Jump to content
 

Little Muddle


KNP
 Share

Recommended Posts

For those of you who are interested here is the pictures of the underside of the Guards Van showing how I fitted the coupling loop.

Made from rigid 0.3mm wire and the supports from plastic strip.

 

post-8925-0-37998600-1514993702_thumb.jpg

 

post-8925-0-93014800-1514993719_thumb.jpg

 

post-8925-0-81298200-1514993730_thumb.jpg

 

As I have previously mentioned I use S & W couplings and fitting those would have removed all the nice brake gear plus it's very confined.

So just the loop was utilised but if it causes an issue when coupling I will bit the bullet and fit the whole lot - only time will tell!

 

I am still not totally sure I can as the main plate (hook and counter balance plate) will conceal the interior/weight fixing screw?

Not a major problem and I could drill an access hole through it to get to the screw (if desperate).

The body is only held on by the four buffers as they pull out and release it.

Edited by KNP
  • Like 10
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Rather than a full S&W coupling, could you utilise a long sprung bar, similar to an Alex Jackson, fixed to the middle of the underside, which could be bent to avoid the axle & brake gear, but still have the hook & drop chain of the S&W coupling?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Nice to see your name nominated for an award Kevin and needless to say, you got my vote!

 

I've never been in to steam and turn of the century countryside layouts but you and Robin have swayed my thought process into thinking I may just build one when I've finished Oak Road.

 

Best of luck  :good:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Picked up the free gift from the Daily Mail this morning

 

post-8925-0-81808400-1515878542_thumb.jpg

 

Looks like one of my next projects as my Grandson is itching for us to build it......

 

Frightening thing is, I first built this model over 50 years ago and was one of dozens of model aircraft that hung from my bedroom ceiling.

In fact, my Dad and I got it to fly (of sorts) by fixing a couple of hooks to it and letting it slide down a long radio aerial cable from my bedroom window to the bottom of the garden.

 

Funny now but such fun at the time.......

Edited by KNP
  • Like 16
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Picked up the free gift from the Daily Mail this morning

 

attachicon.gifIMG_3640.JPG

 

Looks like one of my next projects as my Grandson is itching for us to build it......

 

Frightening thing is, I first built this model over 50 years ago and was one of dozens of model aircraft that hung from my bedroom ceiling.

In fact, my Dad and I got it to fly (of sorts) by fixing a couple of hooks to it and letting it slide down a long radio aerial cable from my bedroom window to the bottom of the garden.

 

Funny now but such fun at the time.......

Far better than a Sopwith Camel...

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Picked up the free gift from the Daily Mail this morning

 

attachicon.gifIMG_3640.JPG

 

Looks like one of my next projects as my Grandson is itching for us to build it......

 

Frightening thing is, I first built this model over 50 years ago and was one of dozens of model aircraft that hung from my bedroom ceiling.

In fact, my Dad and I got it to fly (of sorts) by fixing a couple of hooks to it and letting it slide down a long radio aerial cable from my bedroom window to the bottom of the garden.

 

Funny now but such fun at the time.......

Far better than a Sopwith Camel...

Pity it’s not the Spitfire Mk XIX Photo Reconnaissance variant. Just think of the quality of the aerial photography if the trusty old Squadron Leader used that instead of his old Sopwith! :D Edited by Banger Blue
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Pity it’s not the Spitfire Mk XIX Photo Reconnaissance variant. Just think of the quality of the aerial photography if the trusty old Squadron Leader used that instead of his old Sopwith! :D

Let me know when it's needed - I have built a model for my Flight Simulator.  The trouble is that I can't find 'Little Muddle' on my maps :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Far better than a Sopwith Camel...

 

Now, now I used to work for Sir Tom back in the '70s. He took us all to Farnborough Air Show and lunch in the Hawker Siddeley marque when the Jump Jets were new. Four of them lined up in front and did a bow.......made the hairs on the back of your neck stand up. Whatever happened to our aircraft industry? 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Now, now I used to work for Sir Tom back in the '70s. He took us all to Farnborough Air Show and lunch in the Hawker Siddeley marque when the Jump Jets were new. Four of them lined up in front and did a bow.......made the hairs on the back of your neck stand up. Whatever happened to our aircraft industry? 

 

I remember seeing that on tele and being pretty impressed; the show was broadcast live in those days, national pride and all that I suppose.  

 

Not an aviation expert but having built Airfix Spitfires and Camels in my time I can tell you that the Spit is a 5 minute job while the biplane takes a bit more time and care.  I would have thought that the rusty old Squadron Leader would be far better able to take good photos from his Sopwith Camel than a Spit, which would be going far too fast and which he cannot lean out of the side of for the best angles; I suspect that the Sopwith's radial engine provides a smoother platform for photography in terms of vibration than the Merlin straight piston engine; he can also let the aircraft fly itself for a short time while he gets his shot rather than having to constantly adjust for the Merlin's torque.

 

And he doesn't have to worry about cleaning the windows!

 

I have a chum with a Rotax powered microlight; it makes quite a good photographic platform with it's big side windows, but I have to agree not to publish any of the photos anywhere; apparently the CAA takes a dim view of this sort of thing with amateur pilots who could be construed as being involved in commercial photography for profit!

 

As for what happened to our aircraft industry, we couldn't afford one and had to go in with the Europeans, who couldn't afford theirs either, to compete with the Merkans, and now the Brazilians have got a look in as well.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

I remember seeing that on tele and being pretty impressed; the show was broadcast live in those days, national pride and all that I suppose.  

 

Not an aviation expert but having built Airfix Spitfires and Camels in my time I can tell you that the Spit is a 5 minute job while the biplane takes a bit more time and care.  I would have thought that the rusty old Squadron Leader would be far better able to take good photos from his Sopwith Camel than a Spit, which would be going far too fast and which he cannot lean out of the side of for the best angles; I suspect that the Sopwith's radial engine provides a smoother platform for photography in terms of vibration than the Merlin straight piston engine; he can also let the aircraft fly itself for a short time while he gets his shot rather than having to constantly adjust for the Merlin's torque.

 

And he doesn't have to worry about cleaning the windows!

 

I have a chum with a Rotax powered microlight; it makes quite a good photographic platform with it's big side windows, but I have to agree not to publish any of the photos anywhere; apparently the CAA takes a dim view of this sort of thing with amateur pilots who could be construed as being involved in commercial photography for profit!

 

As for what happened to our aircraft industry, we couldn't afford one and had to go in with the Europeans, who couldn't afford theirs either, to compete with the Merkans, and now the Brazilians have got a look in as well.

The Sopwith Camel wins hands down- the Spitfire is unable to photograph 1935- the shutter speed is too fast!

Link to post
Share on other sites

"As for what happened to our aircraft industry,"

 

worth watching "Hot Jets, Cold War" by the BBC, might still be available.  Every kind of jet you could hope for, and some scary stories to go with it. 

Did you know that v-bombers were sitting on runways, plugged into the national aviation fuel supply, laden with H-bombs, and their engines running? 

No, neither did I, and do you know what, I probably slept better as a result.

 

But to answer your question, we (Stafford Cripps and Harold Wilson) gave some engines & associated knowhow to the Ruskies, and we had to do the same for the Merkans, all during the Korean war, and that was the end of that. 

 

:(

Simon

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not an aviation expert but having built Airfix Spitfires and Camels in my time I can tell you that the Spit is a 5 minute job while the biplane takes a bit more time and care.  I would have thought that the rusty old Squadron Leader would be far better able to take good photos from his Sopwith Camel than a Spit, which would be going far too fast and which he cannot lean out of the side of for the best angles; I suspect that the Sopwith's radial engine provides a smoother platform for photography in terms of vibration than the Merlin straight piston engine; he can also let the aircraft fly itself for a short time while he gets his shot rather than having to constantly adjust for the Merlin's torque.

 

I'm not an aviation expert either, but I have flown a Spitfire (and have the time signed off in my log book).

 

Both the assumptions about the Spitfire are completely wrong, I'm afraid.  In the air, there is absolutely no vibration from the Merlin which comes back through the fuselage.

 

And the Spitfire is unsurprisingly a beautiful aircraft to fly.  It's probably the most responsive machine I've every handled, just about shading throwing a Honda GP250 motorbike around Cadwell Park, which was just sublime.  The handling of the aircraft is superbly neutral.  Unlike other aircraft I've flown, it required no trimming whilst flying, and it literally took a movement of millimetres on the stick to perform maneuvers.  All of this in an utterly stable and predictable way.  I can quite easily see how easily these things were to throw around the sky.  Regrettably, with something over seventy years old, one has to be a little more respectful today...

 

Oh, and when you're sat in the cockpit, you don't have the gorgeous Merlin rumble that you hear from the ground at a distance.  It actually sounds more like a rather elderly and arthritic tractor ;-)

 

post-3210-0-75933800-1516128055_thumb.jpg

 

Cheers

Flymo

  • Like 14
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sadly I’ve not flown a Spitfire, nor have I flown a Camel, but I have no doubt that the Squadron Leader would have had great difficulty photographing anything whilst flying and using a box brownie or similar. A camel in particular was allegedly as slippery as an oiled fish and the castor oil streaming from the rotary engine had a disastrous effect on the digestive system as well as the camera lens! At my outfit we have GoPros strapped to the struts on a Moth but the results can be variable and do not compare to anything that Kevin has achieved on here. The Squadron Leader should get an Avro 504 and take Kevin up! As for the great British Aircraft Industry, I spent a decade or two strapped to one of its products and my back and neck are now keeping my spinal consultant in the style to which he has become accustomed. If they couldn’t design a seat that was roughly the same shape as a human being then what chance had they against Johnny Foreigner?

 

Now, back to the trains (a few steam driving experience days have put aviation in its place!)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Actually, of course, the best tool for aerial photography in 1935 for the Squadron Leader is probably a non-dirigible airship, slow and steady,  and the best camera, sorry to upset his patriotic fervour, is a Leica or a Voightlander.  Truth is he'd be better off in an S.E.5, with an observer to take the photos while he flies the plane.  

 

Photographic work from this low height is dangerous precision flying with no room for error, and in fact would get him into trouble if the CAA find out about it. but I won't say anything...

Link to post
Share on other sites

PEDANT ALERT!

 

An SE5 was a single seater so it might be a bit of a squash, albeit it had an in-line engine so was a lot more stable. As far as aerial photography is concerned, I’d have to check the new EASA rules in Part SPO and Part NCO as the old CAA definitions of Aerial Work have all been subtley altered. The low flying rules remain the same and are surprisingly generous for those not involved. Safety always comes first though!

 

I know absolutely nothing about cameras but do appreciate the results of those more knowledgeable than me on this forum!

 

Here to help!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

PEDANT ALERT!

An SE5 was a single seater so it might be a bit of a squash, albeit it had an in-line engine so was a lot more stable. As far as aerial photography is concerned, I’d have to check the new EASA rules in Part SPO and Part NCO as the old CAA definitions of Aerial Work have all been subtley altered. The low flying rules remain the same and are surprisingly generous for those not involved. Safety always comes first though!

I know absolutely nothing about cameras but do appreciate the results of those more knowledgeable than me on this forum!

Here to help!

I was amazed to watch a plane crop spraying in the Kent countryside about the early 70s- were there strict rules for that?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Any new pics Kevin? I need some inspiration mate.

OK, I’ll see what I can do.

I have a few pictures that need editing so I will see what I can do.

Been working on Cold! planting conifers and building fences.

 

More important, how are you feeling?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

After all this talk about aircraft I’ve had a word with the Squadron Leader and we have come up with a plan.

So he has been out and acquired an RE 8 fitted with a new Lieca camera, so hopefully that should sort the problems out about aerial photography.

As for an observer, well we’ll have to wait and se!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...