[OVERULD]

Here is a link to a thread over at the Mission4Today forum that has over 55 pages of incredible (many in color) WWII aviation photos. There are Army Air Corp, Marine, Navy, and RAF photos, most of which are captioned with aircraft type, location and other details. Be prepared to sit for an hour or more just going...WOW...as you imagine that time and the sacrifice those men and women made.

Enjoy!

http://www.mission4today.com/index.p...ish=15&start=0

BJ

[Old Goat 67]

Neat photos, Thanks.

[Pat68HO]

Originally Posted by OVERULD

Here is a link to a thread over at the Mission4Today forum that has over 55 pages of incredible (many in color) WWII aviation photos. There are Army Air Corp, Marine, Navy, and RAF photos, most of which are captioned with aircraft type, location and other details. Be prepared to sit for an hour or more just going...WOW...as you imagine that time and the sacrifice those men and women made.

Enjoy!

http://www.mission4today.com/index.p...ish=15&start=0

BJ

Bookmarked on my computer... thanks BJ!

[Greg Reid]

Wow....Great pics.
Does anyone know what the device is the young sailor is using on the bomb cradle under the Dauntless?
It's 4 or 5 pics from the bottom of the first page.
EDIT- here is is, I just copied it...

[OVERULD]

Greg:
That is a hand-held winch used for raising bombs into the bay. There are several other pictures of it being used as you go through the pages.

Here is another:




BJ

[OVERULD]

I like this one! What a beauty!



BJ

[OVERULD]

Pretty girls...they go great with cars and planes...and...everything!





BJ

[Alf ista]

Lovely fusilage there, very nice...

[Greg Reid]

Originally Posted by OVERULD

Greg:
That is a hand-held winch used for raising bombs into the bay. There are several other pictures of it being used as you go through the pages.


BJ

In all the years that I've been a WWII airplane nut, since I was 8 years old, I can't believe that I'd never seen that before.

[2002Z4CSS]

Originally Posted by Alf ista

Lovely fusilage there, very nice...

Ditto that!

[MikeNoun]

Another unusual one, the Ryan FR-1 Fireball. It was the US Navy's first jet aircraft, introduced in March 1945, but they never saw combat in WWII. They were found to be structurally weak for carrier landings.

They were born from the belief that a jet aircraft could not be used on an aircraft carrier because jet engines have slow acceleration rates, and require much higher landing speeds compared to a prop driven aircraft. But the Navy was being forced to accept jet aircraft, so their answer was "Give us a jet aircraft, but we still want a propeller up front".

What they received was the Ryan FR-1 Fireball, with a Wright 1820-72 Cyclone radial engine up front, and a GE turbojet exiting the rear. Both engines used the same AV fuel. The jet engine air intakes were were in the wing roots, which made for a rather thick wing. There were electrically operated doors that would close off the air intakes to lower aerodynamic drag if the plane was flying on the piston engine alone. For landings and takeoffs, the prop engine was used, but both methods of propulsion were supposed to be the norm. There were times when the pilot would shut the radial engine down and cruise on the jet engine alone, which led to photographs like this one, where it appears the engine is dead, but the plane is cruising merrily along.

[OVERULD]

Originally Posted by MikeNoun

Another unusual one, the Ryan FR-1 Fireball. It was the US Navy's first jet aircraft, introduced in March 1945, but they never saw combat in WWII. They were found to be structurally weak for carrier landings.

They were born from the belief that a jet aircraft could not be used on an aircraft carrier because jet engines have slow acceleration rates, and require much higher landing speeds compared to a prop driven aircraft. But the Navy was being forced to accept jet aircraft, so their answer was "Give us a jet aircraft, but we still want a propeller up front".

What they received was the Ryan FR-1 Fireball, with a Wright 1820-72 Cyclone radial engine up front, and a GE turbojet exiting the rear. Both engines used the same AV fuel. The jet engine air intakes were were in the wing roots, which made for a rather thick wing. There were electrically operated doors that would close off the air intakes to lower aerodynamic drag if the plane was flying on the piston engine alone. For landings and takeoffs, the prop engine was used, but both methods of propulsion were supposed to be the norm. There were times when the pilot would shut the radial engine down and cruise on the jet engine alone, which led to photographs like this one, where it appears the engine is dead, but the plane is cruising merrily along.

Very cool Mike. Never heard of this aircraft before today! The first thing I noticed was that the prop was feathered. The airframe design reminds me of the Gruman F8F Bearcat with a bit of the Vought F4U Cosair's gull-wing.

BJ

[Hedgehead]

[GT182]

Cars and planes..... but no gals.







If possible next August, I'll have photos of the GTO with B-17 "9O9", B-24 "Witchcraft" and "Betty Jane" a TP-51C

[OVERULD]

I love the look on the guy's face driving the 'vette...He is thinking..."I'm the luckiest guy on the planet right now - I'm driving a convertible Corvette with four - count 'em - four hot chicks; and I'm feeling pretty dang lucky about the prospects for later on!"

Great photo!

BJ

[MikeNoun]

From post-WWII to the 1960's, there were SO many aircraft accepted by the military that came and went within a few years. Money was no object when we were fighting the Cold War. What amazes me is for every new design, there were prototypes, test aircraft, then an order placed with the manufacturer, which required all new tooling, assembly, new weapons systems, and of course all the ground crews had to be trained on the new aircraft. And obviously, pilots had to be trained, and many times pilots just finished training on another front line aircraft, then they had to retrain for the new front line aircraft. Incredible how much time, effort, and money were spent designing an entirely new aircraft, then in a couple years, it was replaced.

Here's another oddball, the Martin P6M Seamaster. The Navy and USAAF were always at odds with each other, each believing they were more important than the other. Whatever the USAAF accepted as a bomber (or fighter), the Navy would reject it, and demand another design to call their own.

The Navy wanted their own first-strike nuclear bomber, and were unwilling to accept the idea of a B-36, B-47, or B-52 launching a nuclear attack from a land-based airfield. So along comes the Martin Seamaster, a huge aircraft, it performed very well, and was going to go into full production until it was decided the new submarine launched Polaris missile was a better first-strike weapon.

One of the COOLEST features of this aircraft was the bomb bay. Being a sea plane, they could not use traditional bomb bay doors due to the potential for leaking. The hull of course had to be water tight. So they developed a bomb bay that rotated longitudinally. The bombs were stored internally, and when the order came to drop bombs, the whole bomb bay rotated (think of a revolving door, lying flat).





And then it was thought they needed fighter escort for this bomber, so in step Convair, traditionally known as a bomber builder, they built the ill-fated Sea Dart. Designed as a fighter, it used skis to land on water instead of a hull or pontoons. The project was cancelled after a tragic midair breakup, which occurred on national TV. Besides, with the Martin Seamaster bomber project cancelled, so there was no need for the Navy to have a fighter that could land and takeoff from the sea.

[GT182]

Mike, I had a 1:48 scale model kit of the Martin P6M Seamaster back in the mid 60s. Was cool tho for it's short lived time.

[MikeNoun]

1/48 scale? That's HUGE! I had a model of the Sea Dart, but not the Martin SeaMaster.

They were fascinating planes (both the SeaMaster and the Sea Dart). One wonders what might have been, but they were developing so many aircraft so quickly, many of these planes, and ideas, were obsolete by the time they were to see production.

Again, it's simply amazing all the design, training, tooling, maintenance, and new procedures that went into an entirely new aircraft, and within a few months, it was all scrapped to make room for the next totally new plane.

This is how they would have serviced the SeaMaster out at sea. They were completing a tender ship when the whole project was scrapped.

[bird72]

Originally Posted by Hedgehead

OK, never mind the two wholesome ones on the fenders, I'll take the sultry dark haired one in the back....

[bird72]

Originally Posted by Steve Barcak

After a few bong hits, Fritz came up with an even better way of monitoring the sound transmissions from the Aliens.