Author Topic: Starfighter  (Read 10037 times)

TimC

  • Old blerk sometimes onabike.
Re: Starfighter
« Reply #50 on: 19 April, 2010, 08:30:08 pm »
Really? When was that put there? When I left (in 1998, after 18 years at Lyneham) the only gate guardian was a Comet 2 ex-216 Sqn (seen here). A beautiful old girl which I helped prepare for display. There was some talk of the RAF Gatow Handley Page Hastings being brought to Lyneham when Gatow closed, but I don't think that happened.

rogerzilla

  • When n+1 gets out of hand
Re: Starfighter
« Reply #51 on: 19 April, 2010, 08:34:54 pm »
It's on the east side of the road, not on the main base.  Technically it's the home of 47 Air Despatch Squadron.

You can just see its tail through the trees

And this is the aerial view

Hard work sometimes pays off in the end, but laziness ALWAYS pays off NOW.

clarion

  • Tyke
Re: Starfighter
« Reply #52 on: 19 April, 2010, 09:34:23 pm »
That won't be a DC-3, but a C-47.  D-Day markings, too.
Getting there...

TimC

  • Old blerk sometimes onabike.
Re: Starfighter
« Reply #53 on: 19 April, 2010, 10:25:48 pm »
Ah, that makes sense. 47AD RCT (RLC these days, I think) were very much part of the Berlin Airlift and, before that, the resupply of Allied troops in Operation Market Garden in 1944. The C47 was their main mode of transport. I wasn't aware they'd acquired one for the site.

rogerzilla

  • When n+1 gets out of hand
Re: Starfighter
« Reply #54 on: 21 April, 2010, 06:39:17 am »
Well, a C-47 Dakota is the military version of the DC-3.
Hard work sometimes pays off in the end, but laziness ALWAYS pays off NOW.

clarion

  • Tyke
Re: Starfighter
« Reply #55 on: 21 April, 2010, 09:24:25 am »
Up to a point.
Getting there...

Re: Starfighter
« Reply #56 on: 23 April, 2010, 07:59:08 pm »
Well, a C-47 Dakota is the military version of the DC-3.

If I remember my Airfix models correctly the Dakota was the British designation for the militarised DC3, C-47 was the American.

Whether there were any major differences between the two types I'm not sure but they were definately different aircraft
“There is no point in using the word 'impossible' to describe something that has clearly happened.”
― Douglas Adams

Re: Starfighter
« Reply #57 on: 23 April, 2010, 08:08:36 pm »
C-47 / Dakota had strengthened floors and loading doors in the side. Not sure if the engines were military grade rather than the same ones as on the civil version.
I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that.

Re: Starfighter
« Reply #58 on: 23 April, 2010, 08:13:11 pm »
Wikipedia say:

The Douglas C-47 Skytrain or Dakota  is a military transport aircraft that was developed from the Douglas DC-3 airliner. It was used extensively by the Allies during World War II and remained in front line operations through the 1950s with a few remaining in operation to this day.

Interestingly I didn't realise that Dakota came from DACoTA for Douglas Aircraft Company Transport Aircraft.

Also known as the R4D for the Naval variant, C-53 Skytrooper for the Paratrooper variant, and many others (see the Wikipedia entry for a quite long list), but as PeteB99 says, Dakota is the generic RAF name for C-47s and impressed DC3s.
Actually, it is rocket science.
 

Martin

Re: Starfighter
« Reply #59 on: 22 August, 2010, 09:42:45 pm »
the UK version (actually it's a Jaguar; seems only last year they were a regular at Eastbourne)

spotted in a field on the way back from Shoreham today

BTW there is a Japanese version built by Mitsubishi (F-1) but you will never see one outside Japanese airspace


Zoidburg

Re: Starfighter
« Reply #60 on: 22 August, 2010, 09:52:04 pm »
The Starfighter and the Jag are a complete mismatch.

The Jag was a jet trainer that was cross rolled as ground attack and a bomber.

The Starfighter is the classic coldwar interceptor man in a missle job, fast climb rate-high speed.

Lightning was it's equivilant.


Martin

Re: Starfighter
« Reply #61 on: 22 August, 2010, 09:54:11 pm »
The Starfighter and the Jag are a complete mismatch.

I mean the UK version of a random old jet plane in a field

it's got stubby wings; close enough for me  ;)

Zoidburg

Re: Starfighter
« Reply #62 on: 22 August, 2010, 09:59:34 pm »
A Starfighter would be sticking out of the ground at a 45 degree angle.

fuzzy

Re: Starfighter
« Reply #63 on: 23 August, 2010, 10:55:37 am »
I've come to the conclusion that Evel Knievel's Snake River Canyon stunt 'bike' was a Starfighter that had misplaced it's wings.


Jaded

  • The Codfather
  • Formerly known as Jaded
Re: Starfighter
« Reply #64 on: 23 August, 2010, 11:08:19 am »


It's a Jaguar imitating a Starfighter.
It is simpler than it looks.

Mr Larrington

  • A bit ov a lyv wyr by slof standirds
  • Custard Wallah
    • Mr Larrington's Automatic Diary
Re: Starfighter
« Reply #65 on: 23 August, 2010, 12:24:18 pm »
I've come to the conclusion that Evel Knievel's Snake River Canyon stunt 'bike' was a Starfighter that had misplaced it's wings.

Some twits are building an LSR car which is basically a Starfighter with the wings sawn off.  Clicky.

<Old_Joak>
Anybody want to buy a Starfighter?  Then buy an acre of ground, und wait!
</Old_Joak>

The father of a skoolfriend was chief test pilot on the Jaguar and stacked at least three of them.
External Transparent Wall Inspection Operative & Mayor of Mortagne-au-Perche
Satisfying the Bloodlust of the Masses in Peacetime