"Graeme Wall" wrote in message
...
As to the story of evacuating the Royal Family in an emergency there are
two
runways in Central London capable of taking an aircraft of the Queens
Flight
assuming the latter still exists.

Why waste time driving to one of these spots which would need some
preparation when a helicopter based in your back garden can get you further
away in the same time?
32 (The Royal) Squadron is based at Northolt with BAe 146's and HS125
bizjets while the Royal Household have their own Sikorsky S76 helicopter to
get them around.
Where did I learn that? The Royal Website!
http://www.royal.gov.uk/output/page2836.asp

Nick P



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

In message
"Nick Pedley" wrote:


"Graeme Wall" wrote in message
...
As to the story of evacuating the Royal Family in an emergency there are
two
runways in Central London capable of taking an aircraft of the Queens
Flight
assuming the latter still exists.

Why waste time driving to one of these spots which would need some
preparation when a helicopter based in your back garden can get you further
away in the same time?

The plans I'm talking about were drawn up on the early 1950s when helicopters
were small and unreliable.

--
Graeme Wall
This address is not read, substitute trains for rail.
Transport Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail/index.html

In article , Graeme Wall wrote:
In message
"Nick Pedley" wrote:


"Graeme Wall" wrote in message
...
As to the story of evacuating the Royal Family in an emergency there are
two
runways in Central London capable of taking an aircraft of the Queens
Flight
assuming the latter still exists.

Why waste time driving to one of these spots which would need some
preparation when a helicopter based in your back garden can get you further
away in the same time?

The plans I'm talking about were drawn up on the early 1950s when helicopters
were small and unreliable.

The helicopters in "Whirlybirds" seemed reliable enough, just a bit on the
small side. My Whirlybirds trumps your Thunderbirds - real people vs. Puppets.

J

"Jock Mackirdy" wrote in message
...

The plans I'm talking about were drawn up on the early 1950s when
helicopters
were small and unreliable.

The helicopters in "Whirlybirds" seemed reliable enough, just a bit on the
small side. My Whirlybirds trumps your Thunderbirds - real people vs.
Puppets.


Not many people know that the Thunderbirds episode that included shots in a
deserted underground of the 21st century was actually filmed in the secret
tunnels. As the puppets couldn't be operated easily in the tunnels because
of the low headroom they had to use real actors...

Paul

In message
Jock Mackirdy wrote:

In article , Graeme Wall wrote:
In message
"Nick Pedley" wrote:


"Graeme Wall" wrote in message
...
As to the story of evacuating the Royal Family in an emergency there
are two runways in Central London capable of taking an aircraft of
the Queens Flight assuming the latter still exists.

Why waste time driving to one of these spots which would need some
preparation when a helicopter based in your back garden can get you
further away in the same time?

The plans I'm talking about were drawn up on the early 1950s when
helicopters were small and unreliable.

The helicopters in "Whirlybirds" seemed reliable enough, just a bit on the
small side. My Whirlybirds trumps your Thunderbirds - real people vs.
Puppets.


You are definitely giving your age away! IIRC Whirlybirds was late 50s and
the machines used were Bell 47G 2 seaters (includes pilot, paint first before
assembly). Similar machine to the Sioux used in MASH.

--
Graeme Wall
This address is not read, substitute trains for rail.
Transport Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail/index.html

"Graeme Wall" wrote in message


You are definitely giving your age away! IIRC Whirlybirds was late
50s and the machines used were Bell 47G 2 seaters (includes pilot,
paint first before assembly). Similar machine to the Sioux used in
MASH.

I've travelled in a Bell 47G as the THIRD person, hanging out on the
right-hand side (no door of course). It was in the Blue Mountains near
Sydney, on a pleasure flight en route to travel on the great zig zag
railway. http://www.zigzagrailway.com.au/

In message
"Recliner" wrote:

"Graeme Wall" wrote in message


You are definitely giving your age away! IIRC Whirlybirds was late
50s and the machines used were Bell 47G 2 seaters (includes pilot,
paint first before assembly). Similar machine to the Sioux used in
MASH.

I've travelled in a Bell 47G as the THIRD person, hanging out on the
right-hand side (no door of course). It was in the Blue Mountains near
Sydney, on a pleasure flight en route to travel on the great zig zag
railway. http://www.zigzagrailway.com.au/



The 47G3 was a three seater, slightly more powerful engine and a bigger
bubble, same seat I gather.

--
Graeme Wall
This address is not read, substitute trains for rail.
Transport Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail/index.html

"Graeme Wall" wrote in message

In message
"Recliner" wrote:

"Graeme Wall" wrote in message


You are definitely giving your age away! IIRC Whirlybirds was late
50s and the machines used were Bell 47G 2 seaters (includes pilot,
paint first before assembly). Similar machine to the Sioux used in
MASH.

I've travelled in a Bell 47G as the THIRD person, hanging out on the
right-hand side (no door of course). It was in the Blue Mountains
near Sydney, on a pleasure flight en route to travel on the great
zig zag railway. http://www.zigzagrailway.com.au/



The 47G3 was a three seater, slightly more powerful engine and a
bigger bubble, same seat I gather.

The bench seat certainly was a tight fit -- my right cheek felt like it
was hanging in space. That was one flight where I made quite sure my
seat belt was done up properly!

In article , Recliner wrote:

I've travelled in a Bell 47G as the THIRD person, hanging out on the
right-hand side (no door of course). It was in the Blue Mountains near
Sydney, on a pleasure flight en route to travel on the great zig zag
railway. http://www.zigzagrailway.com.au/

Been there, done that (the Great Zig-Zag, not the Bell). Perhaps the Bell
helicopter was designed by a descendant of the Bell of Bell's Line of
Road, by which we returned to Sydney.

In message , Graeme Wall
writes
You are definitely giving your age away! IIRC Whirlybirds was late 50s and
the machines used were Bell 47G 2 seaters (includes pilot, paint first before
assembly). Similar machine to the Sioux used in MASH.
I remember "Whirlybirds", the copter looked like a bubble with a tail
made of girder type structure.
--
Clive.