|
401 st mission #195 Maximilliansau
Posted:
By: Dale Nichols
On: 07/11/2007
|
Can any one help me? Was Woodridge the RSF base near the channel coast and close to Ipswitch where flares were used to eaise the fog? Was the runway two miles long and one half mile wide as I remember it mentioned at the time? In general was this a satisfactory way to get aircraft down in fog? I can use all the help I can get.
Thank you
|
|
|
Re: 401 st mission #195 Maximilliansau
Posted:
By: Donald Byers
On: 07/13/2007
|
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suffolk
This little narrative will help a little. Trying to find additional information.
Don Byers
|
|
|
Woodridge vs Woodbridge
Posted:
By: Donald Byers
On: 07/14/2007
|
I found that there were 3 emergency airfields, "Woodbridge" in East Anglia very near Ipswitch, Manston in Kent and Carnaby in Yorkshire that had extra large runways to take damaged aircraft. The main runway at these bases was concrete, 3000 yards long (9000 ft) by 250 yards wide.
This would be you 2 mile long runway I believe. Have not found anything on Flares used at base.
Don Byers
|
|
|
Re: Woodridge vs Woodbridge
Posted:
By: Clyde Larry Mings
On: 07/19/2007
|
Members of the 401st used the strip at RAF Woodbridge. That landing area was so huge you could land several aircraft before cleaning it off- just pick a clear spot and prang it in- even if your hydraulics , brakes, flaps, or engine(s) were kaput.
As to using them flares during fog- I dont think that would burn off much fog. About 1947 I was on a B-29 crew that picked up General Earl Partridge at Andrews and flew him on a tour of western bases, including Boeing at Renton.We went to a demo at Arcata(?) California and they were experimenting with lining the landing area with a perimeter ditch laced with gasoline and then torching it. The resulting temporary inferno literaly "burned away the fog" for awhile. I dont think the procedure was adopted since it was dangerous and not practical for multiple aircraft needing to land. A trivia note: The 307th B-29s deployed to Furstenfeldbruck , Germany and on the way back over the Alps we lost one engine. The base had snow and fog, but they placed high intensity flares at approach, middle, and end of the runway . We had another engine catch fire on final and had one shot at landing. The flare at the far end of the runway gave out and the pilot only saw two bright spots in the fog and thought they marked the ends. We didnt even slow down as we went skidding off into the boondocks and the B-29 nose gear gave way and it stood on its nose.Quite a night in the snow, fog, and confusion. Flares were not the ideal answer.
|
|
|
Re: Woodridge vs Woodbridge
Posted:
By: Donald Byers
On: 07/20/2007
|
Well that didn't post where I wanted it. Oh well Thanks Clyde am sure that will answers Dale's question.
Don Byers
|
|
|
Re: Woodridge vs Woodbridge
Posted:
By: Paul Bellamy
On: 07/23/2007
|
I'm sure I've posted this before, probably on the New Forum....
RAF Woodbridge was equipped with FIDO for burning off fog, so that could be what's being referred to.
All the best,
Paul
|
|
|
Re: Woodridge vs Woodbridge
Posted:
By: Bill Gillespie
On: 07/27/2007
|
I was assigned to RAF Woodbridge in the 60's and we use to find all sorts of bits and pieces of aircraft in the nearby forest. Even found a parashoot still hanging in a tree. I worked in the former base morgue. My father, 615th Sq, used the base returning from a mission. Wish I had known it while I was there.
Thanks for letting me remember some memories.
|
|
