Tomato Eins Productions

[Tomato Eins]

Hi All,
I thought I would share with you some short documentaries I've been working on. I'm a young aviation enthusiast and have a huge passion for warbirds.I hope you enjoy and finding them interesting. More on the way so stay posted

 

[Tomato Eins]

Just finished another doco. This new one focuses on the CAC CA-4 Wackett Bomber/CA-11 Woomera. A very unique plane indeed. The whole look of the doco has been refurbished. Make sure to check it out.

 

[Tomato Eins]

 

[Tomato Eins]

 

[Tomato Eins]

My latest documentary is remake of my original spitfire documentary. A little more info has been added while the whole look of the video ahs been changed. Enjoy

 

[vikingBerserker]

Nicely done on these!

 

[Tomato Eins]

Nicely done on these!

Thank you ✈

 

[Tomato Eins]

Hi all,
The Short Stirling is often overshadowed by the Lancaster and Halifax, but it still made a considerable contribution to the Allied War Effort. In 1942 alone it flew in all the 1,000 bomber raids. While it had its short comings most of them was as a result of the original specification and it was able to find usage of in a range of roles. Here is my attempt at documenting the development of the Stirling:

 

[Capt. Vick]

Good work amigo! Totally beats mine: "Skeet-ball games of the Third Reich".

 

[vikingBerserker]

Well done.

 

[Tomato Eins]

Good work amigo! Totally beats mine: "Skeet-ball games of the Third Reich".

Thank you ✈

 

[Tomato Eins]

Following, the success of the Mosquito, De Havilland set off an providing the RAF with long-range, high performance fighter. From this the twin-engine De Havilland Hornet and Sea Hornet was born, an aircraft that test pilot Eric Brown believed could "even with one propellor feathered...loop with the best single-engine fighter." This is the story of one of Britain's best, but overlooked piston engine aircraft.

 

[Tomato Eins]

Well done.

Thank you ✈

 

[fastmongrel]

Hi all,
The Short Stirling is often overshadowed by the Lancaster and Halifax, but it still made a considerable contribution to the Allied War Effort. In 1942 alone it flew in all the 1,000 bomber raids. While it had its short comings most of them was as a result of the original specification and it was able to find usage of in a range of roles. Here is my attempt at documenting the development of the Stirling:

Just a little nitpick. The Stirlings wingspan wasnt due to the need to fit inside a hangar. Heavies rarely if ever saw the inside of a hangar all maintenance would be carried out in the open. The standard hangar door was either 112 feet or 120 feet wide with bigger hangars being built on new bases. No one seems to know for definite why the wingspan restriction was in the specs possibly the Air Ministry was trying to keep size and weight down.

 

[Tomato Eins]

Just a little nitpick. The Stirlings wingspan wasnt due to the need to fit inside a hangar. Heavies rarely if ever saw the inside of a hangar all maintenance would be carried out in the open. The standard hangar door was either 112 feet or 120 feet wide with bigger hangars being built on new bases. No one seems to know for definite why the wingspan restriction was in the specs possibly the Air Ministry was trying to keep size and weight down.

Thanks When researching it seemed very cloudy, with majority of sources stating the issue was related to fitting into the hangar and only one or two saying otherwise and few not offering anything. I included it, as it was the what most sources stated.

 

[Tomato Eins]

My latest addition. I personally believe this is one of my best:

 

[fastmongrel]

Thanks When researching it seemed very cloudy, with majority of sources stating the issue was related to fitting into the hangar and only one or two saying otherwise and few not offering anything. I included it, as it was the what most sources stated.

If you go to original RAF sources there's no mention of the hangar size being a problem. There were several contemporary aircraft designs that had wingspans greater than the Stirling. If you just read the same sources you will always be at risk of getting things wrong.

Much of what is printed or on the web all uses the same sources and it's easy for a mistake or downright lie to become fact. Google Martin Caidin and the forked tail devil myth. The myth has been busted many times but still the same story gets quoted.

 

[GrauGeist]

I beleive the wing-span limitation was a result of the Air Ministry not wanting the bombers becoming too large.
The Short S.29 (Stirling) was the result of the Air Ministry's B.12/36 (Order 40) specification.

Supermarine's 316/317 wing was under 100 feet (prototypes only), as was Armstrong-Whitworth's proposed A.W.42 (which never left the drawing board) - both of these also being the result of the Ministry's B.12/36 specification.

 

[Gnomey]

Good stuff!

 

[SaparotRob]

My latest documentary is remake of my original spitfire documentary. A little more info has been added while the whole look of the video ahs been changed. Enjoy

Very informative for me. I'm curious about the Spitfire at the 7:21 minute mark. FU*? just seems a little strange. I believe forum members have brought this plane up before. Was the newspaper headline at the 3:26 mark to see if anyone was paying attention?