346
Warplane Art / Re: F3H-Demon
« on: March 01, 2008, 08:35:56 PM »
Some from German wikipedia. Note pic no.3 has still old 1 letter Tailcode.
News:
Forum is closed for new members. All content is private and can not be shared
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
347
Warplane Art / Re: F3H-Demon
« on: March 01, 2008, 05:34:11 PM »
Ok thanks....i learned a lot about Navy fighter markings of the late 50s today 
I made several mistakes. 1st of all. Never trust a single source 
2nd Tailcodes of navy planes have not necessarily something to say about an attached carrier. 3rd i would never want to work in navy research center
In the late 50s navy was renaming their tailcodes. Therefore the CVG-1 Wing went from tail wing "T" -> "AB". Tailcodes starting with A should belong to the Atlantic fleet, starting with N to Pacific fleet.
CVW-1 was originally the "Ranger Air Group", serving aboard USS Ranger during the early years of carrier aviation. The air wing also operated aboard all three carriers in commission at that time - USS Langley, USS Lexington, and USS Saratoga.
From 1946 and 1957, Air Wing ONE served aboard nine different carriers, including the first "Super Carrier", USS Forrestal, during the 1956-57 Suez Crisis. Between June 1966 and February 1967, CVW-1 conducted combat operations off the coast of Vietnam aboard USS Franklin D. Roosevelt. In 1975 onboard USS John F. Kennedy, CVW-1 introduced the Navy’s newest tactical aircraft, the F-14A Tomcat and the S-3A Viking, to the Mediterranean.
Until 20 June 1958 USS Ranger was operating in the caribbean sea operating from Guantanamo Bay. 20. August went into Alameda (California) where it was comissioned to the Pacific fleet. Until end of the year flight training off the Californian coast, in Januar 1959 Ranger went to Okinawa, to train maneuvres with naval units of the SEATO-States. On 27. Juli returned to San Francisco and stayed in alert status.
I would figure then photos were most likely before 1959 because AB is Atlantic fleet. If they were stationed on USS Ranger or rotating at this time i could not determine in the quickness.
PS:Sorry for off topic i couldnt resist to make a little research of everything
I made several mistakes. 1st of all. Never trust a single source 2nd Tailcodes of navy planes have not necessarily something to say about an attached carrier. 3rd i would never want to work in navy research center In the late 50s navy was renaming their tailcodes. Therefore the CVG-1 Wing went from tail wing "T" -> "AB". Tailcodes starting with A should belong to the Atlantic fleet, starting with N to Pacific fleet.
CVW-1 was originally the "Ranger Air Group", serving aboard USS Ranger during the early years of carrier aviation. The air wing also operated aboard all three carriers in commission at that time - USS Langley, USS Lexington, and USS Saratoga.
From 1946 and 1957, Air Wing ONE served aboard nine different carriers, including the first "Super Carrier", USS Forrestal, during the 1956-57 Suez Crisis. Between June 1966 and February 1967, CVW-1 conducted combat operations off the coast of Vietnam aboard USS Franklin D. Roosevelt. In 1975 onboard USS John F. Kennedy, CVW-1 introduced the Navy’s newest tactical aircraft, the F-14A Tomcat and the S-3A Viking, to the Mediterranean.
Until 20 June 1958 USS Ranger was operating in the caribbean sea operating from Guantanamo Bay. 20. August went into Alameda (California) where it was comissioned to the Pacific fleet. Until end of the year flight training off the Californian coast, in Januar 1959 Ranger went to Okinawa, to train maneuvres with naval units of the SEATO-States. On 27. Juli returned to San Francisco and stayed in alert status.
I would figure then photos were most likely before 1959 because AB is Atlantic fleet. If they were stationed on USS Ranger or rotating at this time i could not determine in the quickness.
PS:Sorry for off topic i couldnt resist to make a little research of everything
348
Warplane Art / Re: F3H-Demon
« on: March 01, 2008, 04:15:12 PM »
From what year are photos Srecko?
349
Warplane Art / Re: F3H-Demon
« on: March 01, 2008, 03:55:42 PM »
Nice photos...Machines are from CVN-65 U.S.S. Enterprise
Oh wait correction ....they are from the old Roosevelt.
Check this fine page Santy:
http://f3hdemon.homestead.com/
Oh wait correction ....they are from the old Roosevelt.
Check this fine page Santy:
http://f3hdemon.homestead.com/
350
Combat Warplanes / Re: Yakovlev Yak-3 in Aviation mus. Belgrade
« on: March 01, 2008, 01:20:38 PM »
I like more the Yak than MiGs
353
Combat Warplanes / Re: BMW Motor history
« on: February 29, 2008, 05:15:58 PM »
Nice machine Nico 
We used to have a BMW 1987 525e Limousine. We wanted it to make it an oldtimer, but unfortunately someone crashed into its back in 2004 and after that i was a complete write-off due to frame damage.
Like the one in the photo but ours was silver metallic
We used to have a BMW 1987 525e Limousine. We wanted it to make it an oldtimer, but unfortunately someone crashed into its back in 2004 and after that i was a complete write-off due to frame damage.
Like the one in the photo but ours was silver metallic
354
Combat Warplanes / Re: The identify the plane thread
« on: February 29, 2008, 02:16:37 AM »
Leti you are absolutely right i must have mixed the two types up last night But i guess its more likely to be a Me 410 then. The Me 210 had stability problems and was replaced by the Me410 by Novemer 1943. Since there were still 370 Me210 in the construction phase these were modifyied by a longer fuselage into Me410 to avoid high production cost.
But i guess its more likely to be a Me 410 then. The Me 210 had stability problems and was replaced by the Me410 by Novemer 1943. Since there were still 370 Me210 in the construction phase these were modifyied by a longer fuselage into Me410 to avoid high production cost.355
Warplane Art / Re: Bf109G
« on: February 28, 2008, 09:27:14 PM »
Your pilots are funny.. how do you make these?
357
Combat Warplanes / Re: The identify the plane thread
« on: February 28, 2008, 04:45:41 PM »I have just been told that the airfield is Berlin-Gatow
That doenst makes it easier
. In Gatow was the Luftkriegsschule 2 and Luftkriegsakademie of the Luftwaffe in WWII, which were the most important training facilities for pilots. So it is is likely that there were also many trainer aircrafts around. After the war it was a british operated airfield that took part in the air supply of Berlin. Today there is the Luftwaffenmuseum of the Bundeswehr on this airfield.358
Combat Warplanes / Re: BMW Motor history
« on: February 28, 2008, 04:32:06 PM »
Part II:
Altitude World record: 9.760 meters.
On the basis of the success-motor the engineers developed additional variants in the last months of the war (1918) amonst others also the BMW IV with increased cubic capacity and 250 PS (hp). With this engine the test pilot Zeno Diemer reached an altitude of 9760 meters on 9 June 1919. Nobody before him had reached such high altitudes and Friz's motor concept finally payed off.
Altitude World record: 9.760 meters.
On the basis of the success-motor the engineers developed additional variants in the last months of the war (1918) amonst others also the BMW IV with increased cubic capacity and 250 PS (hp). With this engine the test pilot Zeno Diemer reached an altitude of 9760 meters on 9 June 1919. Nobody before him had reached such high altitudes and Friz's motor concept finally payed off.
359
Combat Warplanes / Re: The identify the plane thread
« on: February 27, 2008, 11:47:38 PM »
It would be easier if we could determine the length of the plane. Do you recce guys have means to determine it from your photos even from far distances? 
360
Combat Warplanes / Re: The identify the plane thread
« on: February 27, 2008, 09:45:30 PM »
Possibilities:
-Ju 86 Variant -> ruled out for nose position
-He 219 "Uhu" -> ruled out for nightfighter
- Ar 240 -> only 15 produced and only 5 prototype of C type were produced
- Me 110 -> best fitting
I left out some trainers that would have also fitted.
-Ju 86 Variant -> ruled out for nose position
-He 219 "Uhu" -> ruled out for nightfighter
- Ar 240 -> only 15 produced and only 5 prototype of C type were produced
- Me 110 -> best fitting
I left out some trainers that would have also fitted.