# Check these out



## Aggie08 (Oct 3, 2005)

Check out all the pics I just uploaded to the wallpaper gallery, there are some rare planes and ones you don't see much. They're all 1024x768. I think I may have mislabed some and there are some I couldn't identify, if you know what they are please post. Thanks


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Oct 4, 2005)

shameless self promotion, that's what i like to see.........


----------



## Aggie08 (Oct 5, 2005)

That wasn't what I meant to do, there are some really cool pics that I wanted the forum to have and they didn't come labeled so I know I misnamed some.


----------



## plan_D (Oct 5, 2005)

No ...Aggie, I think lanc meant that as a compliment. Either that or he's going to use you in the future as a defence for all his shameless self-promotion; "But everyone does it, remember when Aggie did it..."


----------



## evangilder (Oct 5, 2005)

I didn't take it as self promotion either. Self promotion is when people get a login here and only plug their website while not joining any discussions here. I rarely look at the albums, so it's nice to know when there is something new.


----------



## Gnomey (Oct 5, 2005)

Some nice ones there Aggie.

The P-51 is shooting up a either a Blohm und Voss BV 222 or BV238 Flying Boat.

The ones you have no idea what there are: I think they are Dutch. The one in the foreground I think is made by Fokker not sure about the other one though.


----------



## evangilder (Oct 5, 2005)

I posted a comment to the Fokker shot. I am not sure about the bomber that looks like a Mitchell (but it isn;t). The Fighters are definitely Fokker G1As


----------



## Aggie08 (Oct 5, 2005)

I remembered the Blohm und Voss randomly the other day, one of those bits of information that gets lost for years then pops up when I'm taking my damn calc test.  As for the Dutch ones, I've never seen them. Neat lookin' though, any performance figures? Thanks for the comments!


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 5, 2005)

Gnomey said:


> Some nice ones there Aggie.
> 
> The P-51 is shooting up a either a Blohm und Voss BV 222 or BV238 Flying Boat.




Most likely a Bv-222, seeing as the Bv-238 never actually made it to service. I havent looked at them yet, but ill make sure to! 8)


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Oct 5, 2005)

yeah don't worry aggie i wasn't have a go at you


----------



## Aggie08 (Oct 5, 2005)

Oh ok sometimes you brits are hard to understand. My bad. Haha, no really though 75% of the time I can't understand you. That's Texan drawl for you I guess, we talk slow and anything that comes faster we just smile and nod politely...


----------



## Ajax (Mar 19, 2007)

Here are some pictures of some of the more famous aircraft of WWII that I put together, just for anyone new to the site. Please feel free to use them.
_______________________________________________________________

Aircraft of World War II Gallery

_______________________________________________________________


----------



## lesofprimus (Mar 19, 2007)

lmao..


----------



## Gnomey (Mar 19, 2007)

The rendering is pretty awful...


----------



## Wurger (Mar 20, 2007)

The rendering is really awful but the idea is nice.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Mar 20, 2007)

Nor would I call the Ju 88 a heavy bomber or the Swordfish a Fighter/Bomber as a matter of fact.


----------



## Aggie08 (Mar 21, 2007)

You wouldn't call a Swordfish a fighter unless you were really brave!


----------



## Ajax (Mar 23, 2007)

KK, just uopdated my earlier post. Removed the numbers letters from all planes (i was very bored), made the Swordfish a 'light bomber' and the ju88 a 'Medium Bomber'


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Mar 24, 2007)

More like Torpedo Bomber.


----------



## Aggie08 (Mar 24, 2007)

That would be the more accurate designation.


----------



## Ajax (Mar 25, 2007)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> More like Torpedo Bomber.



Happy now?


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Mar 25, 2007)

Naw not really. If you are gonna call the Spit a fighter/converted bomber you might as well say that for the *Bf* 109 and the Corsair as well.



I am just messing with you kid.


----------



## Ajax (Mar 25, 2007)

There, turned the Spitfire into just a fighter, and made the images smaller so rendering dosen't show through too much. Any other complaints?

Seriously though, say what's wrong with it until it's fine i'll post them in the gallery or the 'new members' thread.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Mar 26, 2007)

Me 109 = *Bf* 109


----------



## Aggie08 (Mar 30, 2007)

They're both kind of correct though, I think the Germans used both simulaneously right?


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Mar 30, 2007)

Not on the Bf 109.

All Messerschmitt aircraft up to 162 were designated Bf and all after that were Me.

Therefore Bf 109, Bf 162, Me 163, Me 262, etc...


----------



## Ajax (Mar 30, 2007)

Thanks 'Aggie' and 'DerAdler' all pics are now in the gallery. I've added a gradient to seam the images and turned ME109=>BF109
__________________


----------



## Single-Handed-Sailor (Mar 31, 2007)

As the 109 was designed and initially produced under the auspices of the Bayerische Flugzeugwerke, it was first designated 'Bf 109'. However, after BFW was incorporated as Messerschmitt Aktien Gesellschaft the design was often referred to as both 'Bf 109' and 'Me 109' in factory documents as well as in Luftwaffe documents.

Therefore, both prefixes are correct and it's really a matter of preference. I myself prefer 'Bf', but 'Me' is perfectly acceptable.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Mar 31, 2007)

Bf is still the most widely accepted prefix and the more correct of the two.


----------



## Single-Handed-Sailor (Mar 31, 2007)

Well, I wouldn't say 'more' correct. But let's not get into a p*ssing contest here. I will agree however that 'Bf' seems to be the preference of most folks that I've come across.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Apr 1, 2007)

This is not a pissing contest. If you read about the RLM and how the designation was changed then you will understand why the 109 is actually a Bf and not a Me.


----------



## Ajax (Apr 1, 2007)

Officially, BF is correct.

Unofficialy, some _luftwaffe_ members accidentally used ME.

So please use BF from now on to avoid confusion, and wastes of post space.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Apr 1, 2007)

There is no such thing as waste of post space....

That is what this forum is about, discussing WW2 aviation and that is what is being done here.


----------



## Single-Handed-Sailor (Apr 2, 2007)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> This is not a pissing contest. If you read about the RLM and how the designation was changed then you will understand why the 109 is actually a Bf and not a Me.


Actually, if pedantics be the game, the RLM designation for the type was '8-109'. And I do understand perfectly why the 109 was initially designated 'Bf 109'.



Ajax said:


> So please use BF from now on to avoid confusion, and wastes of post space.


I'll use 'Bf' because, as I've said before, it's my preference; and not because you seem to think that it's the way it _should_ be, thank you very much! 

After some digging, I see that this has been discussed here before and I'm starting to get a barometer on how things go around here, so I won't beat a dead horse in front of a stubborn crowd.


----------



## pbfoot (Apr 2, 2007)

Ajax said:


> Officially, BF is correct.
> 
> Unofficialy, some _luftwaffe_ members accidentally used ME.
> 
> So please use BF from now on to avoid confusion, and wastes of post space.


 Sorry I'll change right away and I'll tell all the pilots that I talk to that flew the thing or against it to change post haste


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Apr 3, 2007)

Single-Handed-Sailor said:


> Actually, if pedantics be the game, the RLM designation for the type was '8-109'. And I do understand perfectly why the 109 was initially designated 'Bf 109'.
> 
> 
> I'll use 'Bf' because, as I've said before, it's my preference; and not because you seem to think that it's the way it _should_ be, thank you very much!
> ...



Hey hey hey, you need to have an attitude check! Can the attitude immediatly or this stubborn crowd is going to send this "know it all" packing.

Everyone can discuss things in an adult like polite manner allright, you dont have to get an attitude with anyone!

Everyone learns from everyone else here. Myths are broken and truths come out. It does not have to be done with attitude however. If you wish to have an attitude please take it someplace else.


----------

