The Loose Association of Wargamers

They do seem to land on an awfully narrow track. So, it wouldn't be "How many hours have you chaps had on Lightnings?"
7 sir
6 and a half sir
Jesus! Stick to me like glue!

grizzlymc wrote: ↑Sun Sep 27, 2020 5:36 am Was the bloodhound really going to drop bears out of the air in droves or was it just wishful thinking and immature tech?

I was still half asleep when I read this and (not helped by the total absence of capital letters) thought it was Grizz having another rant about wargamer-animal cruelty!

No, the Bears were of the Soviet flying variety.

I was recently banned from an Air Cadet Facebook group, due to an RAF Careers post, which showed a female RAF Corporal delivering a briefing in front of a lecture-theatre screen, which featured a large photo of a Tu-95.

Apparently it wasn't appropriate to ask if the young lady knew that she had a Bear behind...

Philistines.

I wonder what varnish they used?

I wondered what the heck they were doing in autogyros.
Read the squadron histories - turns out they used them for radar calibration.
Not a bad way to spend the war.

But which undercoating method did they use too??

Someone list all methods in order cost effectiveness, coverage and compatibility with different painting styles

There is only one undercoat: Humbrol Matt White, all else is heresy;
There is only one varnish; testors, all else is apostasy.

Norman D. Landings wrote: ↑Sun Sep 27, 2020 9:48 am I wondered what the heck they were doing in autogyros.
Read the squadron histories - turns out they used them for radar calibration.
Not a bad way to spend the war.

A safer use than the French, who used them for artillery spotting, although I'm not sure that they actually used them in action. (and do you think that I can find the link to the article that I saved? Can I bollocks...)