OT: Name that plane / ship

MakeeLearn · Post by **MakeeLearn** » Mon Jul 17, 2017 1:26 pm

This plane ????

Chickenboy · Post by **Chickenboy** » Mon Jul 17, 2017 4:53 pm

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

I'm going to say an airborne depth bomb. The explosive was developed by the Australians and quite stable and flexible. They even could use it in the Mk 46 torpedo.

You'll have to be more specific. I can't believe you lot never trained with this specifically.

Chickenboy · Post by **Chickenboy** » Mon Jul 17, 2017 4:53 pm

ORIGINAL: MakeeLearn

This plane ????

That's ridiculous. A chicken with teeth? Clearly someone is off their nut.

AW1Steve · Post by **AW1Steve** » Mon Jul 17, 2017 4:58 pm

I trained with or had dealings with the MK62,MK63 and MK65. This is not configured like , nor painted like , any of those.

Chickenboy · Post by **Chickenboy** » Mon Jul 17, 2017 5:17 pm

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

I trained with or had dealings with the MK62,MK63 and MK65. This is not configured like , nor painted like , any of those.

Maybe a different tail assembly throwing you off?

Chickenboy · Post by **Chickenboy** » Mon Jul 17, 2017 5:20 pm

Dunno. Looks like other Mk. 65s to mine eyes.

Chickenboy · Post by **Chickenboy** » Mon Jul 17, 2017 5:21 pm

.

AW1Steve · Post by **AW1Steve** » Mon Jul 17, 2017 6:03 pm

Paint is wrong , inspection hatch is wrong , size looks too small and it's not retarded. I've never seen a air mine that didn't have retarded fins to allow a "gentle" "lay down". With out them or a parachute the chance of going off on water impact is too high. This could be an early "destructor" made to look like a mine. All US mines in the "Quick strike" family are based upon standard bombs. But I really don't know. As someone else might say "Damit Andre , I'm a RADAR operator not a Ordnance man!". [:D] Seriously , I really don't know. I never spent any time around real live ordnance myself ,just "shapes" (concrete phonies). But something about that photo just doesn't look right. [&:] [:(]

MakeeLearn · Post by **MakeeLearn** » Mon Jul 17, 2017 6:22 pm

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

ORIGINAL: MakeeLearn

This plane ????

That's ridiculous. A chicken with teeth? Clearly someone is off their nut.

It's still there...

https://www.scientificamerican.com/arti ... rows-alli/
http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2006/02/ ... grow-teeth
http://atpeacewithpink.blogspot.com/201 ... icken.html

AW1Steve · Post by **AW1Steve** » Mon Jul 17, 2017 7:07 pm

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

Paint is wrong , inspection hatch is wrong , size looks too small and it's not retarded. I've never seen a air mine that didn't have retarded fins to allow a "gentle" "lay down". With out them or a parachute the chance of going off on water impact is too high. This could be an early "destructor" made to look like a mine. All US mines in the "Quick strike" family are based upon standard bombs. But I really don't know. As someone else might say "Damit Andre , I'm a RADAR operator not a Ordnance man!". [:D] Seriously , I really don't know. I never spent any time around real live ordnance myself ,just "shapes" (concrete phonies). But something about that photo just doesn't look right. [&:] [:(]

OK, I just looked it up in my 35 year old manual , and your absolutely right. As far as color goes , all the pictures in the book are line drawings , so maybe that is the correct color, or maybe the exposure is off. Or maybe , as the old saying goes, the memory is 1st to go. [:(]

BBfanboy · Post by **BBfanboy** » Mon Jul 17, 2017 8:31 pm

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

Paint is wrong , inspection hatch is wrong , size looks too small and it's not retarded. I've never seen a air mine that didn't have retarded fins to allow a "gentle" "lay down". With out them or a parachute the chance of going off on water impact is too high. This could be an early "destructor" made to look like a mine. All US mines in the "Quick strike" family are based upon standard bombs. But I really don't know. As someone else might say "Damit Andre , I'm a RADAR operator not a Ordnance man!". [:D] Seriously , I really don't know. I never spent any time around real live ordnance myself ,just "shapes" (concrete phonies). But something about that photo just doesn't look right. [&:] [:(]

Is it because the mine operator is not looking out of his little glass porthole? [:)]

MakeeLearn · Post by **MakeeLearn** » Tue Jul 18, 2017 11:01 am

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

Paint is wrong , inspection hatch is wrong , size looks too small and it's not retarded. I've never seen a air mine that didn't have retarded fins to allow a "gentle" "lay down". With out them or a parachute the chance of going off on water impact is too high. This could be an early "destructor" made to look like a mine. All US mines in the "Quick strike" family are based upon standard bombs. But I really don't know. As someone else might say "Damit Andre , I'm a RADAR operator not a Ordnance man!". [:D] Seriously , I really don't know. I never spent any time around real live ordnance myself ,just "shapes" (concrete phonies). But something about that photo just doesn't look right. [&:] [:(]
Is it because the mine operator is not looking out of his little glass porthole? [:)]

mine operator....

BBfanboy · Post by **BBfanboy** » Tue Jul 18, 2017 12:09 pm

I thought they only used canaries in mines? Live and learn ...[:)]

Chickenboy · Post by **Chickenboy** » Wed Jul 19, 2017 3:21 pm

Today's mystery plane:

JeffroK · Post by **JeffroK** » Wed Jul 19, 2017 5:23 pm

Kingfisher?
Dont know the numbers

Vought OS2U-1 Kingfisher
after cheating

Chickenboy · Post by **Chickenboy** » Wed Jul 19, 2017 9:31 pm

ORIGINAL: JeffK

Kingfisher?
Dont know the numbers

Vought OS2U-1 Kingfisher
after cheating

Good call.

Cheater. [:'(]

OS2U-1 was on the tail of the aircraft, which I blotted out of the picture. I thought that odd. I can't think of other military aircraft that paint the aircraft designation on the tail-do they?

AW1Steve · Post by **AW1Steve** » Wed Jul 19, 2017 11:14 pm

USN/USMC generally do. [:)]

JeffroK · Post by **JeffroK** » Thu Jul 20, 2017 4:10 am

I knew it was a Kingfisher, has to look up my list of serials numbers for the exact model.

1695 in white on the tailplane is its bureau number, 1681 to 1734 were Vought OS2U-1 Kingfisher.

RevRick · Post by **RevRick** » Sat Jul 22, 2017 10:46 pm

CHICKENMANNNNN....

he's everywhere!

he's everywhere!

Good achin' grief.... I had begun to think that I was the only one who knew about that feathered crime crusader... Outside of So. Fla. that is!

JeffroK · Post by **JeffroK** » Sat Jul 22, 2017 10:52 pm

ORIGINAL: RevRick

CHICKENMANNNNN....

he's everywhere!

he's everywhere!

Good achin' grief.... I had begun to think that I was the only one who knew about that feathered crime crusader... Outside of So. Fla. that is!

About 1971, school bus trip to Shute Harbour and the Great Barrier Reef.
Busload of ratbags from Kingsbury Tech. School had just about worn out the driver, he was a bit of a prat from Sydney.
Mid morning he announces, "time to shut up, I want to hear whats on the radio, you pack of %^&^%*& wouldnt know about this.

5 seconds into the intro the whole bus breaks out CHICKENMAN!!!!!
He's Everywhere
He's Everywhere.

Yep, radio had found its way to Melbourne

OT: Name that plane / ship

RE: OT: Name that plane / ship

RE: OT: Name that plane / ship

RE: OT: Name that plane / ship

RE: OT: Name that plane / ship

RE: OT: Name that plane / ship

RE: OT: Name that plane / ship

RE: OT: Name that plane / ship

RE: OT: Name that plane / ship

RE: OT: Name that plane / ship

RE: OT: Name that plane / ship

RE: OT: Name that plane / ship

RE: OT: Name that plane / ship

RE: OT: Name that plane / ship

RE: OT: Name that plane / ship

RE: OT: Name that plane / ship

RE: OT: Name that plane / ship

RE: OT: Name that plane / ship

RE: OT: Name that plane / ship

RE: OT: Name that plane / ship

RE: OT: Name that plane / ship