Page 1 of 2

canberra bomber...

PostPosted: Tue Dec 21, 2004 1:36 pm
by lemoncat
a nice new canberra with lots of nice animations with vc
very nice to fly and a great model..lovely :) :)
you can d/l it here>> http://devtas.net/holker/

Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image

Re: canberra bomber...

PostPosted: Tue Dec 21, 2004 1:38 pm
by Hai Perso Coyone?
those are some of the best picstures i have seen : :o

is the aircraft compatible with FS2002?

again Nice Pictures.

Ashar

Re: canberra bomber...

PostPosted: Tue Dec 21, 2004 1:43 pm
by Woodlouse2002
I would like to know how the bomb and ejection animations work.

Re: canberra bomber...

PostPosted: Tue Dec 21, 2004 1:44 pm
by congo
Methinks those ejection seats could be very handy in that bomber Lemoncat!

Excellent screenshots

Re: canberra bomber...

PostPosted: Tue Dec 21, 2004 4:18 pm
by lemoncat
thanks i think this is a real gem always liked the canberra..
main exit for ejector.maybe water rudder for bombs and concorde visor for bomb bay i think..check out the animation on the air brakes very nice :) :)

Re: canberra bomber...

PostPosted: Tue Dec 21, 2004 5:46 pm
by jordonj
Wow!  What an interesting aircraft!

Re: canberra bomber...

PostPosted: Tue Dec 21, 2004 5:58 pm
by Hagar
Very nice shots as always Lemoncat. The Canberra was always one of my favourites. ;)

Methinks those ejection seats could be very handy in that bomber Lemoncat!

Very neat. As a matter of interest 2 members of a Canberra crew were killed after ejecting from a Canberra recently. http://www.rafmarham.co.uk/relations/stories/canberra-t4.htm

Charlie knows more about it than me but I think it was quite likely they would have survived if they hadn't ejected. The aircraft was fitted with an older type of seat not intended for use at ground level..

Re: canberra bomber...

PostPosted: Tue Dec 21, 2004 11:50 pm
by lemoncat
thanx :)
yes pete i'm still testing the new lennart's textures out still can't decide which one's to use yet :) :)

Re: canberra bomber...

PostPosted: Wed Dec 22, 2004 12:41 pm
by Woodlouse2002

Very neat. As a matter of interest 2 members of a Canberra crew were killed after ejecting from a Canberra recently. http://www.rafmarham.co.uk/relations/stories/canberra-t4.htm

Charlie knows more about it than me but I think it was quite likely they would have survived if they hadn't ejected. The aircraft was fitted with an older type of seat not intended for use at ground level..

I was under the impression that ejector seats were invented specifically so that pilots could bail out at ground level.

Re: canberra bomber...

PostPosted: Wed Dec 22, 2004 1:28 pm
by Hagar
I was under the impression that ejector seats were invented specifically so that pilots could bail out at ground level.

Not at all Woody. Ejector seats were originally developed to throw the occupant clear of projecting parts of an aircraft travelling at high speeds. I think the first US-designed ejector seats exited downwards through the bottom of the fuselage. I remember being surprised on seeing them in films of USAF jets at the time. The idea didn't look that practical to me & this type would obviously be no use below a certain altitude. The Martin-Baker upward firing seat was later adopted by most military services. The latest ones are rocket powered but the type of seat fitted probably depends on the type of aircraft.

Don't forget the Canberra has been in service for a very long time, something like 50 years. I don't know which Mark of seat this example was fitted with or if the Canberra was ever updated with the latest ones. I'm certain the investigation report mentioned the type of seat being the main factor for the crew being killed. You can read the history of the Martin-Baker seats here. http://www.martin-baker.co.uk/Acrobat/History_Development_of_MBA.pdf It's a big PDF file so it might be an idea to right-click & download it to your HD.

Re: canberra bomber...

PostPosted: Wed Dec 22, 2004 2:10 pm
by logjam
The Martin Baker CMk1 seat was designed to operate or assist survival at a height of 1000' and 125Kt,  but here's a dramatic account written by Flt Lt Ken Topaz who survived an ejection at ground level and 80Kt. http://www.ejectionsite.com/nochute.htm This account is very similar to my own experience at Kai Tak in 1998 although all 3 of us survived a dip in the ocean. none of us have been allowed to fly in aircraft fitted with ejector seats. I believe I am the only one to actually return to flying as a profession. The link shows pictures of the 2 rear positions, which will enable you to better understand how, with a bone dome, it is nigh impossible to reach the FBH (Face blind handle). Also, some Navs never removed the safety pin from their seat because they claimed that clumsy AEO's might accidentally pull the SPH as they moved from the prone position to the rear. There's more, but it's better said from someone else. :-[

Re: canberra bomber...

PostPosted: Wed Dec 22, 2004 3:10 pm
by jordonj
That is frightning!

Re: canberra bomber...

PostPosted: Wed Dec 22, 2004 9:12 pm
by d0mokun
there were 3 guys on the cranberry that crashed over here, they all banged i believe but only one guy survived, just around 2kts over the envelope.

there is a supposed cause of crash according to a contact i have, but im not going to put it here as its not my place. its just such a shame it happened though.

anyway, does this cranberry look good inside? Needs raf textures though ;)

Annd a T17 wouldnt go amiss  ;D