Page 9 of 9

Re: Short Flying Boats in New Zealand

PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2012 5:54 am
by flyernzl
Nice to have another personal anecdote on the Sunderland touch-and-go.

empty41 wrote:The sad ending to this saga is that they got the plane airworthy and flew it back to the UK and it crashed on landing with the loss of all crew,

This is often quoted, but is actually wrong.
The Vulcan that was damaged at Wellington was XH498.
As discussed, this was repaired at RNZAF Base Ohakea and returned safely to the UK.
After further RAF service, XH498 was retired 19/10/1967, allocated as ground instructional airframe 7993M at RAF Finningley. Finally struck off charge as Cat.5(Scrap) and sold for scrap 9/2/1970

The Vulcan that crashed on returning from a Far East tour was XA897, and that accident took place three years earlier, on 1/10/1956. The two pilots ejected safely, the rest of the crew were killed.

Re: Short Flying Boats in New Zealand

PostPosted: Sun Jul 27, 2014 1:10 am
by flyernzl
Steve Lowe has uploaded some very good histories of NZ flying boat transport & airline operations.
Highly recommended and well worth a read.

RNZAF Chathams Islands operations ... es-to.html

NZ National Airways Chathams Islands operations ... ms-on.html

Tasman Empire Airways Chathams operations ... on-to.html ... lands.html

Re: Short Flying Boats in New Zealand

PostPosted: Wed Dec 14, 2016 2:46 am
by Kiwithrottlejockey
More on the Chatham Islands Sunderland flying-boat hulk.... ... 2016121319

Re: Short Flying Boats in New Zealand

PostPosted: Wed Sep 13, 2017 7:47 am
by Kiwithrottlejockey

Re: Short Flying Boats in New Zealand

PostPosted: Wed Sep 13, 2017 7:54 am
by Kiwithrottlejockey
Yeah, I know there are a few slight inaccuracies in that, but most of today's journalists wouldn't even know what a flying-boat is, let alone possess the ability to distinguish between various types.

And I guarantee the average journalist wouldn't know the difference between a flying-boat and a seaplane.

Which reminds me, I recently put Dave Homewood at Wings Over NZ aviation forum in touch with Geoff White, who is one of only two former TEAL flying-boat pilots still alive.

Dave is going to do an extensive series of interviews with him via Skype, then edit it and put it up on the WONZ show as a podcast.

Geoff grew up in Auckland and was best friends with Ray Hanna when they were kids. After a short service commission with the RNZAF as a transport pilot during the late-1940s and early 1950s flying C-47 and Bristol B170 Freighters, Geoff joined TEAL and was converted onto Solent Flying boats, then flew trans-Tasman and Coral Route services. He later flew DC-6, Lockheed L.188 Electra, DC-8 and DC-10 airliners before retiring. Geoff will be 90 years old later this month, but his memory is still really sharp, so that podcast should be really worth listening to when it is eventually edited and put online. I'll post a link when that happens.

Re: Short Flying Boats in New Zealand

PostPosted: Sat Sep 16, 2017 3:06 am
by AlexNortonesq
Kiwithrottlejockey: before you go too long and hard on the journalist who "doesn't know the difference between a flying-boat and a seaplane" I would draw your attention to the definition found elsewhere on this forum, with which I agree, by the way:
[it was posted by Rajay on]"ยป Mon Apr 08, 2013 4:47 pm

I saw a recent ruckus in another thread (the "Roy Tassell Memorial" Flying Boat Quiz) about what constitutes a "seaplane" versus a "flying boat" etc. and I wanted to comment further. Especially since I kinda found it hard to believe there was any contention over that issue.

For the record, any aircraft capable of repeated operations off of, from, or in and out of the water is a "seaplane"
(even if it is really only capable of flying off of almost ripple-less lakes, rivers, or other protected "fresh water" waterways.)

"Flying boats" and "float planes" are both valid subsets of the larger entire set of "seaplanes" in general (they are all "seaplanes")
but those two basic subsets are each subdivided as well on the basis of whether the specific aircraft in question is also an "amphibian" or not.

There are amphibian flying boats that are fully equipped to "land" on either water or terra firma at the pilot's discretion - and not (i.e. "pure" flying boats that must "land" only in the water and which can be "beached" only after some kind of detachable or temporary "landing gear" is installed) and there are also both amphibious float planes and not - i.e. "straight" float planes - but ALL are "seaplanes".

Is that clear enough?"

So, it would seem that a flying boat IS a seaplane, just as is a float plane. Some journalists may not know the difference between them, but that was not what you tried to say.

I'm of the opinion that anyone who promotes the interest in things that fly on and off of , or in and out of, the water deserves to be encouraged.

... my 2 Canadian cents worth (even if we no longer have the coin)

- Alex Norton

Re: Short Flying Boats in New Zealand

PostPosted: Sat Sep 16, 2017 5:58 am
by Kiwithrottlejockey
Former TEAL flying-boat pilot Geoff White mentioned in my earlier post (I am friends with his son) goes ballistic whenever anybody refers to a flying-boat as a seaplane.

I've met a few other former flying-boat pilots over the years who likewise see calling a flying-boat a seaplane as being like a red flag to a bull to them.

Another thing which gets Geoff going is referring to a flying-boat landing on the water. To him, flying-boats ALIGHT on water, not land, unless they are an amphibian flying-boat and they are landing on terra-firma.

And yes, I realise that both flying-boats and floatplanes can be amphibians if they have a retractable undercarriage.