Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Various Hardstanding Types

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Reading, Berkshire, UK
    Posts
    3,533
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked 11 Times in 11 Posts

    Default Various Hardstanding Types

    Hello All,
    I know what a “spectacle” hardstanding is. I know what a “frying-pan” hardstanding is. What, please, is a “SE” hardstanding?
    Willis & Hollis use the term. I have tried – several times over many years - to contact anybody connected with the various “Military Airfields” publications, but nobody will communicate with me!
    Can the hardstanding expert please help? There were 20 of them at Perranporth.
    TIA
    Peter Davies
    Meteorology is a science; good meteorology is an art!
    We might not know - but we might know who does!

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Northumberland, UK
    Posts
    3,587
    Thanks
    6
    Thanked 60 Times in 57 Posts

    Default

    Peter

    I think it may mean a Single Engine hardstanding - i.e. one for single engined aircraft.

    Regards

    Simon
    Last edited by wwrsimon; 1st July 2019 at 09:33. Reason: typo

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Reading, Berkshire, UK
    Posts
    3,533
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked 11 Times in 11 Posts

    Default

    Simon,
    Tks dat!
    Peter
    Meteorology is a science; good meteorology is an art!
    We might not know - but we might know who does!

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1,716
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts

    Default

    Peter

    Further information on Single Engine Hardstandings

    http://www.heritage.norfolk.gov.uk/D...nstruction.pdf
    Last edited by PeteT; 1st July 2019 at 10:01.
    Main areas of research:

    - CA Butler and the loss of Lancaster ME334 (http://rafww2butler.wordpress.com/ )
    - Aircrew Training (Basic / Trade / Operational / Continuation / Conversion)
    - The History of No. 35 Squadron (1916 - 1982) (https://35squadron.wordpress.com/)

    [Always looking for copies of original documents / photographs etc relating to these subjects]

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Northumberland, UK
    Posts
    3,587
    Thanks
    6
    Thanked 60 Times in 57 Posts

    Default

    Thanks Pete

    For those who don't want to download the PDF, this is what it has (it's about R.A.F. Coltishall, by the way):

    3.8 Aircraft Dispersals
    Aircraft dispersals included 35 single-engine (SE) hardstandings, though some of these may have been for
    twin-engine aircraft; they are not circular, but multi-sided, (a typical hardstanding is 60 feet across flats).
    These were mainly constructed adjacent to the perimeter track. Each of these has a pair of metal tie-down
    rings at 20 ft centres. The original 22 were constructed of concrete slab toned down with tarmac and
    another 15 built around the runway ‘33’ end extension were constructed with PSP. The majority face away
    from the landing ground, so as to be outside the runway clearance zones.

    Regards

    Simon
    Last edited by wwrsimon; 1st July 2019 at 10:41. Reason: typo - again...

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Reading, Berkshire, UK
    Posts
    3,533
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked 11 Times in 11 Posts

    Default

    Pete,
    Mni tks for that. Most instructive. A great deal of what was constructed at Coltishall was clearly replicated at Perranporth. The GE images, and crop-marks, at the latter are just as in the Coltishall plan!
    Tks again,
    Peter Davies
    Meteorology is a science; good meteorology is an art!
    We might not know - but we might know who does!

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Kent
    Posts
    126
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Default

    There were a number of types of hardstand that could be classed as SE (Single Engine) types.

    The descriptions in Willis and Hollis are taken from returns by each airfield that were compiled into a book of RAF airfields. Although the original form no doubt required specific details to be filled in it relied on the form filler being acquainted with the official terms and as such the reliability of some airfield details are suspect or misleading. It is always best to double check what was recorded at the time. This may not be the case with Coltishall or Perranporth but something to be aware of in future.

    As a postscript, the Record Site Plans can also suffer from misleading information in that they can sometimes show what was planned at an airfield but not what was actually built, or what was built but not the changes made after that date. I always try to get a good quality aerial photograph and if possible relevant to the period to confirm things.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Reading, Berkshire, UK
    Posts
    3,533
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked 11 Times in 11 Posts

    Default

    PNK, Hi,
    Tks yr detailed warning of the differences between planned/stated/maps, etc, and what actually turns up when one excavates it. I found that out myself during my archaeological fieldwork training! Always check sources/measurements, etc – and then check again! It was, however, surprising just how accurate the Roman surveyors/engineers actually were with just a groma and a carefully measured length of rope!
    Peter Davies
    Meteorology is a science; good meteorology is an art!
    We might not know - but we might know who does!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •