On 10/24/07, John Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
They have the throttles pretty much wide open during take-off, so all
you need to do is get to one of the airshows where a B-17 will be flying.
I guess my point was that with so few of them flying, it might be
difficult to get to one of their
John Sessoms wrote:
From: P. J. Alling
They've changed their name to the Commemorative Air Force,
(Confederate is so Politically Incorrect).
Might have something to do with so many of them old war-birds being
owned by people who don't owe allegiance to the old confederacy.
More
frank theriault wrote:
On 10/24/07, graywolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, the B-25 only had 28 cylinders, while the Lancaster had 48. But it
always
seemed that the radials sort of rumbled while the v-12's sort of snarled. The
one that always sent shivers up my spine was the Beech 18 (C-45)
frank theriault wrote:
On 10/24/07, John Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
They have the throttles pretty much wide open during take-off, so all
you need to do is get to one of the airshows where a B-17 will be flying.
I guess my point was that with so few of them flying, it might be
mike wilson wrote:
More likely due to the original organisation's recreation of the
bombing of Hiroshima. I don't think that went down very well
anywhere outside of a few redneck crania.
Anything like the Batley Townswomen's Guild's recreation of the battle
of Pearl Harbor?
From: Mark Roberts
John Sessoms wrote:
Actually, the 22,000 lb bomb did weigh 22,000 lb.
I think the thread has been officially beaten to death when someone has
to point something like this out!
Heh heh. My daddy used to say, Drive it into the ground and bark over
the hole.
--
On 25/10/07, mike wilson, discombobulated, unleashed:
I live on the flight path of the RAF memorial flight in its travels up
and down the coutry to airshows. A couple of times every summer I drop
whatever it is I am doing and rush outside to watch the Lancaster, a
Spitfire and a Hurricane
On Wed, Oct 24, 2007 at 12:35:07AM -0400, Doug Franklin wrote:
Adam Maas wrote:
There's only 2 flying Lanc's, 1 in the UK and one here in Canada, based
out of Hamilton, about an hour west of Toronto. A beautiful bird, but
small by todays standards.
Yeah, I think there's only one
John Francis wrote:
On Wed, Oct 24, 2007 at 12:35:07AM -0400, Doug Franklin wrote:
Adam Maas wrote:
There's only 2 flying Lanc's, 1 in the UK and one here in Canada, based
out of Hamilton, about an hour west of Toronto. A beautiful bird, but
small by todays standards.
Yeah, I think
John Francis wrote:
I don't believe you're right. The Collings Foundation have a B-17,
B-24 and B-25 in their Wings of Freedom flight, and they claim there
are currently fourteen B-17s in flyable condition in the USA. The B-24,
though, is apparently the only one flying.
It's entirely
Adam Maas wrote:
Doug Franklin wrote:
Adam Maas wrote:
If you want a great sounding bird, very little beats a Lancaster, with
it's 4 Merlins.
I've never been near a running Lanc, though I've seen them on static
display several times. I have had a B-17 and B-24 go overhead at around
1,000
On Wed, Oct 24, 2007 at 06:53:13PM +0100, mike wilson wrote:
Adam Maas wrote:
Doug Franklin wrote:
Adam Maas wrote:
If you want a great sounding bird, very little beats a Lancaster, with
it's 4 Merlins.
I've never been near a running Lanc, though I've seen them on static
display
John Francis wrote:
The Lancaster could (when stripped down) carry as much as a
22,000lb bomb.
Ah yes, the earthquake bomb. They used them to bring down bridges: It
didn't have to hit the bridge, just strike nearby where the shock waves
from the explosion (I believe they were fused to go off
John Francis wrote:
On Wed, Oct 24, 2007 at 06:53:13PM +0100, mike wilson wrote:
Adam Maas wrote:
Doug Franklin wrote:
Adam Maas wrote:
If you want a great sounding bird, very little beats a Lancaster, with
it's 4 Merlins.
I've never been near a running Lanc, though I've seen them on
On 10/23/07, Adam Maas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you want a great sounding bird, very little beats a Lancaster, with
it's 4 Merlins.
We get it over Toronto on a regular basis during Airshow season.
Like you, I've seen and heard that Lanc on a regular basis. IIRC, it
was built in Canada @
From: http://www.warbirdalley.com/
B-17G, 17,600 pounds of bombs.
Lancaster Mk I, Fourteen 1,000 pound bombs.
B-24, 12,800 lb. maximum bomb load
Bomb load could be traded for ceiling and/or range with all these. For
example, B-17 typically flew with 6000 pounds of bombs to gain
Bob Blakely wrote:
From: http://www.warbirdalley.com/
B-17G, 17,600 pounds of bombs.
Lancaster Mk I, Fourteen 1,000 pound bombs.
B-24, 12,800 lb. maximum bomb load
Bomb load could be traded for ceiling and/or range with all these. For
example, B-17 typically flew with 6000
Adam Maas wrote:
Bob Blakely wrote:
From: http://www.warbirdalley.com/
B-17G, 17,600 pounds of bombs.
Lancaster Mk I, Fourteen 1,000 pound bombs.
B-24, 12,800 lb. maximum bomb load
Bomb load could be traded for ceiling and/or range with all these. For
example, B-17 typically
Well, the B-25 only had 28 cylinders, while the Lancaster had 48. But it always
seemed that the radials sort of rumbled while the v-12's sort of snarled. The
one that always sent shivers up my spine was the Beech 18 (C-45) throttled back
with the 9 cyl PW R-985 engines slightly out of sync.
Yes, but I assume they didn't take that load all the way to Berlin and that
they were stripped of nearly everything not absolutely necessary for flight.
Payload vs fuel is the most common trade off made. For example, the
specification for the Lancaster range with 14,000 pound load was 1,660
Ya, but you guys have to remember you are talking two different things; Weight,
and explosive power. Also payload includes crew, ammo, and fuel as well as the
bombs.
A 22,000# has the equivalent power of 22,000# of TNT it does not weigh 22,000#.
Just as a 5 megaton atomic bomb does not weight
On 10/24/07, graywolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, the B-25 only had 28 cylinders, while the Lancaster had 48. But it
always
seemed that the radials sort of rumbled while the v-12's sort of snarled. The
one that always sent shivers up my spine was the Beech 18 (C-45) throttled
back
with
From: P. J. Alling
They've changed their name to the Commemorative Air Force,
(Confederate is so Politically Incorrect).
Might have something to do with so many of them old war-birds being
owned by people who don't owe allegiance to the old confederacy.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
From: Bob Blakely
From: http://www.warbirdalley.com/
B-17G, 17,600 pounds of bombs.
Lancaster Mk I, Fourteen 1,000 pound bombs.
B-24, 12,800 lb. maximum bomb load
Bomb load could be traded for ceiling and/or range with all these.
For example, B-17 typically flew with 6000 pounds of
Actually, you've got it backwards. The 22,000lb bomb weighed 22,000lb,
but actually had much less explosive power (which is why the current
USAF MOAB can claim to be the most powerful conventional bomb ever
deployed, despiet weighing 1000lb less than the Grand Slam, but had
18,700lb of
Which is correct, but the B-17 didn't either, it's range was quite
restricted with an 8,000lb load.
Interestingly, the RAF used stripped B-24's in the BMI theater, and
carried a 12,000lb load some 1,400 miles in one case.
Note of course that the return fuel numbers are also much smaller, since
From: graywolf
Ya, but you guys have to remember you are talking two different
things; Weight, and explosive power. Also payload includes crew,
ammo, and fuel as well as the bombs.
A 22,000# has the equivalent power of 22,000# of TNT it does not
weigh 22,000#.
Actually, the 22,000 lb
On Wed, Oct 24, 2007 at 05:39:36PM -0400, frank theriault wrote:
On 10/24/07, graywolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, the B-25 only had 28 cylinders, while the Lancaster had 48. But it
always
seemed that the radials sort of rumbled while the v-12's sort of snarled.
The
one that always
From: John Sessoms [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Why? They didn't operate under the same conditions.
No.
Regards,
Bob...
Art is not a reflection of reality. it is the reality of a reflection.
-Jean Luc Godard
- Original Message -
: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 3:36 PM
Subject: Re: Starfighters Co.
Which is correct, but the B-17 didn't either, it's range was quite
restricted with an 8,000lb load.
Interestingly, the RAF used stripped B-24's in the BMI theater, and
carried a 12,000lb load some 1,400 miles in one case.
Note
John Sessoms wrote:
Actually, the 22,000 lb bomb did weigh 22,000 lb.
I think the thread has been officially beaten to death when someone has
to point something like this out!
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from
Doug Franklin wrote:
mike wilson wrote:
BTW, wind your sound up and listen to the Merlin at full blast here. Don't
play the Corsair one at the top, it will make you feel ill.
http://www.aviationshoppe.com/Sounds1.html
There used to be a tractor pull car here in the US that had either
mike wilson wrote:
Still not as nice (for me) as the
inline(ish) Merlin, with the overlaying supercharger whine.
Might be the same for me if'n I'd ever had three P-51s zoom me in V
formation at mess up my hair altitude. :-)
--
Thanks,
DougF (KG4LMZ)
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Doug Franklin wrote:
mike wilson wrote:
Still not as nice (for me) as the
inline(ish) Merlin, with the overlaying supercharger whine.
Might be the same for me if'n I'd ever had three P-51s zoom me in V
formation at mess up my hair altitude. :-)
If you want a great sounding bird, very
Adam Maas wrote:
If you want a great sounding bird, very little beats a Lancaster, with
it's 4 Merlins.
I've never been near a running Lanc, though I've seen them on static
display several times. I have had a B-17 and B-24 go overhead at around
1,000 feet. Heard them coming and going for
Doug Franklin wrote:
Adam Maas wrote:
If you want a great sounding bird, very little beats a Lancaster, with
it's 4 Merlins.
I've never been near a running Lanc, though I've seen them on static
display several times. I have had a B-17 and B-24 go overhead at around
1,000 feet. Heard
- Original Message -
From: Adam Maas
Subject: Re: Starfighters Co.
If you want a great sounding bird, very little beats a Lancaster, with
it's 4 Merlins.
We get it over Toronto on a regular basis during Airshow season.
The Canadian based Lancaster made an appearance in Regina
Adam Maas wrote:
There's only 2 flying Lanc's, 1 in the UK and one here in Canada, based
out of Hamilton, about an hour west of Toronto. A beautiful bird, but
small by todays standards.
Yeah, I think there's only one Flying Fortress (B-17) left flying, in
the Confederate Air Force of all
They've changed their name to the Commemorative Air Force, (Confederate
is so Politically Incorrect).
Doug Franklin wrote:
Adam Maas wrote:
There's only 2 flying Lanc's, 1 in the UK and one here in Canada, based
out of Hamilton, about an hour west of Toronto. A beautiful bird, but
P. J. Alling wrote:
They've changed their name to the Commemorative Air Force, (Confederate
is so Politically Incorrect).
Yeah, well, I'm not all that Politically Correct. ;-
--
Thanks,
DougF (KG4LMZ)
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
So here's the answer:
www.dariobonazza/public/Fiat_G59.jpg
It's a 1948 Fiat G59, a derivative of the WWII-era G55 with a Merlin engine.
In Italy, it was only used as a trainer (hence the 2-seat cockpit), while a
few were also built with as single-seater fighters for other armed forces.
Thanks to
Of course, I missed the .com:
www.dariobonazza.com/public/Fiat_G59.jpg
Dario
- Original Message -
From: Dario Bonazza [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2007 10:44 PM
Subject: Re: Starfighters Co.
So here's the answer
On Oct 20, 2007, at 1:44 PM, Dario Bonazza wrote:
So here's the answer:
http://www.dariobonazza.com/public/Fiat_G59.jpg
It's a 1948 Fiat G59, a derivative of the WWII-era G55 with a
Merlin engine.
In Italy, it was only used as a trainer (hence the 2-seat cockpit),
while a
few were
I don't know what it is but it looks like it has RR Merlin engine.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
From: Dario Bonazza [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2007/10/19 Fri AM 10:01:43 GMT
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Starfighters Co. (was: Completely and totally OT: Politics)
mike wilson wrote:
From: Adam Maas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2007/10/18 Thu PM 08:14:36 GMT
Dario Bonazza wrote:
And now, let's discuss WWII planes with a quiz for warbird buffs out there.
Please take a look at www.dariobonazza.com/public/KGP03047.jpg
What's that?
Nose of an early P-51 Mustang? Or maybe a Hawker Hurricane?
--
Thanks,
DougF (KG4LMZ)
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail
Yes, it's a Merlin.
No, it's neither e Messerschmitt nor another plane developed from a ME109.
Dario
- Original Message -
From: Adam Maas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 2:48 PM
Subject: Re: Starfighters Co.
Doug Franklin
mike wilson wrote:
BTW, wind your sound up and listen to the Merlin at full blast here. Don't
play the Corsair one at the top, it will make you feel ill.
http://www.aviationshoppe.com/Sounds1.html
There used to be a tractor pull car here in the US that had either
five or seven Merlins
And now, let's discuss WWII planes with a quiz for warbird buffs
out there.
Please take a look at www.dariobonazza.com/public/KGP03047.jpg
What's that?
Ciao,
Dario
Is it a Yak-9?
Evan
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to
From: Dario Bonazza
And now, let's discuss WWII planes with a quiz for warbird buffs out there.
Please take a look at www.dariobonazza.com/public/KGP03047.jpg
What's that?
P-51B
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE
I would have guessed P51 but apparently that's not it.
I'd never heard of the Hispano Aviacion HA 1112 Buchon but I doubt that's it.
The wheels retract away from the fuselage in the photo you posted whereas in
Dario's photo they retract towards the fuselage.
Cheers
Brian
No.
Dario
- Original Message -
From: Bong Manayon [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 3:05 PM
Subject: Re: Starfighters Co. (was: Completely and totally OT: Politics)
I thought it was half of a P-82 Twin Mustang, but my guess
I thought it was half of a P-82 Twin Mustang, but my guess its one of
those Cavalier Mustangs (Mustang II? Piper Enforcer?) ...
On 10/19/07, Dario Bonazza [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
mike wilson wrote:
Civilianised P51 Mustang?
Nope. You have another chance, as I wrote WWII when it's actually
mike wilson wrote:
Civilianised P51 Mustang?
Nope. You have another chance, as I wrote WWII when it's actually post-WWII.
Dario
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above
Err... let's better say post-WWII.
Dario
- Original Message -
From: Dario Bonazza [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 12:01 PM
Subject: Starfighters Co. (was: Completely and totally OT: Politics)
mike wilson wrote:
From:
It looks a lot like the front end of a P51 but a lot of planes noses
looked a lot like that.
Dario Bonazza wrote:
mike wilson wrote:
From: Adam Maas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2007/10/18 Thu PM 08:14:36 GMT
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: Completely and totally OT:
From: Adam Maas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2007/10/19 Fri PM 12:48:10 GMT
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: Starfighters Co.
Doug Franklin wrote:
Dario Bonazza wrote:
And now, let's discuss WWII planes with a quiz for warbird buffs out there.
Please take
Doug Franklin wrote:
Dario Bonazza wrote:
And now, let's discuss WWII planes with a quiz for warbird buffs out there.
Please take a look at www.dariobonazza.com/public/KGP03047.jpg
What's that?
Nose of an early P-51 Mustang? Or maybe a Hawker Hurricane?
Neither. Although it's almost
Dario Bonazza wrote:
mike wilson wrote:
From: Adam Maas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2007/10/18 Thu PM 08:14:36 GMT
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: Completely and totally OT: Politics
Well, Canada did buy a bunch of F-104's. Too bad ours were low-level nuke
ground
59 matches
Mail list logo
