Thu Apr 28, 2005 8:12 pm
Chris--
I'd like to see that too. Both, maybe? (If it were a choice between being able to complete and fly a Beau with Merlins or have to have it sit engineless in storage, I'd opt for the former; but ideally any rebuild would be done to original spec, which for all the surviving Beaux means Hercules engines.)
Re salvoing-off a bunch of inert-headed rockets, that actually used to happen at the late-40s/early-50s CNE waterfront shows at Toronto ON...Mustangs and Sea Furies would fly genuine strafing runs on barges in Lake Ontario, loosing off concrete-headed HVARs! Wish I'd been around to see that...
Cheers
S.
I'd like to see that too. Both, maybe? (If it were a choice between being able to complete and fly a Beau with Merlins or have to have it sit engineless in storage, I'd opt for the former; but ideally any rebuild would be done to original spec, which for all the surviving Beaux means Hercules engines.)
Re salvoing-off a bunch of inert-headed rockets, that actually used to happen at the late-40s/early-50s CNE waterfront shows at Toronto ON...Mustangs and Sea Furies would fly genuine strafing runs on barges in Lake Ontario, loosing off concrete-headed HVARs! Wish I'd been around to see that...
Cheers
S.
Thu Apr 28, 2005 8:28 pm
Hi Steve:
That would be great. I suppose the planes involved were still military?
That would be great. I suppose the planes involved were still military?
Thu Apr 28, 2005 8:42 pm
Yes, RCAF and RCN (Seafires and Seafuries).
Fri Apr 29, 2005 8:13 am
It’s hard to beat a “Live Fire” airshow.
I will miss them off the side of the Ship, except the bombs were BLU, they went Boom.
I will miss them off the side of the Ship, except the bombs were BLU, they went Boom.
Fri Apr 29, 2005 5:59 pm
I may be mistaken , but I was rummaging through USAAC serial numbers and I think I remember several dozen Beaufighters were transferred to the US. I think they had Pratt & Whitney R-1830's and Ham. Standard props. I know many would hate the thought of american engines on a british design, but it's the easiest, cheapest and fastest way to get a Beaufighter in the air. There are probably drawings available for the conversion, and I know that firewall forward everything is readily available for the engines and accessories. What do you'all think? It could shave years off the restoration process!
Fri Apr 29, 2005 6:04 pm
I would do it, but we can't do anything right now. The ones being rebuilt aren't far enough along, and there are no known others available. It sounds like an alright idea, anyway. I think something an original Bristol engine could be built up from parts too.
Fri Apr 29, 2005 6:35 pm
Chris et al--
The USAAF did indeed use quite a few Beaux; that's why Dayton has an ex-Aussie one under restoration. Have not heard before of the substitution of Pratts for the Bristols on a Beau; there was a prototype Aussie Beau with Wright R2600s in long-tailed nacelles, and of course many Beauforts and a few Bolingbrokes were built with US engines. Would be interested to hear more on the USAAF re-engines.
Both the Spitfire and the Beaufighter were used in significant numbers by the USAAF, yet neither was ever assigned a Pursuit designation; however the numbers 73 and 74 were never used, so I consider USAAF Spits to be "honorary P-73s" and Beaux "honorary P-74s"...
S.
The USAAF did indeed use quite a few Beaux; that's why Dayton has an ex-Aussie one under restoration. Have not heard before of the substitution of Pratts for the Bristols on a Beau; there was a prototype Aussie Beau with Wright R2600s in long-tailed nacelles, and of course many Beauforts and a few Bolingbrokes were built with US engines. Would be interested to hear more on the USAAF re-engines.
Both the Spitfire and the Beaufighter were used in significant numbers by the USAAF, yet neither was ever assigned a Pursuit designation; however the numbers 73 and 74 were never used, so I consider USAAF Spits to be "honorary P-73s" and Beaux "honorary P-74s"...
S.
Fri Apr 29, 2005 8:57 pm
Actually Steve, the Spit would have been the P-74.
Can't remember where I read that, but historians agree on the designation.
Can't remember where I read that, but historians agree on the designation.
Fri Apr 29, 2005 9:03 pm
Ollie--
Interesting! Didn't realize anyone else had had the same idea regarding two missing P-numbers and two reverse-Lend-Lease Brit fighters in US service, and the logical link between. OK...guess the Beau can be P-73 then. Matters not, of course: what we want is to see a Beau arrive at Geneseo...
S.
Interesting! Didn't realize anyone else had had the same idea regarding two missing P-numbers and two reverse-Lend-Lease Brit fighters in US service, and the logical link between. OK...guess the Beau can be P-73 then. Matters not, of course: what we want is to see a Beau arrive at Geneseo...
S.
Fri Apr 29, 2005 9:06 pm
Screw the Beau, get us more Spits, because you can never have too many Spits!
Brit planes & US engines
Sat Apr 30, 2005 9:04 am
The Aussie Beaufort with Prat's was a decent looking AC. I.E the cowling job made it look OK.
The Boly with Prat's ( Was it ? ) on the other hand was pretty ugly to look at.
On the subject of different conversion on Bristol AC. Here is one that is also quite nice.
The Boly with Prat's ( Was it ? ) on the other hand was pretty ugly to look at.
On the subject of different conversion on Bristol AC. Here is one that is also quite nice.
Sun May 01, 2005 3:23 pm
Hi Michel--
There were Bolies with both Wright and Pratt & Whitney engines; the IVC (Cyclone) was built in prototype form only, as I recall, while there was a short production run of IVW (Wasp--R1535 Twin Wasp Jr, specifically), most of which served on 119 (BR) Sqn in Eastern Air Command. It is one of those that CWH's project will represent when complete. (Appropriate, as 119 was the City of Hamilton Squadron, becoming 424 Sqn when sent to the UK.)
That Bolingbroke III, the floatplane conversion, would surely be a big hit at the Oshkosh floatplane event!
S.
There were Bolies with both Wright and Pratt & Whitney engines; the IVC (Cyclone) was built in prototype form only, as I recall, while there was a short production run of IVW (Wasp--R1535 Twin Wasp Jr, specifically), most of which served on 119 (BR) Sqn in Eastern Air Command. It is one of those that CWH's project will represent when complete. (Appropriate, as 119 was the City of Hamilton Squadron, becoming 424 Sqn when sent to the UK.)
That Bolingbroke III, the floatplane conversion, would surely be a big hit at the Oshkosh floatplane event!
S.
Hi Steve.
Mon May 09, 2005 7:54 am
Hi Steve
On the CWH subject.
How far along is the Boly.
Their web site is not updated too often.
Last pics of the Lizzy makes me think it should be up this season ???????
But I have not seen the Boly or info on it in a long time.
As for the engines, their option back then to use Mercury's was canned fronm the start. Parts, servicing, availability.
They where lucky ennough that the Smithsonian had in archives all engine mounts ever made for american engines on micro-film. So with this info they where able to reproduce the mounts. No originals where know to survived I was told back then.
On the CWH subject.
How far along is the Boly.
Their web site is not updated too often.
Last pics of the Lizzy makes me think it should be up this season ???????
But I have not seen the Boly or info on it in a long time.
As for the engines, their option back then to use Mercury's was canned fronm the start. Parts, servicing, availability.
They where lucky ennough that the Smithsonian had in archives all engine mounts ever made for american engines on micro-film. So with this info they where able to reproduce the mounts. No originals where know to survived I was told back then.