Which fighters were "thick skinned?"

Anonymous · Apr 19, 2005

FLYBOYJ said:
OK guys - next week I'm going to be in California, at Mojave airport and at Gillespie Airfield for an airshow (Apr. 28-May 1). Both places are a warbird environment rich. There will definitely be a Mustang at at least one these places, maybe a Spit, possibly a P-47. Because I'll be an airshow participant, I should be able to get a real close look at these aircraft, providing they are all there. I'll take pictures and let you know what I find out.

=FBJ=

Take a micrometer and see if you can find somewhere you can take some measurements

DAVIDICUS · Apr 19, 2005

Please get some P-47 pictures. 8)

FLYBOYJ · Apr 19, 2005

I'll try if one shows up to the airshow.

Soren · Apr 19, 2005

RG_Lunatic said:
Soren said:

RG it is clearly you who is the blind one, and especially because you don't even see it when enlarged !

Click to expand...

Soren, do you notice that there is a head right in the middle of the red circle you've drawn and marked "leg" ???

In the Middle !! Look here's where the head is:

Anonymous · Apr 19, 2005

Grrrr...

Where is the guy in blue's right leg?

And again, it really does not matter as he is clearly NOT STANDING ON THE WING!

FLYBOYJ · Apr 19, 2005

I WANT TO TAKE YOU GUYS TO THE GRASSY KNOLL

Soren · Apr 19, 2005

*Sigh*

Anonymous · Apr 19, 2005

There is no "leg" in the left of your two red boxes. It's on the other side of the wing which you have boxed. The right side is less clear, but appears to be the same - it is obscured by the guys head and the guys arm too much to make a solid determination.

Soren · Apr 19, 2005

*Sigh*

Believe what you want to RG, but they are there, and he is crouching. He is probably sitting on one of his feet, making it less apparent on the pic.

evangilder · Apr 19, 2005

Guys, is this WWII aviation or photo analysis? You mean to tell me that this is the only photo that you have to make your point? Are you forgetting what you were debating about in the first place? Geez, you have been debating this for at least a full page of posts. Are you debating to debate, or is there a point to this?

Soren · Apr 19, 2005

evangilder said:
Guys, is this WWII aviation or photo analysis? You mean to tell me that this is the only photo that you have to make your point? Are you forgetting what you were debating about in the first place? Geez, you have been debating this for at least a full page of posts. Are you debating to debate, or is there a point to this?

Yes your quite right, this is stupid, and Im done debating that pic.

Point is the Spit, 109 and 190's wings could be walked on without sustaining any damage. (As long as you don't start jumping on them)

Even on todays conserved WW2 fighters, wich are being handled with extreem caution, it is allowed to sit on the wing-tip ! (Also while taxiing)

evangilder · Apr 20, 2005

I wouldn't do that for mainly safety reasons. That's a dangerous exercise that I hope young impressionable aviation buffs don't get the idea of doing. Safety should be the number 1 concern, especially with old warbirds.

We don't have any German planes in our museum, but we do have a zero and a spitfire. There are zones very clearly marked on the zero where you are not to step, else your foot may go through. There are not zones like that on the spitfire, but everyone knows that you don't step on flaps or control surfaces. Most guys will walk where the supports are so as to preserve the aircraft as long as possible. Could any part of the wing be walked on? Most likely, but doing that in our hangar is likely to get you a serious ass-whooping. But these are 60+ year old airplanes that have few cheap spare parts. These airplanes are treated better than some peoples kids!

trackend · Apr 20, 2005

I'm sure you're right Evan it would seem a tad daft to use any surface on an aircraft for anything other than the purpose to which it was designed for, even more so with such rare craft as these as for war time i'm sure that short cuts or the need for speed mean't that tasks (including clambering incorrectly on wings ect), would have been tollerated to a degree exactly as aircraft componants where pushed well beyond there designed service limits or pilots taking there planes beyond sensible stress levels during combat

Anonymous · Apr 20, 2005

Soren said:
*Sigh*

Believe what you want to RG, but they are there, and he is crouching. He is probably sitting on one of his feet, making it less apparent on the pic.

That is possible, but tell me... how is that "standing" on the wing? Point made! LOL.

FLYBOYJ · Apr 20, 2005

the lancaster kicks ass · Apr 20, 2005

RG_Lunatic said:
Soren said:

*Sigh*

Believe what you want to RG, but they are there, and he is crouching. He is probably sitting on one of his feet, making it less apparent on the pic.

Click to expand...

That is possible, but tell me... how is that "standing" on the wing? Point made! LOL.

even if he's crouching he's putting all of his weight on a very small area, which has the same effect as standing, either way there's allot of weight on a small area.........

Anonymous · Apr 20, 2005

the lancaster kicks ass said:
RG_Lunatic said:

Soren said:

*Sigh*

Believe what you want to RG, but they are there, and he is crouching. He is probably sitting on one of his feet, making it less apparent on the pic.

Click to expand...

That is possible, but tell me... how is that "standing" on the wing? Point made! LOL.

Click to expand...

even if he's crouching he's putting all of his weight on a very small area, which has the same effect as standing, either way there's allot of weight on a small area.........

Standing on a boot can put all the weight on the edge of a heel generating many many times the lbs/sq-inch of kneeling. It's not the same thing at all. Neither is being barefoot or in tennis or other soft-soled shoes.

the lancaster kicks ass · Apr 20, 2005

ok you're standing on the wing, your body weight is mostly on the heels of your feet however there's still a considderable ammount of weight being distributed by the rest of your feet, so that's your body weight being distributed over the area of your feet, if you're kneeling only the tips of your toes and a small area of your knees are having to distribute your body weight, that's a small area still, not much bigger than the area of your feet if it is at all...............

trackend · Apr 20, 2005

What if you're wearing flippers or snow shoes or you have a bunion that concetrates the weight in a smaller area or you only have one leg or one leg and a peg leg or ballet shoes on point or high heel shoes ( the last two only apply to transvestite ground crew) or clogs or mochasins or SS boots and you tend to goose step or ice skates or jumping jacks or moon boot or oooooooooooooo thats it im now officially bonkers

Anonymous · Apr 20, 2005

the lancaster kicks ass said:
ok you're standing on the wing, your body weight is mostly on the heels of your feet however there's still a considderable ammount of weight being distributed by the rest of your feet, so that's your body weight being distributed over the area of your feet, if you're kneeling only the tips of your toes and a small area of your knees are having to distribute your body weight, that's a small area still, not much bigger than the area of your feet if it is at all...............

Combat boots had hard soles. Walking rolls the weight from the back to the front of each foot as you step. With a boot, it would be very easy to put a crescent shaped dent into thin duraluminum sheeting, especially if the internal structure is sparse.

Which fighters were "thick skinned?"

Anonymous

Guest

Staff Sergeant

"THE GREAT GAZOO"

1st Lieutenant

Attachments

Anonymous

Guest

"THE GREAT GAZOO"

1st Lieutenant

Attachments

Anonymous

Guest

1st Lieutenant

Attachments

"Shooter"

1st Lieutenant

Attachments

"Shooter"

Chief Master Sergeant

Anonymous

Guest

"THE GREAT GAZOO"

Attachments

Major General

Anonymous

Guest

Major General

Chief Master Sergeant

Anonymous

Guest

Users who are viewing this thread

Similar threads