Classic Aircraft - August

[Weaver]

This month's Classic Aircraft magazine has some interesting stuff:

Article on the Vickers V1000 questioning whether it would really have worked well enough to compete with the Boeing 707.

Article on the Defiant, questioning it's reputation as a failure in the light of it's actual combat record (should please the Wooksta.... ). It's principle disadvantage seems to have been lack of speed and climb rate, which makes you wonder what it could have done with later Merlins... Answers another frequently-asked question too: the guns could indeed be swivelled forwards and control transferred to the pilot, but they didn't have to fire through the prop because their minimum elevation in this position was 19 deg., so it was basically for below-and-behind attacks. The facility was hardly ever used in practice because the pilot didn't have a gunsight.

Article on a Polikarpov I-16 warbird being flown in Germany. What's interesting here is the very good photography, which shows up just how rough the surface finish is! The straps on the wings just inboard of the guns are visibly separate from the wing surface in places and the edge of the tailplane root fairing is anything but a smooth curve. Makes you think twice about criticising a kit for wavy panel lines and heavy surface detail....

[raafif]

sounds interesting !

Russian stuff was very rough -- to wit --  a Mig-15 with 3/8" gaps between the fuselage & wing fillet !

[NARSES2]

Article on the Defiant, questioning it's reputation as a failure in the light of it's actual combat record (should please the Wooksta.... ). Answers another frequently-asked question too: the guns could indeed be swivelled forwards and control transferred to the pilot, but they didn't have to fire through the prop because their minimum elevation in this position was 19 deg., so it was basically for below-and-behind attacks. The facility was hardly ever used in practice because the pilot didn't have a gunsight.

Thats what a friend of mine (now sadly deceased) always said and he was a fitter on them for a time. Glad to see it's in print.

Russian stuff was very rough -- to wit --  a Mig-15 with 3/8" gaps between the fuselage & wing fillet !

The Me 262 at The RAF Museum has gaps of at least 2" between wing and fusalage 

[PR19_Kit]

....the guns could indeed be swivelled forwards and control transferred to the pilot, but they didn't have to fire through the prop because their minimum elevation in this position was 19 deg., so it was basically for below-and-behind attacks. The facility was hardly ever used in practice because the pilot didn't have a gunsight.

...and possibly because he would have been permanently deafened by twin .303s going off on BOTH sides of his head at the same time!