Beverley Woes
I understand from a post on X from the museum that this is the provisional plan for disassembly:
One of the questions was whether the flaps can remain attached, as the wing centre section (mounted transversely on a trailer) would then be wider than a certain max width that can be accommodated without removing lampposts and such. Only heard that through the grapevine though.
One of the questions was whether the flaps can remain attached, as the wing centre section (mounted transversely on a trailer) would then be wider than a certain max width that can be accommodated without removing lampposts and such. Only heard that through the grapevine though.
I'm sure that Rhône Valley story is quite true! A bit like the Swordfish which lumbered off one of HM's carriers into a stiff headwind - as it climbed the headwind increased and the carrier overtook the Swordfish, much to the crew's chagrin!
The following users liked this post:
Mistral blowing, homeward bound up the valley at 8k-ish, in and out of cloud tops, with a full moon. 10 minutes behind us was a Breguet Deux-Ponts, same level. Our position reports were becoming amended more and more frequently as the Mistral took effect. Making one of my frequent 'look-outs' from the astrodome, we momentarily broke cloud and I was immediately dazzled by a brilliant light between the tail-fins. Unhinged brain fart instantly decided that this must be the Deux-Ponts, about to smash into us from behind ! ,,, yes ! ... even now I can't understand what prompted that particular idiocy.!
THE BEVERLEY – ANOTHER THOROUGHBRED
A famous aircraft designer saw a Dutch Barn blow past in a gale. The basic idea of the Beverley was born at that moment.
The original design of the machine was intended to fulfil a single-seat fighter specification, but as full power was required to taxi the aircraft forward at a slow walking pace, another engine was added. The resulting increase in all-up weight necessitated the addition of two further engines to enable it to move at all. This had increased the general dimensions somewhat, and work was often delayed for several days at a time while the aircraft was utilised as a spare hangar for visiting aircraft.
This state of affairs continued for so long that by the time the prototype was ready for flight all other new types of aircraft were jet powered. This rather embarrassed the designer. Fearing to appear behind the times, he had the propellers placed much higher than he had originally intended in the hope that they would not be noticed. This entailed raising the mainplane and fuselage sides. Subsequently the Production Manager raised the roof – which accounts for the immense height of the machine.
As no adequate runway was available, the undercarriage was adapted to take locomotive wheels and its first take-off was from both tracks of the Brough – Hull railway line. It was in fact airborne by the time it reached Beverley – hence its name. A conversion kit for this purpose is still in existence. While the aircraft is in use in this role, the flight deck should at all times be referred to as the ‘Driver’s Cab’ and the V.H.F. should be re-crystallised to include the frequencies of Crew Signal Box and the Head Office of the National Union of Railwaymen.
Spinning the aircraft is not recommended, as the torque reaction involved causes the Earth to rotate in the opposite direction to the spin, to the accompaniment of terse notes from Greenwich Observatory. The aircraft is, however, extremely versatile, and may be employed in many roles, particularly those that do not include flying or movement of any kind.
It is extremely amenable to modification: for example wind-tunnel tests have shown that the wings could be placed at the bottom and the wheels at the top without any appreciable drop in performance.
Taken in all, the Beverley is an ideal aircraft for a civilian enthusiast with a million pounds, a private oil-well, and a complete abhorrence of the rules of flying.
Anon, from RAF Abingdon, Berkshire, UK (where some of these aircraft were based), circa 1963.
A famous aircraft designer saw a Dutch Barn blow past in a gale. The basic idea of the Beverley was born at that moment.
The original design of the machine was intended to fulfil a single-seat fighter specification, but as full power was required to taxi the aircraft forward at a slow walking pace, another engine was added. The resulting increase in all-up weight necessitated the addition of two further engines to enable it to move at all. This had increased the general dimensions somewhat, and work was often delayed for several days at a time while the aircraft was utilised as a spare hangar for visiting aircraft.
This state of affairs continued for so long that by the time the prototype was ready for flight all other new types of aircraft were jet powered. This rather embarrassed the designer. Fearing to appear behind the times, he had the propellers placed much higher than he had originally intended in the hope that they would not be noticed. This entailed raising the mainplane and fuselage sides. Subsequently the Production Manager raised the roof – which accounts for the immense height of the machine.
As no adequate runway was available, the undercarriage was adapted to take locomotive wheels and its first take-off was from both tracks of the Brough – Hull railway line. It was in fact airborne by the time it reached Beverley – hence its name. A conversion kit for this purpose is still in existence. While the aircraft is in use in this role, the flight deck should at all times be referred to as the ‘Driver’s Cab’ and the V.H.F. should be re-crystallised to include the frequencies of Crew Signal Box and the Head Office of the National Union of Railwaymen.
Spinning the aircraft is not recommended, as the torque reaction involved causes the Earth to rotate in the opposite direction to the spin, to the accompaniment of terse notes from Greenwich Observatory. The aircraft is, however, extremely versatile, and may be employed in many roles, particularly those that do not include flying or movement of any kind.
It is extremely amenable to modification: for example wind-tunnel tests have shown that the wings could be placed at the bottom and the wheels at the top without any appreciable drop in performance.
Taken in all, the Beverley is an ideal aircraft for a civilian enthusiast with a million pounds, a private oil-well, and a complete abhorrence of the rules of flying.
Anon, from RAF Abingdon, Berkshire, UK (where some of these aircraft were based), circa 1963.
The following 11 users liked this post by Nugget90:
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,035
Received 2,902 Likes
on
1,243 Posts
Trouble was the Hendon one wasn’t theirs.
Gnome de PPRuNe
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Too close to Croydon for comfort
Age: 60
Posts: 12,634
Received 299 Likes
on
167 Posts
Test pilot Timber Woods was alleged to have turned to the co pilot and said "well, my side's airborne - is yours?"
And to follow your comment on the first take-off, a Beverley pilot I knew told me that he once took off from a grass aerodrome with the parking brake still on - with no noticeable loss of performance!!
Last edited by Nugget90; 7th Apr 2024 at 07:47. Reason: Spelling error
Gentleman Aviator
… and using an in-to-wind dual carriageway as a nav line feature in a Bell 47 - sooo embarrassing. (70 knots flat out was it?)
Re. 'Timber' Woods, I had the pleasure of watching his retirement flight at Brough. when we went to pick up one of ours after a 'heavy' check. Three dimensional skill and intimate knowledge of variou building heights made for a unique display
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Under the clag EGKA
Posts: 1,026
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You had to hand it to the pilots. I saw a Beverley land at shoreham air display probably early sixties late fifties. Shorter runway than today and grass. It got almost to the ditch then reversed thrust. It taxied right past us. There was little separation between the display and spectators back then. Wonderful display from the Black Arrows too.
Technically it was an 'Orphan" parked outside . Internal structural corrosion was getting very serious and the real fear was that if something fell off it could do bad damage , or worse, to whatever was below........
It was not a decision made lightly.
It was not a decision made lightly.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,035
Received 2,902 Likes
on
1,243 Posts
W
post 16
Beverley
Beverley
The Hendon Beverly story is not a pretty one indeed. Basically the RAF retained ownership of the aircraft after it landed at Hendon and didn't offer it to the museum until it was completely rotten and beyond saving. The museum therefore got a corroded airframe which had been sitting on their doorstep for quite a while and it was a choice of scrapping or a multi-million $ restoration for which there were no funds. An understandable decision but a shame nonetheless.
Looking back through my photo files I have just realised that the 50th anniversary of the last Beverley flight has just passed. I may have posted some of these before but here are a few of XB259 on or just after its arrival at Paull airfield on 23rd March 1974.
The following 2 users liked this post by walbut:
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: England
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Post 26.
The author of this entertaining piece was not the ubiquitous 'ANON' but a Flight Engineer by the name of Gerry Hatt.
Gerry was one of the early Flt Engs to join the Beverley force around 1959/69 when the powers that be concluded that, even with responsibility for raising and lowering the undercarrieage being removed from the co-pilot's duties, the tasks of fuel management, throttles, pitch, torque meters etc. were still too much for him and they added a flt eng to the crew to help out.
This piece was very typical of Gerry's sense of humour and style of writing and reflected his quick wit and eye for the ridiculous. He wrote extensively about the Beverley, much of it being published in 'Max Torque', the house magazine of the still-extant Beverley Association.
The author of this entertaining piece was not the ubiquitous 'ANON' but a Flight Engineer by the name of Gerry Hatt.
Gerry was one of the early Flt Engs to join the Beverley force around 1959/69 when the powers that be concluded that, even with responsibility for raising and lowering the undercarrieage being removed from the co-pilot's duties, the tasks of fuel management, throttles, pitch, torque meters etc. were still too much for him and they added a flt eng to the crew to help out.
This piece was very typical of Gerry's sense of humour and style of writing and reflected his quick wit and eye for the ridiculous. He wrote extensively about the Beverley, much of it being published in 'Max Torque', the house magazine of the still-extant Beverley Association.
