Guy is a bit of an acquired taste, but I did enjoy his enthusiasm-you could tell that it was entirely genuine.
I have to share my story from a couple of Sunday's back: I live in Leamington Spa in Warwickshire and we don't get many WWII era aircraft around here, but I was treated to a Spitfire performing 2 or 3 dives and roll's above my flat, incredibly low. It felt like I could almost reach out and touch it on each pass. It was absolutely stunning and took me from my late-30's self right back to being a small boy who adored the machine. Maybe I'm sad, but it was the most alive that I've felt in ages! There's something utterly magical and evocative about that Merlin engines sound.
A few years ago a friend of mine got married in the Officer's mess at Duxford. When we went outside for the photos there was a flight of WWI aircraft including at least one Spitfire and an ME109 doing what looked like dogfighting exercises or something right above us. The cameraman had to tell everyone to look at the camera all the time because everyone was staring at the sky .
Isn't that a bit like saying a WWI Hadley Page O/100 was completely rubbish when compared to a B-52 Stratofortress? Of course the more modern aircraft is going to be better..
Well yes but my point is that the commentary said what I said it said - and that isn't true. All it would have needed was a few words to say "of WW2" or something, which really WOULD have been 'arguable'.
It's just sloppy writing, but then that's a problem with pretty much every one of these programmes. Just 'cause it's on telly they think only the pics matter.
I thought it was a fascinating programme although I found it a bit strange that they claimed they were rebuilding the wreck of a particular Spitfire, since as far as I could see it was built from the plans using all new parts, then they just stuck the same number as the wreck on it.
It would of been an even better programme if they had clarified what and how much they did re-use of the recovered plane. Still, fantastic to see a Mk I Spitfire restored / re-manufactured to a like new standard and flying.
For those interested, if you visit Duxford Imperial War Museum, you are allowed to wander around the hangers where they are restoring planes and can see all sorts of old war birds up close, in various bits.
It's just sloppy writing, but then that's a problem with pretty much every one of these programmes. Just 'cause it's on telly they think only the pics matter.
If the show had been "Yeah, we're rebuilding a spitfire but they were crap by today's standards. Couldn't get anywhere near Mach One, no FBW electronics and their BVR engagement capability was practically zero. Let's not bother with it, after all it's just a piece of junk compared to the stuff we have now" it wouldn't have got past the commissioning editor's desk.
Frankly, you're exhibiting a level of tedious pedantry which makes me utterly terrified of the very idea I might ever be stuck in a lift with you.
The Spitfire was and is a fantastic, iconic piece of design, engineering and history. Whether it was actually the best combat aircraft ever built, well, nobody else bloody cares.
They're made of strong stuff and the particular engine involved had a softer landing than many rebuilt engines, looking at the one that Guy bought his is made from two originals.
They're made of strong stuff and the particular engine involved had a softer landing than many rebuilt engines, looking at the one that Guy bought his is made from two originals.
The design of the wings was quite complex, a long way away from a couple of beams and some spars.
It would of been an even better programme if they had clarified what and how much they did re-use of the recovered plane. Still, fantastic to see a Mk I Spitfire restored / re-manufactured to a like new standard and flying. .
That. It's like claiming that one of the new build Jaguar E-Types of Ford GT40s are original cars. Seemed to me that it wasn't a "rebuild" or "restoration" of the original plane, it was the build of a brand new plane (albeit it was interesting to see the engineering and technique that went into it) with bits of the old plane just happening to be in the same room, then slapping the old designation number on it.
They're made of strong stuff and the particular engine involved had a softer landing than many rebuilt engines, looking at the one that Guy bought his is made from two originals.
A friend of mine knows Guy as an acquaintance through years of them both attending the Isle of Man TT Races. He has told me the Guy Martin you see on TV is exactly the same as he is in real life, there is nothing "faux" about him at all.
I can believe that too. I met Fred Dibnah at a Steam Fair during his meteoric rise in TV 'fame' and he was just an ordinary bloke called Fred! Really chatty and friendly. I think Martin's persona grates with a few folk mixed with his heavy accent and unpolished presentation......very similar to Dibnah really.
Martin undoubtedly has a good understanding of mechanics due to his background and a fanatical enthusiasm over anything with an engine.
Isn't that a bit like saying a WWI Hadley Page O/100 was completely rubbish when compared to a B-52 Stratofortress? Of course the more modern aircraft is going to be better.
However if a F-15 were to fly over a park on a summer's day a few people would look up to see what was making the noise, but if a Spitfire was to fly over the park a lot more people would look up to watch it fly past and they would be far more likely to recognise it as well.
Entirely agree with this. Even the start up of a Merlin engine spluttering into life is enough to get me aroused! Years ago when i used to 'fiddle around' modifying Cooper S engines i used a local Engineers for specialist machine work. Walked in one day to see this massive 'lump' of an engine on the floor. Turned out to be a Merlin engine out of a privately owned Spitfire that the owner was having totally rebuilt. I dread to think what his bill would have been!
I doubt there are too many people who have looked down on a Spitfire flying 50 feet above an airfield runway, but as we were 130 feet up that is exactly what we did. My point being, though, that whilst the pilot spent a good 30 minutes flying around the airfield, doing barrel-rolls, loop-the-loops, low flying, etc, not only were we watching, all the other people on the airfield were watching and at all the airfield emergency gates there were dozens of others watching as well as people leaning out of bedrooms in neighbouring houses. There aren't many aircraft that would have that impact.
You were privileged! A memorable moment you will never forget! I'm envious!
I always think a good comparison to the Spitfire is the E-type Jaguar. A Lambo Aventador will turn heads and sounds dramatic....but look at the lines of the E-type remembering that this was a car built half a century before an Aventador....and that still turns heads!
The Spitfire design was brilliant and is a Classic in a class of it's own. By far the best people to listen to are those who actually flew them.
Does anyone know who the guy was the documentary was dedicated to at the end? Simon or Stephen Marsh 1962-2014 so only 52 years old.
The Spitfire performed better - faster, better turning radius and better at higher altitude.
The reason Hurricanes shot down more aircraft is because there were more of them built.
The Hurricane was of box girder construction with doped linen covering, thus making it quicker to build and easier to repair
What the show made clear to me was that the Sptifire was like a hand built Ferrari, whereas the Hurricane was more like a Ford Fiesta. They both do the job required of them, but the Spitfire obviously took a lot more time and effort to build.
I don't mind Guy Martin, but I don't think he was right for this, would have liked to have seen a bit more about the build, some superfluous bits were overly long, like the machine gun shooting the BMW.
Does anyone know who the guy was the documentary was dedicated to at the end? Simon or Stephen Marsh 1962-2014 so only 52 years old.
Apparently £3 million.
Simon Marsh, who from looking on the net, was one of the two anonymous purchasers of the wreck mentioned at the start. (The other being Thomas Kaplan, details at their website here http://markonepartners.co.uk/ It appears that this was the second Spit they have restored/built.
Simon Marsh, who from looking on the net, was one of the two anonymous purchasers of the wreck mentioned at the start. (The other being Thomas Kaplan, details at their website here http://markonepartners.co.uk/ It appears that this was the second Spit they have restored/built.
Interesting site that with some brilliant photos. Strange though.....i wonder what took so long from 2003 to 2014?
The rebuild will follow original MK1 modification state and procedures and if all goes well the team hope to have this project close to it's first flight for nearly fifty years around 2003.
Must be a typo given that the press release was 2011.
Yes i saw that but then they had purchased the 'bits' back in October 2000 and mentioned elsewhere they expected it to take around three years to complete, making the 2003 date fit in.
Comments
They're quite an amazing sound aren't they ?
Well yes but my point is that the commentary said what I said it said - and that isn't true. All it would have needed was a few words to say "of WW2" or something, which really WOULD have been 'arguable'.
It's just sloppy writing, but then that's a problem with pretty much every one of these programmes. Just 'cause it's on telly they think only the pics matter.
For those interested, if you visit Duxford Imperial War Museum, you are allowed to wander around the hangers where they are restoring planes and can see all sorts of old war birds up close, in various bits.
You might care to give this a browse. :cool:
Frankly, you're exhibiting a level of tedious pedantry which makes me utterly terrified of the very idea I might ever be stuck in a lift with you.
The Spitfire was and is a fantastic, iconic piece of design, engineering and history. Whether it was actually the best combat aircraft ever built, well, nobody else bloody cares.
They're made of strong stuff and the particular engine involved had a softer landing than many rebuilt engines, looking at the one that Guy bought his is made from two originals.
The design of the wings was quite complex, a long way away from a couple of beams and some spars.
That. It's like claiming that one of the new build Jaguar E-Types of Ford GT40s are original cars. Seemed to me that it wasn't a "rebuild" or "restoration" of the original plane, it was the build of a brand new plane (albeit it was interesting to see the engineering and technique that went into it) with bits of the old plane just happening to be in the same room, then slapping the old designation number on it.
Thanks, I understand now.
Martin undoubtedly has a good understanding of mechanics due to his background and a fanatical enthusiasm over anything with an engine.
Entirely agree with this. Even the start up of a Merlin engine spluttering into life is enough to get me aroused! Years ago when i used to 'fiddle around' modifying Cooper S engines i used a local Engineers for specialist machine work. Walked in one day to see this massive 'lump' of an engine on the floor. Turned out to be a Merlin engine out of a privately owned Spitfire that the owner was having totally rebuilt. I dread to think what his bill would have been!
You were privileged! A memorable moment you will never forget! I'm envious!
I always think a good comparison to the Spitfire is the E-type Jaguar. A Lambo Aventador will turn heads and sounds dramatic....but look at the lines of the E-type remembering that this was a car built half a century before an Aventador....and that still turns heads!
The Spitfire design was brilliant and is a Classic in a class of it's own. By far the best people to listen to are those who actually flew them.
Does anyone know who the guy was the documentary was dedicated to at the end? Simon or Stephen Marsh 1962-2014 so only 52 years old.
Apparently £3 million.
What the show made clear to me was that the Sptifire was like a hand built Ferrari, whereas the Hurricane was more like a Ford Fiesta. They both do the job required of them, but the Spitfire obviously took a lot more time and effort to build.
Simon Marsh, who from looking on the net, was one of the two anonymous purchasers of the wreck mentioned at the start. (The other being Thomas Kaplan, details at their website here http://markonepartners.co.uk/ It appears that this was the second Spit they have restored/built.
Must be a typo given that the press release was 2011.