For you aviation buffs

I thought some of you aviation buffs might enjoy this photo that I took
at a mini air show in Driggs, Idaho last summer.

What is wrong with this picture? (Other than it is not that great of a
picture, etc., etc.)

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/25602611/jets.jpg


Russell

On 2013-04-17 11:46:35 -0700, "Russell D." said:

I thought some of you aviation buffs might enjoy this photo that I took
at a mini air show in Driggs, Idaho last summer.

What is wrong with this picture? (Other than it is not that great of a
picture, etc., etc.)

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/25602611/jets.jpg


Russell

At first glance one might believe this to be an F-86 "Sabre" followed
by a pair MIGs. The F-86 as such was never a Navy aircraft, and was
used exclusively by the USAF. However North American Aviation developed
the FJ, FJ-2, FJ-3, & FJ-4 "Fury" for the US navy from the basic F-86.
That is the aircraft in your capture. You should see that on close
examination, your FJ-3 does not have the three on either side of the
nose, .50 caliber guns, but is armed with 4 x 20mm cannons, two on
either side of the nose.
Also, you can just see the tail-hook confirming this as an FJ-3 "Fury",
a derivative of the F-86, flown by US Navy & USMC.

Nice capture!

--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 2013.04.17 17:35 , Savageduck wrote:
On 2013-04-17 11:46:35 -0700, "Russell D." said:

I thought some of you aviation buffs might enjoy this photo that I
took at a mini air show in Driggs, Idaho last summer.

What is wrong with this picture? (Other than it is not that great of a
picture, etc., etc.)

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/25602611/jets.jpg


Russell

At first glance one might believe this to be an F-86 "Sabre" followed by
a pair MIGs. The F-86 as such was never a Navy aircraft, and was used
exclusively by the USAF. However North American Aviation developed the
FJ, FJ-2, FJ-3, & FJ-4 "Fury" for the US navy from the basic F-86. That
is the aircraft in your capture. You should see that on close
examination, your FJ-3 does not have the three on either side of the
nose, .50 caliber guns, but is armed with 4 x 20mm cannons, two on
either side of the nose.
Also, you can just see the tail-hook confirming this as an FJ-3 "Fury",
a derivative of the F-86, flown by US Navy & USMC.

Nope. FJ-4.

I picked up on it as a not-F86 pretty quick but hadn't sorted out what
it was yet. The F-86 and FJ-2 & 3 do not have the strake from the
canopy back to the tail either.

The first Mig is definitely a 15; the second is probably a 15UTI trainer.


--
"There were, unfortunately, no great principles on which parties
were divided – politics became a mere struggle for office."
-Sir John A. Macdonald

On 2013-04-17 14:47:15 -0700, Alan Browne
said:

On 2013.04.17 17:35 , Savageduck wrote:
On 2013-04-17 11:46:35 -0700, "Russell D." said:

I thought some of you aviation buffs might enjoy this photo that I
took at a mini air show in Driggs, Idaho last summer.

What is wrong with this picture? (Other than it is not that great of a

picture, etc., etc.)

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/25602611/jets.jpg


Russell

At first glance one might believe this to be an F-86 "Sabre" followed b
y
a pair MIGs. The F-86 as such was never a Navy aircraft, and was used
exclusively by the USAF. However North American Aviation developed the
FJ, FJ-2, FJ-3, & FJ-4 "Fury" for the US navy from the basic F-86. That

is the aircraft in your capture. You should see that on close
examination, your FJ-3 does not have the three on either side of the
nose, .50 caliber guns, but is armed with 4 x 20mm cannons, two on
either side of the nose.
Also, you can just see the tail-hook confirming this as an FJ-3 "Fury",

a derivative of the F-86, flown by US Navy & USMC.

Nope. FJ-4.

I picked up on it as a not-F86 pretty quick but hadn't sorted out what
it was yet. The F-86 and FJ-2 & 3 do not have the strake from the
canopy back to the tail either.

The first Mig is definitely a 15; the second is probably a 15UTI trainer.

Agreed. I just checked, and it is an FJ-4B. This particular one is
serial number 143575 owned by Richard Sugden. It was built in 1958.
It has had a rough life on the airshow curcuit.
http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviatio.../1/1612132.jpg

--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 2013-04-17 14:53:50 -0700, Savageduck said:

On 2013-04-17 14:47:15 -0700, Alan Browne
said:

On 2013.04.17 17:35 , Savageduck wrote:
On 2013-04-17 11:46:35 -0700, "Russell D." said:

I thought some of you aviation buffs might enjoy this photo that I
took at a mini air show in Driggs, Idaho last summer.

What is wrong with this picture? (Other than it is not that great of a

picture, etc., etc.)

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/25602611/jets.jpg


Russell

At first glance one might believe this to be an F-86 "Sabre" followed b
y
a pair MIGs. The F-86 as such was never a Navy aircraft, and was used
exclusively by the USAF. However North American Aviation developed the
FJ, FJ-2, FJ-3, & FJ-4 "Fury" for the US navy from the basic F-86. That

is the aircraft in your capture. You should see that on close
examination, your FJ-3 does not have the three on either side of the
nose, .50 caliber guns, but is armed with 4 x 20mm cannons, two on
either side of the nose.
Also, you can just see the tail-hook confirming this as an FJ-3 "Fury",

a derivative of the F-86, flown by US Navy & USMC.

Nope. FJ-4.

I picked up on it as a not-F86 pretty quick but hadn't sorted out what
it was yet. The F-86 and FJ-2 & 3 do not have the strake from the
canopy back to the tail either.

The first Mig is definitely a 15; the second is probably a 15UTI trainer.

Agreed. I just checked, and it is an FJ-4B. This particular one is
serial number 143575 owned by Richard Sugden. It was built in 1958.
It has had a rough life on the airshow curcuit.
http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviatio.../1/1612132.jpg

....er, circuit.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 2013.04.17 17:53 , Savageduck wrote:

It has had a rough life on the airshow curcuit.
http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviatio.../1/1612132.jpg

"There are two kinds of pilots. Those who have landed gear up and those
who will."
(An expression that doesn't hold much anymore but was popular in
the 70's).

A Belgian pilot I knew eventually did the feat.

His name was Guerin. ("gair-ain" in French, but we teased him as "Gear-in)


--
"There were, unfortunately, no great principles on which parties
were divided – politics became a mere struggle for office."
-Sir John A. Macdonald

On 2013.04.17 17:55 , Savageduck wrote:

It has had a rough life on the airshow curcuit.
http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviatio.../1/1612132.jpg

...er, circuit.

No need to correct...


--
"There were, unfortunately, no great principles on which parties
were divided – politics became a mere struggle for office."
-Sir John A. Macdonald

On 2013-04-17 15:09:37 -0700, Alan Browne
said:

On 2013.04.17 17:53 , Savageduck wrote:

It has had a rough life on the airshow curcuit.
http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviatio.../1/1612132.jpg


"There are two kinds of pilots. Those who have landed gear up and those
who will."
(An expression that doesn't hold much anymore but was popular in
the 70's).

A Belgian pilot I knew eventually did the feat.

His name was Guerin. ("gair-ain" in French, but we teased him as "Gear-i n)

My father managed to get through WWII without a wheels up landing.
However, he remembers July 8, 1944, the day he "got blown up" after a
Japanese warehouse at Fac Fac, New Guinea exploded in front of him on a
low level strafing run, and he flew through the airborne debris. The
result was he had a japanese ammunition case jammed in the intercooler
intake of one of the engines of his P-38L necessitating a 290 mile
single engine flight to return to his home airfield.

It even made it into the 9th fighter Squadron Unit history:
"Until the 8th, the missions flown by the squadron were very prosaic
patrols, but on this date our planes escorted B-25's to Fac Fac. Upon
completion of the bombing all the flights strafed the target with fine
results. Lt. H. "Daddy Duck" strafed a warehouse which turned out to be
an ammunition depot. The resultant explosion threw debris to a very
respectable height. Passing thru all the flying boxes and miscellaneous
matter fouled up the coolant system of his plane, and Lt. "Daddy Duck"
came home on one engine with his right prop feathered, a distance of
290 miles, landing safely. Pieces of ammunition boxes lodged in his
intercoolers bore mute testimony to the fate of the warehouse. This was
an example of good minimum altitude strafing."

http://db.tt/uHYaWaFm

--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 2013.04.17 18:43 , Savageduck wrote:
On 2013-04-17 15:09:37 -0700, Alan Browne
said:

On 2013.04.17 17:53 , Savageduck wrote:

It has had a rough life on the airshow curcuit.
http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviatio.../1/1612132.jpg


"There are two kinds of pilots. Those who have landed gear up and those
who will."
(An expression that doesn't hold much anymore but was popular
in the 70's).

A Belgian pilot I knew eventually did the feat.

His name was Guerin. ("gair-ain" in French, but we teased him as
"Gear-i n)

My father managed to get through WWII without a wheels up landing.
However, he remembers July 8, 1944, the day he "got blown up" after a
Japanese warehouse at Fac Fac, New Guinea exploded in front of him on a
low level strafing run, and he flew through the airborne debris. The
result was he had a japanese ammunition case jammed in the intercooler
intake of one of the engines of his P-38L necessitating a 290 mile
single engine flight to return to his home airfield.

It even made it into the 9th fighter Squadron Unit history:
"Until the 8th, the missions flown by the squadron were very prosaic
patrols, but on this date our planes escorted B-25's to Fac Fac. Upon
completion of the bombing all the flights strafed the target with fine
results. Lt. H. "Daddy Duck" strafed a warehouse which turned out to be
an ammunition depot. The resultant explosion threw debris to a very
respectable height. Passing thru all the flying boxes and miscellaneous
matter fouled up the coolant system of his plane, and Lt. "Daddy Duck"
came home on one engine with his right prop feathered, a distance of 290
miles, landing safely. Pieces of ammunition boxes lodged in his
intercoolers bore mute testimony to the fate of the warehouse. This was
an example of good minimum altitude strafing."

Fun and games.


--
"There were, unfortunately, no great principles on which parties
were divided – politics became a mere struggle for office."
-Sir John A. Macdonald

On 2013-04-17 15:21:45 -0700, Savageduck said:

On 2013-04-17 15:00:57 -0700, Savageduck said:

On 2013-04-17 14:18:29 -0700, "Russell D." said:


I thought some of you aviation buffs might enjoy this photo that I took
at a mini air show in Driggs, Idaho last summer.

What is wrong with this picture? (Other than it is not that great of a
picture, etc., etc.)

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/25602611/jets.jpg


Russell

As I noted in you post to rec.photo.equipment.35mm (you should have
cross posted here):

At first glance one might believe this to be an F-86 "Sabre" followed
by a pair MIGs. The F-86 as such was never a Navy aircraft, and was
used exclusively by the USAF. However North American Aviation developed
the FJ, FJ-2, FJ-3, & FJ-4 "Fury" for the US navy from the basic F-86.
That is the aircraft in your capture. You should see that on close
examination, your FJ-3 does not have the three on either side of the
nose, .50 caliber guns, but is armed with 4 x 20mm cannons, two on
either side of the nose.
Also, you can just see the tail-hook confirming this as an FJ-4 "Fury",
a derivative of the F-86, flown by US Navy & USMC.

I just checked, and it is an FJ-4B. This particular one is serial
number 143575 owned by Richard Sugden. It was built in 1958.
It has had a rough life on the air show circuit.
http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviatio.../1/1612132.jpg

Nice capture!

I would add, that #143575 is the last flying example of the FJ-4B
"Fury", and has been restored to flying condition after the wheels up
landing shown above.

I have also taken the liberty to X-post to rec.photo.equipment.35mm as
that is appropriate and on topic for both groups.

Here is that wheels up landing in 2008:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YnuKgAcOD2Q


--
Regards,

Savageduck