|
Post by komata on Jun 3, 2021 12:41:56 GMT 12
Concerning the Chevrolet crane and FWIW: it was for many years located in Hamilton East - somewhere around the County Crescent area - and was visible from SH 1 as that road descended into the 'Riverlea wreckers' gully. It eventually disappeared from that site and I was subsequently advised that it had been purchased by the late Ross Paton of Cambridge; a gentleman well- known in military vehicle restoration circles.
Unfortunately, I don't know what happened to it after Mr Paton died, but perhaps the Tauwhare Military Museum near Cambridge (Address: 1149 Victoria Road, Tauwhare 3287) might be able to assist concerning it's subsequent fate / current whereabouts.
As I said, FWIW; I hope this helps.
|
|
|
Post by komata on May 29, 2021 5:55:13 GMT 12
FWIW: As a 'Corsair' fan of many years, I had high-expectations of this volume and certainly found it to be very informative.
I believe however that it could have been so much better.
Where (for example) were the Maps of the South West Pacific Area (SWPA) combat area where the Corsair served, or of Japan, even perhaps of New Zealand - if only to locate places named in the text, or an Index (a feature which would have been helpful in locating the various pilots named within the volume) or even a list of the airframes and their ultimate fates; things which, because of the comprehensiveness of the coverage, I would have expected to be included as a matter of course. And why, when the focus was on a specific type of aircraft and it's service with a particular air arm, was it deemed necessary to include a five-page biography of the author within the volume; a biography of this size being something which is extremely unusual for any book and which IMHO contributed little to the narrative. Given that biographies are usually very short ( three succinct paragraphs at maximum), it is perhaps unfortunate that four of it's pages could not have been used to include the aforementioned Maps, Index, Airframe list etc.
As already stated, this is a very informative work, but IMHO it could have been better; the potential was certainly there.
On the basis of the above, I'd give it a six out of ten.
It should have been more.
Thank you.
|
|
|
Post by komata on Jan 31, 2021 10:11:53 GMT 12
31 January 2021@1100
What is the twin-engined highwing monoplane which is currently flying around the central Waikato? It appears to be similar to an Aercommander 500, but FR24 gives no indication as to it's identity.
Help please.
Thanks
|
|
|
Post by komata on Nov 23, 2020 14:21:56 GMT 12
Harvard1041.
Thank you for the clarification.
|
|
|
Post by komata on Nov 23, 2020 6:03:28 GMT 12
Concerning 'Gloria'; clarification please...
This was an airframe which had been carefully preserved and it's provenance (History) known and documented. It was / is an 'Historic artifact' in it's own unique right, and worthy of preservation in that state, to the extent that it should be considered a 'time capsule'.
At least, IT WAS!!
For reasons known only to the museum which now has 'care' of her, Gloria's history has now been compromised by the addition of imported, non-original parts, by the installing of-which her value as an historic artifact is 'tainted' and it cannot be said with any degree of accuracy that she is currently in 'original' (as found) condition.
On that basis, would someone please explain exactly what Gloria's fate is to be?
Is she to be left in her 'as found' condition (as hauled out of John Smith's shed' and be respected as such), or is she to become a 'bitzer' with 'add-ons' (such as engine mounts, new fabric, panels etc.) to 'make her look pretty' for public display; which latter situation is apparently her current state?
Clarification would be appreciated, as the 'add-ons' means that her value as an 'Historic artifact of national importance' is severely-reduced, and, for historians, she is 'No longer the girl she once was'.
Thank you.
|
|
|
Post by komata on Mar 22, 2020 8:23:18 GMT 12
It's even closer:
Mrs Komata and I were scheduled to fly to Niue on 28 March fora family-related visit, until we realised that while we could get OUT of NZ, there was no certainty that we could either get back off the Island or even back INTO NZ, and if we did come back in there would be a 14-day 'self-isolation' period until we were cleared.
With only two flights onto the island a week and the distinct possibility that these could be cancelled without due-warning because of the virus or the weather (as proven by a Hurricane a few weeks ago, when all flights stopped), it could have become somewhat complicated...
Better safe than sorry, but we are going back; just not immediately...
|
|
|
Post by komata on Mar 21, 2020 4:46:52 GMT 12
Dave:
Apologies for the unintentional confusion; it was indeed GWYNNETH Common; it must be an 'age' thing...
Thanks for the additional info BTW.
|
|
|
Post by komata on Mar 20, 2020 19:29:45 GMT 12
FWIW (@ 2020) If anyone is interested, a helicopter (possibly an MBB although it was difficult to identify certainty in the dark), landed on the area of ground in Leamington Cambridge, known as 'Innes Common'.
Lots of attention from the locals, and of course, lots of speculation, with one resident commenting that it narrowly missed a tall local Oak tree on its final approach.
Curiously, it was closed down on arrival, before departing at 2040, seemingly heading towards Hamilton.
Someone might find this of interest and even know what's going on.
As I said, FWIW.
Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by komata on Mar 5, 2020 5:26:51 GMT 12
Rone
It could have been worse; they could have all been 'Cessnas'. (The New Zealand 'journalist's'seemingly-standard go-to).
|
|
|
Post by komata on Feb 22, 2020 18:53:19 GMT 12
A very interesting archive; thanks for bringing it to our attention.
FWIW, Several things noticed after a quick 'tour' and given that it's 'early days' for the collection, intended to help...
There seems to be no awareness of the possibility that an aircraft-type can have two designations (it's 'Military' one and it's 'Common-name' one), that it is possible to have several variations on the manufacturers name, and that (as shown with the 'Corsair') where there are two manufacturers names (ie 'Chance Vought') these are both valid search titles and should be treated as such (ie, a search for 'Chance' or 'Vought' should take the enquirer to the archive)
To use two of the archive's aircraft types examples as illustrations of this:
P-40 / 'Kittyhawk'
Searching under 'P40' returned 1 image (with a 'Corsair' in the background BTW), with neither of the 'productive' sites (or that for 'F4U-1D / Corsair') carrying that particular image themselves.
Searching under 'P-40' returned 18 images (aka'hits').
Searching under 'Kittyhawk' returned 72 'hits'.
Searching under 'Variants' (ie P-40 E, P-40K, P-40N): No hits.
Curiously, searching under 'Curtis' produced one image, although not of a P-40.
Searching under 'Curtiss' produced 9 images.
Surprisingly (and as I expected that both 'searches' would lead to the same group of images), there was no 'universal commonality'of images on both the 'productive' sites' each containing ones unique to themselves.
F4U-1D / 'Corsair'
Searching under 'F4U-1D' returned no 'hits'
Searching under 'Corsair' produced 31 images.
Searching under: 'Vought':8 images
Searching under: 'Chance-Vought': No images
Searching under: 'Chance Vought': 8 images
Searching under: 'Chance Vought Corsair': 4 images
While theoretically, all of the above search-enquiries should have lead to the one, central, photographic archive, and as with the 'P-40 Kittyhawk' series, there seemed to be no 'universal commonality' of images.
It should be noted BTW, that I did not do a 'subject search' based on a specific aircraft's serial number.
While appreciating the effort that has so-far been put into the site, perhaps the 'cross referencing' of 'common' images and use of an 'All roads [Enquiries] lead to Rome [The central photographic archive for the particular subject aircraft]' approach is something that should be given consideration,. as it would be a shame to miss out on an archive / resource due to a misplaced enquiry-entry.
Submitted for what it may be worth; As I have no knowledge of who might be who at the RNZAF Museum, perhaps someone within the membership can pass this on to the appropriate authorities.
Thank you.
(BTW: If anyone is needs to know under what 'authority' I make these observations, I am a (now retired) qualified Librarian and Historian and have undertaken Photographic-Archive work for various national and local libraries, a university, museums and various special-interest groups. As a result I retain a certain 'professional interest' in such matters...).
|
|
|
Post by komata on Feb 22, 2020 17:30:50 GMT 12
I guess that, with the concept now proven, the next 'exciting' thing in the development of such devices, will be 'self-piloting' drones; flown / controlled by the person in the cockpit...
Oh, wait, aren't they known as 'Microlights'?
The phrase 'Re-inventing the wheel' did come to mind...
|
|
|
Post by komata on Feb 2, 2019 19:06:25 GMT 12
(Admins please move if ithis is in the wrong place)
This might be of interest:
_____________________
Bill ‘Kiwi’ Smith, submariner who won a DSO for an attack on Japanese cruisers in Singapore harbour – obituary
Telegraph Obituaries
28 JANUARY 2019
Commander Bill “Kiwi” Smith, who has died aged 96, was at the controls of the midget submarine XE3, commanded by Lt-Cdr Ian Fraser, during Operation Struggle, when shortly before midnight on July 30 1945 she began her attack on two Japanese cruisers in Singapore harbour.
Having been towed by a parent submarine, Stygian, to the Horsborough Light, a lighthouse off Singapore, the underwater approach up the Straits of Johore through numerous harbour defences took some 12 hours. The submerged passage required steady depth-keeping and great concentration from Smith, and, as the buoyancy altered between salt seawater and the fresher waters higher up the strait, he constantly trimmed the craft.
Once, after Fraser ordered a depth of 40 ft, XE3 hit the bottom and broke the Chernikeef speed log, leaving the gyro compass as the only mechanical aid to navigation. Fraser, who knew Singapore from his pre-war days in the Merchant Navy, took frequent sights through the periscope to guide XE3 by eye.
After two hours’ searching for their camouflaged target, XE3 stopped under the keel of the 10,000-ton Takao, and Fraser and Leading Seaman James Magennis left through watertight hatches to place limpet mines and to place two-ton explosive charges under the cruiser.
However, when Fraser and Magennis returned inside XE3 the tide had dropped, trapping the submarine under the cruiser, until, after 15 minutes of panic, they worked the boat backwards and forwards and XE3 plopped free. The crew had been on duty and mostly awake, fuelled on orange juice and Benzedrine, for 52 hours before they were able to rendezvous in Singapore Strait with Stygian.
Takao was severely damaged when the charges blew. Fraser and Magennis were awarded the Victoria Cross, Smith received the DSO and Engine Room Artificer Charles Reed, who had been at the motors, received the Conspicuous Gallantry Medal.
Later, in the depot ship, Bonaventure, Captain “Tiny” Fell asked: “The other cruiser hasn’t been destroyed – will you go back and have another go?” Fraser and Smith exchanged glances and in silent agreement said: “Yes, we’ll go back.” But they were relieved when the atom bomb was dropped. Smith recalled: “That put paid to our going back. Thank God.”
William James Lanyon Smith was born on December 1 1922 into a family of publicans at Gore, South Island, and educated at the Cathedral Grammar School in Christchurch.
He enlisted in the New Zealand Army in 1940 as an artillerist, but when he found that only men with experience in the Western Desert would be accepted as officers he transferred to the Navy in May 1943.
After a short time in the battleship Duke of York he was accepted for officer training at HMS King Alfred at Brighton, where he volunteered for special service and found himself being tested to assess his suitability as a submariner. Successful, Smith trained on midget submarines in Scotland and was made captain of a training craft, before becoming first lieutenant of the operational submarine XE6.
With the war in Europe drawing to a close, the midget submarines were transferred to the Far East, where, after the tragic loss of two officers in diving accidents, the submarine flotilla’s crews were reshuffled and Smith was teamed with Fraser in XE3.
Bill Smith was later involved in setting up Scott Base in Antarctica
In 1946 Smith was chosen as one of the officers to bolster the newly established Royal New Zealand Navy. He was in the New Zealand cruiser Bellona when about 100 men, already on leave, mutinied, but the actions of the cruiser’s officers prevented any sailors on duty from joining the mutiny.
After further training in Britain, Smith was bored by peacetime duties as gunnery officer in the Loch-class frigate HMNZS Hawea, and when he heard that another ship was being commissioned as a survey ship he immediately volunteered. Sent to Portsmouth, he recruited some 200 Royal Navy sailors to join him in manning Lachlan and to take her over in Fremantle from the Royal Australian Navy.
After loan to the Royal Navy (1953-55), he returned to New Zealand and became involved in the setting up of Scott Base in Antarctica. Next, he was first lieutenant of HMNZS Endeavour, which supported New Zealand’s trans-Antarctica team, and after further loan to the Royal Navy in 1958, Smith returned to become the first New Zealand-born captain of Lachlan (1960-62). In 1962 he was appointed as the first Hydrographer of the Royal New Zealand Navy, where he served until retirement in 1972. In 1968 he was appointed OBE.
He lived quietly in retirement as a tutor in Surveying at the Technical Correspondence Institute; he enjoyed golf, tennis and ski-ing and supported numerous charities.
His medals, papers and Antarctica memorabilia were donated to the Torpedo Bay Naval Museum in Auckland. Though modest and unassuming, Smith was flattered when the RNZN’s Maritime Combat Support Centre at the Devonport Naval Base was named after him in 2006.
Smith married a fellow Cantabrian, Natalie Vale: she predeceased him in 2018 and he is survived by his daughter, Victoria Daniel.
Cdr W J L Smith, born December 1 1922, died December 2 2018
|
|
|
Post by komata on Jan 31, 2019 12:04:35 GMT 12
(Admins: Please relocate this if it is in the wrong place. It IS however 'Post-War RNZAF'). I don't know if anyone else has seen this, but posted here for those who know him. Long may he enjoy his well-earned retirement. _____________________ 'Signing off after lifetime of service to the Air ForceIan Hingston will end his career with the Royal New Zealand Air Force on 8 February, after 60 years and 30 days of continuous service. When Ian Hingston joined the Royal New Zealand Air Force (RNZAF) in 1959, Walter Nash was the New Zealand Prime Minister, United States President Dwight Eisenhower and Soviet Union leader Nikita Khrushchev were protagonists at the peak of the Cold War, and the Morris motor company had just released its first Mini model, which cost £500. On February 8 he will finally call time on his career, after 60 years and 30 days of continuous service. He joined as a boy entrant, aged 17, on 9 January, 1959, in the electrical trade. After a boyhood spent in Dannevirke with his grandmother and then at Trentham with his father for a couple of years, he was impressed by an RNZAF display at Heretaunga College and signed up. “The Boy Entrant program was the New Zealand Defence Force’s way of getting youngsters straight out of school into the services until they were old enough join the ranks,” Mr Hingston said. He joined an intake of 60 at the Woodbourne base, where he spent the next 18 months learning technical skills, spending time in the classroom, and of course marching. “I was from a broken home, as were a lot of the other boys in the intake,” he said. “We were obviously looking to get away and start a new life of our own.” After postings in his early years as an electrical fitter trainee at the Wigram and Woodbourne bases, once he completed his training he was posted to Ohakea and then Tengah, Singapore, where he was the senior non-commissioned officer in charge of the 41 Squadron Electrical Section, which operated Bristol Freighters around Asia. In 1969 he was part of a team of 50 RNZAF personnel sent to the United States to train on the Skyhawk fighter jets. “We were at Cecil Field, a Navy base in Jacksonville, Florida. The pilots and servicing crew trained on US Navy Skyhawks, eventually receiving New Zealand’s Skyhawks as they came out of the factory in California and testing those,” he said. “During that time Apollo 11, the first manned spaceship to the moon, launched from the Kennedy Space Centre in Florida and we went down to watch.” The following year he was part of the team that towed the RNZAF’s new Skyhawk fleet through the streets of Auckland, after they arrived on the USS Okinawa. Mr Hingston proudly sat in the cockpit of one of the aircraft as they were taken down Queen Street, ignoring a request from the Political Youth Movement leader Tim Shadbolt to activate the ejection seat. Because of his familiarity with the planes, he returned to the United States in 1986, as part of an RNZAF team of six in Grand Rapids, Michigan, on the Skyhawk refurbishment programme. Mr Hingston was the project publications senior non-commissioned officer, where he documented all the changes being made. He was singled out later by the management team of Lear Siegler, which conducted the refurbishment, as one of the most productive people in the department. “We fitted F-16 supersonic fighter jet components in them, on the assumption the RNZAF would be upgrading to F-16s, but that didn’t happen,” he said. In 1972 he was initially disappointed to miss out on a role in the New Zealand embassy in Moscow as the maintenance officer. However, when a Russian spy working in the Russian embassy in Wellington was detected and deported soon after, his disappointment turned to relief. “As a military person working in the New Zealand embassy in Moscow I would have been the obvious person to be identified as a Kiwi spy and kicked out,” he said. He got out of uniform on Friday, 17 February, 1989, and turned up for work in civilian clothes at the same desk — and position — in Bunny Street, Wellington, on Monday, 20 February, 1989, to continue working as second in charge at RNZAF Technical Publications. “I thought it was the right time to get out of uniform, before it was too late to get a job as a civilian,” he said. Now based in the NZCIS complex in Heretaunga near the Trentham Military Camp, he will retire next month as Manager of Publications, Information and Drawing Support, a role he has filled since 2002. The New Zealand Defence Force was much different today than it was when he joined, Mr Hingston said. “It was a slower pace back then,” he said. “You dealt with people face to face and if you wanted something you wrote a letter and expected a reply in about a month. These days you get an email and five minutes later, if you haven’t answered that email, you get a reminder.” At a function recently to celebrate his 60 years of service, Chief of Defence Force Air Marshal Kevin Short said for Mr Hingston to serve 60 years was a fantastic achievement. “That is three-quarters of the existence of the RNZAF,” Air Marshal Short said. “Your dedication to serve, in and out of uniform, has been incredible.” Mr Hingston said he had thoroughly enjoyed his time in the Air Force. “What has kept me going is a passion for the job and a passion for the people who have worked with me. But it is time for me to move on now.” His first priority in retirement will be to finish rebuilding his Jowett Jupiter car, one of only 400 left in the world and one of only 20 in New Zealand. There is also plenty of gorse and blackberry to clear on his hillside Paraparaumu property, and his weekly Hash House Harrier runs will be more enjoyable knowing that there is no work to worry about the next morning'. 1_______________________________________1 [n.a.], 'Signing off after lifetime of service to the Air Force' [online], New Zealand Defence Force, medium.com/@nzdefenceforce [Accessed 31 January 2019].
|
|
|
Post by komata on Oct 19, 2018 10:02:33 GMT 12
Condolences to the family; an absolute tragedy.
Too early to know the cause of course, and no doubt the rumour-mill is already circulating, but the NZ Herald's statement that 'What appears to be the tail section is more than 100m away' (even allowing for 'journalistic licence'), seems a tad unusual..
|
|
|
Post by komata on Feb 20, 2018 12:30:05 GMT 12
Dave H
Re: 'Did Egbert Cadbury invent the chocolate egg?'
The (very) short answer is no!
However, since you are obviously interested in such matters, herewith the origins of said ovoid confection:...
'The chocolate Easter egg
The chocolate Easter egg has developed from the simple type wrapped in paper to the beribboned variety wrapped in brightest foil and packed in a box or basket.
The first chocolate Easter eggs were made in Europe in the early 19th Century with France and Germany taking the lead in this new artistic confectionery. A type of eating chocolate had been invented a few years earlier but it could not be successfully moulded. Some early eggs were solid while the production of the first hollow chocolate eggs must have been rather painstaking as the moulds were lined with paste chocolate one at a time!
John Cadbury made his first 'French eating Chocolate' in 1842 but it was not until 1875 that the first Cadbury Easter Eggs were made. This may have been because he was not sufficiently impressed with continental eggs to wish to compete with them or because he was too busy with other aspects of his growing business. In fact, progress in the chocolate Easter egg market was very slow until a method was found of making the chocolate flow into the moulds.
The modern chocolate Easter egg with its smoothness, shape and flavour owes its progression to the two greatest developments in the history of chocolate - the invention of a press for separating cocoa butter from the cocoa bean by the Dutch inventor Van Houten in 1828 and the introduction of a pure cocoa by Cadbury Brothers in 1866. The Cadbury process made large quantities of cocoa butter available and this was the secret of making moulded chocolate or indeed, any fine eating chocolate.
The earliest Cadbury chocolate eggs were made of 'dark' chocolate with a plain smooth surface and were filled with dragees. The earliest 'decorated eggs' were plain shells enhanced by chocolate piping and marzipan flowers.
Decorative skill and variety soon followed and by 1893 there were no less than 19 different lines on the Cadbury Brothers Easter list in the UK. Richard Cadbury's artistic skill undoubtedly played an important part in the development of the Easter range. Many of his designs were based on French, Dutch and German originals adapted to Victorian tastes. From Germany came the 'crocodile' finish which by breaking up the smooth surface, disguised minor imperfections; still used today by some manufacturers, this was the forerunner to the many distinctive finishes now available.
The launch in 1905 of the famous Cadbury's Dairy Milk Chocolate made a tremendous contribution to the Easter egg market. The popularity of this new kind of chocolate vastly increased sales of Easter eggs and did much to establish them as seasonal best sellers. Today the Easter egg market is predominantly milk chocolate'.(1)
______________________
(1)[n.a.],'History of Chocolate Easter Eggs',Chocolate Trading Co. Ltd.(Chocolate Trading Co.Ltd., Macclesfield, 2018),[n.p.n.]
|
|
|
Post by komata on Jan 14, 2018 7:41:21 GMT 12
If it is 'different' military schemes that you are seeking, then perhaps the (Royal?) Iranian Air Force P47N's would be in that category?
Just a thought...
|
|
|
Post by komata on Sept 20, 2017 14:20:19 GMT 12
if anyone is interested, the recent Goodwood Revival (8-10 September 2017) had an air component, this comprising a Spitfire, P-40F, F4U-1D, a P-51 and a P-38.
As some may find it of interest, herewith a couple of links:
|
|
|
Post by komata on Sept 9, 2017 15:25:47 GMT 12
Concerning 'Gentleman of the ROYAL New Zealand Air Force' (Note the emphasis). Within my family two relatives were (wartime) 'Navy (one RN, one RNZN) and one NZ Army. My father was RNZAF. The Army and Navy 'uncles' were present at the parade and the Newall comment wasn't well received , to the extent that 40 YEARS after it occurred, the subject could still cause acrimony. However, on the positive side (and for all RNZAF personnel who might read this), Sir Cyril's announcement DOES mean that all and any members of the RNZAF, whether currently-serving or not (and including Civi's I believe; Sir Cyril didn't specify otherwise), can quite legitimately call themselves 'GENTLEMEN',and sight the Newall comment as complete (and legal) justification for so-doing. Although for some odd reason, Navy and Army don't quite see things the same way, if the Governor General (as HM's representative) has made the statement, it carries the full weight of 'Royal' Authority... So 'Gentlemen' of the RNZAF you are all entitled to be (Sir Cyril said so ) (I thought you might like to know).
|
|
|
Post by komata on Jul 22, 2017 12:41:20 GMT 12
A most excellent project, but I have to ask: Is anyone, in NZ rebuilding (or even 'replica'-building) a long-fuselage extended-canopy P40-N-25? We have several short fuselage 'original outline' examples being worked on, but AFAIK, none of the final version flown by the RNZAF, hence my question.
Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by komata on Jul 21, 2017 9:24:00 GMT 12
Thank you Gentlemen; a little-known aspect of the RNZAF.
|
|