On Wed, 4 Jun 2014 14:35:58 +0100, Ramsman wrote
(in article <2hFjv.117970$i%1.31500@fx23.fr7>):
> On 04/06/2014 14:11, Netko wrote:
>> On Wed, 4 Jun 2014 13:09:21 +0100, Joseph Testagrose wrote
>> (in article <4jvto9p2qt5g9g3v7u1h29e24iv4n87brg@4ax.com>):
>>
>> Something wrong here.
>>
>> The Mk1 Buccaneer had dinky little intakes for its dinky little engines -
>> these look like the man-sized intakes of a Spey.
>>
>> And XN342 is listed as Skeeter.
>>
>
> That's just what I thought: "Those aren't Mk.1 intakes".
>
> As for the serial, try XV342:
> http://www.blackburn-buccaneer.co.uk/S2_XV342_files/S2_XV342.html
>
> Based on the history on that page, the caption in the original post must
> refer to a different drawing.
Plausible but I'm still puzzled. The history of XV342 on the page you cite
puts it at Lossiemouth for its entire RN career, with no record of it having
served aboard Ark Royal as the illustration depicts.
Also, were any Mk2s painted in that anti-flash colour scheme? I didn't think
so but I could well be wrong.
> Considering the vast quantity of good posts from Joseph, I think the odd
> typo can be forgiven.
I agree and I'm happy to make it clear that I didn't intend any criticism of
the estimable Mr Testagrose.
|
|
){kind=link}