NZFF

A seahorse ....



and other ...






WBS, NZSI, REX+

Nice, where's the Nz one ?

Yob wrote:

QUOTE (Yob @ Jul 29 2013,3:12 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Nice, where's the Nz one ?

Cheers .... there is one in this series , but Im not sure about the tail marking ....will pop a screen up tonight.
These are part of the wbs "mustang tales" release.

Yea thanks, did not have to post one if ya don't want too.

I can certainly see the attraction to Mustangs, and these are great shots.
But I have some kind of Mustang phobia, they just seem too fragile, open and the pilot is just asking for trouble sitting in that little bubble. I think it has something to do with a previous flightsim experience, too many crashes in what I seem to recall as a very twitchy flight model. It might be time for me to give it another go.

toprob wrote:

QUOTE (toprob @ Jul 29 2013,3:47 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I can certainly see the attraction to Mustangs, and these are great shots.
But I have some kind of Mustang phobia, they just seem too fragile, open and the pilot is just asking for trouble sitting in that little bubble. I think it has something to do with a previous flightsim experience, too many crashes in what I seem to recall as a very twitchy flight model. It might be time for me to give it another go.

Thanks for looking Rob , messed up the light a bit on the middle one . I think a few trips will cure the phobia

With all going on during WWII , surprisng North American looked at the 51 for carrier operations , would have been a better choice for the Seafire regard's to the UC .

Ian Warren wrote:

QUOTE (Ian Warren @ Jul 30 2013,8:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

With all going on during WWII , surprisng North American looked at the 51 for carrier operations , would have been a better choice for the Seafire regard's to the UC .

Thanks for looking I.W , i agree, the wide track suits .

Splitpin wrote:

QUOTE (Splitpin @ Aug 1 2013,4:11 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thanks for looking I.W , i agree, the wide track suits .

Nope Bf-109 UC all the way i like wide track a lot but can be a lot on landing, i personally prefer a mid UC

Yob wrote:

QUOTE (Yob @ Aug 1 2013,7:27 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Nope Bf-109 UC all the way i like wide track a lot but can be a lot on landing, i personally prefer a mid UC

Cant think of anything worse than trying to land a 109 on a carrier ......

Splitpin wrote:

QUOTE (Splitpin @ Aug 2 2013,4:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Cant think of anything worse than trying to land a 109 on a carrier ......

Oh i can a Antonov An-124-100-M that would be hard. A hard to land plane on it would be the Yak-3 because of it's tendancey to pull to the left after touch down and during takeoff. Or the Ye-200 i think it was that it was a prototype from Mig it was very fast and very narrow UC

Splitpin wrote:

QUOTE (Splitpin @ Aug 2 2013,7:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Cant think of anything worse than trying to land a 109 on a carrier ......

Was tests done in Sep 1939 and aircraft were equipped with arrestor gear but canceled late 1940 due Hitlers lack of insight for having major surface fleet , fortunate the same idiotic desicion with the build off heavy bombers , guess had he started the war later Sea Mustangs may have come into fruition ... lucky he was an idiot .

Ian Warren wrote:

QUOTE (Ian Warren @ Aug 2 2013,5:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Was tests done in Sep 1939 and aircraft were equipped with arrestor gear but canceled late 1940 due Hitlers lack of insight for having major surface fleet , fortunate the same idiotic desicion with the build off heavy bombers , guess had he started the war later Sea Mustangs may have come into fruition ... lucky he was an idiot .

Amen to that. He was an idiot fighting Russia and Usa at the same time, who could have fought the Russians alone and won, goes for both Us and R but both at the same time.