|
Thank you Dora. A comprehensive brief on colour schemes.
I was not aware when the blue bands were painted on. |
I don't doubt for one moment that the blown canopy is better though.... vmcdemo, cocerning your bubble canopy, the ability to retro-fit the original canopy depends on whether the current canopy was obtained from Britain or if it is a Canadian canopy, the installation of which would have required a new windshield as well. |
some aircraft would have "skipped" one or even two of the schemes, https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....3663c1fb04.jpg WG478 with Leeds UAS, photographed at the same time as WP915 (post #8). WG478 went to Leeds UAS in 1962, so I'd say this is when the photo was taken, i.e. just before getting the DayGlo strips. The aircraft is overall silver with painted panels. Note the odd shaped "G" in the serial too. I've often thought of submitting this photo on the Caption Competition thread! https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....bf6e412972.jpg A 1965 photo, still with Leeds UAS, still in silver but now with the painted strips. Now the "G" is the more familiar font. https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....27d68c69cc.jpg Now in overall LAG. WG478 from either PFS or 2 FTS - it went to PFS on 24.9.1969, unit re-designated 2 FTS on 16.1.1970, but noted as a "Blue Chips" aircraft in the first R/W/LAG scheme at the BoB Display at Coltishall on 11.9.1970! |
Dora-9
Well that settles it, Grey and orange stripes it is! Looks good! While everyone is probably correct about the bubble canopy and I will find out shortly, I remember my short time in the "birdcage" fondly. |
I am still searching for the manual, it is on a hard drive somewhere,,, BTW look at the silver yellow scheme too.
|
https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....1d4ce4fb8.jpeg
And going back to the birdcage! https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....8fba42f59.jpeg As it should be https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....9ec5e3665.jpeg 👍 |
It looks better already! Now where's the grey paint? ;)
I see BNH behind, in the last picture. Are you currently in Canada? |
I was once told that A&AEE evaluated the blown canopy as a possible retrofit, but recommended against it after the one they were trying out cracked while the aircraft was airborne. Anyone heard similar?
|
Hi VMCDemo,
Slightly off topic, but if you are considering buying a Chipmunk check the maintenance records for the undercarriage mounting x-ray inspection TNS-165. This is a repeat inspection (every 6 years I think), most are cracked but only need to be monitored for crack propagation. I no longer have a copy of the TNS so I can't tell you what the limits are. There is also TNS-157, another 6 year repeat x-ray inspection on the tailplane structure front spar joints, I don't recall ever finding one cracked but it does require removal of the tailplane and elevators as a complete assembly to carry out the inspection. Neither of the above would be a deal breaker but it would be better to check they've been done recently to avoid any unexpected costs. Good luck with the purchase ! And if you do buy it, we want photos :) |
Webby737,
Yep, I have in fact bought her. The 'birdcage" canopy together with a replacement windshield has been put on at my request. Although in Canadian guise she is in fact a British Chipmunk and It has been very well looked after. She is one of only 10 in the US as Standard Category by the FAA and not experimental. When I have flown her back to NJ I'll take more pics and not this year but next she will get a new British paint job. Thank you Dave |
Fantastic Dave !
Good luck with it, I look forward to seeing the pics of the new paint job. Webby |
Martin - no, never heard that one. There were some concerns that there no equivalent of the jettisonable side panels, so initially (until a crash axe was fitted) there was a requirement to take off and land with the canopy partially open. This must have been fun in a Canadian winter! The other issue was severe buffeting generated by the canopy when spinning, which is why these aircraft (with the blown canopy) have reduced span stalling strips.
Webby - the u/c housing X-ray requirement is every 12 years (reduced if there are cracks detected; I'm on a 6 year cycle). |
I'm on a 6 year cycle |
I42 - aha, so you're a connoisseur of ambiguous postings too?
All of me is cracking, but only my Chipmunk's u/c castings have this issue... |
I don't doubt for one moment that the blown canopy is better though... Now that I’ve used this picture in the What Aérodrome thread, I can show you how good the view from the blown canopy is. This is from the back seat! https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....ce9d6e887.jpeg |
Originally Posted by Dora-9
(Post 10617202)
Webby - the u/c housing X-ray requirement is every 12 years (reduced if there are cracks detected; I'm on a 6 year cycle). It's been many years since I did this inspection, but I remember most of them where cracked so probably the majority of Chippies are on a 6 year repeat inspection. |
but I remember most of them where cracked so probably the majority of Chippies are on a 6 year repeat inspection. |
Originally Posted by Dora-9
(Post 10618664)
I know of two accidents here where the aircraft arrived with massive vertical velocity (destroying one; badly damaging the other). Both aircraft had pre-existing cracks in the u/c leg housing, yet neither came anywhere near actually failing!
They crack from a hole and propagate to the top of the tube so the crack is contained. |
Ok Ladies and Gents,
I think I have come to the conclusion, that WP829 is going to go back to its original style of paint scheme, with a slight twist. Instead of going back to bare metal, I think we are going to use the later poly grey scheme and perhaps paint the Dayglo orange.I believe this scheme was used briefly before the Red/white/Grey. My question to all, if you're able to assist, and bear in mind the repaint isn't happening till later in 2020, am I able to get drawings, measurements of the paint scheme, as well as accurate colour palette from anywhere. Basically I'm wanting to replicate how it looked originally in the painting pictured earlier in this thread, with poly grey vs metal Thank you Dave |
Originally Posted by possel
(Post 10609051)
No one has mentioned the RN Chipmunks at Roborough. I recall (while at HQRAFSC c.1987) that we had a contract with Slingsbys to repaint a number of Chipmunks including a couple of RN ones. The delivery pilot (ex RAF) told me that he thought it was odd, when he arrived there with their first aircraft after repaint, that all the ones he could see were slightly different to the one he was in. It turned out that the Navy had repainted them at some stage and made various changes to the official drawings (which were of course the ones referenced in the contract). I think the differences incuded the colour of the canopy, the amount of red on the wingtips and the position of the roundel on the wing (but there may have been more).
We also sorted replacement aircraft (WG466 & WG486) for Gatow, as they wanted the up to date radio (I forget if that was UHF or VHF) instead of the 10 channel jobs. Then they said they wanted them in grey not red and white, so I told Shawbury to use the correct drawing but to use grey where it said "red" or "white"! WG486 is with the BBMF now; it had been repainted in black but is now in grey/dayglo. https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....fd1a9f32c6.jpg |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 14:33. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.