Post amazingly cool pictures of aircraft (Volume 1)
Discussion
FourWheelDrift said:
root 666 said:
But i'm sure there's a picture of a mk 9 (note nervousness) in duck-egg blue with lots of cameras and very few guns.
Maybe not.
You're not mad you may well have seen a PR MkIXMaybe not.
"Pending development of a dedicated Merlin 61 powered PR Spitfire (the Mk XI) at least three Mk IXs (BS338, BS339 and BS473) were taken off the production line and modified to carry two vertical cameras in the rear fuselage. The first of these was delivered to 541 Squadron at Benson on 30 November 1942. Subsequently another 15 Mk IXs were converted to PR Mk IXs (factory designation type 374) at the Vickers-Armstrong Worthy Down facility. As well as incorporating camera equipment, a wrap-around PR type windscreen was fitted and a larger oil tank was installed under the nose. All armament was removed and a PRU Blue finish applied."
Could also have been an FR MkIX which was still an armed MkIX but with a single camera.
There are no PR IXs (or FRIXs) knocking about today. I'm not even sure if any static display examples survive.
There are quite a few PRXIXs because they were the last Mark of Spit used operationally by the RAF, only being retired in the mid 1950s.
So how does it go again?
"They would have been extremely rare" (Your original contention was that there was no such thing)
"I can't recall seeing a photograph of one" (Which proves?)
(I can,despite being unable to recollect what I had for breakfast with any degree of conviction).
"There certainly aren't any around today" (Not too many Dinosaurs either. Doesn't mean they didn't exist).
So the fact (are you OK with that?) that FourWheelDrift's research throws up (sorry) eighteen of the bloody things still leaves me as the deluded one.
Is that about the size of it?
The thing that (originally) miffed me was your vaguely school-masterly (and erroneous) "correction" coupled with a somewhat turbo-charged pedantry pointing out that I typed "1X" rather than "IX"!
I just thought I'd give you the opportunity to personally adhere to the ludicrously high standards of accuracy you seem to require from others.
"They would have been extremely rare" (Your original contention was that there was no such thing)
"I can't recall seeing a photograph of one" (Which proves?)
(I can,despite being unable to recollect what I had for breakfast with any degree of conviction).
"There certainly aren't any around today" (Not too many Dinosaurs either. Doesn't mean they didn't exist).
So the fact (are you OK with that?) that FourWheelDrift's research throws up (sorry) eighteen of the bloody things still leaves me as the deluded one.
Is that about the size of it?
The thing that (originally) miffed me was your vaguely school-masterly (and erroneous) "correction" coupled with a somewhat turbo-charged pedantry pointing out that I typed "1X" rather than "IX"!
I just thought I'd give you the opportunity to personally adhere to the ludicrously high standards of accuracy you seem to require from others.
root 666 said:
So how does it go again?
"They would have been extremely rare" (Your original contention was that there was no such thing)
"I can't recall seeing a photograph of one" (Which proves?)
(I can,despite being unable to recollect what I had for breakfast with any degree of conviction).
"There certainly aren't any around today" (Not too many Dinosaurs either. Doesn't mean they didn't exist).
So the fact (are you OK with that?) that FourWheelDrift's research throws up (sorry) eighteen of the bloody things still leaves me as the deluded one.
Is that about the size of it?
The thing that (originally) miffed me was your vaguely school-masterly (and erroneous) "correction" coupled with a somewhat turbo-charged pedantry pointing out that I typed "1X" rather than "IX"!
I just thought I'd give you the opportunity to personally adhere to the ludicrously high standards of accuracy you seem to require from others.
I note you've managed a 4 month stint."They would have been extremely rare" (Your original contention was that there was no such thing)
"I can't recall seeing a photograph of one" (Which proves?)
(I can,despite being unable to recollect what I had for breakfast with any degree of conviction).
"There certainly aren't any around today" (Not too many Dinosaurs either. Doesn't mean they didn't exist).
So the fact (are you OK with that?) that FourWheelDrift's research throws up (sorry) eighteen of the bloody things still leaves me as the deluded one.
Is that about the size of it?
The thing that (originally) miffed me was your vaguely school-masterly (and erroneous) "correction" coupled with a somewhat turbo-charged pedantry pointing out that I typed "1X" rather than "IX"!
I just thought I'd give you the opportunity to personally adhere to the ludicrously high standards of accuracy you seem to require from others.
A word to the wise regarding aviation topics in the P&P.
There are numerous Boeing and Airbus drivers who frequent these threads, and many PPLs. My personal favourite distraction involves flinging aerobatic aircraft around the sky, but that's my problem.
But nobody messes with the Eric Mc when it comes down to intellectual rigour in this regard. The man is a legend.
You may want to revise your hissy fit stance. It does you no credit.
Jonny671 said:
I found this quite cool..
http://link.brightcove.com/services/link/bcpid1374...
Thats the Air Traffic over NYC
It says air traffic over USA and indeed the 'shape' of the traffic looks the shape too, but still a good video! http://link.brightcove.com/services/link/bcpid1374...
Thats the Air Traffic over NYC
Mr Harding, your incorrect assumption that I'm unfamiliar with the pointed end of an aircraft does you little credit either.
From the nature of his replies it is clear that you aren't the only one who regards Mr Mc as a legend.
The nature of my original post (about a dozen up) merely commented on the beauty of a photograph with an entirely personal observation that an alternative aircraft would (in my eyes) make it achingly beautiful.
I then become the recipient of Mr Mc's slightly flawed knowledge. And pedantry.
I fail to see what my four month "stint" has to do with anything but am confident that it's entirely clear in your mind.
I won't trouble you with the fact that my son is the third generation of my family to have served in the R.A.F.
Nor indeed with anything else.
From the nature of his replies it is clear that you aren't the only one who regards Mr Mc as a legend.
The nature of my original post (about a dozen up) merely commented on the beauty of a photograph with an entirely personal observation that an alternative aircraft would (in my eyes) make it achingly beautiful.
I then become the recipient of Mr Mc's slightly flawed knowledge. And pedantry.
I fail to see what my four month "stint" has to do with anything but am confident that it's entirely clear in your mind.
I won't trouble you with the fact that my son is the third generation of my family to have served in the R.A.F.
Nor indeed with anything else.
root 666 said:
Mr Harding, your incorrect assumption that I'm unfamiliar with the pointed end of an aircraft does you little credit either.
From the nature of his replies it is clear that you aren't the only one who regards Mr Mc as a legend.
The nature of my original post (about a dozen up) merely commented on the beauty of a photograph with an entirely personal observation that an alternative aircraft would (in my eyes) make it achingly beautiful.
I then become the recipient of Mr Mc's slightly flawed knowledge. And pedantry.
I fail to see what my four month "stint" has to do with anything but am confident that it's entirely clear in your mind.
I won't trouble you with the fact that my son is the third generation of my family to have served in the R.A.F.
Nor indeed with anything else.
Calm down dear, its only an internet forum.From the nature of his replies it is clear that you aren't the only one who regards Mr Mc as a legend.
The nature of my original post (about a dozen up) merely commented on the beauty of a photograph with an entirely personal observation that an alternative aircraft would (in my eyes) make it achingly beautiful.
I then become the recipient of Mr Mc's slightly flawed knowledge. And pedantry.
I fail to see what my four month "stint" has to do with anything but am confident that it's entirely clear in your mind.
I won't trouble you with the fact that my son is the third generation of my family to have served in the R.A.F.
Nor indeed with anything else.
Regarding the pointy end though....were you a genuine pointy, or a blunty who was fortunate enough to enjoy the view?
root 666 said:
All three of us were pointy (although my father was the only one who had lots of other pointy things directed at him).
I now infinitely prefer gliders.
Not quite as....noisy.
We can do the glider vs. power jeering later.....I note however that this year the match is at Wickenby as opposed to Lasham. If you're going to be there though, I'll make the effort..I now infinitely prefer gliders.
Not quite as....noisy.
I trust this spat with Eric will be sorted out in short order.
I won't take it personally.
The point I was trying to make was that the PRIX was so rare that one hardly ever sees pictures of it. I'm sure if one was interested enough you could find a production list of all the Spitfire versions on the net and you would find the the PRIX was built in very small numbers.
On the other hand the MkIX was built in the thousands (even though it was supposed to have been an "interim" type) and is very commonly seen in photos - and there are a number still flying.
Not a huge amount of PRXIXs Spitfires were built either but a number still exist today (and lovely they are too) because they were the last operational Spitfires with the RAF.
Anyway, I won't continue the "debate" any longer.
And if I upset Route 666, I apologise.
The point I was trying to make was that the PRIX was so rare that one hardly ever sees pictures of it. I'm sure if one was interested enough you could find a production list of all the Spitfire versions on the net and you would find the the PRIX was built in very small numbers.
On the other hand the MkIX was built in the thousands (even though it was supposed to have been an "interim" type) and is very commonly seen in photos - and there are a number still flying.
Not a huge amount of PRXIXs Spitfires were built either but a number still exist today (and lovely they are too) because they were the last operational Spitfires with the RAF.
Anyway, I won't continue the "debate" any longer.
And if I upset Route 666, I apologise.
Edited by Eric Mc on Saturday 7th March 08:33
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff