<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The raiders</title>
	<atom:link href="http://airminded.org/2008/06/08/the-raiders/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://airminded.org/2008/06/08/the-raiders/</link>
	<description>Airpower and British society, 1908-1941</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 11:24:47 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Brett Holman</title>
		<link>http://airminded.org/2008/06/08/the-raiders/#comment-76070</link>
		<dc:creator>Brett Holman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jun 2008 17:11:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://airminded.org/?p=509#comment-76070</guid>
		<description>It is indeed reminiscent of a Brisfit, but if you click on the picture to get a higher-res version, I think you'll see that it is actually a two-engined aeroplane. Well, actually I can only see one engine nacelle clearly, but as it's in the middle of the wing (attached by a close grouping of 4 struts, which the Bristol didn't have) I think it's a reasonable inference that there's a second one on the other side :) And there's perhaps a hint of another one on the far side as well.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is indeed reminiscent of a Brisfit, but if you click on the picture to get a higher-res version, I think you&#8217;ll see that it is actually a two-engined aeroplane. Well, actually I can only see one engine nacelle clearly, but as it&#8217;s in the middle of the wing (attached by a close grouping of 4 struts, which the Bristol didn&#8217;t have) I think it&#8217;s a reasonable inference that there&#8217;s a second one on the other side :) And there&#8217;s perhaps a hint of another one on the far side as well.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Roger Horky</title>
		<link>http://airminded.org/2008/06/08/the-raiders/#comment-76066</link>
		<dc:creator>Roger Horky</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jun 2008 16:40:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://airminded.org/?p=509#comment-76066</guid>
		<description>It looks like a Bristol F.2 Fighter on non-stepped floats. The vertical tail has the same rounded shape, but with a strake beneath. The fuselage is above the lower wing. The engine cowling has the same upsloped lower contour and level upper contour. It is clearly a two-seater (is that what you meant by twin-engined? "cos the painting clearly shows but one). 

Of course, the Biff was a two-bay biplane, and the aircraft depicted is a single-bay. But I find that many non-specialist illustrators are more interested in impression than accuracy (ever seen a Dornier Do28 with its main gear retracted?--only in paintings by the uninitiated) so the painter may have been working from a photo of a Bristol, to which he added the floats.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It looks like a Bristol F.2 Fighter on non-stepped floats. The vertical tail has the same rounded shape, but with a strake beneath. The fuselage is above the lower wing. The engine cowling has the same upsloped lower contour and level upper contour. It is clearly a two-seater (is that what you meant by twin-engined? &#8220;cos the painting clearly shows but one). </p>
<p>Of course, the Biff was a two-bay biplane, and the aircraft depicted is a single-bay. But I find that many non-specialist illustrators are more interested in impression than accuracy (ever seen a Dornier Do28 with its main gear retracted?&#8211;only in paintings by the uninitiated) so the painter may have been working from a photo of a Bristol, to which he added the floats.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brett Holman</title>
		<link>http://airminded.org/2008/06/08/the-raiders/#comment-75861</link>
		<dc:creator>Brett Holman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 14 Jun 2008 11:31:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://airminded.org/?p=509#comment-75861</guid>
		<description>Thanks -- the consensus &lt;a href="http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=81535" rel="nofollow"&gt;over here&lt;/a&gt; is also that it's not a real aeroplane. The idea didn't even occur to me!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks &#8212; the consensus <a href="http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=81535" rel="nofollow">over here</a> is also that it&#8217;s not a real aeroplane. The idea didn&#8217;t even occur to me!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ian Evans</title>
		<link>http://airminded.org/2008/06/08/the-raiders/#comment-75583</link>
		<dc:creator>Ian Evans</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Jun 2008 08:10:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://airminded.org/?p=509#comment-75583</guid>
		<description>I agree with that assessment. There was a Short project design of 1919/20 (all metal) with a very similar layout, but rather more sophisticated floats.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with that assessment. There was a Short project design of 1919/20 (all metal) with a very similar layout, but rather more sophisticated floats.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: George Shaner</title>
		<link>http://airminded.org/2008/06/08/the-raiders/#comment-75539</link>
		<dc:creator>George Shaner</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Jun 2008 18:24:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://airminded.org/?p=509#comment-75539</guid>
		<description>To my eye it looks like a cross between a contemporary flying boat and some of the early floatplane torpedo bombers.  I'd bet it's a period flight of fancy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To my eye it looks like a cross between a contemporary flying boat and some of the early floatplane torpedo bombers.  I&#8217;d bet it&#8217;s a period flight of fancy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
