James D Kightly
banner
jdkightly.bsky.social
James D Kightly
@jdkightly.bsky.social
Does history - not an historian. Does aviation - not a pilot. Writes, reads, learns, communicates. Aviation Cultures Conferences. Interesting in many things. Freelance. No AI. He/him. Aviation content based at: https://vintageaerowriter.wordpress.com/
Reposted by James D Kightly
Richard Overy and Lord Russell at KCL History department.
November 8, 2025 at 7:08 PM
Incidentally, the article's from last year...
November 4, 2025 at 3:59 AM
Well, I’m hanging for the proof of the breadth of BlueSky’s reach when someone pops up and says ‘yes’!
October 7, 2025 at 11:16 AM
Reposted by James D Kightly
* And extra points if you can tell us about something YOU put in a logbook. (Or better still, left out!)

You can DM us in confidence, this account isn’t monitored by any retro aviation authorities (probably). -JDK
a man in a military uniform is sitting in a classroom with other men and says `` it 's classified . ''
Alt: I’ma just gonna leave the auto descriptor there: “a man in a military uniform is sitting in a classroom with other men and says `` it 's classified . ''
media.tenor.com
October 7, 2025 at 11:13 AM
The ‘dress’ has been worn by almost every surviving Spitfire decades longer than the re-production of two seat conversion revival.

The casual watcher of warbirds is getting a brief intro. Not an accurate history lesson - on multiple counts.
October 7, 2025 at 10:40 AM
Nice! A Tiger Moth with manners!
October 7, 2025 at 10:34 AM
There’s a lot of interesting developmental elements to the D-520 story.

But in 1944, they were still using the standard model. And it was not capable as an air superiority fighter by then.
October 7, 2025 at 10:11 AM
Essentially, yes. Long range over water to return to a MOVED base seemed to justify a dedicated navigator.

(There's also a forgotten belief that bombers were going to be hard to down, and fighters, thus less useful - so adding other roles to fighters didn't seem as a big compromise as it became.)
October 3, 2025 at 3:09 AM
That level of thinking is next level, literally!

Great model and idea, too.
October 1, 2025 at 6:50 AM
Ha! *If* I get there (fingers crossed) this will be the largest model I've completed in decades. That said, if you can avoid messing around and/or trying to be clever (like me!) it's a pretty simple kit that mostly looks like it fits well, so there's that...
October 1, 2025 at 6:42 AM
A bit of progress on #HeaviesGB #histscalemodels Fw 200. ‘Busying up’ the cockpit which, as well as being very empty, bears little resemblance to the real thing. And the seats are nothing like those provided. Meanwhile the mystery boxes and 1:1 screws have come good in V2 of the plan. Details anon.
September 29, 2025 at 12:30 PM
Blocked Tom a while back (on Twitter) as it became increasingly evident No One Was Ever As Right As Tom About Anything.

He also stopped listening a long time ago.

Of the fascism point, the current US is ticks all the criteria of the definition. You know, Tom, FACTS.
September 26, 2025 at 6:43 AM
It was a good airshow! So in my #HeaviesGB #histscalemodels Fw 200 build, I decided the failure of my special bit was just a blip.

In the 'conventional modelling' element of the build, I created an inner frame structure and the inner side of the passenger door. This Fw 200's cabin was stripped out.
September 25, 2025 at 4:52 AM