Post amazingly cool pictures of aircraft (Volume 2)

[BoRED S2upid]

I'm sure it's not amazingly cool and has been posted many times before but we watched this crazy looking thing take off earlier today.

[5ohmustang]

When the portajohns are placed too close to the holding pads.

[irocfan]

Eric Mc said:

It's been in the American Hall for many years. However, they recently had a major refurbishment of the hall so some of the aircraft normally on show there were moved to other hangers for a short while until the refurbishment was complete.

Duxford is a great place to visit.

seconded, car show there next sunday so I've got 3 things to enjoy (they also have a land warfare section there - tanks, planes and automobiles)

[Trevatanus]

irocfan said:

Eric Mc said:

It's been in the American Hall for many years. However, they recently had a major refurbishment of the hall so some of the aircraft normally on show there were moved to other hangers for a short while until the refurbishment was complete.

Duxford is a great place to visit.

seconded, car show there next sunday so I've got 3 things to enjoy (they also have a land warfare section there - tanks, planes and automobiles)

I've been invited to the car show, any good?

[Rogue86]

Been going through some stuff from a few years ago and found these, thought they might be of interest in here.

Tornado air/air sortie for the 95th Anniversary of 41(R)Sqn. Aircraft is a GR4 (ZA600) painted with a commemorative tail. Shot from a Hawk of 100Sqn.

BTS shot - shows all the things that are working against you on an air/air photo sortie!


One of the final images, cruising along the white cliffs:


Typhoon on QRA duty after returning from Op Ellamy (note bomb markings), shot for a news piece on QRA.


Typhoons during the Diamond-nine flypast for the Queen's jubilee, heading over RAF Cranwell.


Couple of Spitfires to end with, both taken from the rear gun of the Lancaster (one on each side):

[Ayahuasca]

Very nice!

[5ohmustang]

Life on the Farp. Safing prior to refueling and rearming.



Grey skies, just like England.


Mounted FCR

[knight]

Rogue86 said:

Been going through some stuff from a few years ago and found these, thought they might be of interest in here.

Tornado air/air sortie for the 95th Anniversary of 41(R)Sqn. Aircraft is a GR4 (ZA600) painted with a commemorative tail. Shot from a Hawk of 100Sqn.

BTS shot - shows all the things that are working against you on an air/air photo sortie!


One of the final images, cruising along the white cliffs:


Typhoon on QRA duty after returning from Op Ellamy (note bomb markings), shot for a news piece on QRA.


Typhoons during the Diamond-nine flypast for the Queen's jubilee, heading over RAF Cranwell.


Couple of Spitfires to end with, both taken from the rear gun of the Lancaster (one on each side):

Absolutely superb pics

[yellowjack]

Have Bernie and Leepu been let loose on a Chinook now???

[Eric Mc]

The chopper nearest the camera in the first shot is a CH-46 - not a Chinook. The chopper furthest away in the first picture IS a Chinook.

[MartG]

Eric Mc said:

The chopper nearest the camera in the first shot is a CH-46 - not a Chinook. The chopper furthest away in the first picture IS a Chinook.

Strictly speaking the one nearest is a Model 107, while the other is a Model 234. The CH-46 and CH-47 designations are for military ones

[yellowjack]

Eric Mc said:

The chopper nearest the camera in the first shot is a CH-46 - not a Chinook. The chopper furthest away in the first picture IS a Chinook.

That CH-46 is actually a Boeing Vertol 107-II, the commercial variant of the Sea Knight. It's written above the access door...


The photo was used to illustrate the gap between front and rear wheels, where I always thought the fuel cells and transfer gear were located. How does it fly if it's got no fuel in it? Maybe the fuel is now inside?

I got onto these pictures because I was wondering what happened to the British airways liveried Chinooks that were used to support oil rigs off Scotland. Turns out, Columbia Helicopters own the surviving ex-BA Chinooks. Withdrawn from rig support in 1986 after G-BISP was lost with 45 persons aboard killed, they were declared too big for rig support ops and sold. Currently operated in the heavy lift and logging roles, with no passenger carrying capability.

I love the livery, and the big 'bubble' crew windows, and the 'Chop Shop' style modifications to the fuselage.


ETA: Damn! Beaten to it!

Edited by yellowjack on Sunday 30th April 22:50

[Speed 3]

Eric Mc said:

The chopper nearest the camera in the first shot is a CH-46 - not a Chinook. The chopper furthest away in the first picture IS a Chinook.

Actually no, its a civil version BV-107 built by Kawasaki. Very interesting operator, I spent some time with them in Portland when I was sourcing engine maintenance for another helicopter operator.

[yellowjack]

Speed 3 said:

Actually no, its a civil version BV-107 built by Kawasaki. Very interesting operator, I spent some time with them in Portland when I was sourcing engine maintenance for another helicopter operator.

Oh, so you might know what's happened to the fuselage then. Why those gaps are there, and where whatever 'stuff' was in the gaps has gone to?

Having been carted around quite a few times in Chinooks, I was interested to know what the interior of the civilian (BA) Chinooks looked like, but the Google search words I used brought up no pictures of the inside.

[Speed 3]

Speaking of which and in the spirit of the thread:

[MartG]

Speed 3 said:

Speaking of which and in the spirit of the thread:

107 towing an air-cushion ( i.e. hovercraft ) barge across ice floes

[Eric Mc]

Speed 3 said:

Eric Mc said:

The chopper nearest the camera in the first shot is a CH-46 - not a Chinook. The chopper furthest away in the first picture IS a Chinook.

Actually no, its a civil version BV-107 built by Kawasaki. Very interesting operator, I spent some time with them in Portland when I was sourcing engine maintenance for another helicopter operator.

Fair enough. I was more or less right about the basic airframe. Military users often use a different system for naming their aircraft.

The Boeing twin rotor helicopters trace their history back to the original Piasecki line of helicopters.

[Speed 3]

Eric Mc said:

Fair enough. I was more or less right about the basic airframe. Military users often use a different system for naming their aircraft.

The Boeing twin rotor helicopters trace their history back to the original Piasecki line of helicopters.

Indeed, one of the other companies I visited on Vancouver Island on that engine sourcing trip had a HUP-1 in their reception. The owner was going to donate it to the Smithsonian but don't know whether the deal completed. It was still leaking oil despite not having flown for several decades. Wooden blades IIRC.

The commercial BV-234 and the military Chinook were of course based on the same airframe, as is common in the rotary world, but there were some systems and fuselage differences. I believe Columbia bought the Type Certification rights off Boeing for both the civil 107 and 234 so in theory could manufacture their own.

[Dr Jekyll]

I was looking at a Bristol Belvedere recently in a museum

and the information board said something about each rotor being powered by a Napier turboshaft. Surely this is wrong, both engines must have powered both rotors? Please tell me nobody would make a twin engine helicopter that would be uncontrollable after an engine failure.

I Know the Belvedere was a bit crap but not that crap.

[FourWheelDrift]

Both engines drove both rotors connected via a gearbox. Belvedere info - http://www.pprune.org/aviation-history-nostalgia/4...

I like the fact it was developed for the Navy but didn't have folding rotor blades so wouldn't fit down the lifts into the hangars. So they gave it to lumbered the RAF with it instead.

Edited by FourWheelDrift on Monday 1st May 10:53