Duxford....Birds in Theirs Nests

[Jeff Hunt]

For those who have not been to Duxford, there are buildings just full of static aircraft and this thread is designed to show you Duxford's nestlings.

Many more to follow......


Cheers,

Jeff

 

[Airframes]

Good stuff Jeff. That's inside the restoration hangar, with all the aircraft under (sometimes slow) restoration. It's also where the conservation is done on Museum exhibits, and the Huey is 'resting' there, waiting to go back into the American Museum.

 

[Wurger]

 

[Crimea_River]

Good stuff. maybe someone here knows why that Strikemaster had that rough coating on the wing leading edges.

 

[Airframes]

Yes, it would be good to know. Either Evan or Grant might know, as they had them in the RNZAF, but I don't know if they had that coating though.
I'll e-mail Evan and see if he has any idea.

 

[Jeff Hunt]

More for you.....

Cheers,

Jeff

 

[Wurger]

 

[gumbyk]

Good stuff. maybe someone here knows why that Strikemaster had that rough coating on the wing leading edges.

Was it on the Saudi one? Could have been an anti-abrasive rubberised coating? I've seen similar on tailplanes of aircraft operating off sandy/stony airstrips to protect them from damage.

 

[Gnomey]

Nice shots Jeff!

 

[Crimea_River]

Was it on the Saudi one? Could have been an anti-abrasive rubberised coating? I've seen similar on tailplanes of aircraft operating off sandy/stony airstrips to protect them from damage.

Yes, the Saudi one but it did not extend the full length of the wing, just from the tip to half way inboard. It was an extremely rough surface. Unfortunately I don't have pics.

 

[Airframes]

I'd thought maybe it was for rough-field ops, and even suggested it may be some sort of coating to disrupt air-flow at certain angles in a hot climate, although I'll admit that was a very 'outside guess'.
I took a couple of shots specially to show this (I hadn't noticed it before, during previous visits), and I'll post them tomorrow, as I haven't downloaded the 'extras' from my other cameras yet.

 

[gumbyk]

I'd thought maybe it was for rough-field ops, and even suggested it may be some sort of coating to disrupt air-flow at certain angles in a hot climate, although I'll admit that was a very 'outside guess'.
I took a couple of shots specially to show this (I hadn't noticed it before, during previous visits), and I'll post them tomorrow, as I haven't downloaded the 'extras' from my other cameras yet.

- The Airfix Tribute Forum - ? View topic - Airfix 1/72 BAC Jet Provost T5/Strikemaster (02044/03049):

The T Mk5 had tip tanks but no nose strakes (they were originally converted from T Mk4 airframes), when the aircraft were upgraded to T Mk5A standard (an avionics upgrade of single VOR initially and later a DME) the tip tanks were removed.

This caused 2 related aerodynamic problems. Firstly directional control at high angles of attack was poor and, associated with this, the aircraft's spin performance was unstable and very oscillatory.

Secondly there was little or no stall warning buffet and stall entry was rather sudden (which could bite the unwary).

Neither of these problems were desirable in a basic trainer!

The spin problem was caused because removal of the tip tanks resulted in a greater fuselage weight (and thus inertial moment) relative to the wings (something known as the 'B : A Ratio'). This was cured by the fitting of the strakes to the nose (the strakes around the engine intakes are there for a different reason and are common to all JP5 types).

The stall problem was cured by the fitting of a roughened leading edge surface to the outboard part of both wings (the grey area ahead of the red on the models). This was an adhesive coating that actually felt like rough concrete! The idea being that this would increase the pre-stall buffet and result in wing drop at the stall (ie the tips stall before the main part of the wing), thus giving a more defined stall entry.

 

[Crimea_River]

Interesting! While we were mulling it over whilst looking at this feature, discussion did come up that it might be for aerodynamic reasons but we could not figure out why there would be a need to do that. Thanks for the info!

 

[Airframes]

Thanks for the info - it would seem I was thinking along the right lines, if not perhaps totally accurate.

 

[rochie]

Yes, thanks for that, it does look strange on the wing but obviously has a use !

 

[Jeff Hunt]

Cheers,

Jeff

 

[Wurger]

 

[Airframes]

Good ones Jeff. I never tire of looking at the Bf109E when I'm at DX.
Going back to Post #6, the P-47 from the American Museum looks as if it might have been fitted with suspension shackles at the wing roots. It used to be in a cameo setting on the floor, with close access, good for detail shots, but now looks like it's being prepared to hang from the roof of the building after it's been refurbished.

 

[Airframes]

Here are the pics of the wing leading edge of the BAC Strikemaster, referred to earlier. As can be seen, it's quite rough, rather like an exaggerated anti-slip coating.
Good to have a rational explanation, as it was Jeff who noticed it, and asked me my opinion - for what it was worth !

 

[Jeff Hunt]

Cheers,

Jeff