And now the Live Warbirds!!
- Paolo Tagliaferri, GregP, Kutscha and 3 others like this
Jump to content
Posted by Stony on 27 January 2017 - 07:18 PM
And now the Live Warbirds!!
Posted by Paolo Tagliaferri on 21 January 2017 - 01:24 PM
I am working to upgrade the forum so that it will be available as a default over a secure connection (HTTPS)
This is usually visible in your browser bar - For example in Google Chrome you will see a green padlock icon and the "Secure" wording.
What does this mean?
Keeping it simple, it means that when you write and post content on this forum, it will be transmitted in encrypted format over the public internet. This means that, generally speaking, people cannot spy on your content. T
This is probably not very important for the discussions itself (which are public already) - but it is quite important when you type your e-mail address (which you may not want someone to "steal" while the data transits between your computer and this website) or even your passwords.
If you are still confused, have a look at this video. It's a bit old but it explains it quite simply. We never ask credit card information anyway here on warbirdsforum, or sell anything, but it still applies to your personal information such as e-mail and passwords.
Hey! Some pages do not have the green lock? Is it safe?
In most cases, it is very liklely be that the forum users have inserted external resources in posts (such as images) that do NOT support SSL/TLS (i.e. linked via HTTP and not HTTPS). The browser therefore will alert you that some of the content on the page did not come over an encrypted tunnel, so it's generally deemed "unsafe". It's nothing to worry about in most cases.
Remember: at warbirdsforum, we never ask you to disclose publicly personal details, credit cards or other financial data in any case. The only data we store about you is the details you provided voluntarily when you registered to participate to the forum, or that you update on your public profile.
What do I have to do?
NOTHING. Continue to enjoy the forum as before. If you run into issues, please let me know and I will look into it.
Safe browsing everyone!
Posted by Kutscha on 11 January 2017 - 10:14 PM
Like Greg said there have been a few,
airshows at RCAF Rockcliff - Sopwith Snipe and a Spitfire doing a low level pass almost cutting the grass with its prop, Gloden Hawks coming over the bluff one by one (silence then a roar) The Aviation and Space Museum is there now.
grew up about 1.5 mi from the end of the runway at RCAF Uplands so saw all kinds of a/c > Lancaster, Sabres, CF100s, CF104s (seen a CF104 go vertical til out of sight once - heard roar as it was taken off then silence then an almighty roar as the pilot got the engine relit and went AB)
On the interstate in Georgia almost drove off the road when a B-52 came up from behind (never saw it coming) at low level - what a noise as it passed over!!
Posted by GregP on 11 January 2017 - 08:11 AM
My best experience was at Chino, too.
I took flying lessons in 1968, but had to wait untli 1981 to get my license, and life got in the way of flying some 5 - 6 year later. Pan ahead to 2006 and I found myself in So Cal (Irvine) and decided I was close enough to finally go see the Planes of Fame. I went out one Sunday and wandered through the museum and went to my first volunteer meeting some 2 weeks later. Been a volunteer ever since.
I met Dr. Ken Wagoner about 2 years later and became friendly at Flo's Cafe. Later I saw him several times at the musem and started going by his hangar when I chanced across it. He had (and has) a BEAUTIFUL P-51D called Lady Alice. Spotless ... and not a speck of paint out of place. When I walked in and said hi, he immedialtely put me in the pilot's seat and told me not to move any switches as it was primed and ready to fly. I didn't.
Some 2 years later I was in the museum restoration area and he came walking past my workbench on a visit. We had talked casually for a some of that time, and he mentioned he was going on a flight a bit later to practice for his bieniial flight review ... and that I could ride along if I wanted to.
Naturally, I beat him back to his hangar and he took me on a 2-hour P-51 ride that was an absolute blast. He practiced approach and departure stalls, and did some ground reference maneuvers.We flew up around Temecula, then went over to Big Bear for a higher-speed descent to the lake. You can't put the nose of a P-51 down very far without getting somewhat faster! On the way he unstrapped, leaned over one way, and allowed me to lean way forward and take the stick for a bit. It flew EXACTLY like I suspected it would after flying several simulators, and we had a great time going slowly back to Chino over Diamond Bar and the general area. I said slowly, but it was still close to 215 knots!
Now THAT was pretty neat. He is still one of the friendliest and happiest guys I know and will gladly show anyone his beautiful toys (the P-51 isn't the only plane in the hangar). It was a rather high point for me along with getting rides in two different Planes of Fame Musuem aircraft (B-25J and P-40N) over the years of restoration when they were doing maintenance hops or flights to other venues. I didn't get to handle the controls of either of them, but had two more great times flying, that's for sure! Meanwhile, I'm doing aircraft restoration on Saturdays. Mostly sheet metal, some machining, and a bit of painting now and then.
All great fun. And there are NO people around the museum who aren't friendly, good people. It makes for a great place to spend some productive time very weekend, that's for sure.
Posted by Heräkulman Ruhtinas on 29 December 2016 - 09:42 PM
Here is a treat:
Picture of FR-167, the single plane converted to retractable undercarriage.
EDIT: Actually, as this was built in Finland, it was originally built with retractable undercarriage and later, after damage due to a landing mishap, it was converted to fixed undercarriage. Details details
Posted by Romantic Technofreak on 01 December 2016 - 06:28 PM
I would like to share some pictures with you.
#1 (source: Flickr account of *Buidseach*). I especially like this picture. P-36s escorting Fairey Battles:
BTW, are you aware that the P-36 probably is the most colorfully camouflaged aircraft of WWII? Well, one should include pre-war experiments and remote contributors. The USAAF employed an experimental camouflage on the P-36, including even light rosé! So seen (at least suspected) in the 3rd aircraft of
#2 (shown in happyscale-modellbau.blogspot.de, there are other sources too):
These lined-up aircraft also performed formation flights. The first one is easily to be found in
#3 (source sorrily not recorded):
#4 (source: *Mam121061*'s bucket in Photobucket):
A single shot of the leading aircraft is also pictured in
#5 (source: *Kspectre*'s bucket in Photobucket):
The most "eye-catching camouflage", this being a contradiction within itself, was employed in the Vichy French air force, which gained a number of P-36s. They had to paint the engine cowling and rudder in red and yellow stripes, probably to avoid being attacked by one of the warfaring sides.
As there are no good original colour pictures of this, I show you a computer graphic.
#6 (souce: blog for worldofwarplanes.com):
#7 (source: given) shows how this aircraft looks on a contemporary black/white picture:
Let me close with an example from the Imperial Iranian air force, which shows an unique pattern either.
#8 (a model built by the owner of happyscale-modellbau.blogspot.de):
Hope you enjoyed, and regards,
Posted by Romantic Technofreak on 11 October 2016 - 05:14 PM
Once you say it correctly, your toungue will never operate properly again ...
Very well spoken, Greg. More, I fear of getting crazy while trying... and beginning to think in such a language...
OT, and as normally we should leave politics out here, I mean there could be something done for world peace. I don't know how tight the ties between Finland and New Zealand are, but I mean there is always room for an improvement. The following things could be done:
1) Re-open the bar in Äteritsiputeritsipuolilautatsijänkä.
2) Create a bar in Taumatawhakatangihangakoauauotamateaturipukakapikimaungahoronukupokaiwhenuakitanatahu.
3) Perform twinning between these two places. Travelings by politicians and normal people, frequenting the bars, and trying to speak the names on a lot of alcohol consumed.
And, the most important thing: do this all on state money, so the bars won't close down again. Our states waste so much money, e.g. on turkeys like the F-35 or the A400M, so they could spend a comparedly little amount for useful things. Ususally I don't drink much alcohol, but I confess, if world peace required it, I would give my liver for it.
Posted by Armand on 09 February 2017 - 12:58 AM
Posted by CORSNING on 08 February 2017 - 06:54 PM
I did say A5M but at first I thought it was a P-26
Your first thought was absolutely correct! The dead give-a-ways were:
Straight mid-wing. The Mitsubish A5M has a low bent wing.
Larger wheel spatting. The A5M spats are much smaller and closer fitting.
Horizontal tail leading edge. The P-26 is a straight incline the A5M is a more
The upper fuselage is much different also.
And yes I named 49 out of 49 correctly but for No.10 I punched in the Vought.
No sense in them giving me a CORRECT ANSWER that really isn't.
And that is how I see that, Jeff
Posted by Ricky on 11 January 2017 - 08:47 AM
Posted by F7Ftigercatlover on 11 January 2017 - 12:08 AM
For a lot of us here aviation has been a big deal for most of our lives. Many grew up around aviation, others found out about it later in life, or maybe one incredible experience made us want to learn more. For me it was a combo of all 3, My father was pilot and went to the Reno championship air races form 1973-1986 every year so he poured a lot of knowledge onto me when I was a kid. By the time I was about 8 years old I really began to dive deeper into aviation history, specifically WWII air power, the TV series Dogfights and countless books that my father gave me increased my interest and knowledge in a huge way and it has only gotten bigger since. But the one moment I can say I didn't just want to learn about aviation but pursue a career came when I was 9 years old. It was May of 2009 and it was me and my dad's first trip to the Planes of Fame air show and museum. We had been at the air show since 7:30AM on Sunday but our flight back to phoenix was at 4PM only an hour after the end of the show. The Last flight is a massive grouping of 40 or 50 warbirds flying all at the same time, that was at first the real reason why we were there was to see that marvelous sight. Unfortunately if we were to get to the airport on time we would have to leave about 45 minutes early, I was disappointed, angry, and really devastated. As me and my dad walked back to our car in the grassy parking lot my dad excitedly grabbed me by the shoulder and turned me around and said, "Look, do you see that Sea Fury it's going to fly right over us!" The Sanders family Sea Fury was just finishing it's flight demonstration and in fact was heading right towards us at 400mph while flying at about 70 feet. It ripped right over us, with it's wingtip smoke falling on us. The whole experience made up for my disappointment, and that was the moment I knew I had to fly. Does anyone else have a similar story? I'd love to hear it
Posted by GregP on 22 December 2016 - 08:00 PM
First, hi F7Ftigercatlover, go back into the briefing room and look at your introductory thread. I posted 3 or 4 videos of Tigercats flying aerobatics at our airshows.
To the thread, from my long time interest the USAAF was WAY oversized after the war ended with tens of thousands of aircraft more than we had pilots in service. Naturally, a long war is EXPENSIVE. So, they looked around and decided that there were too many airplanes. Many types were "retired" from front-line service. Some were issued to Air National Guard units (reserve forces) around the various states. That way, the states would assume funding for maintenance, personnel, and operations unless the units were called up into active service.
In the Navy, they retired the Hellcat quickly for some reason, and retained the F4U Corsair. I believe the Cordairs were by and large newer, and were still being improved, and had a good supply of spares in the logistics pipeline. So we had Corsairs in active service and some in the Navy Reserves, and the Hellcats got largely scrapped with some winding up on the surplus market. Some went into private hands. TBMs, flying boats, and other bomber types wound up fighting forrest fires with the addition of tanks instead of torpedos or bombs. Some were converted into executive transports, like the Howard 250 and 350 (250 on top). See below. There were others like the On Mark Invader, too. Believe it or not, I've seen "Executive" versions of the B-25!
The USAAF knew jets were the future and quickly after the war had the P-80 that became the F-80 and rapidly also the F-84. The USAAF saw the F-84 as the fighter-bomber of the future and sent a lot of P-47s to National Guard units as well as selling many to other countries for their post-war air forces. Ditto the "extra" P-51 Mustangs. South America got a lot of ex-USAAF aircraft for their immediate post-war Air Forces, and could therefore take their time developing newer airplanes. Argentina used a lot of our WWII aircraft while they were trying to develop jets such as the Ta-183-like FMA IAe 33 Pulqui II with Kurt Tank. Plenty of other stories to go around.
The P-47 was a high-maintenance item that was OK as front-line equipment, but not so justifiable if being operated as a second-line aircraft. By second-line, I mean, obsolete or combat-weary. Once the maintenance hours per flight hour start to rise somewhat, the expense of operating a P-47 is enormous. It definitely needs a crew and parts to keep flying. If active on the front line (first-line aircraft), it makes sense. If not, then ...
Our museum (Planes of Fame) operates a P-47G and it is much less expensive to operate than a fully-functional Thunderbolt because the turbocharger has been removed and we have no armament or armor in it. It is many thousands of pounds lighter than in stock military trim. So the engine doesn't need the turbo system tweaked after every flight and isn't working nearly so hard as a fully functional P-47 engine would be. The airframe is fine but many systems were complex. If you remove the complex systems, it becomes MUCH cheaper to fly ... more like a normal R-2800 fighter. Of course if you DO that, it really isn't a combat-ready P-47 anymore, is it?
Likewise they sent a LOT of bombers into outdoor storage at many locations and retired many medium bombers, leaving just a few as "hacks" for the pilots to use logging time.
Anyway, my take on it is basically that we downsized and had to choose which equipment to continue using. I believe we chose the newer equipment with the most numerous recent spares to retain and rapidly divested ourselves of the rest. If we had 3 aircraft doing one job, we chose one and released the others. The Air Force upper brass and secretary's office probably made the choices, while the Navy brass and secretary of the Navy probably made their choices for the Navy and Marines.
Posted by Kutscha on 03 December 2016 - 10:03 PM
You need to get more Armand.
Posted by GregP on 02 December 2016 - 11:02 AM
My big question that nobody has yet answered is whether the 3D printed metal parts could ever be airworthy. Most aircratf metal is VERY selective. When we restore, we mostly use 2024-T3 Aluminum for skin. We can also use 2024-O soft Aluminum, form it, and then heat treat it to make it into -T3 hardness. Some parts are 7075 and some are other alloys. The strength requirments demand aviation-grade alloys.
If they plane to just display these aircraft, there is no problem.
If they plan to FLY these 3D printed parts, I predict some dire consequences unless they 3D print in wax and use a lost-wax method to cast a part in a proper alloy and heat treat it to the proper hardness for aviation strength and corrosion resistance.
So far, we have restored an old Bell YP-59A Airacomet with proper aviation-grade Aluminum alloys, and properly heat-treated parts that were made with O-Aluminum. Personally, I'd not fly a plane that had 3D printed parts in structural places. Canopies endure a LOT of stress in flight. The stress is all outward and the airflow is trying to suck the canopy off the aircraft. When we needed to construct a canopy frame, the tubing was steel and we welded on some steel gussets that we could attach the Plexi to with bolts. We needed a canopy bow and we made one out a 3 pieces. The top cap was machined by our small group (3 of us) out of a solid piece of 7075 and we carefully removed material until it was the correct shape. 7075 is already hardened, so no further strengthening was needed.
The canopy jettison mechanism was robbed from a Grumman Tigercat, courtesy of Steve Hinton. It was a small bit too thick and I machined off about 0.23" in overall thickness to make it fit. Everything else was fabricated from 2024-T3 or -T6 Aluminum. We didn't do a Finite Element Analysis on the Emergency Canopy Release, but the Airacoment is also not going to see speeds as high as even a standard Tigercat can make. Our piece started off pretty stout and we only removed 230 mills of thickness from a piece that was over 4 inches thick, and everyone who has experience at stress analysis says we will never see a problem.
Wonder if we could say the same had we 3D printed a scintered-metal part? To date, I don't know anyone who can tell me and the testing of the part would be VERY expensive to certify it for flight. Making a 3D model to be scanned and read into a CNC machine program is one thing. Flying a 3D printed part is quite another. My guess is that if they plan to fly it, they print a bit oversize, sand it smooth, and scan it into a machining code program for rendering on a CNC machining center from Aviation grade alloys.
Posted by flying kiwi on 15 September 2016 - 11:14 AM
This is becoming horribly reminiscent of neoconshooter, with his unique facts. All I'm getting from these discussions are strongly stated falsehoods and distastefully stated opinions, with the odd fact thrown in.
Today I read about Mustangs on free sweeps over Germany before 44. This just didn't happen. When I asked about this - no reply so far.
My suspicions were raised when I wrote that one of the VK engines was strange in having exhausts both inside and outside the V. Our friend seemed to take a while to grasp what I was actually saying, giving examples of hot tunnels, Harley V-twins, and Chrysler 6s. None of his examples fitted the criteria. He has not exhibited great reading comprehension. As for telling us about mouths he's filled.................we do not need that.
I won't speculate on why he acts like he does, but it is very tiring. We have had meticulously researched posts in this forum, not least by Edgar. This is not in the same tradition.
Posted by Chino Kid on 22 July 2016 - 12:48 PM
Here's my treatment of the Red Baron RB-51 racer with the Rolls Royce Griffin engine. It was being built and tested at Chino while I was there. This drawing was done in a large format in full color and framed. I gave it to Steve Hinton just prior to his tragic wreck in Reno that destroyed the aircraft and almost killed Hinton.
Wish I had a scan of the original.
img050 (2450 x 1780).jpg 147.8KB 0 downloads
Posted by Chino Kid on 17 July 2016 - 01:18 AM
One of the things I used to do to while away the time when I worked in the ticket trailer of the Museum was drawing cartoons of people and aircraft I saw. Over the years I developed those drawings into posters that I sold or gave away. I have a few of the old ones left so I thought I'd share the few I have. Here's the first.
Skyshark (2550 x 1853).jpg 189.57KB 0 downloads
Posted by flying kiwi on 12 March 2016 - 10:02 PM
But it didn't meet the spec and the competition did. If the decision is already made, why in the world have a competition? The people who should be picking the fighter are actual service pilots. Train maybe 10 to fly both and have them cast a secret ballot. The winner is the winner, no appeal, no re-test.
I think it might be worthwhile giving the maintenance guys a vote as well. Politicians should be kept as far away as possible.
Posted by flying kiwi on 20 December 2015 - 09:05 AM
I can only be beaten if we have a poster living in the Shaky Isles. I'm still an economic refugee in Australia.
Posted by Paolo Tagliaferri on 28 November 2015 - 07:41 PM
I've recently been to Warsaw and had a chance to stop by the Muzeum Wojska Polskiego (Polish Army Museum). There are quite a few items in display here, including World War Two planes and tanks. Inside you can also find an interesting exhibition about the Battle of Britain (with a focus on the Polish airmen contribution).
As I go trough the pictures, I will be uploading them at this location - It does take some time to go through them!
I hope you like it!
Community Forum Software by IP.Board
Licensed to: Paolo Tagliaferri