Yeah, i seem to recall stories of the Bull shar swimming up the Mississippi and there have been attacks there….as well as Lake Titicaca in S. America…

m

Never mind…just figured it out….Zambezi (DUH)…mind working slowly tonight…

M

Daz, old boy, you seem to have repeated Carcharhinus Leucas 2wice….doubly afraid of them, are you?
Mark

Jacques Cousteau….he fears sharks no more….he is dead….or to put it in Italian….’He sleeps wit da fishes…’ But then I think he did anyway….and you’re not bullsharking me about the Bull shark are ya? Always heard they were bold and incredibly dangerous, probably fairly high up on the ‘danger’ scale….speaking of which, we should create one of those and see what we come up with, a great way to gauge opinions of who fears what, shark wise….so let’s rank the top ten sharks we’d each NOT like to be in the water with….I’ll go first…

1 Oceanic Whitetip
2 Bull Shark (no, seriously)
3 GW
4 Tiger Shark
5 Great Hammerhead
6 Lemon Shark
7 Grey Reef
8 Mako
9 Zambezi
10 Silky shark

I can do them by scientific name from memory if you prefer (serious showing off now…)

Mark

I have always tried to figure out why I am particularly interested in WWII and not so much any other war, even though in a lot of respects the Korean war was very similar…WWII just holds my attention for some unfathomable reason, and I have to admit that even then it’s really the machines of that time period-the Battleships, the Carriers, the planes, and to a lesser extent the tanks and other bits of kit, but I never really found myself interested in the ‘foot soldier’ aspect of it, and I guess I have a hard time justifying that to myself, because they did just as much as any machine or plane or boat did in the war, those machines did’nt WORK without the men to operate them, but those infantry stories just never caught my interest as much as say the Battle of Savo Island or Midway or the air war over Europe and everything that happened at those and other places….I guess the best way to put it is I am interested in the TECHNOLOGY of the time…war always advances technology at a MUCH more rapid pace (unfortunately at the expense of human suffering)….WWII was a HUGE transition period, Korea was just a continuation of that in most respects, and even Vietnam, at least as far as aircraft, STILL used some of WWII’s technology (A-26’s, Skyraiders which were DESIGNED for use in WWII)….they just did’nt do it for me….I guess if I had to pick any other area of warfare that I have any interest in it would be the old sailing ships like the USS Constitution and the like…beautiful ships and a more elegant era…

Just my 2 cents…

Mark

Hey, Bob, here’s the attachments that I could’nt attach earlier….I really thing the Cape Gloucester aircraft look sharp, and none flying like that now….I think you guys should consider it!

Mark

If I’d been flying Corsairs in WWII like I was SUPPOSED to, being from Colorado like I am, it would have been ‘The Coloradan’…a tribute to my home state….I know there was a Sherman tank with a similar name (but I also know a LOT of names were repeated during the war…as it is, Colorado was well represented with the battleship USS Colorado BB-45, the USS Denver (a cruiser then, a landing ship today) and some others…

mark

I have always agreed with the term ‘ex-military aircraft’…therefore if a Miles Messenger was pressed into service on behalf of the military and served in the military, when it was surplused it became EX-military and is, as such, a warbird, even if it only served as a trainer, courier, transport, or whatever….
Jets are warbirds, hence the term ‘jet warbird’….the F-14 will, unfortunately, soon become a Jet Warbird (if anyone can afford to pick one up and operate one)…otherwise they will become something else, a ‘gate guard’….not glamorous, but oh well…