RE: Australian Beauties II
Posted: Sat Jan 01, 2022 2:19 am
It's time to stop this stuff.
It's embarrassing.
[&:]
[8D]
It's embarrassing.
[&:]
[8D]
Page 5 of 17
RE: Australian Beauties II
Posted: Sat Jan 01, 2022 5:45 am
Well then, I give you a KV-2
RE: Australian Beauties II
Posted: Sat Jan 01, 2022 11:29 am
A picture of a Female that is not wearing clothes - it is a historical picture . . .
RE: Australian Beauties II
Posted: Sat Jan 01, 2022 1:56 pm
You may very well call it a female. I call it a tank. [:)]ORIGINAL: RangerJoe
A picture of a Female that is not wearing clothes - it is a historical picture . . .
RE: Australian Beauties II
Posted: Sat Jan 01, 2022 2:01 pm
The beauty is indeed in the eye of the beholder.ORIGINAL: warspite1
Personally I am not a fan of these ships. The gap between the funnel and the bridge looks odd, and the lack of a main turret at the rear gives a lop-sided appearance a la the Nelson's. But beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
However, I suspect that you agree that the ship in the picture below is a grand looking battleship. At least from this angle. [:)]
RE: Australian Beauties II
Posted: Sat Jan 01, 2022 4:11 pm
Two more that fell out of the ugly tree. Grant and Lee.
RE: Australian Beauties II
Posted: Sat Jan 01, 2022 4:28 pm
Yeah I don't see the beauty in anything like a Grant or a Lee. [;)]
RE: Australian Beauties II
Posted: Sat Jan 01, 2022 6:12 pm
ORIGINAL: ncc1701e
Yeah I don't see the beauty in anything like a Grant or a Lee. [;)]
If you'd been in the 8th Army in May 1942, anything with a 75mm gun would have looked gorgeous to you.
RE: Australian Beauties II
Posted: Sat Jan 01, 2022 6:53 pm
warspite1ORIGINAL: Orm
The beauty is indeed in the eye of the beholder.ORIGINAL: warspite1
Personally I am not a fan of these ships. The gap between the funnel and the bridge looks odd, and the lack of a main turret at the rear gives a lop-sided appearance a la the Nelson's. But beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
However, I suspect that you agree that the ship in the picture below is a grand looking battleship. At least from this angle. [:)]
Yes I would agree that from this angle she looks fine.... but I think all angles need to be taken into account, and from side on, she is just not a good looking warship to my mind.
RE: Australian Beauties II
Posted: Sat Jan 01, 2022 6:56 pm
warspite1ORIGINAL: Aurelian
Well then, I give you a KV-2
I know little about tanks. Why was that oversised chunk of metal considered necessary in the KV-2's design?
RE: Australian Beauties II
Posted: Sat Jan 01, 2022 7:00 pm
warspite1ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay
Focke Wulf 190D-9:
I have always had a soft spot for the Fw-190A
RE: Australian Beauties II
Posted: Sat Jan 01, 2022 7:08 pm
ORIGINAL: warspite1
warspite1ORIGINAL: Aurelian
Well then, I give you a KV-2
I know little about tanks. Why was that oversised chunk of metal considered necessary in the KV-2's design?
I think it was due to the 152mm howitzer it had rather than the 76mm of the KV-1.
RE: Australian Beauties II
Posted: Sat Jan 01, 2022 8:47 pm
ORIGINAL: warspite1
warspite1ORIGINAL: Aurelian
Well then, I give you a KV-2
I know little about tanks. Why was that oversised chunk of metal considered necessary in the KV-2's design?
A 152mm main gun and the German 88mm AT shells bounced off the armour.
RE: Australian Beauties II
Posted: Sat Jan 01, 2022 8:48 pm
ORIGINAL: DD696
Ah, the "ranger" joe. Uou speak with a forked tongue. The worst violator of standards in your verbose posts. Hard to imagine that you can honestly criticize another with your demonstrated abuse of what is now allowed.
Do you really want to get into it?
RE: Australian Beauties II
Posted: Sat Jan 01, 2022 8:51 pm
ORIGINAL: Orm
You may very well call it a female. I call it a tank. [:)]ORIGINAL: RangerJoe
A picture of a Female that is not wearing clothes - it is a historical picture . . .
It is a Female tank!
Here is a picture of a hot bikini . . .
RE: Australian Beauties II
Posted: Sat Jan 01, 2022 9:05 pm
ORIGINAL: Capt. Harlock
ORIGINAL: ncc1701e
Yeah I don't see the beauty in anything like a Grant or a Lee. [;)]
If you'd been in the 8th Army in May 1942, anything with a 75mm gun would have looked gorgeous to you.
They ruled in the desert in Afrika during that summer and they were very effective in the Burma theatre.
RE: Australian Beauties II
Posted: Sun Jan 02, 2022 2:09 am
She may not have been the biggest nor the most famous, but the USS North Carolina will always be my favorite because she was the first warship I ever toured. The first of the new generation of USN fast battleships in WWII, she had an impecable service record in the Pacific...and she had an ice cream machine [8D]
RE: Australian Beauties II
Posted: Sun Jan 02, 2022 2:56 am
If the contest is most beautiful BBs THAT STILL EXIST then the USA wins by default. USS Texas:
RE: Australian Beauties II
Posted: Sun Jan 02, 2022 2:58 am
ORIGINAL: gekkoguy35
She may not have been the biggest nor the most famous, but the USS North Carolina will always be my favorite because she was the first warship I ever toured. The first of the new generation of USN fast battleships in WWII, she had an impecable service record in the Pacific...and she had an ice cream machine [8D]
Still a beauty, and it still has a Kingfisher scout plane. You can easily spend a full day touring that ship.
RE: Australian Beauties II
Posted: Sun Jan 02, 2022 3:01 am
One more:
