GB#19 Question.

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

Wojtku...:lol: :lol:

Yep, Paul's definition seems to sum it up for me too.


Btw, since GB 30 was brought up, just quickly mention that it was my idea and have no problem making it any military aircraft given a 'second life', no matter the era.
Could include anything from barnstormers from WWI aircraft to modern jets going to civilian aerobatic teams or musems... if that's ok by the judges.
 
You owe me a new monitor Bill and a new set of glasses!

I don't mind where the 'nose art' is, have seen some on tails (B-17's) so that's ok, as long as as it's personal to the pilot or crew... ;) :D
 
Looks like you've come up with the goodies Paul, nicely done, but just one question. Would you consider art added at a squadron level acceptable. I'm thinking post WWII when many squadrons at the instigation of pilots and ground crew brightened up the aircraft with squadron emblems or colours, some of which became quite flamboyant and continued to be so until higher authority put the mockers on it. On reflection I'm thinking this would probably be outside the scope but for me and others it would be clarification.
 
Last edited:
I think that the fact that "Higher Authority" frowned on it would be qualification.
Squadron-wide use shouldn't be a problem, how about the "Black Flight" (?) of the RFC in WW1?
 
Very quick my friend, very quick!!

t2027.gif
 
From the "new generation GB" brief.

Aug 1st–Sunday Dec 1st 2013 – GB 19-Aircraft Nose Art.
Aircraft must be based on an actual example of flamboyant personal or squadron markings. This one has no set period.
 
Dance? Dance?!! Can hardly bl**dy walk, let alone bl**dy dance. Stupid boy, Pike.
\

Gangnam style :)? Ok no really its like invaded every where here its awesome hehe :)
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back