Arthur Louis Aaron

Festwerfer · Post by **Festwerfer** » Tue 13 Jan, 2009 9:39 pm

Rumour has it Airfix plan a 48th scale kit of the Stirling so it might be a future project but my eye sight is too bad now for the smaller 72nd scale model. As a member of the Bomber Command Special Interest Group, if the Museum wanted a display I'm sure we could come up with something for them.

Si · Post by Si » Wed 14 Jan, 2009 8:30 am

Festwerfer wrote: Rumour has it Airfix plan a 48th scale kit of the Stirling so it might be a future project but my eye sight is too bad now for the smaller 72nd scale model. As a member of the Bomber Command Special Interest Group, if the Museum wanted a display I'm sure we could come up with something for them. Have you tried one of those illuminated magnifying glasses? Or a "daylight" lamp? They help me, but I work in 1/35th, so my eyesight must be worse than yours! A 1/48th Stirling will be huge! Do you know Aaron's aircraft markings, Festwerfer?

Festwerfer · Post by **Festwerfer** » Wed 14 Jan, 2009 5:09 pm

Funny you should mention 1/35th I have moved up to 1 /32nd at the moment and I'm struggling there as for the magnifiers I tried my mates and I guess that's what modelling on acid feels like LOL He was flying EF452, O-Oboe, of 218 Squadron on the mission. The problem with the Short Stirling was that once fully loaded it's operational ceiling was not high a real problem on trips to Italy over the Alps, Especially if an engine was out.

Cardiarms · Post by **Cardiarms** » Wed 14 Jan, 2009 5:15 pm

Did the specification limit the wingspan so it would fit in a standard hangar so its potential true perfomance was never achieved?

Festwerfer · Post by **Festwerfer** » Wed 14 Jan, 2009 5:19 pm

Not sure on that but they did build a half scale flyiing prototype so I would say they knew the limits.

Cardiarms · Post by **Cardiarms** » Wed 14 Jan, 2009 5:34 pm

According to the Wiki entry it was to keep the weight down.

hillbilly · Post by **hillbilly** » Tue 27 Jan, 2009 5:37 pm

Further to previous messages about the poor attempts at commemorating FS Aaron VC, why not rename Leeds/Bradford airport Arthur Aaron Airport ? Better if the place has to be named after an individual, to name it after a real hero than a nonentity (liverpool john lennon anyone).

hillbilly · Post by **hillbilly** » Tue 27 Jan, 2009 5:38 pm

Further to previous messages about the poor attempts at commemorating FS Aaron VC, why not rename Leeds/Bradford airport Arthur Aaron Airport ? Better if the place has to be named after an individual, to name it after a real hero than a nonentity (liverpool john lennon anyone).

Brandy · Post by **Brandy** » Tue 27 Jan, 2009 7:44 pm

hillbilly wrote: Further to previous messages about the poor attempts at commemorating FS Aaron VC, why not rename Leeds/Bradford airport Arthur Aaron Airport ? Better if the place has to be named after an individual, to name it after a real hero than a nonentity (liverpool john lennon anyone). Sounds good to me

Festwerfer · Post by **Festwerfer** » Tue 27 Jan, 2009 9:32 pm

Might cause a little bit of an upset amongst the Fighter command boys dont forget 609 Squadron was formed there and they had more than their share of hero's. But I agree in principle, Chicago named there airport Butch O'hare and he won the American version the Congressional Medal of Honour so why not. Mind you he aint the only one in Leeds to win ithttp://www.victoriacross.org.uk/yorkshir.htm609 history herehttp://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/609photos/index.htm