|
Post by davidd on Apr 26, 2024 13:58:07 GMT 12
A short, but quite interesting, "Ripping Yarn".
|
|
|
Post by davidd on Apr 24, 2024 14:48:01 GMT 12
Yes, that name THUNDERGUTZ certainly rings a bell witth me too. There was some sort of scramble to name the No. 14 Squadron Kittyhawks (no idea when this occurred unfortunately, but would have to have been sometime between about June 1942 and February 1943, which was their period at Masterton; certainly all those with these names seemed to have them by this time.) Peter Gifford semed to recall a quite a lot about the naming; he was most closely associated with MAGONOLIA MUFFLEWURT and UMSLOPOGAAS (NZ3008?) Some of the background to this last-named aircraft on this thread is not particularly accurate with respect to the original (fictitious) African warrior. Apparently the author, H Rider Haggard, was not too concerned with real African history, although he relied on the general sweep of this continent in those days to provide him with the inspiration for his characters, and probably made a small fotune with his book sales. From memory, the book portrays this fictitious character as a Zulu warrior, and he was cast as the illigitimate son of the tribe's chief (who was a real character in history). However their close relationship was concealed from the son, who went through his life as an ordinary warrior, but obviously he was possessed of great leadership qualities. It is about 60 years ago that I read any of Haggard's books, and think I only read "Alan Quatermain", so totally unqualified to pontificate on anything further (such as King Solomon's Mines", "She", "Nada the Lily", or "The Queen of Sheeba". I think Peter Gifford (14 Squadron pilot at the time, ex 488 Sqdn) read the lot!
|
|
|
Post by davidd on Apr 23, 2024 13:22:49 GMT 12
F/O Thomas Somerset - I have the idea that this man was actually F/O Somerset Thomas (was this ever hyphenated?) In which case he must have had another (given) name.
|
|
|
Post by davidd on Apr 23, 2024 9:22:08 GMT 12
The majority of mines laid in NZ waters in WW2 were British ones, serving in the three "controlled fields", in Akaroa (Banks Peninsula), Mahanga Bay (Wellington), and Islington Bay (between Rangitoto and Motutapu Islands, Auckland). Australian-manufactured mines were also shipped to NZ and installed at various sites around the country. Read official history of NZ in WW2, "The Royal New Zealand Navy", pgs 223 - 237 (Chapter 15, Anti-Invasion Mine Defences). Of course Germany also left some steel "presents" in 1940 (and 1941?), which claimed the NIAGARA shortly thereafter. Possibly Germany also left other mines in NZ waters in WW1?
|
|
|
Post by davidd on Apr 22, 2024 9:54:38 GMT 12
"Chunky" Watson was the test pilot for all the PV-1 Venturas assembled for RNZAF in Hawaii during 1943/44, as well as being a "line pilot" on Hudsons with 3 Squadron at Guadalcanal previously. Postwar of course he was one of the better known captains on the Hastings on their long range routes overseas.
|
|
|
Post by davidd on Apr 20, 2024 12:29:06 GMT 12
Caption (and question) for first of the 4 photographs - what are the other two men doing there? As kids, me and my brothers (or somebody else perhaps?) used to play around in this wreck in about 1964/65 - never got caught by the guards! There were also other wrecks in same location, mostly cars I think, also two major sections of the central fuselage of Canberra NZ6101. The remains of a Piper Apache (Canterbury Aero Club) also lay in a sort of a scrap yard now too far away (it came to grief at Harewood of course, a few years earlier, after a botched night landing I believe).
|
|
|
Post by davidd on Apr 16, 2024 20:15:13 GMT 12
Great looking planes, especially the Beaver, really looks the business! Never tire of that fantastic background, but who keeps the grass so well trimmed?
|
|
|
Post by davidd on Apr 16, 2024 19:59:58 GMT 12
I'm fairly certain I once owned a plastic kit of a Viscount, but doubt it was of the 800 series, and its scale was, shall we say, "unstated"! Might have been from that World famous New Zealand manufacturer of very fine plastic kitsets of an amazingly curious range of aircraft of all sorts, in random scales, and invariably produced in a rather nice silvery grey plastic material. Don't think it had any actual clear windows for pilots or passengers, and probably lacked any sort of undercarriage. Somebody on this Board must remember this beauty from those long-ago innocent days of our youth. I also had a much smaller metal model of a TAA Viscount which had an undercarriage (I think!) and was nicely painted in quite thick coat of paint in white and blue colours, but certainly too small for any clear windows. The 4 propellers could rotate, but were fragile, and several of them broke after a short and brutal life! Manufactured in Oz of course.
|
|
|
Post by davidd on Apr 16, 2024 17:58:45 GMT 12
Impossible to identify squadron of a Hudson in the "forward area" in 1943, as by this time their original squadron identification letters had been removed. The original letters for 3 Squadron (JV) were only worn for the first couple of months or so overseas, before being "obliterated". I don't think the Americans (or was it RNZAF HQ?) were very keen on retaining these markings, as they were not really required under American command anyway, and as the earliest aircraft started to be rotated back to NZ for major inspections, the probability was that other squadrons' aircraft were likely to be sucked into a pool of fully operational Hudsons, operating from Guadalcanal, Espiritu Santo, and to a lesser extent, Fiji. These aircaft were practically all radar equipped, with full defensive armament, including "waist" mounted VGO (Vickers) guns, and American IFF, while many had Australian radio sets replacing the earlier British, or American sets to get the correct frequencies used in South Pacific in earlier years of the Pacific war. I'm guessing the image above was exposed in about July 1943, when a large number of photograps were taken at Espiritu Santo, and Guadalcanal.
Very difficult to suggest what might be causing the interesting "patterns" on upper surfaces of this aircraft - could even be remains of a passing rain shower of course.
Don't know about using aviation fuel in such a reckless way as suggested - I realize you have been advised of such practices before Dave, but would they have raw petrol dripping off an aircraft whilst technical personnel are still working on it? Also unusual to see an aircraft parked up (admittedly whilst being serviced) with its props in fully feathered mode. The (ASV) radar antennae on rear fuselage are pretty evident too. The rather weird looking upper wing roundel visible is obviously a heavily "modified" one, probably derived form a preious effort to change the Type B roundel to a Type C, then changed the red centre to blue. There were numbers of aicraft that caught fire during WW2 in Pacific theatre, for one reason or another, in flight or on ground. Using aviation fuel inside aircraft for cleaning purposes seemed to be rather too common, and I can think of two Lockheed aircraft off top of my head, one of which caused a fatality, this being a PV-1 Ventura in the forward area, other was a Lodestar at Palmerston North in about 1947. The PV-1 was repaired, the Lodestar was a write off. The boss of a garage I used to work at was a close witness to the Ventura incident, very nasty it was too, the fellow tried to scramble out through the bow compartment lower hatch, but his burns were too severe for survival. Another Ventura was badly damaged when an airman was testing a fuel gauge inside an internal wing tank, and managed to cause an explosion, with a part of the wreckage killing another airman innocently walking along some considerable distance away. Some Corsair aircraft suffered from fires resulting from spilled petrol (during refueling) trickling down inside the forward fuselage around the main fuel tank and collecting in belly area, which could easily be ignited on starting up by the nearby exhasut outlet.
|
|
|
Post by davidd on Apr 13, 2024 11:20:45 GMT 12
Sounds like good, solid professional work in locating and confirming this aircraft, and hence i.d. of crew members.
|
|
|
Post by davidd on Apr 13, 2024 11:11:18 GMT 12
Baffin did not force land on the beach, it ditched in the bay OFF the beach. And Little Pigeon Bay is quite separate from the REAL Pigeon Bay, just a little to the west, with a low ridge terminating in a point, known as Pigeon Point (the spelling of Pidgeon Bay is incorrect). At the time, this aircraft was still marked with its Fleet Air Arm serial number, and of course it was never restored to flying condition, so the serial NZ160 was never applied. I doubt that the airframe ever ended up at Rongotai, but parts of it (including the main fuel tank) survived in a wool shed at Pigeon Bay for many years, and I was in charge of a part of the flying controls for perhaps 10 years (the athwartships steel tube which transmits both aileron and elevator commands to the aforementioned control surfaces!) I have an idea that the Baffin was brought down by a failure of the reduction gear, but have not studied the accident report. The Pilot was responsible for saving the other crew member, although both men were heavily encumbered by their winter flying suits, and Grant was very lucky to have survived. Appears to be a small wharf on left of the image.
|
|
|
Post by davidd on Apr 10, 2024 11:08:05 GMT 12
chinapilot, John Kempton LAWRENCE (RAFVR No. 70388) arrived in NZ January 1941, departed on return to UK approx August 1943. Seems to have served in RNZAF purely as flying instructor. He was posted to Ohakea (presume 3 FTS) 5/1/41, to Hobsonville 12/1/41 - 17/5/42 (Flying Instructors School/Central Flying School), was appointed CFI of this school 18/5/42. Held rank of F/L on arrival. So far as I know, was NOT a New Zealander. Errol Martyn may have further information, but note your note that he may have been in NZ postwar. Very sad about his wife. He may also have instructed at Tauranga (where CFS moved to in August 1941).
|
|
|
Post by davidd on Apr 9, 2024 9:00:37 GMT 12
As this aircraft was a military transport, its flying hours would be slow to accumulate. Typically military aircraft, and more specifically VIP transports, although frequently polished, just did not clock up the hours like a normal civilian airliner. I cannot recall what the hours of the RNZAF's NZ3551 came to, but probably similar to the one on the video.
|
|
|
Post by davidd on Apr 8, 2024 13:34:47 GMT 12
Just thinking of the earliest days of No. 486 (NZ) Squadron, equipped with all-black Hawker Hurricanes and trained up to become night fighters in close collaboration with Douglas Havocs (Turbinlite ones I think, complete with very heavy batteries). The Hurricanes were termed as "satellites" - I think the Havocs lacked all guns, which was where the Hurricanes were expected to step up and provide the firepower (Havocs provided the electrical stuff).
|
|
|
Post by davidd on Apr 8, 2024 10:21:25 GMT 12
Great story Dave. I "have" two cats who visit me from time to time here in Christchurch. Secret of a good relationship with local cats is to NEVER feed them. Have known them (Mr Ming, and Sophie) for 5 years, and they frequently visit me, and want to be "petted" quite often. Their nominal "owner" (his house about 10 metres away) pays for all their food and vet bills. Mr Ming is bold enough to enter my house from time to time, but Sophie (who is rather deaf) has never screwed up enough courage. Hoever she is extremely keen to get a good "tummy scratch" and ditto under the chin and behind the ears. So is Mr Ming.
|
|
|
Post by davidd on Apr 8, 2024 10:08:33 GMT 12
Certainly some weird stuff there Dave H, which I am in no position to challenge in any way. Insurance was sometimes a suspected reason for some ship losses, but most of the above examples do not seem to fit into any scenario that would make sense. Losses of modern airliners are another can of worms.
|
|
|
Post by davidd on Apr 7, 2024 11:35:49 GMT 12
A very small point, but in RNZAF the term SFTS (for Service Flying Training School) was not in use till about February 1942, although I have never found the Order which authorised this change, from FTS to SFTS. Also on this theme, the RNZAF only had ONE such FTS prewar (which was Wigram) and so far as I can tell, the number "1" was not ever used until the formation of the second FTS (at Blenheim, later called Woodbourne) in about December 1939, which presumably was awarded the title of No. 2 FTS from this time. In the RAF, the title FTS was changed to SFTS on the outbreak of WW2, in early September 1939.
The obvious "code" identification on flanks of your model of course indicate that it was on strength of "B" Flight of the FTS, which was later called the Advanced Training Squadron (ATS). The "A" Flight of FTS's usually featured red colouring, and was later redesignated Intermediate Training Squadron (ITS). THe ITS was where trainee pilots, having completed their elementary training with an EFTS (or an aero club in prewar days) learned to fly what were called "service" aircraft (as opposed to light civilian types) for the first time, and the flying staff of the ITS was composed almost entirely of flying instructors. On passing out of ITS the trainees were now considererd to be service pilots, regardless of the type of aircraft they normally flew. On posting to the ATS, the trainees were now introduced to "applied" flying, which included formation flying, bombing (or aerial gunnery in case of single-engine pilots), plus night flying (and instruments), and aerobatics (single-engine pilots only), as well as advanced navigation, etc. Interestingly, trainee pilots on multi-engine aircraft (such as Oxfords) also learned aerial gunnery (flexible) during their ATS course, although once on an operational squadron, it was highly unlikely that they they would ever have to exercise this particular skill. Probably for the latter reason, aerial gunnery (flexible) for multi-engine pilots was dropped from the RNZAF SFTS syllabus in about March 1942. Trainee pilots with ITS would either fly with a qualified instructor, with a staff (qualified) pilot, or solo. After advancing to ATS, trainee (pupil) pilots frequently flew together for exercises, being paired up with another pupil from same course for duration of this stage of training. During the ATS stage, pupils were also carried in an Oxford flown by a staff pilot, for certain navigation exercises. (A staff pilot was a qualified pilot, but NOT a qualified instructor). Hope these brief notes are of interest to some.
|
|
|
Post by davidd on Apr 6, 2024 10:25:46 GMT 12
Would you believe it, that silver P-51 is flying over Christchurch again today, just flew over my house 5 minutes ago! Sky rather cloudy, but some sun getting through, temperatures not so high though. Flew over again just about 10 mins ago, must have flown best part of 6 flight or more so far (carrying passengers?)
|
|
|
Post by davidd on Apr 5, 2024 10:25:13 GMT 12
Hmm, I arrived in Christchurch city in about December 1963 so as to attend high school, and made frequent visits (by bicycle of course!) to the international airport, and included side trips to view the Spitfire alluded to in the first entry. However I have no memory of a 10-foot high "airman" as shown immediately above at any time since 1963. Perhaps I was looking in the wrong places, or (more likely) the Brevet Club never had it cast, or it was erected in another location (also highly unlikely). The answer should show up in copies of "The Press" I imagine.
|
|
|
Post by davidd on Apr 5, 2024 10:08:18 GMT 12
Third image from bottom shows one of the "interesting" colour schemes (RF903) that turned up in NZ, one of 80 selected in the UK for sale to RNZAF. This was possibly an OTU aircraft (131 or 132?) However about 50 of our Mossies were claimed to be "new" aircraft.
|
|