PDA

View Full Version : Goose Neck's



Able Mabel
17-01-2010, 15:55
Love to be able to show you photos but as yet can't get on with PB account. However, i have three that i 'aquired' from a skip at RAF BInbrook when they were having a clear out, still got a 'rag' of sorts in the funnel of the can.:-D

They were used during the war to aid landings before the advent of the electrical system installation, ie The DREM system.

olympusman
17-01-2010, 17:48
A Goose Neck used up to the end of the 70ties in the Belgian Air Force...

http://i280.photobucket.com/albums/kk185/olympusman/P4166290-2.jpg

Seen at the "Brustem Air Base Museum" (St-Truiden - Belgium)

Richard Flagg
17-01-2010, 18:45
Are there any photos of them in use? They just look like a garden watering can to me!!

Able Mabel
17-01-2010, 18:47
Great piccy, i shall photograph mine and post in the next day or so.
I would presume that their use in Belguim would compliment the electric lightning ??

Paul Francis
17-01-2010, 19:43
Ha ha ha, that looks like a cheap version, mine is cast iron and very heavy, designed to stay put even when under the down-draught of a helicopter. Got no photo though. Yes its a Cold War version, designed under some long-lost NATO spec - I suspect.

PETERTHEEATER
18-01-2010, 08:00
Are there any photos of them in use? They just look like a garden watering can to me!!

I don't have any photos of Goosenecks in use but I will tell you a little story of actually using them.

When I worked on the Song Song bombing range in Malaya (1961-1964) our base at Butterworth built a Low-level Target in the workshops. This was an amazing contraption designed by someone with a troubled mind who decided that, since it was a floating target, it should be universally jointed in each corner to better 'ride the waves' in a high sea state. About 6 metres square pyramid structure from angle iron covered in painted canvas and floating on empty 45 gallon oil drums.

For night bombing, I amongst other poor souls, had to jump - from a Range Safety Launch skilfully maneuvered alongside - with a Gooseneck in each hand full of kerosene onto the bobbing target and lash the flares one to each corner with wire then light the wick with a portfire. Dodging the burning wicks and trying to avoid slipping into the corner 'joints' and losing a leg was only for the fit and young. All this being pre-HSE days there was no life-line or life preserver and it was not uncommon for the RSL to back off to avoid collision and leave us clinging in the dark. Someone had the bright idea of attaching a portfire to the end of a gaff hook and lighting them after re-boarding the launch but this would usually result in the canvas covering catching fire!

Not quite an aircraft 'flarepath' but then the Gooseneck Flare was a universal use item.

canberra
18-05-2010, 19:40
I wonder if any airfield still has them? No airfield I worked on had them the emergency lighting was the LE58 portable lighting, but that was withdrawn about 10 years ago.

binbrook74
19-05-2010, 18:17
Cant wait to see the pics of the goose necks from binbrook .
Would love to have one of them in my Binbrook collection if you ever decide to part with one :)

AiXAdmin
19-05-2010, 18:52
I wonder if any airfield still has them?

I can`t say whether or not anyone still uses them, but I recall they were made "available" for emergency use at Tollerton when night flying was in progress, and their use and procedures formed part of my briefing to students (late 70's - mid 80's) . in reality I'd have hot footed it over to EMA along with everyone else I suspect, but I wouldn`t be surprised if they stiil have them in store somewhere - along with the "glims" for the taxiways.

Cheers
Dave

canberra
19-05-2010, 19:05
Blimey nI havent seen a glim lamp for almost 30 years!

canberra
24-05-2010, 19:57
Just seen goosenecks being used at the moment on the sweeney.

Smoggieboy
24-05-2010, 20:50
In 1985 AATC training only consisted of signal flares, FGI's(flare ground indicator?) and portfires. The only goosenecks we saw were hanging up outside TTF!

Glims are still in use at Shawbury for marking aircraft at night and for our RLG's.

PNK
26-05-2010, 20:16
Just seen goosenecks being used at the moment on the sweeney.

Yes, I saw that too. I wonder if it was at an airfield? Awful sound quality though as it sounded like my old 1970s C60 cassette tapes!

P Bellamy
27-05-2010, 13:14
Apparently that bit of "Nightmare" was filmed at Fairoaks airfield, with the farm being on Bonsey's Lane at the northeast corner of the airfield.

All the best,
PB

canberra
27-05-2010, 16:27
On my course (1978) we were shown a gooseneck, but that was the only time I ever saw one.

However in my day job we have a goose neck in control and restraint.

Smoggieboy
11-06-2010, 20:11
http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb26/SCARECROW450/LE58s.jpg

Just a few Gims and LE58's for nightflying at Ternhill this week.



However in my day job we have a goose neck in control and restraint

I am not ! going to upset you !!

PNK
11-06-2010, 21:14
Silly question. Why label one as spare? Surely the one you don't use is the spare one, I meaning the one that is left?

canberra
12-06-2010, 16:33
By the left, last time I saw a glim lamp was 1980!

canberra
12-06-2010, 16:34
And what vehicle are they in?

Smoggieboy
12-06-2010, 23:04
Toyota Hilux, our Landrover relpacement.

canberra
13-06-2010, 10:06
So despite the credit crunch and government spending being squeezed MOD can afford to buy fancy new vehicles.

Molesworth
14-06-2010, 08:40
So despite the credit crunch and government spending being squeezed MOD can afford to buy fancy new vehicles.

Rent, part of the "White" fleet that's on a five year lease. If you need a worn tyre replaced they call in Kwik Fit, I kid you not.

EGDGZTCW
14-06-2010, 11:54
http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb26/SCARECROW450/LE58s.jpg

Just a few Gims and LE58's for nightflying at Ternhill this week.

A familiar site but one I don't particularly miss if I'm honest. Never used the gooseneck but have seen some somewhere in my murky past. I thought glims where long gone and like the goosenecks, a museum piece. I used to love "playing" with FGI's and port fires :D

olympusman
15-06-2010, 08:10
Any picture of a RAF type Goose Neck around... ?

PETERTHEEATER
15-06-2010, 08:16
Any picture of a RAF type Goose Neck around... ?

From my experience, they were very similar to the Belgian model which you pictured at the beginning of this thread. Thin steel galvanised zinc.

P Bellamy
15-06-2010, 12:55
My wartime dated RAF ones are identical to the Belgian one pictured at the start of the thread, except painted matt black.

All the best,
PB

olympusman
15-06-2010, 16:47
Thanks Peter & Paul !

Thierry

Molesworth
16-06-2010, 16:46
Some background information about portable airfield lighting from 1978.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v298/Molesworth/Flarepath1.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v298/Molesworth/Flarepath2.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v298/Molesworth/Flarepath3.jpg

Carnaby
16-06-2010, 19:07
This thread contains much off topic stuff which has been copied HERE (http://www.airfieldinformationexchange.org/community/showthread.php?4691-Portable-Electric-Lighting)

It will be tidied in a few days

Graham

jamesinnewcastle
06-02-2011, 00:28
Hi All

I've finally got my gooseneck flare animation to a point where it needs some informed criticism!

I'll try to use the video feature on here but if not go to You Tube and type chickenduckquack in the search and the gooseneck videos should show up nearby!

The video is in 3 parts - the first is a close up of a single flare. I guess the colours, flame style, illumination effect, etc could all suffer some comment please!

The second part uses a collection of the same lights but at a scale distance of 300 yards apart and seen from a distance. How realistic is this in terms of the distance that the light is seen around the flares?

The last bit is a landing simulation that is a little darker than my original. As the plane nears the ground it gets more into the range of the flares how realistic does this all look? What about the T shape of the lighting array - OK?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WmIfafE5C-Q

It's the lights and lighting here that need criticism not the style or the fact the propellers aren't rotating!

PETERTHEEATER
06-02-2011, 08:47
Sequence 1 - As a former gooseneck flare user I would say that the flame is too red and should be yellow. Assuming 'no-wind' condition the animation shows the flame 'blowtorching' upwards as if under pressure. Burning kerosene the flame was soft and flickering and very smoky at the tip. The flame burned from the end of a large flat wick made from cotton strands wrapped in a cotton tube so the more wick that was pulled out of the 'neck' the wider the flame at the burn end. The ground reflection is good!

Sequence 2 and 3 I can't see clearly; need to look on YouTube.

jamesinnewcastle
06-02-2011, 20:11
Hi Peter

I'll make some adjustments. In the animation software the 'flame' itself doesn't cast any light, that is done by a separate light (which you can't see). So look at the light cast on the ground separately from that of the flame and criticise accordingly!

I'll make the scene a little lighter. Given that the flares are 300 yards apart is the light 'pool' cast by the lights, 'too small', "OK" or "too large"?

Cheers for looking
James

Paul Francis
06-02-2011, 20:51
But it is very good though, just needs tweeking a bit. Excellent!

PETERTHEEATER
07-02-2011, 07:31
Sequence 1 - If anything, the pool of light on the ground should be increased in diameter by about 20% with graduation. Obviously, the apparent 'pool of light' is dependent on the darkness and ground texture. Looks larger on a hard surface and smaller on grass.

I can't comment on the flarepath. I know that you will get it right; I just home that it's not too much work.

tarkey
07-02-2011, 09:34
excuse me if this is a daft question , but weren't goose neck flares positioned on the sides of the runway, forming 2 lines.

jamesinnewcastle
07-02-2011, 11:23
Thanks Peter - I'll adjust it and put up the new one.

Tarkey - I've been told by Carnaby that they were likely to have been only to the left, I guess the pilot sat on the left so possibly it was just as easy for him to watch the flares alongside his cockpit as it was to land between two lines. As the plane set down his view forward probably excluded any lights as the nose went up so perhaps looking down to the left was a sensible line to follow. I've also been send some Air Traffic Controller notes that talk about goosenecks and state that only a single line is used, however this is definitely the pattern for emergencies but it wasn't clear if that was correct for normal use. I'm still searching for a living pilot to get word of mouth on this!

Thanks Guys

James

Carnaby
07-02-2011, 11:40
Tarkey - I've been told by Carnaby that they were likely to have been only to the left ...
Correct. The Mk.1 Drem alectric system also had 'active' lights down the left hand side of the runway only, but it must be remembered that there would also be a set on the right hand side - though pointing in the reverse direction.

AP3236 (Works) contains the gem,
'Initially only one row of runway marker lights were installed... , but with the introduction of USA manufactured aircraft, a requirement arose for both sides of the runway to be delineated in either direction.
I've never fully understood this - something to do with tricycle undercarriage perhaps?

Simulation is looking good James. I'm trying to find my notes of the Standard Flarepath etc to comment fully.

Graham

tarkey
07-02-2011, 15:23
I am friends with a 90 year old ex Martlesham lad and he was talking about gooseneck lamps on friday night. He said one night when he was called to help, they had just lit them when some one shoute " DUCK" and a wheel just missed them by inches.

BTW I think your simutation is good and I hope my comment wasnt taken as a criticism

AiXAdmin
07-02-2011, 18:18
From the RAF Pocket Book of 1937....

http://www.aviationancestry.co.uk/flares.jpg


Plenty more of this sort of info if anyone's looking for anything in particular.
(including the burial service - presumably in case the layout above wasn`t done properly)

jamesinnewcastle
07-02-2011, 19:33
Thanks All

Carnaby - I look forward to all information!!

Tarkey - Would you ask your friend how many he lit, how long was the runway, was it just goosenecks, were they lit every night as a matter of course, when did they put them out? Don't worry about criticism I invite everyone to criticise (read - make better!)

AiX Admin - I am assuming that in 1937 the aircraft were on the 'light' side and quite slow, wouldn't a brand new 4 engine bomber demand a longer runway? There seems to be a single row of gooseneck consensus though! Hmm now you introduce a boundary light - what was a boundary light??


Keep the info coming!

James

AiXAdmin
07-02-2011, 19:58
AiX Admin - I am assuming that in 1937 the aircraft were on the 'light' side and quite slow, wouldn't a brand new 4 engine bomber demand a longer runway? There seems to be a single row of gooseneck consensus though! Hmm now you introduce a boundary light - what was a boundary light??

I copied that extract in a hurry and haven`t really studied the section as a whole.. but it looks to me as though the lights are marking a centreline?? and the aircraft could land to either side. Not an issue on a grass airfield and would allow a more rapid recovery of a formation.... or keep the airfield active if one came a cropper.

I would have thought that two sets would be standard for a paved runway - not only to clearly delineate the edges but for visual approach slope perspective clues for the pilot. (more important in a heavy to stabilise the approach early to help touchdown in the zone.. lower rolling friction etc)

PETERTHEEATER
08-02-2011, 04:32
Re Post # 10 diagram.

That set up was OK for a biplane with a slow landing speed and short landing run but when multi-engine mono-planes came into service I would expect that the 'flarepath' layout was adjusted to reduce the distance between the individual flares and, of course, increase the number to cater for a longer run.

The angle and distance of approach (glide-slope) would have been quite different for (say) a Tiger Moth and a Wellington so the pilots view on a shallow angle approach would foreshorten the distance between flares.

Perhaps a current pilot would comment. My flying time (crewman) was in helicopters.

jamesinnewcastle
08-02-2011, 14:55
The single grass runway at Oakington was 1700 yards long (initially and at the date I'm interested in) - I'm assuming that it was flared from end to end. The votes so far for the pitch of the flares are 100yds and 300yds. My animation was scaled to 300yds.

The foreshortening issue is important to me as I want to animate what the pilot saw on circling and approaching the airfield. I can put the 'camera' anywhere in the animation so eventually there will be a cockpit view, (should be fun).

Incidentally - I've just received a Luftwaffe aerial photo of Cambridge taken in August 1940, it shows Oakington and Dry Drayton as well as an emerging Cambridge Airport. Not detailed enough to show the lighting arrangements sadly!


James

tarkey
08-02-2011, 19:23
Tarkey - Would you ask your friend how many he lit, how long was the runway, was it just goosenecks, were they lit every night as a matter of course, when did they put them out? Don't worry about criticism I invite everyone to criticise (read - make better!)


James

Just got this from Vic ( 90 yrs old and served here at Martlesham at the same time as Bader

HELLO TARKEY QUERY ABOUT GOOSE NECKS. STATION R.A.F NORTH COATES NEAR GRIMSBY SOUTH OF HULL GRASS RUNWAY
ROUGHLY ABOUT THREE QUARTERS OF A MILE LONG RAF BEAUFORT SQUADRON STATIONED THERE, BUT BECAUSE THE CARRIER GLORIOUS HAD JUST BEEN SUNK, HER FAIRY SWORFISH MANAGED TO ESCAPE AND LAND AT NORTH COATES.FOR THE SHORT TIME THHEY WERE THERE, THEY FLEW MINE DROPPING EXECISES ABOUT FOUR TIMES AS ROOKIE ( WAS SATIONEDWAS (1940)WE WERE USED TO COVER A LOT OF DUTIES AND STANDING ALONG A GOOSE NECK, WAS ONE OF THEM
EACH AIRMEN WAS ABOUT 50-100 YARDS APART AND THE GOOSE NECKS, WERE PERMANTLY SITUATED IN THE GRASS. THEY WERE ONLY USED WHEN OPERATIONS WERE ON.A CARAVAN WAS SITUATED AT THE END OF THE RUNWAY. AS SOON AS THE FLARE-PATH HAD TO BE LIT,A GREEN LIGHT WAS FLASHED AND WE IGNITED THE SATUATED COTTON IN THE LAMP.
ON RED WE PUT THEM OUT. RETIRED TO OUR BILLETS PUT A TOWEL CCC
AT THE BOTTOM OF THE BED TO SIGNYFY WE WERE RUN WAY CREW. AS SOON ASTHE AIRCRAFT WERE DUE TO RETURN WE WERE RECALLED OUT TO THE RUNWAY AND ON HEARING AIRCRAFT ENGINES AND GETTING THE GREEN LIGHT WE RE-LIT THE LAMPS. ON THE ONE OCCASION I DID THAT DUTY, ONE AIRCRAFT CAME DOWN THE WRONG SIDE OF THE LAMPS AND WE HAD TO DUCK VERY QUICKLY. REGARDS VIC

jamesinnewcastle
09-02-2011, 18:31
Hi Tarky

That's great stuff - do thank Vic for me, that removes my imaginings of a single bloke running a mile with a match! It also helps the security issue of lighting a runway only when necessary - easy with electric light - not so simple with goosenecks!

But ask him another question if you would, he says 'wrong side of the lamps', does this mean that there was only a single row of lamps? If so what side of the line were the planes supposed to land (right or left of the lamps)?

Can you also ask what shape the lamps were arranged in, just a straight line, a T shape or an L shape?


Cheers
James

tarkey
10-02-2011, 13:18
Hi James

got this from Vic

HELLO TARKEY REGARDING GOOSE LAMPS THERE WAS ONLY ONE LINE OF LAMPS ALL FACING THE SAME WAY. TOWARDS THE END OF THE RUNWAY. THE AIRCRAFT WERE SUPPOSED TO KEEP TO THE RIGHT OF THE LAMPS, BUT THE WIND OFTEN (BECAUSE THEY WERE BI-PLANES) BLEW THEM OF COURSE. IF THE WIND CHANGED WHILST OPERATIONS WERE IN PROGRESS AND AIRCRAFT WERE RETURNING A RED VERY LIGHT WAS FIRED, THE CARAVAN WENT TO THE OTHER END. WHILST THE GOOSE LA MPS KEPT BURNING
AND BECAUSE THE WIND BLEW THE FLAME DOWNWIND IT HELPED
THE PILOTS TO IDENTITY CORRECT SIDE OF RUNWAY AND INTO WIND LANDING REGARDS VIC

jamesinnewcastle
10-02-2011, 14:01
Tarkey

Thanks again to you and Vic please! It's very good to read the human stories around these procedures, it adds another dimension to whole thing!

I've just got a copy of AP 129 the RAF Flying Training Manual - lots of interesting stuff - backs-up what Vic has said. I imagine that the lights would have to have been extended to cope with the length of runway a 4 engined bomber would need - A few pages scans attached.

Looking for a copy of AP1234 now - the navigation manual. I may get some of my other answers in that!

Cheers
James

tarkey
10-02-2011, 15:03
Viv was 90 last year and had a trip including taking the controls of the Tiger Moth at Duxford. He served at Martlesham with Bader and indeed had a confrontation with the great man when he demanded to test fly a Hurricane Vic was working on. He had just fitted some of the first cannons on a Hurricane. He wasn't CO of Vic s Sqd so he told him to go and see the CO, which he did and returned with him. Bader then ( in Vic's words ) returned with the CO and gave the most amazing piece of flying Vic has ever seen. Hurri and Cannons tested. Every time I see him he talks about something different.

jamesinnewcastle
10-02-2011, 16:19
Great story - so much of this should be written down somewhere!

I was quite taken aback when I realised that most of the little stories within the film 'Battle of Britain' were based on actual events!

Oh I've just noticed that a page of AP 129 shows the aircraft landing with the wind - surely they would have landed against the wind?


James

tarkey
10-02-2011, 16:44
James I have sent you a PM

AiXAdmin
10-02-2011, 17:18
Interesting thread.. and looking for info whenever I get a few moments.

Thought I'd struck gold with a 1943 copy of the RAF advanced flying instructors handbook (AP1723b). A comprehensive section about night flying but it seems to assume that aircraft are destined for paved runways with two sets of lights and equipped with Descent Path Indicators (SBA) for location and approach slope guidance - no mention of goosenecks or any lighting diagrams. (maybe there's another handbook for elementary flying training - (AP1723a presumably)

Carnaby
10-02-2011, 22:51
I think one needs to be careful about the need to get this simulation right. As I mentioned earlier the 'Standard Flarepath' was far from standard.

My experience (with hindsight!) of reading Air Publications is that they are frequently very wrong. The modern equivalent is the computer software instruction manual which describes 'this is how it was meant to be'. They then omit the essential 'you may however find it behaves in a very different manner.

Browsing through numerous TNA documents on technical stuff over the years, it became obvious that many stations 'did their own thing', especially when it came to airfield lighting and synthetic training simulators. They used whatever was available at the time to produce something which worked for them. Regarding synthetic training, this later produced standards such as the Harwell Box, Thornaby Recce Trainer, Manby Spotlight Trainer, Finningley Allez-Allez Crew Trainer etc. These would then be copied and installed at appropriate airfields, though many devices remained unique as that particular station remained convinced that it was the optimum.

Of course the Drem system became the norm for electric ground lighting, and this standard system was installed on large number of airfields. However towards the end of the war the Drem MK.III variant had been specified yet I have only discovered one airfield which claimed to have had it installed (Condover !). Elements of that version were already in use at a large number of airfields.

With flares it was probably a matter of 'how many can we get our hands on?' and how best to utilise them.

Graham

PETERTHEEATER
11-02-2011, 05:41
Here here!

buccaneer66
11-02-2011, 13:10
Have a read on this you may like the lead in light Graham http://www.bbc.co.uk/ww2peopleswar/stories/62/a7771962.shtml

Carnaby
11-02-2011, 13:29
Thanks buccaneer. Fascinating!

It does confirm the use of a metal hood to shield the goosenecks. Setting up a flarepath must have been very time consuming.

Also - a new one - the remote bonfire to indicate the turn-in to the runway! They must have been hard-up at this station. By 1940 the self powered electric floodlight (Chance Light) was normally used to provide this function. (Probably spent all their allowance on gooseneck hoods).

Prior to Drem Mk.II two self powered lights would be used, the other was at the runway threshold. Drem Mk.II only had the latter.

jamesinnewcastle
11-02-2011, 19:45
Hi

I remember looking at Buccaneer66s reference a while ago and mentioned it in a forum (can't find it now, could have been here!). The response was that the metal hood was only for the larger flares, a name was given...

Anyway, Tarkey can this be another one for Vic? Did his goosenecks have a three-legged metal cover?


Cheers

James

tarkey
11-02-2011, 22:28
Vic's reply

goosenecks were flat bottomed no legs, just like an oversized oil can like engine drivers used on the railway about a foot in length and six inches or more deep vic

jamesinnewcastle
12-02-2011, 03:49
Thanks to All

I'm going to start my full animation now - lots of stuff needs 'fiddling' with and resizing so it will take a while. Meantime a final draft animation with a Stirlings wash catching a gooseneck! Made the flame a bit more smokey.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jMUT7CWrP1I

I've lit up the aircraft's landing light just for effect really!

Thanks for all the input - keep going if you have more!!

James

PETERTHEEATER
12-02-2011, 06:30
Looks good to me! Now you have to consider the reflector hood mentioned in the link given in Post #25 (above). Good job James!

tarkey
12-02-2011, 09:43
James great stuff

I will show Vic and he will be pleased. He didnt mention this but his favourite aircraft was a Stirling having worked on them at Stoney Cross Tarkey

jamesinnewcastle
12-02-2011, 13:00
Hi All

Peter - I'm not sure about the 'cover', hardly anyone mentions them, in fact there's only one reference to them that I've found and that's the one Bucaneer66 mentions. I can see the idea of the hood preventing the light going upwards and giving away the airfield and I can easily model such a hood but I'd need to be happier that they would have been used at Oakington.

Tarkey - I don't think that the hood concept was fully understood - can you ask Vic if there was a three legged metal stool (if you like) that was placed over the top of the gooseneck. It wasn't part of the gooseneck.


Cheers

James

tarkey
12-02-2011, 13:14
I have asked him again and sent him a link to the You Tube

He will be delighted

Tarkey

Richard Flagg
13-04-2011, 13:36
These three different types of Gooseneck Flares are on display at NASAM, FLixton

http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb198/Flyer719/SUFFOLK/Flixton/20110412Flixton137-1.jpg

http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb198/Flyer719/SUFFOLK/Flixton/20110412Flixton134-1.jpg

http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb198/Flyer719/SUFFOLK/Flixton/20110412Flixton135-1.jpg

http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb198/Flyer719/SUFFOLK/Flixton/20110412Flixton136-1.jpg

Carnaby
13-04-2011, 16:12
We have one of the rare cast types (on the right) in our Archive. Courtesy of NP.

DG1
14-04-2011, 11:52
Just found this in a book about RAF Oulton.

Laying out the flare path on the grass landing strip for night flying, with two other airmen we loaded a truck with metal trays, some 24ins square and a number of ‘Goose necks’ which were akin to metal watering cans, these were filled with paraffin and sported a wick instead of a rose and with them we had a number of battery powered Glim lamps for taxying guides. These goose neck were placed in their trays at intervals along the strip and lit, a colleague was stationed at each end with myself in the middle, it continued through the night while aircraft carried out circuits and landings, we stamped our feet and rubbed our hands and awaited enemy intruders in order to run the strip and douse the flares.
T. C. Long Armourer RAF Oulton 1941

Ranger 1
29-09-2011, 01:44
I managed to obtain a Wells cart Iron type Gooseneck today via ebay (same type shown in the last photo) I decided to collect it in person rather than risk it being delivered by courier.
I was told that it was used at Lasham in the War.
It appears the seller had another one but it was sold in advance of my purchase, after the 145 mile round trip I decided to see if it was able to hold any liquid it was no surprise to find that there was a crack in the base, possibly caused by it having water inside it and freezing at some stage, however I can restore it by filling the crack and repaint it in its original yellow paint (plenty of that at my work place still!).
A photo will follow when its restored.

PETERTHEEATER
29-09-2011, 09:56
Now that's dedicated collecting! If there ever is a summer in the UK you will be able to light up the BBQ area with it and show off!

superplum
01-10-2011, 08:42
If there ever is a summer in the UK

Tsk tsk. 1 Oct today and temps expected to reach approx 29C.

canberra
01-10-2011, 09:13
And being a pedant, 1st of October is NOT summer!!!!!!!

jamesinnewcastle
02-11-2011, 00:35
Whoo Hoo

Found some Gooseneck flares in various places. This one from the Air Museum in Sunderland

jamesinnewcastle
02-11-2011, 00:42
And 4 from the place in Lincoln where they have a Lancaster that can run its engines up which I watched twice but for the life of me I can't remember what it's called but it was fab except that I missed the bit where they were rebuilding some planes!

(Not sure why it has gotten squashed, I can try again if anyone is bothered!)

jamesinnewcastle
02-11-2011, 00:45
And finally....

A still from a video (OK, film) of a real life flare in WWII flapping in the wind!! At last a video!


James

Bomber
03-11-2011, 21:43
Do you mean East Kirkby The Lancaster being " Just Jane"?

jamesinnewcastle
04-11-2011, 00:38
That's the one! :-)

James

Richard Flagg
09-11-2011, 13:46
Another photo to compliment James of the Goosenecks at East Kirkby
http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb198/Flyer719/LINCOLNSHIRE/East%20Kirkby/20111105EastKirkby10-1.jpg

Bomber
09-11-2011, 23:33
Would love one for my collection if any one knows of the whereabouts of any for sale or dummed somewhere let me know .

Dr_Bishop
09-01-2012, 15:52
I was taught at how to set up and maintain goose necks at RAF Shawbury in 1974... I feel old now - bu$$er.

canberra
09-01-2012, 19:31
I too was taught how to set them up and use them, but never did. In fact have any of the serving or ex serving TG 9 ever used them in anger????

Carnaby
09-01-2012, 20:18
Would love one for my collection if any one knows of the whereabouts of any for sale or dummed somewhere let me know .
Methinks you want a watering can for the fragments of runway in your garden:D.

http://www.airfieldinformationexchange.org/community/showthread.php?7051-Bomber-s-Runway-Rockery

Dr_Bishop
10-01-2012, 13:00
I too was taught how to set them up and use them, but never did. In fact have any of the serving or ex serving TG 9 ever used them in anger????

Had to do one at Lossimouth in 74 as part of my trade training exam from LAC to SAC!

Intially we used the old glips, before LE58's became standard. Preferred LE58's any day. Hated them when I was SNCO i/c Leuchars tower, as the middle part was a V&A item.

AiXAdmin
10-01-2012, 13:23
Had to do one at Lossimouth in 74 as part of my trade training exam from LAC to SAC!

Intially we used the old glips, before LE58's became standard. Preferred LE58's any day. Hated them when I was SNCO i/c Leuchars tower, as the middle part was a V&A item.

AP3456F Piloting Manual (1970 edition) Does not contain any references to these - even under abnormal procedures. Barring light aircraft types operating from grass or minor satellite airfields (for example) it's difficult to imagine that laying out goosenecks to recover aircraft would ever have been seriously contemplated in the last 50 years. I standby to be corrected though.

Dr_Bishop
10-01-2012, 16:02
They were used as a last resort and as such we had to know how to use them. Remember this was 1974!

AP3456F Piloting Manual (1970 edition), not much use for an assistant air traffic controller... Used AP3418 or JSP318, like you I too stand corrected, but I do remember being shown at the School (RAF Shawbury) and at Lossiemouth in there use.

Ranger 1
17-01-2012, 01:00
As promised a few months ago (when restored) here is the said Goose Neck in action.
74957496

Carnaby
17-01-2012, 01:08
Excellent, Ranger - very similar (but much better) than photos I took last summer of our archive's version. To get that dramatic effect in photo 2 the wind has to be 'just right' !

Ranger 1
17-01-2012, 01:21
Thanks for that Carnaby, It was last used at Lasham many years ago according to the previous owner.
I have a video of it but its on mp4 format and not supported, however an earlier simulation posted on here is very representative of the real thing.

Richard Flagg
17-01-2012, 01:43
I have a video of it but its on mp4 format and not supported, however an earlier simulation posted on here is very representative of the real thing.

I have just looked at the forum settings and changed something! It should be ok now to upload as an mp4. if not PM me and I can always put it on youtube for you.

Ranger 1
17-01-2012, 02:31
Thanks for the kind offer REF I was already in the process of sending it to youtube.
Its not the best video but shows it in action.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t91Ztn4UZA0

tarkey
17-01-2012, 10:09
doesnt work for me I get "THIS VIDEO IS PRIVATE"

PETERTHEEATER
17-01-2012, 10:14
As promised a few months ago (when restored) here is the said Goose Neck in action.
74957496

If you substitute gasoline for the kerosene the effect cab be much more dramatic:)

jamesinnewcastle
26-01-2012, 13:53
Hi Ranger (Sorry, not Peter as I put earlier)

That's just exactly what I need for my computer animation! It's a different shape from the more common gooseneck, was this one specifically for the RAF?

Excellent!

James

Carnaby
26-01-2012, 16:37
... was this one specifically for the RAF?
No - it was called a 'Trench Lamp' LINK (http://www.gracesguide.co.uk/File:Im1951Benn-ACWells6.jpg)
(http://www.gracesguide.co.uk/File:Im1945Benn-ACWells.jpg)

tarkey
12-02-2012, 10:01
Looks good

PNK
17-08-2013, 20:14
In the 1SFTS ORB there were instructions for dimming the lighting on the airfield and this included shrouds for the goose neck flares. This was dated 10/9/1940 and was as a result of enemy activity at night. The photo shows the two types and the ORB stated that the drawings (not in the ORB - as per normal!) were to be used for local manufacture. Not being a lighting person I don't know if these were widely used.

http://i303.photobucket.com/albums/nn128/PNK_album/Gooseneckshroud_zpsf2872240.jpg

Trucker54
18-08-2013, 00:05
We had them when i worked at Oxford/Kidlington in the 90,s for emergencies. We laid them out and used them a few times as
well when somebody kept on cutting the mains cables to the airfield light. We could either do a full set or emergency as a couple of times we had to put them out with aircraft waiting in the circuit.

PETERTHEEATER
18-08-2013, 08:36
Gooseneck Flares I am very familiar with but for illuminating low-level bombing targets pitching on the sea but those photographs show me something new. Two types a full (bi-directional?) and a 'half' screen (uni-directional?) The insides would have been thick with soot after a couple of uses making it a pleasure to handle!

In the background of Image 3 can be seen the lower limbs of an leaning individual wearing Plus-Fours or puttees or suffering from shrinkage in the wash.

canberra
18-08-2013, 10:22
They look like puttees or gaiters to me.

PNK
18-08-2013, 11:07
Looking at the un-cropped photo, which doesn't show much more, I would say they were gaiters and the uniform may be Army rather than RAF? For the plane spotters there was the bottom of a Hurricane and it looked to be coded LK left of the roundel. I suspect this was a pre recoding photo (1939??) and possibly not taken at Netheravon as suggested by the ORB.

PETERTHEEATER
18-08-2013, 14:44
Gaiters? So that's where the Bishop went:)