but AFAIK all the VV operations both in Burma and New Guinea were flown with Mks. I and II. Mk.IIIs came out to us at the end, but were used for odd jobs. I've never even seen a Mk.IV in the metal. Most of these (in UK and Australia) were converted into target tugs.
I checked through all the pics in Peter C. Smith's "Vengeance!", there are very few unmasked "full frontals": the only clear ones are on pp. 40, 105, and 123. In all cases they show a 2-gun wing.
So what have we here ? The outboard extra two must be something else - but what ?
The 250lb going on to the wing rack looks as if the light metal back "fin" is painted black. Never saw that before, it would certainly be attached to the yellow (bomb) front half, and would be painted yellow, too. They were joined before going on the bomb trolley.
The 'op' count on the fuselage may've been exaggerated a bit. But possible !
More next time, Danny42C.
________
One day in Burma in WWII, General "Bill" Slim addressed his ragged troops of the 14th Army:
"You men call yourselves the 'Forgotten Army'. You've not been forgotten - it's just that no one's ever heard of you !"
And this remains, in general, the position of the British (and the world) media during WWII and ever since. As it may well be that I am the last man alive to have flown the Vultee Vengeance operationally with the RAF in Burma *, I must welcome Sean Feast's extended article in the September issue of "Fly Past" magazine, and intend to add my two cent's worth, and invite comment, amplification and (yes) correction if needed.
Note *: I know nothing of the RAAF operations with them in New Guinea, and cannot comment.
What comes now can only be followed by those who have a copy of the magazine open before them, and it is to these I write.
In order to avoid tedious repetition, "Squadron" will be omitted, it will be "110, 82, 8, etc"
--------------------------
I think it useful to start with my explaining the photograph top left on Page 28, for it maybe that others may plug the gaps in my my memory.
Bear in mind:
The pic was taken in Madhaiganj, not Digri, in the first days of January, 1943. I'd joined just a few days before.
Not all the Flight aircrew are there.
All aircrew named are Sergeants, except where othewise stated.
There are only two officers there - look for the caps.
Names and wings are L to R (looking at pic).
All pilots are standing on wings. All navs and AGs are sitting on wings. Standing on wheels are two ground NCOs.
Erks standing and sitting below. Many faces familiar; names familiar - but cannot put the two together.
..........
On top of cowling is F/O R.C.Topley ("Topper") Flt Commander. His acting Flt Lt has not come through yet, signs as F/O in my log until end of May. Draped on prop boss is "Chiefy" - F/Sgt Darling.
Standing (L to R) Sgt ("?"), think (RAAF); Reg Duncan (RCAF); Self; across to W/O Doug McIlroy (RNZAF); George Davies (RAF); Bud Yates (Yeats ? RCAF).
Sitting Sgt ("?"); P/O Robertson (nav - not the one who nearly lost entire Flight en route to Chittagong !), flew with me on first three (Akyab) ops in May; Duncan's dog "Spunky" #; another Sgt ("?"); across to a hunched figure: Keith Stewart-Mobsby (we'd not "crewed-up" yet). Why was he not with me in May ? Dunno, malaria perhaps ?
Then three more ("?")s. Together with first two ("?"s), perm from Payne, Mills, Turner, Brown, Lewis, and Foster.
Two NCOs standing on wheels, Cpl/(Sgt"?"); Cpl Reavill. (one would have been a Fitter I, t'other a Rigger I.
Sad note *: "Spunky" got extensive and incurable (Doc Pete Latcham did his best) skin infection, fur coming off in lumps, animal was suffering, in March poor Reg had to take his pistol and do the last act of kindness to his (and the whole Squadron's) friend. Everybody broken-hearted.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Fly Past,
Now that we have the dramatis personae sorted out (not a BMI over 21 to be seen), let us have a look at the text of the article. It is clear that the author (Sean Feast) has relied heavily on Peter C. Smith's "Vengeance!" ISBN 0 396393 65 5, particularly in the preamble. This points out the paradox that, when so much has been written about the success of the Ju87 "Stuka", and the Russian Pe-2; the RAF did not want to know about the operational value of this aircraft, which they themselves had commissioned in a panic in the dark days of '40-'41, now wished they hadn't, and that it would just go away quietly.
Many of the illustrations appear in "Vengeance!", but the quality is better and enable me to make useful comment.
The Vengeance was used by the RAF and IAF in India/Burma and by the RAAF in New Guinea. A useful (and only visible) difference is that the RAAF white centre of the blue/white SEAC roundel is larger than the RAF one.
--------------------------------
Now back to the beginning:
PAGE 26 PICS
The "silhouettes" of the three in echelon starboard show the normal wingover entry into the dive.
The one being bombed-up looks to have four ? * gun ports in the wing, two in the centre section(normal fit) and (judging by the masking) another two in the outer section, with one port visible. I think some later Mk.IVs did have an eight-gun installation, but the only picture available to me ("Vengeance!", page 117), clearly shows a Mk.IV used on 'ops' by the French at Agadir, Morocco). It has the trademark single 0.50 in the back, but only two masked ports in the wing.
The RAAF did get some Mk.IVs later on, but AFAIK all the VV operations both in Burma and New Guinea were flown with Mks. I and II. Mk.IIIs came out to us at the end, but were used for odd jobs. I've never even seen a Mk.IV in the metal. Most of these (in UK and Australia) were converted into target tugs.
I checked through all the pics in Peter C. Smith's "Vengeance!", there are very few unmasked "full frontals": the only clear ones are on pp. 40, 105, and 123. In all cases they show a 2-gun wing.
So what have we here ? The outboard extra two must be something else - but what ?
The 250lb going on to the wing rack looks as if the light metal back "fin" is painted black. Never saw that before, it would certainly be attached to the yellow (bomb) front half, and would be painted yellow, too. They were joined before going on the bomb trolley.
The 'op' count on the fuselage may've been exaggerated a bit. But possible !
More next time, Danny42C.
Danny42C, with the best will in the world, perhaps your post might be better placed in the 'Aviation History and Nostalgia' forum?
Guest
Posts: n/a
BEagle,
Could well be right, but as the whole of my Vengeance story over the last few years has followed naturally from my "gaining a RAF Pilot's Brevet in WWII", I'm at home here (and don't want to change).
And you have a better class of Poster on this Thread !
Danny.
Could well be right, but as the whole of my Vengeance story over the last few years has followed naturally from my "gaining a RAF Pilot's Brevet in WWII", I'm at home here (and don't want to change).
And you have a better class of Poster on this Thread !
Danny.
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: eastcoastoz
Age: 76
Posts: 1,699
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's difficult to type when you're chuckling.
I've not yet seen that issue of Flypast on the news-stands but I'll certainly be having a look at it when it becomes available.
Just why the VV was not used more extensively in the New Guinea campaign, I don't yet know.
I do have my suspicions, though.
The Japs were very difficult to winkle out of their well-constructed bunkers - particularly during the Buna-Gona stage of things in NG.
It struck me that the Vengeance, effectively applied to the task, would have saved the lives of many, many of our brown/green jobs.
I'll be looking into it (just to enhance my 'PhD in Hindsight', of course).
Just by the way of a p.s., Australia, by the end of the War, had the fourth largest air force in the world - behind the US, USSR and GB.
Not bad for a country of our population at the time.
.
I've not yet seen that issue of Flypast on the news-stands but I'll certainly be having a look at it when it becomes available.
Just why the VV was not used more extensively in the New Guinea campaign, I don't yet know.
I do have my suspicions, though.
The Japs were very difficult to winkle out of their well-constructed bunkers - particularly during the Buna-Gona stage of things in NG.
It struck me that the Vengeance, effectively applied to the task, would have saved the lives of many, many of our brown/green jobs.
I'll be looking into it (just to enhance my 'PhD in Hindsight', of course).
Just by the way of a p.s., Australia, by the end of the War, had the fourth largest air force in the world - behind the US, USSR and GB.
Not bad for a country of our population at the time.
.
Last edited by Stanwell; 8th Aug 2016 at 22:09.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,037
Received 2,910 Likes
on
1,247 Posts
Guest
Posts: n/a
What a wealth of supplementary information has been loosed on our undeserving heads ! Now it's my turn to chuckle at Larry66's "Hangar about, lad !" (I may be registered on "Aviation Forum", for all I know, but a couple of weeks ago was saving my stuff on Desktop and Flash Drive; by an act of stupid carelessness replaced my 'MEMORANDA' file by putting 'DRAFTS FOR PRUNE POSTS' on top of both). Now cannot retrieve it, may have to engage local friendly (@ £50/hr) computer wizard to have a go.
Consequence: all Callsigns, Passwords etc and other vital information "gone with the wind", have to start again from scratch. But enough of my troubles......
Thanks to David Thompson (not far from me !) and NutLoose for putting up Dick Simpson's beautiful string of photos. Yes, it's the Camden Museum one all right, the only complete one in the world AFAIK. But there are several groups of enthusiasts in Oz trying to find enough bits to build another. I wish them well, and hope they may succeed, but it's been a long time....
Simpson's photos deserve comment as follows:
No.1: "complete and original"; complete, yes, original no. It is a genuine Mk.I (never saw action), EZ999 is genuine. But the Museum chose to fit it out as a Mk.IV, as evidenced by the massive 0.50 in the back (No.2), with matching perspex segment.
All Mks. other than IV, would have 2x 0.303s (to replace the unreliable 0.300s which came with them) and a different rear perspex to fit.
No.2: Now the good points. Note only two gun ports per wing, and the (justified) appearance of immense strength and solidity (to which I probably owe my life). Unfortuately strong means heavy: it was pretty useless for all purposes except as a vertical dive bomber - but it was very good at that.
No.3: Note the huge white centre to the roundel, much bigger than the RAF pattern, the hand-holds to get up to the back seat, or to get onto wing for the front (we found a quicker and better way: get on wheel and shin up strut up and over leading edge). "Bomblets" are fake.
No.4: No Comment.
No.5: As before, note pronouced dihedral on outer wing sections, with enormous fin made very stable in cruising flight, and part open bomb doors, you could load luggage on the "shelf" and close doors (with hand pump) - so long as you weren't "bombed-up".
Stanwell (#4),
You've "hit the nail on the head" there. It was the target the VV might have been designed for. When you're pushing the Jap back, his invariable tactic was to dig in at some strong point which would impede our advance. With a timely four tons (from a box-of-six) of HE, we dug him out again and sent him to join the ancestors. It was our "bread and butter" task, we did a lot of it, the Army was suitably grateful, for to reduce these places by frontal assault would involve heavy casualties.
Enough for the moment. Danny.
Consequence: all Callsigns, Passwords etc and other vital information "gone with the wind", have to start again from scratch. But enough of my troubles......
Thanks to David Thompson (not far from me !) and NutLoose for putting up Dick Simpson's beautiful string of photos. Yes, it's the Camden Museum one all right, the only complete one in the world AFAIK. But there are several groups of enthusiasts in Oz trying to find enough bits to build another. I wish them well, and hope they may succeed, but it's been a long time....
Simpson's photos deserve comment as follows:
No.1: "complete and original"; complete, yes, original no. It is a genuine Mk.I (never saw action), EZ999 is genuine. But the Museum chose to fit it out as a Mk.IV, as evidenced by the massive 0.50 in the back (No.2), with matching perspex segment.
All Mks. other than IV, would have 2x 0.303s (to replace the unreliable 0.300s which came with them) and a different rear perspex to fit.
No.2: Now the good points. Note only two gun ports per wing, and the (justified) appearance of immense strength and solidity (to which I probably owe my life). Unfortuately strong means heavy: it was pretty useless for all purposes except as a vertical dive bomber - but it was very good at that.
No.3: Note the huge white centre to the roundel, much bigger than the RAF pattern, the hand-holds to get up to the back seat, or to get onto wing for the front (we found a quicker and better way: get on wheel and shin up strut up and over leading edge). "Bomblets" are fake.
No.4: No Comment.
No.5: As before, note pronouced dihedral on outer wing sections, with enormous fin made very stable in cruising flight, and part open bomb doors, you could load luggage on the "shelf" and close doors (with hand pump) - so long as you weren't "bombed-up".
Stanwell (#4),
...It struck me that the Vengeance, effectively applied to the task, would have saved the lives of many, many of our brown/green jobs...
Enough for the moment. Danny.
Last edited by Danny42C; 9th Aug 2016 at 16:35. Reason: Underline missed (# is a 'flag' so I don't miss it) and change wording.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 1,057
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thread drift..............
Thread drift.......
I've had every issue of Flypast since edition 1, I've always taken Aeroplane as well (used to be Aeroplane Monthly when I was a lad.......), cost of each is getting high and I am starting to think I need to decide between one or the other...........
Over the last few years I think I've seen a distinct decrease in quality of the articles in Flypast - is it me or does it seem like a comic nowadays with articles having little depth, some almost appear to be repeats of earlier (equally poor) articles ??
Aeroplane on the other hand, has retained its quality, and if anything, seems to have improved.
What do other people feel ??
Thanks
Arc
I've had every issue of Flypast since edition 1, I've always taken Aeroplane as well (used to be Aeroplane Monthly when I was a lad.......), cost of each is getting high and I am starting to think I need to decide between one or the other...........
Over the last few years I think I've seen a distinct decrease in quality of the articles in Flypast - is it me or does it seem like a comic nowadays with articles having little depth, some almost appear to be repeats of earlier (equally poor) articles ??
Aeroplane on the other hand, has retained its quality, and if anything, seems to have improved.
What do other people feel ??
Thanks
Arc
I wish Aeroplane would take pity on their ageing readership and up the font size. I complained when it went smaller a year or so back, and for an issue or two it improved, but seems to have sunk back again.....
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,037
Received 2,910 Likes
on
1,247 Posts
New editor on Aeroplane, it was bought out by the publishers who own Flypast and they are endeavouring to make it more cohesive, previously it would chop and change all over the place with no clear direction.
We had a go on Flypast's forum Wander about weird colour text over photos you couldn't read as well.
I get them both and Britain at War, another excellent read that was also bought out by the same group.
It was not me Danny, the person you should be thanking is David.
We had a go on Flypast's forum Wander about weird colour text over photos you couldn't read as well.
I get them both and Britain at War, another excellent read that was also bought out by the same group.
and NutLoose for putting up Dick Simpson's beautiful string of photos
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: eastcoastoz
Age: 76
Posts: 1,699
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Arclite, Wander and Nutty,
It's not only you.
As a former publishing person, I agree with your comments.
They'd better get their act together - or go under, which would be a shame.
There was a discussion here on PPRuNe about a year ago to do with that very subject.
The Editor of the magazine even came on here, trying to point out the economic realities of 'today's publishing environment'.
I'm afraid he was missing the whole point.
Having been a long-time supporter of that once fine publication (Aeroplane Monthly), I've had quite enough of their, I'm sorry to say, amateurism.
Has somebody now employed their 'talented' grand-niece as editor?
Also, as a grumpy old man was once heard to say, 'I'll take my business elsewhere'.
.
It's not only you.
As a former publishing person, I agree with your comments.
They'd better get their act together - or go under, which would be a shame.
There was a discussion here on PPRuNe about a year ago to do with that very subject.
The Editor of the magazine even came on here, trying to point out the economic realities of 'today's publishing environment'.
I'm afraid he was missing the whole point.
Having been a long-time supporter of that once fine publication (Aeroplane Monthly), I've had quite enough of their, I'm sorry to say, amateurism.
Has somebody now employed their 'talented' grand-niece as editor?
Also, as a grumpy old man was once heard to say, 'I'll take my business elsewhere'.
.
Last edited by Stanwell; 9th Aug 2016 at 18:35.
I have a copy of Flypast, and I've been resisting reading the article until Danny42C has !
Thankyou Danny, I can go and read it now with your notes. Thankyou. (and not just for the notes)
Thankyou Danny, I can go and read it now with your notes. Thankyou. (and not just for the notes)
Guest
Posts: n/a
Why does everything happen to me ?
kghifg,
Why, thankee, kind sir. Another half ?....Don't mind if I do !
Spent a lot of time last night on exegesis of Illustration and Text of p.27. Had all done 'n dusted on Notepad (for fear of PPRuNe gremlin) before copy-paste to Post. Bloody gremlin had moved over to Notepad, everything vanished..
You should've had it to read this morning, all to do again now, bit of luck will get it out today.
Danny.
Why, thankee, kind sir. Another half ?....Don't mind if I do !
Spent a lot of time last night on exegesis of Illustration and Text of p.27. Had all done 'n dusted on Notepad (for fear of PPRuNe gremlin) before copy-paste to Post. Bloody gremlin had moved over to Notepad, everything vanished..
You should've had it to read this morning, all to do again now, bit of luck will get it out today.
Danny.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,812
Received 137 Likes
on
64 Posts
Danny ... "Save often" usually helps! Although I thought Notepad on Mac saved all the time anyway - provided you have a saved filename in the first place!.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Page 27 of "Fly Past" - DEVASTATION TO ORDER
PAGE 27 PICS
Amarda Road was in W.Bengal (Orissa?), about 100 mi SW of Calcutta. Seems they called the strip that as it was the name of the local railway station (same is true of Drigh Rd. Karachi).
But not of "Red Road" (Calcutta). That was the name of the park road which it had been before it was requisitioned as an airstrip. Difficult, I was told, because of the camber - but Hurricanes used it). Handy for the Top Brass, as very close to Old Court House Street and Great Eastern Hotel (junior officers sent round to Tradesmen's Entrance).
Whatever it was doing in Amarda, it wasn't 'operating' from there. It is on the wrong side of the Bay of Bengal from the Arakan. AP114 was a Northrop built Mk.I to "British Contract" (Peter C. Smith "Vengeance!"): ie we bought the thing (about $63,000), "Lend-Lease" came in later.
Never flew it, but flew AP119 on 110 at Khumbirgram a few times. 21 October 1943 attacked Kalemyo, log says "1 bomb hang-up", doesn't say what I did with it and can't remember now. 28 October, "long haul" to Tintha, logged 3.10 - refuelled Palel on way home. Palel was on the Imphal plain, but the great battles would be fought there only next year.
As to aircraft itself, note smaller white centre (RAF) to roundel. It has a retractible tailwheel - when, of all the aircraft in the world, a Vengeance least needed one. No bombs visible. Masked two-gun fit in wing centre section. No nose art - so never been on a squadron and no letters. Will continue rest of flight in this attitude, pilot can't see much in front.
Was foxed by spot 2 o'clock on cowling, then realised magazine put it on.
PAGE 27 TEXT
"...the Vengeance ultimatately evolved to a British specification..." It wasn't quite like that. The French had ordered the thing from Vultee, but the first had not flown when France collapsed. Vultee then had a production line going and no customer in sight (USAAC wanted nothing to do with it). They were very glad indeed when we came along and took over the French contract.
"Evolved" ? - all they would have had to do would've been to swap the metric instrumentation for imperial. The British contract required numbers in excess of Vultee's capacity to build. Northrop had spare capacity and built a lot of them (including our specimen on page 27). USAAC took a few for trial: their pilots turned it down for poor front visibilty. The USAAC gave it their number A-31, but lost interest after that. But beggars can't be choosers, we had to fly them poor visibility or not. The A-31 became our Vengeance Mks. I-II-III. All look and fly exactly alike: all have the 2x 0.303s in the back. All have zero Angle of Attack.
Then USAAC tried again, asked Vultee to put a 4° AoA on the wing. Which made them better aeroplanes, but worse dive-bombers. Called the A-35, the USAAC were still unsatisfied, gave up and palmed them off on us * as the Vengeance Mk.IV. All carry a single 0.50 in the back, and 2x (or 3x) 0.50s in each wing. I have heard rumours of four-gun wings, but nothing more. Note that the size of the gun ports is always the same: it is just the diameter of the blast tubes down which the guns (buried far back in the wings) have to fire. Both in UK and Oz, the only use found for them was as target tugs.
Note *: and the French, and the Brazilians, and maybe others. No one (AFAIK) could do much good with them. The Camden Museum has a Mk.I pretending to be a Mk.IV. (Why, God only knows !) Will Post this now before gremlin gets to it. More on Page 27 Text later.
Before I go: two little tips (which, for all I know, may only work for me). I have a touch-screen laptop. Every so often touch-screen downs tools. No sweat, close lid, wait for lights to go out, lift lid and hit start , normal service resumed (most times).
Brand new one, was working with little job involving Superglue. No fool he, Danny has clear thin medical plastic gloves on. Job done, no spillage, glove still on R.hand, starts on laptop. Dabs finger on screen, cursor appears every time without fail. With bare finger or little pointer thing, was very hit or miss. Now "every time a winner" - and no paw marks on screen !
D.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,812
Received 137 Likes
on
64 Posts
Touch screens can be funny. I put a new screen-protector on my iPad ... its a bit think, and 'taos' can have variable results.
Which has nothing to do with the topic
Which has nothing to do with the topic
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀
Posts: 1,994
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An interesting comment made on Daves link in regards to the RAAFs issues with operating the Vultee, "If I remember rightly, didn't it also suffer from very high oil use which limited it's usefulness due to strains on the supply chain?".
How long could a squadron operate for on a Dakota load of oil? They used them to good effect in at least one battle against the Japanese in New Guinea, routing them. But they then staged from the inland field they helped capture. So if the above is true it might help explain why they were sparingly used.
How long could a squadron operate for on a Dakota load of oil? They used them to good effect in at least one battle against the Japanese in New Guinea, routing them. But they then staged from the inland field they helped capture. So if the above is true it might help explain why they were sparingly used.
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: eastcoastoz
Age: 76
Posts: 1,699
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Another gem, Danny. Thank you.
The thing with the VV as far as Oz was concerned, was that, by the time Consolidated Vultee/Northrop had ramped up their
production, the war had moved on a bit.
We then had shiploads of them arriving at our ports - whether we wanted them or not.
'Well, thank you anyway, but we're in the market for lots of target-tugs' (not).
p.s. Hempy .. Our posts crossed. Which battle was that - can you refresh my memory?
Also, Wright engines using oil? .. That's what they were primarily designed to do, I was told. (smiley).
.
The thing with the VV as far as Oz was concerned, was that, by the time Consolidated Vultee/Northrop had ramped up their
production, the war had moved on a bit.
We then had shiploads of them arriving at our ports - whether we wanted them or not.
'Well, thank you anyway, but we're in the market for lots of target-tugs' (not).
p.s. Hempy .. Our posts crossed. Which battle was that - can you refresh my memory?
Also, Wright engines using oil? .. That's what they were primarily designed to do, I was told. (smiley).
.
Last edited by Stanwell; 10th Aug 2016 at 21:04.