|
Post by lumpy on Jan 9, 2015 19:02:09 GMT 12
We definitely change the tour guides at the Wigram Museum or hang on, that was a story told to me twenty plus years back ... might take another tour get inside that Avenger for a few photo's Yes , I do recall being told it was in the bomb bay , by a guide at the museum . Surely any further rearwards of there would have a really bad affect on the aircrafts centre of gravity ( similar to the West Coast skydiving disaster ? )
|
|
|
Post by baz62 on Jan 9, 2015 19:20:36 GMT 12
We definitely change the tour guides at the Wigram Museum or hang on, that was a story told to me twenty plus years back ... might take another tour get inside that Avenger for a few photo's Yes , I do recall being told it was in the bomb bay , by a guide at the museum . Surely any further rearwards of there would have a really bad affect on the aircrafts centre of gravity ( similar to the West Coast skydiving disaster ? ) Would have been in the rear compartment as with no bombload she would have been fine weight and balance wise..
|
|
|
Post by lumpy on Jan 9, 2015 19:41:08 GMT 12
Would have been in the rear compartment as with no bombload she would have been fine weight and balance wise.. Thanks Baz , but the guide at the museum still said " bomb bay " ( we even made jokes about what a disaster it would have been if the " doors " were acidentally opened ).( perhaps it was her " first day " ) Is the " rear compartment " above the bomb bay ? ( as the correct C of G would surely be within that area )
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jan 9, 2015 19:58:08 GMT 12
|
|
|
Post by baz62 on Jan 9, 2015 21:14:29 GMT 12
Would have been in the rear compartment as with no bombload she would have been fine weight and balance wise.. Thanks Baz , but the guide at the museum still said " bomb bay " ( we even made jokes about what a disaster it would have been if the " doors " were acidentally opened ).( perhaps it was her " first day " ) Is the " rear compartment " above the bomb bay ? ( as the correct C of G would surely be within that area ) No it starts from the rear of the rear cockpit, without the turret there is a ton of room in there plus there is the observers cockpit as well which you can actually access from the rear compartment. I suppose they could have tied players into the bomb bay, would have been draughty and cold!
|
|
|
Post by baronbeeza on Jan 9, 2015 21:21:49 GMT 12
Well the tight 5 could pack down in the bomb bay.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jan 9, 2015 21:47:12 GMT 12
We should ask Brendon to do a Mythbusters and test this out with the Ohakea rugby team.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jan 9, 2015 21:48:29 GMT 12
By the way from what I was told years ago by a veteran it was only a short trip, Woodbourne to Rongotai I believe.
|
|
|
Post by tbf25o4 on Jan 10, 2015 12:53:20 GMT 12
Greetings everyone, There is simply no room in the Bombay of an Avenger to carry people, and certainly in the 1950s when 'regulations' were interpreted different from these days, no pilot would have contemplated taking anyone in the Bombay if he wanted to continue to be a pilot in the RNZAF! Dave is correct in thinking it was a short trip from Wellington to Woodbourne. My sources seem to recall it was a cricket team (12) which would make sense as you could squeeze them into the rear compartment and the second cockpit. As Baz had indicated the Target Towing TBFs were stripped out so that additional bods as say 170lbs each plus some cricket gear is well within the capability of the Avenger.
|
|
|
Post by komata on Jan 10, 2015 13:07:21 GMT 12
Since we are describing in-flight 'losses': Didn't some of Five Squadron's rugby team flying as 'passengers' on one of the Squadron's aircraft (from Laucala) loose most of their gear en route to Nuku'alofa to play a Tongan First XV? From memory the 'bomb bay' doors opened (and yes, I am aware of the correct technical term for the area-concerned) 'by accident' due to an 'equipment malfunction', and a lot of the team's clothing took flight outwards and then downwards into the Pacific.
|
|
|
Post by baronbeeza on Jan 10, 2015 13:15:11 GMT 12
Back in the day when the roads were safer we had something like 9 in a Mini. This was a country pub crawl as well so there was plenty of time for toilet stops along the way. We didn't have seat belt laws, no motorbike helmet laws, no breathalysers, indeed probably a lot fewer things to worry about. Anyway the culture was certainly different then. If nine can fit in a Mini and travel then there would be no reason why a similar number couldn't jump in an aeroplane to travel a short distance. Times have changed and what is the norm now wasn't always that way. I am sure young men always pushed the boundaries whenever but I have a feeling every generation has been measured against different norms.
I tell a story about having a beer after work in a back country pub. I was underage and with just a few assorted workmates. No-one else in the place. The doors opened and in walked the Prime Minister and a small entourage. He bought jugs for us and upon being reminded about my age replied to my workmate with, 'I know how old (my name) is thank you'. I was only a little surprised but the old fellow almost choked on his beer. It seemed like a different country back then..... Where did things go wrong ?
|
|
|
Post by komata on Jan 10, 2015 13:29:02 GMT 12
bb
Only because you asked (although it could have been a rhetorical question) 'Where did thing go wrong'? We (the 'Boomer generation) decided that we knew better than our parents and were determined that the 'injustices' and 'unfairnesses' 'inflicted' on us by them would never ever happen again, especially not to our children and grandchildren. We accordingly voted-in those who we thought were going to take away these 'injustices and unfairnesses'.
They did, but because they had their own agenda's replaced them with something far worse. We got what we thought we wanted, but the results weren't exactly what we had in mind...
As I said. only because you asked.
Now, to return to the topic.....
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jan 10, 2015 17:58:56 GMT 12
You're very right Komata, the Baby Boomers have screwed things up big time for this country. Worst of all the Baby Boomers never saved more Vildebeests and Vincents for us younger generations. I want to ride on one's wing!!!
|
|
|
Post by errolmartyn on Jan 10, 2015 18:34:55 GMT 12
I just remembered a conversation I had way back in 1996. I made a visit to the Cambridge RSA in the hope of finding any members who may have been in the Cambridge Home Guard, which I was researching at the time. I got chatting to some old veterans and one in particular, who's name I never got and I never later found out, had been a mechanic in the RNZAF during WWII, and I have a feeling he actually said also before the war. He told me he worked on the Vildebeests in the early period of the war, and during the conversation he mentioned that often they'd fly away from the station to other airfields and they often took a few groundcrew with them on these excursions. He said there was often too much of a squeeze to get everyone into the plane for these trips, so they'd back all the tool boxes into the back cockpit, and as many as could fit would squeeze in there, but often a couple of ground staff had to ride on the wings. He said he did it several times, standing on the lower wing strapped onto the struts. The guy seemed pretty genuine, and he was a very short guy, and given some of the things that happened in the RNZAF back then I find it hard to doubt his word. Has anyone ever heard of this practice before? He said they were always fairly short trips, nothing long distance. The Vildes cruised at only about 85mph so it's not impossible by any means. I assume they wore helmets and goggles. Dear Editor With reference to the rumoured rugby team in a 'Vildy', I can confirm this is a fact. For obvious reasons a 'Wall of Silence' was placed around all such escapades! The facts I can remember in somewhat of a haze after over 60 years are the following. It must have been the winter of 1942, I was W/OP on temporary detachment to the signals office at Whenuapai. One very quiet Saturday, most of the section personnel being on weekend leave; a challenge came in from Waipapakauri to play them at rugby. A scratch team was hastily put together from all sections given leave, but had remained on station. The only transport available was a dear old 'Vildy'. A flight plan was submitted and approved - 'Familiarization Cross Country'. We were literally packed in like sardines! One of the guys was going on leave straight afterwards and wanted to take his bike. 'Not a problem, strap it onto the struts' said the 'Cabbie'. We lumbered down the runway and ultimately staggered into the air. What followed was a very cold and uncomfortable trip as we were all stripped down in our rugby gear. We duly arrived at 'Waipap' and played our game. I can't remember the score, but we won. There were a number of youthful exuberant escapades like this, it could have been a disaster, but we never thought of consequences of that nature. NZ427096 L. P. Martin L.A.C. W/OP St. Clair, Dunedin, N.Z. ( Classic Wings, Vol 12, No 2, 2005, Issue 50) Errol
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jan 10, 2015 19:54:47 GMT 12
Fantastic! Thanks Errol!
Imagine the results had the aircraft crashed or even had a simple mishap on landing. I wonder who the pilot was. Either a No. 1 (GR) Squadron or a 7 (GR) Squadron chap I'm sure.
|
|
|
Post by isc on Jan 10, 2015 21:39:30 GMT 12
A quote from "New Zealand Military Aircraft" 1913 1977 by David Duxbury and Ross Dunlop, Ross Macpherson & Ross Ewing. "in early 1934 orders were placed in England for 12 Vickers Vildebeeste general purpose bombers(the RNZAF always spelt the name incorrectly, with the final 'e'). isc
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jan 10, 2015 22:00:31 GMT 12
That's not strictly true, some spelled it incorrectly, others correctly. It probably depended what school they went to.
It's like the myth someone came out with that all P-40's in the RNZAF were called Kittyhawks no matter which mark. I have seen plenty of logbook entries and other documentation where they referred to the M and N models as Warhawks.
I think a lot of these myths came about in the 1960's and 70's when much less research had been done into the RNZAF, and over the years some of them have been dispelled while others continue to persist.
|
|
|
Post by errolmartyn on Jan 11, 2015 9:46:30 GMT 12
There are at least three mentions of the aircraft in the RNZAF's Routine Orders of 1938. All three entries spell the name as Vildebeest (no 'e').
Errol
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jan 11, 2015 10:08:40 GMT 12
See!
|
|