Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photo Sharing & Visual Enjoyment Transportation 
Thread started 11 Dec 2015 (Friday) 08:19
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

take off

 
kingsown
Goldmember
2,838 posts
Likes: 294
Joined Jul 2005
Location: barrow-in-furness
     
Dec 11, 2015 08:19 |  #1

BAE WARTON off to the southport air show


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.



HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


http://barrowdpc.com/c​pg1414/index.php (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
LA ­ Smith
Senior Member
Avatar
403 posts
Likes: 13
Joined Mar 2008
Location: North Carolina
     
Dec 11, 2015 08:25 |  #2

What a neat old airplane! That thing must be a blast to ride in!


5D,20D, some lenses and stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BigAl007
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,011 posts
Gallery: 543 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 1625
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Repps cum Bastwick, Gt Yarmouth, Norfolk, UK.
     
Dec 11, 2015 12:54 |  #3

Fairey Swordfish Maritime Strike and reconnaissance aircraft. Operated by the Royal Navy during WWII. The Swordfish was replaced in service by the Fairey Albacore, which was also a biplane, but with an enclosed cockpit. The Albacore was then replaced in service by the Swordfish! The problem was that the Albacore, was heavier and even slower than the aircraft it replaced. It made it a bit of a flop, and so the RN effectively just carried on using the older aircraft.

There are now two flying Swordfish left, both operated by the RN Historical Flight based at RNAS Yeovilton.

Alan


My Flickr (external link)
My new Aviation images blog site (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
texaskev
Goldmember
Avatar
1,444 posts
Gallery: 15 photos
Likes: 211
Joined Aug 2008
Location: Austin & Dallas Texas
     
Dec 11, 2015 16:34 |  #4

Nice shots! If memory serves, the Swordfish was the type of aircraft that disabled the Bismarck.


Canon 1DX II, 1DX, 11-24 F4 L, 100 F2.8 L, 16-35 F2.8 L II, 17-40 F4 L, 24-70 F2.8 L II, 24-105 F4 L II, 70-200 F2.8 L II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BigAl007
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,011 posts
Gallery: 543 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 1625
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Repps cum Bastwick, Gt Yarmouth, Norfolk, UK.
     
Dec 11, 2015 20:25 |  #5

texaskev wrote in post #17815525 (external link)
Nice shots! If memory serves, the Swordfish was the type of aircraft that disabled the Bismarck.

Yes correct, and probably even more famously disabled/sunk most of the Italian Fleet's battleships in Taranto Harbour, in a low level night torpedo attack on 11/12 November 1940. It was the RN's attack on Taranto that proved that the attack on the USN in Pearl Harbour on 7 December 1941 was highly likely to be successful.

Alan


My Flickr (external link)
My new Aviation images blog site (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
GibJock
Kill killer
Avatar
9,863 posts
Gallery: 45 photos
Likes: 2245
Joined May 2013
Location: From Scotland, living in Gibraltar "A Jock on the Rock"
     
Dec 12, 2015 01:12 |  #6

BigAl007 wrote in post #17815756 (external link)
Yes correct, and probably even more famously disabled/sunk most of the Italian Fleet's battleships in Taranto Harbour, in a low level night torpedo attack on 11/12 November 1940. It was the RN's attack on Taranto that proved that the attack on the USN in Pearl Harbour on 7 December 1941 was highly likely to be successful.

Alan

So Pearl Harbour could be blamed on us Brits rather than the Japanese? Ooops!


flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BigAl007
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,011 posts
Gallery: 543 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 1625
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Repps cum Bastwick, Gt Yarmouth, Norfolk, UK.
     
Dec 12, 2015 05:53 |  #7

Ian Mackie wrote in post #17815997 (external link)
So Pearl Harbour could be blamed on us Brits rather than the Japanese? Ooops!

Well the Japanese had been working on using aerial torpedos in shallow water since about 1938, so I think they already had that idea in mind. There was a Japanese Military Attache on site in Taranto within 24 hrs, and a larger delegation visited soon after. What it does say is if the Brits could do in Taranto with Swordfish and standard "deepwater" torpedos, that then they could do it at Pearl Harbour with their improved equipment. Which is pretty much exactly what happened of course. I think the real lesson of Taranto, which was the first ever true "Naval Aviation" battle, where only aircraft engaged the opposing fleet, was that Naval Aviation worked and was the new cutting edge. It was also where the Japanese attack on Pearl failed, as none of the American carriers were in harbour that morning. So it is Taranto that we should really be remembering, not Midway. By Midway Naval Aviation was fully proved.

Alan


My Flickr (external link)
My new Aviation images blog site (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
davechng
Member
Avatar
227 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 322
Joined Oct 2013
Location: Allen TX
     
Dec 16, 2015 09:35 |  #8

nice string bags! great sets!

would like to see this in person!!!

DaveC
www.airwingspotter.com (external link)


www.airwingspotter.com (external link)
Dedicated to Military Aircraft spotting and great Aviation pictures

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
PhotosGuy
Moderator
Avatar
75,885 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 2531
Joined Feb 2004
Location: Middle of Michigan
     
Dec 16, 2015 10:13 |  #9

Ian Mackie wrote in post #17815997 (external link)
So Pearl Harbour could be blamed on us Brits rather than the Japanese? Ooops!

It's best to blame your friends, 'cause your enemies just don't give a sh!t? ; D


FrankC - 20D, RAW, Manual everything...
Classic Carz, Racing, Air Show, Flowers.
Find the light... A few Car Lighting Tips, and MOVE YOUR FEET!
Have you thought about making your own book? // Need an exposure crutch?
New Image Size Limits: Image must not exceed 1600 pixels on any side.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Pagman
I just hold the thing :-)
Avatar
9,100 posts
Gallery: 2068 photos
Likes: 10147
Joined Dec 2011
     
Dec 16, 2015 18:28 |  #10

Its such a shame that the string bags did not act against the Bismarck when they were in action from Hood and the other British battle ship, instead I believe they were just used for recon, perhaps the Hood would not have been destroyed if the Swordfishes had carried and used torpedo's?

P.


Some stuff.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BigAl007
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,011 posts
Gallery: 543 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 1625
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Repps cum Bastwick, Gt Yarmouth, Norfolk, UK.
     
Dec 17, 2015 17:36 as a reply to  @ Pagman's post |  #11

The thing is you are not going to load up your reconnaissance aircraft with a very heavy torpedo, s it drastically reduces the range/patrol time. The Stringbag was designed as a multi role, Torpedo Strike and Reconnaissance, TSR, although in the later infamous TSR2, of the 1960's the Torpedo was changed to Tactical. The only disadvantage of using the same airframe for both strike and reconnaissance is that you have to bring the recon birds back to base to convert them into strike aircraft. Rather than being able to launch your strike, while the recon assets stay in place. With a squadron of ships that are cruising at around 25 Kts, a couple of hours or more between the initial sighting and the arrival of the strike force means you still actually have quite a large area of ocean to cover to reacquire the target.

Even the type of weapon chosen can make a big difference. The classic is Yamamoto at Midway, he had his aircraft loaded ready for a bombing strike against Midway Island, when parts of the US carrier fleet were spotted. Instead of then sending the strike aircraft off with the already loaded bombs, he decided to rearm them with torpedoes for a strike against the US carriers. While they were rearming the US got in a hit the Japanese carriers with their own strike aircraft, putting a couple of the carriers out of the battle, and sparing the US fleet serious damage. The US did have a lot of tactical advantages at Midway, but if Yamamoto had launched immediately the successful US strike might not have had any aircraft carriers to return to either.

Alan


My Flickr (external link)
My new Aviation images blog site (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
GibJock
Kill killer
Avatar
9,863 posts
Gallery: 45 photos
Likes: 2245
Joined May 2013
Location: From Scotland, living in Gibraltar "A Jock on the Rock"
     
Dec 19, 2015 05:06 |  #12

BigAl007 wrote in post #17816103 (external link)
Well the Japanese had been working on using aerial torpedos in shallow water since about 1938, so I think they already had that idea in mind. There was a Japanese Military Attache on site in Taranto within 24 hrs, and a larger delegation visited soon after. What it does say is if the Brits could do in Taranto with Swordfish and standard "deepwater" torpedos, that then they could do it at Pearl Harbour with their improved equipment. Which is pretty much exactly what happened of course. I think the real lesson of Taranto, which was the first ever true "Naval Aviation" battle, where only aircraft engaged the opposing fleet, was that Naval Aviation worked and was the new cutting edge. It was also where the Japanese attack on Pearl failed, as none of the American carriers were in harbour that morning. So it is Taranto that we should really be remembering, not Midway. By Midway Naval Aviation was fully proved.

Alan

Thanks for the info Alan, much appreciated.


flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

2,937 views & 3 likes for this thread
take off
FORUMS Photo Sharing & Visual Enjoyment Transportation 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is VTKRZY
1012 guests, 290 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.