Steve W-O Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 T h i s one on the cover looks like it would perform well, don't know about on a slope Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Harris - Moderator Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 Slope, flat, inverted, any way looks good to me! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ken anderson. Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 been nice knowing you lads--here come the Mods...... ken anderson ne...1. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Mackey Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 All OK so far, but of course, we are watching Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olly P Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 Shame we can't see the undercarrage very clearly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Privett Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 Posted by Tim Mackey - Administrator on 12/06/2011 20:38:56:All OK so far, but of course, we are watching Watching what though? The posts on here, or the pic on ebay? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Cantwell Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 OY!! thats the wife if you dont mind **************gotcha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Mackey Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 both of course Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve W-O Posted June 12, 2011 Author Share Posted June 12, 2011 I was wondering with such a large wingspan if the covering would be up to the job in a heavy wind.They didn't have carbon in those days to take the stresses, thought I see the tips are removable. I like the shape of the fuselage, just looks more elegant than some of the modern ones that look stick-like. Doesn't look dated, considering how long they have been around. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wiltshire Flyer Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 Looked at the pic, looked really hard..... still don't see a plane though Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 Tim and I are taking it in turns as to what to watch.... BEBEdited By Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator on 12/06/2011 21:14:38 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve W-O Posted June 13, 2011 Author Share Posted June 13, 2011 Ah!Now I realise what is being watched! Not much point I don't think, after 34 years the airframe will be warped, and the covering will need more than a hot air gun to get it smooth again. September 1977, I had only been flying for about 20 months then, doesn't seem so long ago! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myron Beaumont Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Ah Yes I remember well when models were real models Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Mackey Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Posted by Steve W-O on 13/06/2011 05:07:36: Ah!Now I realise what is being watched! Not much point I don't think, after 34 years the airframe will be warped, and the covering will need more than a hot air gun to get it smooth again. September 1977, I had only been flying for about 20 months then, doesn't seem so long ago! LOL very good Steve Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Harris - Moderator Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Isn't it sad that you can turn on the television at almost any time of the day and see sights and hear language that would have struggled to get an X rating at the cinema in 1977, set your Google filter to anything other than moderately safe and get instant visibility of things best left undescribed on this forum but the thought of a beautiful young lady displaying nothing more titillating than her natural charm while posing with a model aircraft would lead to calls for the head of any editor foolish enough to risk alienating a small proportion of a tiny minority buying sector of the magazine. Why would it be so wrong to return to those innocent days? Aren't women's magazines full of pictures of both lovely female models and wll toned chaps? Would the small female readership really find such pictures offensive or are we just told that they do? ...or am I just an un-reconstucted sexist dinosaur for thinking this way? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Mackey Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Where I might agree with you on a purely personal level, I know Mrs T would certainly be "upset" if the mag started this old trend again. Very touchy about this sort of thing she is Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve W-O Posted June 14, 2011 Author Share Posted June 14, 2011 In some cases there is reason for upset, but I think in most cases it is a case misguided/brain washed ideas, not meant in any personal way, but in similar light to the current H&S situation. If you look on youtube for Cebu Pacific dancing air hostess, you will see a refreshing way of giving the safety talk on flights. "Women's rights" groups condemned it, but they didn't bother to get the opinion of the participants. They judged another culture by applying their own irrelevant standards. (look for Cebu dancing prisoners as well) If the purpose of whatever it is was not intended to degrade anyone, and the people taking part are happy to do so, surely it is part of enjoying life and being happy? Very little of that around in the west these days. My wife thinks that the model holding the model has "fat" upper legs, have to agree on looking. Although she has a better figure, I don't think my wife will hold my planes for photos or should that be Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terence Lynock Posted June 23, 2011 Share Posted June 23, 2011 Now if my calculations are correct, 1977 + age of model 22/24 = born around 1953/55 = approaching the Zimmer frame zone, varicose veins, grey hair, plastic teeth, boobus droopus, I think I will pass on that one.............. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete B Posted June 23, 2011 Share Posted June 23, 2011 Posted by Terence Lynock on 23/06/2011 00:03:31:Now if my calculations are correct, 1977 + age of model 22/24 = born around 1953/55 = approaching the Zimmer frame zone, varicose veins, grey hair, plastic teeth, boobus droopus, I think I will pass on that one.............. As a New Elizabethan, born in 1953, you speak for yourself, Terry! A bit salt-and-pepper, maybe, but none of the others - yet!!!!! Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve W-O Posted June 23, 2011 Author Share Posted June 23, 2011 Posted by Terence Lynock on 23/06/2011 00:03:31:Now if my calculations are correct, 1977 + age of model 22/24 = born around 1953/55 = approaching the Zimmer frame zone, varicose veins, grey hair, plastic teeth, boobus droopus, I think I will pass on that one.............. That is what I was thinking when I said:- "Not much point I don't think, after 34 years the airframe will be warped, and the covering will need more than a hot air gun to get it smooth again." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jack semple Posted August 22, 2011 Share Posted August 22, 2011 I love to purchase on ebay for their variety and reviews. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.