Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

Daily Mail strikes again

Wikiposts
Search
Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

Daily Mail strikes again

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 8th May 2016, 18:53
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Mordor
Posts: 1,315
Received 54 Likes on 29 Posts
Originally Posted by MPN11
Having last year visited the USS Missouri [BB-63, "The Mighty Mo] at Pearl Harbor is was quite clear that they were having great difficulty in keeping her in a decent condition. Some areas, particularly the upper deck planking, were in a pretty poor state.

https://ussmissouri.org
Are you sure? According to the documentary film "Battleship" it only took a couple of hours and a few vets to fire her up and take her into battle against aliens - apparently she still has live shells and powder bags on board...



PDR
PDR1 is offline  
Old 8th May 2016, 21:46
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 66
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Ken Scott
HMS Belfast, Victory, Warrior, M33, Alliance? Shame that HMS Plymouth was scrapped but that perhaps shows the difficulty a private organisation has maintaining such an exhibit.
As Ken says there are a few to be seen. For me HMS Belfast is a must when in London. I highly recommend a visit.
HMS Plymouth was a favourite too but after seeing her rusting in Birkenhead for years the end was the inevitable scrap yard.
GGR
GGR155 is offline  
Old 9th May 2016, 09:43
  #23 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Welwyn Garden City
Age: 63
Posts: 1,854
Received 77 Likes on 43 Posts
Interesting posts, especially Reds and Greens incident with bloat, but its depressing just how much the press (ok the Daily Mail) can put together a sweepingly inaccurate headline without first checking, on google for instance, if they may have got their emotive claims right or not. They need to stop flapping about deadlines and take a second or two, all it takes these days, to verify something. I'll volunteer for the job, if the DM's interested.

FB
Finningley Boy is offline  
Old 9th May 2016, 12:25
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Next to Ross and Demelza
Age: 53
Posts: 1,235
Received 52 Likes on 21 Posts
PDR1 said:
Are you sure? According to the documentary film "Battleship" it only took a couple of hours and a few vets to fire her up and take her into battle against aliens - apparently she still has live shells and powder bags on board...
Ssh, we might know that but we don't want THEM to know that.
Martin the Martian is offline  
Old 9th May 2016, 17:50
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 1,528
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Still, they have found the 'World's first ever vertical takeoff plane'

Check out the world's first ever vertical takeoff plane! | Daily Mail Online
Background Noise is offline  
Old 10th May 2016, 18:50
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Penzance, Cornwall UK
Age: 84
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Oh, do be charitable to the Fail for once. IF they had added the words 'electric powered' they would have been correct!
Rosevidney1 is offline  
Old 11th May 2016, 10:58
  #27 (permalink)  

Gentleman Aviator
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Teetering Towers - somewhere in the Shires
Age: 74
Posts: 3,698
Received 51 Likes on 24 Posts
Still, they have found the 'World's first ever vertical takeoff plane'
Surely one of these (not bad for the 1950s!) ......


I think the Convair XFV (Pogo) on the left was the more successful, apparently doing some genuine VTOL flights.

The Lockheed XFY (Salmon) on the right I believe never flew vertically untethered.

Must have been sporting to land!

But perhaps the Bachem Ba 349 Natter has primacy - unmanned first flight in 1944, manned first flight
in 1945!


But was that a "plane" (sic) or just a manned SAM.........
teeteringhead is offline  
Old 11th May 2016, 15:13
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: In the State of Denial
Posts: 1,078
Likes: 0
Received 146 Likes on 28 Posts
But perhaps the Bachem Ba 349 Natter has primacy - unmanned first flight in 1944, manned first flight in 1945
I think that's a typo - should be 'Nutter'.
Ken Scott is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.