Saturday, April 28, 2012

WW II Beer Flights

Posted supplied by: John Tapper
Getting the important things done properly was very important in times of war.  The Britsknew how to do it!  Great ingenuity!
Wonder why the aeronautical engineers never thought of this? When men were men and "drag-coefficient" was overcome by libation desire.
cid:E84A90CD1EDC43BEA59FB6B322C68079@JohnPC

In the lighter moments of World War II, the Spitfire was used in an unorthodox role: bringing beer kegs to the men in Normandy .

During the war, the Heneger and Constable brewery donated free beer to the troops. After D-Day, supplying the invasion troops in Normandy with vital supplies was already a challenge. Obviously, there was no room in the logistics chain for such luxuries as beer or other types of refreshments. Some men, often called "sourcers", were able to get wine or other niceties "from the land" or rather from the locals. RAF Spitfire pilots came up with an even better idea.
The Spitfire Mk IX was an evolved version of the Spitfire, with pylons under the wings for bombs or tanks. It was discovered that the bomb pylons could also be modified to carry beer kegs. According to pictures that can be found, various sizes of kegs were used. Whether the kegs could be jettisoned in case of emergency is unknown. If the Spitfire flew high enough, the cold air at altitude would even refresh the beer, making it ready for consumption upon arrival.
 
A variation of this was a long range fuel tank modified to carry beer instead of fuel. The modification even received the official designation Mod. XXX. Propaganda services were quick to pick up on this, which probably explains the "official" designation.
cid:5655A39F3A5C4D259B9A89B9B791F1EF@JohnPC
Mod. XXX tank being filled.

As a result, Spitfires equipped w ith Mod XXX or keg-carrying pylons were often sent back to Great-Britain for "maintenance" or "liaison" duties. They would then return to Normandy with full beer kegs fitted under the wings.
Typically, the British Revenue of Ministry and Excise stepped in, notifying the brewery that they were in violation of the law by exporting beer without paying the relevant taxes. It seems that Mod. XXX was terminated then, but various squadrons found different ways to refurbish their stocks. Most often, this was done with the unofficial approval of higher echelons.


In his book " Dancing in the Skies", Tony Jonsson, the only Icelander pilot in the RAF, recalled beer runs while he was flying with 65 Squadron. Every week a pilot was sent back to the UK to fill some cleaned-up drop tanks with beer and return to the squadron. Jonsson hated the beer runs as every man on the squadron would be watching you upon arrival. Anyone who made a rough landing and dropped the tanks would be the most hated man on the squadron for an entire week.

cid:527571DA1E5B4348BC1DF13676218BAF@JohnPC

cid:AF36689DA7D6456F845A442D99C629FC@JohnPC
To help us keep PropWash relevant, please rank your interest in this article below.

Saturday, April 7, 2012

Matthew Fisher F-35 Article

Posted supplied by: Carl Mills

Matthew Fisher: Let's put the F-35 debate in perspective

The auditor general’s report on the F-35 aside, no one knows what Canada will pay for the Joint Strike Fighter, and they won’t until a final price is negotiated. So, in the inimitable words of Aislin, “Everybody take a Valium!”
Price estimates now range from $75 million to $162 million per aircraft. The nine partners in the JSF project are currently pressing the manufacturer (and the U.S. government, as program co-ordinator) to get costs down. The odds are, they will.
Things such as which tranche you buy in at, how many aircraft you buy, over what time frame, and where your currency is vis-a-vis the U.S. dollar at the time of signing, all will affect the prices each country pays — just as with every other similar program. Indeed, these factors can have a huge impact on final pricing. As things stand now, the Canadian military still reckons the per-aircraft cost, as the U.S. Congress was told last week, is about $85 million and that the federal government still can purchase F-35s under the $9-billion ceiling the Harper government unnecessarily announced two years ago and boxed itself into for good last week.
Still, the overriding question remains: Does or doesn’t Canada need a replacement for the CF-18s and if so, what performance should that replacement aircraft be capable of?
Unfortunately, sometimes ridiculously exaggerating what the AG had to say, politicians and other critics conflate these two, using the bureaucracy’s and the government’s handling of the procurement to question the need for the fifth generation F-35 itself.
Let’s live in the real world. Unless Canada decides drastically to change its defence strategy and becomes pacifist and isolationist, we will continue, as we have done for a century, to commit ourselves to military alliances and partnerships to further our national interests. To be worthy allies and partners we have to be more than peacekeepers uttering platitudes — the bulwark of the Liberal defence strategy for years.
As with the entire F-35 debate, the auditor general’s report is being discussed with no external context. The competence and integrity of the folks at the Defence Department aside, what about the eight other partner countries in the program, and the Japanese, who have ordered 42 F-35s? Why are a bunch of Europeans signed up to an American program when the EU nations already produces several newish fighter jets of their own. Are they all idiots, too?
The multinational JSF program follows on that of the F-16, another U.S. warplane chosen by many European countries about 30 years ago. As with the F-35, the F-16 had some initial teething problems but it was ultimately successful. This may explain why the F-35 European partner nations have shown far more patience with the F-35’s hurdles than Canadian critics have.
As for Canada not having a competitive bidding process before deciding on the F-35, neither did its JSF partners except the U.S., which chose Lockheed Martin’s X-35 over Boeing’s X-32. The Japanese, who are not partners, did hold a competition and concluded the JSF was better than Boeing’s Super Hornet and the Eurofighter consortium’s Typhoon.
There is no competition to be had if you want stealth and a networked capability because there are no other western aircraft being produced now that have this. It is THAT simple. The justification the U.S., Japan and most of their western European allies have accepted is that China and Russia are rushing to catch up with fifth-generation warplanes of their own. Looking out 20 or 30 years, it is hardly a stretch to see how the Chinese or Russians might one day pose a military threat to Canada or Canadian interests.
The only reason for Canada to have a competition to replace its CF-18s is if it decides — in advance — that the stealthy fifth-generation aspects of the F-35 are not important. If they aren’t, then the F-35 is going to lose any competition, because aside from these potentially revolutionary capabilities, it isn’t that much different from the fourth-generation aircraft out there and of course, it costs more.
Much has been made of the United States Navy and the Royal Australian Air Force purchasing a relatively small number of additional, less expensive fourth-generation Super Hornets, with suggestions that Canada should follow their lead. This misrepresents those Super Hornet purchases. Those additional aircraft buys are intended to fill an operational gap due to F-35 production delays, not to replace them.
As for the fourth-generation alternatives to the F-35, several have had troubled histories. Sweden’s Grippen, for example, had two very public and embarrassing prototype crashes. Nowhere near as advanced as the F-35, reams of its software code needed to be re-written, delaying the program and boosting costs. France’s Rafale was long delayed, over budget, and it has little success in export sales despite years of expensive promotion. Eurofighter’s Typhoon has experienced enormous problems, delays and cost overruns and has failed to attract buyers outside its builders’ group. The only one that has had any real sales success has been the Super Hornet, and most its recent sales have been as bridge aircraft to the F-35.
Why have so few Super Hornets been sold? There are many reasons, but one that stands out is that they are not in the same league as the F-35. The prospect of the JSF’s arrival has helped keep other aircraft from selling well, as has the prospect of Russian and Chinese fifth-generation fighters now under development.
Something else forgotten is that Canada spent several billion dollars to purchase C-17 heavy-lift transport aircraft and rebuilt CH-47 medium-lift helicopters for the Afghan mission without a tendering process. At the time, some critics demanded that Canada consider Airbus’s A-400M heavy-lift transport, then at the design stage. Well, the A-400M still has not entered service. The RCAF would still be waiting for it if it had been the winner of a competitive process.
Alas, almost none of this has shown up in either the government’s case for the F-35 or in the broader debate surrounding it.
© Copyright (c) Postmedia News

To help us keep PropWash relevant, please rank your interest in this article below.

Wednesday, April 4, 2012

What DOES A Piper Wear Under His Kilt ?

Posted supplied by: Doug Louch
Prelude by: Bill Bishop
Many years ago I had the pleasure of sharing an apartment with then 400 Squadron Drum Major Bill Flaherty.  I can recall on numerous occasions asking Bill "Really, what do you guy's wear under your kilts".  His response was always given with a wry smile.  He always answered "I've told you before, we wear a night fighter and two hangers."  I always thought he was joking until I saw the following pictures submitted by Doug Louch.  Please be aware that these are not pictures of Our Band Members ..... but it does beg the question ..............





 To help us keep PropWash relevant, please rank your interest in this article below.