Recent content by Greyman

Flight Sergeant Peter Engbrecht, RCAF Mennonite, born in Russia, ethnically Dutch, family moved to Canada when he was two or three. In their Halifax III (HX316 then MZ802) the gunnery team formed by Engbrecht (mid-upper gunner) and Flight Sergeant Gordon Gillanders (rear gunner) accounted for 9...

https://theaviationist.com/2026/09/23/canadas-first-f-35-conducts-maiden-flight/

Looks like it would behave very similarly to the .303 Mk.IV incendiary.

A lot more than the Aussies! British Commonwealth Air Training Plan - Wikipedia

Interesting bit of trivia ... but the early gun button was three concave divots of equal shape (and feel). Cases began coming in where pilots had inadvertently pressed the wrong portion of the button and fired the wrong combination of guns. So a modification was done up (Oct 41) where a piece...

Proper harmonisation would negate any issue here (within reasonable shooting ranges). Though the difference in muzzle velocity and bullet time of flight would factor in at some point with deflection shooting.

No, as I posted earlier, the FN64 was fine. AFDU report conclusions: The F.N.64 is of considerable value in the defence of a heavy bomber. The view from the periscope is satisfactory and the field of fire adequate for the requirements of present tactics. Use of the sight for purposes of search...

No I'm refering to the F.N.54 – did some reading to firm up some details ... During a conference on 6 November 1939, Bristol agreed to design an installation involving a 'dished' escape hatch panel, firing aft, for the under defence of the Blenheim. By 17 December these were being made and it...

The only remote systems the British had were still in the prototype stage at the end of the war. These were the RAE system (electric setup in a Lancaster) and the Vickers-Armstrong system (electric/hydraulic setup in a Windsor). Under armaments were generally used in any daylight bombers that...

British summary of the topic, reporting from a visit to Korea back to the Air Ministry (via British Embassy in Tokyo) 10 May, 1952: The facts are that in a fair fight a well handled Meteor should be able to avoid being shot down by a MIG 15 at low to medium altitudes. On other hand a MIG 15...

I have: 6 mm plate for the pilot's head armour 4 mm plate for the pilot's seat back 6 mm plate for the seat extension (legs) 8 swg dural for the seat bottom (works out to about 4 mm) As we've been saying, nominal thickness. Just as I was looking the above figures up and saw Orfordness...

No this was at the AFDU. The seat back armour was the only armour installed. 'This armour is American type and it is understood it is being replaced by British armour'

When the British were examining the initial Buffalos they noted the US armour plate in place, but also said this would be replaced by British armour. I can't say for sure why, but I know they were suspicious of the Mohawk's low-quality armour plate when examining the first examples of those...

I've run into this a lot. Armour (just like a lot of aspects of frantic, wartime manufacturing) has a spec/nominal value, and an actual, real-world value. Maybe they were all 41.28 mm, or maybe they were just 41.28 mm for a specific lot due to a particular machine calibration, or maybe it was...

I'm not sure what the point of such a propaganda drive would have been. Who would they be trying to fool? I also doubt Quill would be obscuring any drawbacks of the Spitfire. This would be in order to ... ? Again, I'm not sure what the point would be. He was critical enough about the ailerons...