|
Post by ezaviator on Sept 4, 2018 12:14:00 GMT
Another excellant read which I am constantly picking up and not just browsing, as I used to with Digest, but actually getting into the articles. So far I have enjoyed the Battle of Britain film article and Farnborough report (as I did not visit).
I hope this continues and will certainly renew with FULL membership next year.
Best wishes Geoff
|
|
|
Post by davidkeeble on Sept 4, 2018 12:27:32 GMT
Having been a critic of the first two issues of Aviation World, I have to say that the content of the Autumn 2018 edition shows a considerable improvement. Long may it continue thus.
David Keeble
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2018 8:37:25 GMT
Agree, with the above 2 posts.I posted on ABIX how much I enjoyed this edition, will probably be in trouble for posting there, but anyway, thanks to all contributors for latest edition.
|
|
|
Post by elmsleigh on Sept 19, 2018 9:19:26 GMT
Back cover photospread of the Albatross’ is a bit of a disaster! Some issues are more obvious than others but, from the top, here are some comments.
UF-2G/HU-16E 7233 never served with the USAF. As with many ‘ex-USAF’ UF-2Gs it went from the manufacturer direct to storage (at DM) in 1953 before going back to Bethpage in 1958 and conversion from SA-16A to UF-2G for the USCG.
Norwegian 15281 is an HU-16B (ASW). No such thing as ‘SHU-16B’. The original designation SA-16B (ASW) was changed to HU-16B (ASW) during the production run and 15281 was delivered as SA-16B (ASW). Norway only ever received 18 aircraft. Strictly speaking its role was killing submarines, not rescuing drowning matelots.
UF-2 146430 (SC105) was a West German Navy aircraft with MFG-5 – not Air Force!
15305 was an SA-16B in 1961, not SA-16A.
While on the subject, the picture of the Spanish aircraft on page 189 is that of an HU-16B (ASW) – a sub-hunter and not a ‘SAR’ bird. The Spanish had two very different colour-schemes for their SAR and ASW aircraft. Rgds
|
|