As I said I might well be wrong – it just struck me as odd.

Prompted by the G91 thread on the Modern Military board, what is the most significant warplane (numerically) never to see operational use? How about the B-47? If we limit it to British types, the Lightning?

Actually B47s flew spy flights in the Cold War over the USSR so I suppose they did see sharp end operational service.

CGI aircraft are just cartoons – and the best cartoon aircraft are in Porco Rosso.

So if I want to watch cartoon aircraft I’ll watch that, but if a film is about flying then I demand real aircraft.

Picky, unreasonable, difficult? perhaps but CGI is just plain fake.

Wont do a “which one was better” thread, so……..compare the beasts. Seems the R-100 an 101 had a very “Edwardian” feel to the passenger compartments whereas the Hindenburg had a sort of art deco look……..I imagine the level of service on the Brit ships would have been on par with the Germans. Comments?

I believe all the service was flaming wonderful. 😀

Although barbeques and crepe suzettes were off the menu.

🙂

A flying shot of a Proctuka reputedly taken during test flying by VB (though it was never used in the BoB film in the end). See 5th photo down on the following page:
http://www.wonwinglo.scale-models.net/id34.htm

A courageous try but doesn’t really do much for me. The photo caption says it all.

Hmm my mind wanders.

So that’s the explanation we’ve all been seeking.

Don’t sue!!! I’m only joking 😀

The problem with this forum ,is those new members who seem to come from nowhere ,acting as though they’ve been doing it all there lives, and offering opinions and advice where neither are wanted or needed (don’t forget some forum members have been doing this for years) ;they don’t even have enough sense to know when they are butting in on a “private” chat between a bunch of mates (who probably were at school together if indeed they hadn’t met much earlier ) And worse still they have the supidity to open up discussion on subjects already covered a thousand times.

B*gger, THATS ME isn’t it !!

One of the greatest cruelties one human being can inflict on another is being right. :rolleyes:

Frankly I didn’t think this forum’s general tone was any better or any worse than most I’ve seen. 🙂 Certainly it has its fair share of interesting discussions and its fair share of ones that get a little warm – but passion isn’t a bad thing, and watching others have a good stoush is always fun. 😀

Greetings,

Have been reading up recently on the ME109 and its variants and came across the Messerschmitt 109 Turbo-Lader Strahltriebwerk ( turbocharger jet engine).

I can find plenty of 3view type technical drawings but not any photos of it in operational service.

So was wondering if anyone out there had a picture of the TL variant in their collection.

Regards and thanks for looking

Cliff

Many years ago Ian Huntly did an article in Scale Aircraft Modelling which offered a hypothetical chain of development, in sketches, of a Me109 being slowly transformed into a Mig15. That hypothetical Me109TL is similar to his first step.

It resembles the process by which Yakovlev transformed the Yak 9 into the Yak 15. The process worked with the Yak because it had a wide track stable undercarriage. I would suspect that a similar process with a Me109 (which had possibly the worst u/c design of any fighter in WW2) would result in an aircraft with the ground handling traits of a supermarket trolley.

Frankly I would be highly surprised if anyone seriously took the design further than a sketch – another example of the knapkinwaffe 🙂 .

The Czechs did use the Yak 15 so that’s where some confusion might lie. They also used the Me262 and built Me109Gs with Jumo engines because there were no DB engines available in 1946. Possibly the worst fighter aircraft that ever tried to get into the air. The Israelis used some as well – known as the Mule for its handling qualities..