Reno Air races folder 1 of 13 Updated 28/10

Post by **lozza** » Fri 04 Oct 2013, 2:45 pm

OK so long as they don't bore you I'll post each set as I go, took over 9000 at the races so have started at the beginning :shock:

Spent 9 days at Reno Air races (Stead field), we were on the airfield every morning by 05.00, I was very fortunate, plus grateful to have full media pass for the whole week, can honestly say best 9 days of Aviation togging for me, everything from the folks I was with, to everything going on and to some of the places the media pass permitted me to access (the pylons).

The constant roar of Merlins, Radials and the bark of the T6's was just outstanding.

A massive thank-you to Bruce Croft (Zerotwowest), who without this whole adventure would never have taken place, that's why you should always reply to all emails (flickr) in this case, as that's how we met.

Not sure when the next 12 folders of images will get done as off to Switzerland tomorrow for Axalp, still its a long winter.

1

Reno Air races 2013 pt 1 by lauriehughes, on Flickr
2

Reno Air races 2013 pt 1 by lauriehughes, on Flickr
3

Reno Air races 2013 pt 1 by lauriehughes, on Flickr
4

Reno Air races 2013 pt 1 by lauriehughes, on Flickr
5

Reno Air races 2013 pt 1 by lauriehughes, on Flickr
6

Reno Air races 2013 pt 1 by lauriehughes, on Flickr
7

Reno Air races 2013 pt 1 by lauriehughes, on Flickr
8

Reno Air races 2013 pt 1 by lauriehughes, on Flickr
9

Reno Air races 2013 pt 1 by lauriehughes, on Flickr
10

Reno Air races 2013 pt 1 by lauriehughes, on Flickr
11

Reno Air races 2013 pt 1 by lauriehughes, on Flickr
12

Reno Air races 2013 pt 1 by lauriehughes, on Flickr
13

Reno Air races 2013 pt 1 by lauriehughes, on Flickr
14

Reno Air races 2013 pt 1 by lauriehughes, on Flickr
15

Reno Air races 2013 pt 1 by lauriehughes, on Flickr
16

Reno Air races 2013 pt 1 by lauriehughes, on Flickr
17

Reno Air races 2013 pt 1 by lauriehughes, on Flickr
18

Reno Air races 2013 pt 1 by lauriehughes, on Flickr
19

Reno Air races 2013 pt 1 by lauriehughes, on Flickr
20

Reno Air races 2013 pt 1 by lauriehughes, on Flickr
21

Reno Air races 2013 pt 1 by lauriehughes, on Flickr
22

Reno Air races 2013 pt 1 by lauriehughes, on Flickr
23

Reno Air races 2013 pt 1 by lauriehughes, on Flickr
24

Reno Air races 2013 pt 1 by lauriehughes, on Flickr
25

Reno Air races 2013 pt 1 by lauriehughes, on Flickr
26

Reno Air races 2013 pt 1 by lauriehughes, on Flickr

lozza

Post by **Agg** » Fri 04 Oct 2013, 2:52 pm

Im really not a fan of modifying warbirds and dressing them up in horrible colors, but the pictures are great!

Post by **Maisie** » Fri 04 Oct 2013, 3:00 pm

I love Reno aircraft, so please post away! Would love to get there one day for it but I can't see it... especially if they ever stop it?!

Great set so far.... weather hot there?

Post by **MRTT** » Fri 04 Oct 2013, 3:31 pm

I agree with Agg that modifying aircraft and painting them but the pictures are brilliant.

Post by **adamp89** » Fri 04 Oct 2013, 3:36 pm

Agg wrote:Im really not a fan of modifying warbirds and dressing them up in horrible colors, but the pictures are great!

so your favorite aircraft is the sea fury in number 26 then?

love the images, and the props in no 14...

Post by **tankbuster81** » Fri 04 Oct 2013, 4:16 pm

Rare Bear looks like an R/c model in flight to me......

Post by **FarnboroJohn** » Fri 04 Oct 2013, 6:47 pm

adamp89 wrote:
Agg wrote:Im really not a fan of modifying warbirds and dressing them up in horrible colors, but the pictures are great!

so your favorite aircraft is the sea fury in number 26 then?

love the images, and the props in no 14...

I like the pix, even though the non-stock warbirds are a bit weird. But "924" is also non-stock, with a tall tailfin, incorrectly positions fin flash and for some reason an impossible serial number. UK military serials are two letters and three numbers, and Sea Furies are all further up than "ES" anything, let alone having four numbers after it. What's that about?

John

Post by **FarnboroJohn** » Fri 04 Oct 2013, 6:48 pm

adamp89 wrote:
Agg wrote:Im really not a fan of modifying warbirds and dressing them up in horrible colors, but the pictures are great!

so your favorite aircraft is the sea fury in number 26 then?

love the images, and the props in no 14...

I like the pix, even though the non-stock warbirds are a bit weird. But "924" is also non-stock, with a tall tailfin and for some reason an impossible serial number, UK military serials are two letters and three numbers, and Sea Furies are all further up than "ES" anything, let alone having four numbers after it. What's that about?

John

Post by **F-86** » Fri 04 Oct 2013, 7:29 pm

FarnboroJohn wrote:
adamp89 wrote:
Agg wrote:Im really not a fan of modifying warbirds and dressing them up in horrible colors, but the pictures are great!

so your favorite aircraft is the sea fury in number 26 then?

love the images, and the props in no 14...

I like the pix, even though the non-stock warbirds are a bit weird. But "924" is also non-stock, with a tall tailfin, incorrectly positions fin flash and for some reason an impossible serial number. UK military serials are two letters and three numbers, and Sea Furies are all further up than "ES" anything, let alone having four numbers after it. What's that about?

John

924's tailfin looks standard to me.

Greats shots btw.

Post by **timuss** » Fri 04 Oct 2013, 8:15 pm

Awesome somewhere I'd :cool:

love to go to someday

Post by **centaurus18** » Fri 04 Oct 2013, 8:26 pm

The serial ES8502 is its construction number I believe - it's been in that scheme for years!
Cracking shots

Were there many Sea Furies taking part?

Post by **FarnboroJohn** » Fri 04 Oct 2013, 11:50 pm

F-86 wrote:
FarnboroJohn wrote:
adamp89 wrote:
Agg wrote:Im really not a fan of modifying warbirds and dressing them up in horrible colors, but the pictures are great!

so your favorite aircraft is the sea fury in number 26 then?

love the images, and the props in no 14...

I like the pix, even though the non-stock warbirds are a bit weird. But "924" is also non-stock, with a tall tailfin, incorrectly positions fin flash and for some reason an impossible serial number. UK military serials are two letters and three numbers, and Sea Furies are all further up than "ES" anything, let alone having four numbers after it. What's that about?

John

924's tailfin looks standard to me.

Greats shots btw.

Looked again, agree with you on tailfin. However, "construction number" wouldn't be shown on the aircraft in a UK scheme (though a bit of googling showed the German target tugs displaying it - Doug Arnold had several of these at one time) whereas its UK military serial number would. I'm sure someone on here knows what it should be - in the W- and V- ranges most likely.

John

Post by **Maisie** » Sat 05 Oct 2013, 8:15 am

Some info on '924' http://www.sandersaircraft.com/restorat ... ry-924.asp

Post by **FarnboroJohn** » Sat 05 Oct 2013, 9:06 am

Maisie wrote:Some info on '924' http://www.sandersaircraft.com/restorat ... ry-924.asp

Thanks for that. From there I established it was built under a UK military contract as VX300 before becoming a German target tug and being one of several Sea Furies procured by Doug Arnold and kept at Blackbushe until he got a decent offer.

In the early Seventies Blackbushe was a remarkable sight with up to 3 Sea Furies, some CASA 352s (license built Ju52), at least one 2111 (License built He111 with RR Merlins that appear to be simply Lanc installations stapled on), some Spanish Daks, the five B25s used in Hanover Street, and hangars at the far end with Spitfires in various states of restoration along with everything from a P51D to a Mosquito B35, bits of Lancaster, bits of Liberator and so on. As a youth I did a fair bit of peering through the back windows until I finally spent a summer sweeping Indian dust out of Spits and dismantling them with minimal tools. The Indian Spits had pick-axe holes through their Griffon crank-cases (and other bits of the engines) which rumour had it was IAF sabotage when they heard Arnold had bought and was exporting all their gate-guards. All of those Spitfires are now airworthy. There was also a Bf109 that Arnold had allegedly exported from Australia illegally, bypassing licensing requirements by describing the shipment as "scrap metal" - I don't know where that one might be by now.

A long reminiscence from a couple of photos - hope it tweaks others' memories.

John

Post by **FarnboroJohn** » Sat 05 Oct 2013, 9:06 am

Maisie wrote:Some info on '924' http://www.sandersaircraft.com/restorat ... ry-924.asp

Thanks for that. From there I established it was built under a UK military contract as VX300 before becoming a German target tug and being one of several Sea Furies procured by Doug Arnold and kept at Blackbushe until he got a decent offer.

In the early Seventies Blackbushe was a remarkable sight with up to 3 Sea Furies, some CASA 352s (license built Ju52), at least one 2111 (License built He111 with RR Merlins that appear to be simply Lanc installations stapled on), some Spanish Daks, the five B25s used in Hanover Street, and hangars at the far end with Spitfires in various states of restoration along with everything from a P51D to a Mosquito B35, bits of Lancaster, bits of Liberator and so on. As a youth I did a fair bit of peering through the back windows until I finally spent a summer sweeping Indian dust out of Spits and dismantling them with minimal tools. The Indian Spits had pick-axe holes through their Griffon crank-cases (and other bits of the engines) which rumour had it was IAF sabotage when they heard Arnold had bought and was exporting all their gate-guards. All of those Spitfires are now airworthy. There was also a Bf109 that Arnold had allegedly exported from Australia illegally, bypassing licensing requirements by describing the shipment as "scrap metal" - I don't know where that one might be by now.

A long reminiscence from a couple of photos - hope it tweaks others' memories.

John

Post by **lozza** » Sat 05 Oct 2013, 9:56 am

DanO1978 wrote:As per the rules, you must keep all your photographs from the event, no matter how many, in this one thread.

Um yes I know, didn't say otherwise, no harm in adding is there :hide:

Post by **colper** » Sat 05 Oct 2013, 10:28 am

Great set.Personally I like the different colourschemes,think it adds to the event.Looking forward to seeing some more.

Colin

Post by **colper** » Sat 05 Oct 2013, 10:28 am

Great set.Personally I like the different colourschemes,think it adds to the event.Looking forward to seeing some more.

Colin

Post by **centaurus18** » Sat 05 Oct 2013, 8:26 pm

FarnboroJohn wrote:
F-86 wrote:
FarnboroJohn wrote:
adamp89 wrote:
Agg wrote:Im really not a fan of modifying warbirds and dressing them up in horrible colors, but the pictures are great!

so your favorite aircraft is the sea fury in number 26 then?

love the images, and the props in no 14...

I like the pix, even though the non-stock warbirds are a bit weird. But "924" is also non-stock, with a tall tailfin, incorrectly positions fin flash and for some reason an impossible serial number. UK military serials are two letters and three numbers, and Sea Furies are all further up than "ES" anything, let alone having four numbers after it. What's that about?

John

924's tailfin looks standard to me.

Greats shots btw.

Looked again, agree with you on tailfin. However, "construction number" wouldn't be shown on the aircraft in a UK scheme (though a bit of googling showed the German target tugs displaying it - Doug Arnold had several of these at one time) whereas its UK military serial number would. I'm sure someone on here knows what it should be - in the W- and V- ranges most likely.

John

The scheme on N924G is not a genuine Fleet Air Arm scheme... most of the T.20s were painted in silver colours with yellow bands back in the day.
Sanders has painted it in their own personalised colours - which is probably why it carries its construction number on the tail rather than its ex-FAA serial number.

Post by **ciaranchef** » Wed 09 Oct 2013, 5:44 am

Great set of pictures, look forward to next bunch, Ciaran

Post by **FarnboroJohn** » Fri 11 Oct 2013, 6:47 pm

centaurus18 wrote:
FarnboroJohn wrote:
F-86 wrote:
FarnboroJohn wrote:
adamp89 wrote:
Agg wrote:Im really not a fan of modifying warbirds and dressing them up in horrible colors, but the pictures are great!

so your favorite aircraft is the sea fury in number 26 then?

love the images, and the props in no 14...

I like the pix, even though the non-stock warbirds are a bit weird. But "924" is also non-stock, with a tall tailfin, incorrectly positions fin flash and for some reason an impossible serial number. UK military serials are two letters and three numbers, and Sea Furies are all further up than "ES" anything, let alone having four numbers after it. What's that about?

John

924's tailfin looks standard to me.

Greats shots btw.

Looked again, agree with you on tailfin. However, "construction number" wouldn't be shown on the aircraft in a UK scheme (though a bit of googling showed the German target tugs displaying it - Doug Arnold had several of these at one time) whereas its UK military serial number would. I'm sure someone on here knows what it should be - in the W- and V- ranges most likely.

John

The scheme on N924G is not a genuine Fleet Air Arm scheme... most of the T.20s were painted in silver colours with yellow bands back in the day.
Sanders has painted it in their own personalised colours - which is probably why it carries its construction number on the tail rather than its ex-FAA serial number.

I'm always happy to be educated but in that case can you explain the scheme on the RNHF T20, VX281, which looks pretty much identical to me?

John

Post by **Toetapper** » Sat 12 Oct 2013, 2:53 pm

Superb images as usual, I would love to see these for myself one day

Post by **centaurus18** » Sat 12 Oct 2013, 4:52 pm

FarnboroJohn wrote:I'm always happy to be educated but in that case can you explain the scheme on the RNHF T20, VX281, which looks pretty much identical to me?

John

VX281 is panted in the colours and markings of an early Fleet Air Arm Sea Fury FB.10, (the Squadron and exact aeroplane escapes me), but it looks exactly as the original would have done aside from carrying its own serial number.

Post by **FarnboroJohn** » Sat 12 Oct 2013, 5:53 pm

centaurus18 wrote:
FarnboroJohn wrote:I'm always happy to be educated but in that case can you explain the scheme on the RNHF T20, VX281, which looks pretty much identical to me?

John

VX281 is panted in the colours and markings of an early Fleet Air Arm Sea Fury FB.10, (the Squadron and exact aeroplane escapes me), but it looks exactly as the original would have done aside from carrying its own serial number.

Which means the US aircraft is in an authentic FAA scheme apart from this weird business of carrying its build number.

I think we can excuse putting a single seat scheme on a two-seater, quite a few tandem Spitfire owners have done the same.

John