PDA

View Full Version : warton 3rd march (IPA1 &DA2)


holty
4th Mar 2006, 21:42
i didn't know were to put these on here, so i guess here will do
had a chance to go through the rest of my warton pictures and i'd like to present what i think are the cream of my shots, virtually alll shot in RAW 5.6 and 100asa, but please if you think theres something i can improve let me know

http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b239/holtmark70/warton/IMG_0350warton3march06.jpg

some of the lads (steve, brother of 'epsom' on warplane forum)

http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b239/holtmark70/warton/IMG_0357warton3march06.jpg

http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b239/holtmark70/warton/IMG_0364warton3march06.jpg

http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b239/holtmark70/warton/IMG_0411warton3rdmarch06.jpg

http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b239/holtmark70/warton/IMG_0423warton3rdmarch06.jpg

http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b239/holtmark70/warton/IMG_0428warton3rdmarch06.jpg

http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b239/holtmark70/warton/IMG_0474warton3rdmarch06.jpg

http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b239/holtmark70/warton/IMG_0450warton3rdmarch06.jpg

http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b239/holtmark70/warton/IMG_0490warton3rdmarch06.jpg

http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b239/holtmark70/warton/IMG_0496warton3rdmarch06.jpg

acbus1
5th Mar 2006, 06:51
Take a good look.

Those Eurofighter Typhoos in a majority of the pictures cost the UK taxpayer more than they'd care to know about, or even believe could possibly be spent upon one aeroplane.

They don't serve any useful purpose other than keep a load of engineers in work, and they are an embarassment when compared to the standards achieved by the USA.

OK, the USA are producing aircraft for different roles, but the Typhoo role is redundant, which might explain part of the reason.

And, no, before you start, it's not multi-role. Just tacking loads of stuff on the wings and calling it multi-role doesn't make it multi-role.

And it's at least fifteen years too late, arguably much more, both role-wise and technology-wise.

And no-one will want to buy it. Not at that price, nor with that limited role. And not if it's going to be blown out of the skies by a US machine it didn't even know was there.


:mad: disgrace.



Welcome to Jet Blast, holty.

Krystal n chips
5th Mar 2006, 10:31
Take a good look.
Those Eurofighter Typhoos in a majority of the pictures cost the UK taxpayer more than they'd care to know about, or even believe could possibly be spent upon one aeroplane.
They don't serve any useful purpose other than keep a load of engineers in work, and they are an embarassment when compared to the standards achieved by the USA.
OK, the USA are producing aircraft for different roles, but the Typhoo role is redundant, which might explain part of the reason.
And, no, before you start, it's not multi-role. Just tacking loads of stuff on the wings and calling it multi-role doesn't make it multi-role.
And it's at least fifteen years too late, arguably much more, both role-wise and technology-wise.
And no-one will want to buy it. Not at that price, nor with that limited role. And not if it's going to be blown out of the skies by a US machine it didn't even know was there.
:mad: disgrace.
.

Well---that's the Typhoon taken care of-----any thoughts ( less than 1000 words please ) on the Nimrod at all ?:hmm: ;)

Vfrpilotpb
5th Mar 2006, 12:04
Abacus,

The Grey Typhoon is obviously a Multi Role thingy for it can take pax, so could carry many droppy type thingys, or even take a couple of mates for a ride out sort of thing, thats multi role aint it?

Beside that the Yanks are hardly going to be shooting at our chaps, well as long as were at the rear of them, that is, come to think of it, well to the rear.


Vfr

tubthumper
5th Mar 2006, 13:58
No, acbus 1, don't pussy-foot about. Get down off that fence and tell us what's really on your mind....

acbus1
5th Mar 2006, 15:35
Watch it, or you lot'll be next. :mad:



;)

Paranoid Parrot
5th Mar 2006, 18:33
... err by the way nice piccies :\ :ouch: