|
StandardVC10 posted:RULE THE SEAS Nobody show this to David Axe  And as awesome as those floatliners are, I think you may be focusing on the wrong manufacturer:  Boeing's acquisition of the the company that once hired the engineers that did this means they are clearly already the mature market leader, so if it ain't Boeing I'm not going. 
|
#
¿
Dec 10, 2015 21:35
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 16:13 |
|
|
Since I have it out, I'll go ahead and  some stuff from the US Army-Navy Journal of Recognition. I think the Journal is a pretty fascinating document, both as a primary source of the published contemporary opinions of the US Military, intended for the common fighting man, on the various tactics, doctrines, and equpment of the war, and as a relatively early expression of some then-pretty-radical but now invisibly ubiquitous ideas about the value of graphic design to education. The problem of recognition, though a concern as universal to warfare as supply lines, was monumentally more complex in WWII than at any time before thanks to a Cambrian explosion of military vehicles and, particularly with aircraft, the almost complete obviation of geograpical location as a recognition aide. The Journal attempted to convey recognition information to American forces organically by collating it into a LIFE-style photomag troops would read for its own sake. This page, on the C-60, is pretty typical: Big, attractive photographs that show all angles and views of the aircraft, captions that draw attention to specific visual details and features, and conversational copy peppered with superlatives and factoids—it's essentially a car ad. This seems pretty workaday and non-notable now, but at the time formatting serious, sensitive training materials in this manner was definitely a deliberate choice and a departure from convention. The Journal was only the most basic level of US recognition instruction but as far as I know it is fairly unique in the democratized width of its appeal and intended audience (as a side note, according to the introduction to my edition, the British had much less trouble with recognition than the US because a sufficient percentage of the British public were massive plane and boat nerds that recruiting experts wasn't a problem). Anyway, since we're on the subject of flying boats, here's a spread on the Sunderland and Wellington:  When I was 13 I was pretty convinced that the Sunderland was just about the coolest airplane conceivable. I've always loved big floatplanes and I bought hard into the hype of it being the ultimate turret-gunship able to singlehandedly tackle JU88 squadrons while nonchalantly depth-charging whole wolfpacks. Anyway point being I was a dumb kid but the Sunderland is p cool. (though I have heard mooring it was one of the most hated and unenvied tasks in the RAF)  The action photography in the Journal is consistently pretty top-notch as part of the mass-appeal gearing. The last photo of this sequence in particular is pretty viscerally pause-giving. Though not all antisub guncam stuff has quite that gravitas:  looks like beef, tastes like beef  Have I mentioned that I'm completely in love with the prose, particularly the headlines? That pre-po-mo declarative just-so confidence: WE HAVE SUNK MANY JAP DD'S. LARGE TRANSPORTS HAUL BIG CARGOES. HEAVY CRUISERS OF AXIS NAVIES REVEAL DEFINITE NATIONAL TRAITS. B-25 & DO-217 HAVE MANY DIFFERENCES. Yes, US Army-Navy Journal of Recognition, yes they do.    It would be contrary to my duties as an American and a patriot not to give this spread the respect of a shot of each page.  This Japanese chart highlights the difference in approaches—though obviously one single document is not representative of all of their materials Japan in particular seems to have put very little effort into their military graphic design. I have some examples of this I can dig out of other books later, but it's a notable contrast. Would you guys be interested in seeing more of this stuff? I have lots more from the Journal of Recognition as well as another book full of (color!) aviation training and operations materials from the four major Europe combatants. I could also post the recognition quizzes from the Journal if people want to test their chops.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2015 02:24
|
|
|
A couple more while I see about getting access to a scanner: I alluded to other techniques for teaching recognition, the shadowgraph is an example of such. It was also commonly used to teach aerial gunnery.  A very interesting page that kind of captures the conversational approach. Again, we see an association being made, tailor-fit to american tastes by the editors, with the car industry. Providing a narrative of iteration, of brand identity was absolutely a coopted advertising tactic, and a quite successful one—convince someone of the quality of a brand, and they will become invested in learning to differentiate that brand from other, lesser products (and in showing off their discerning taste to others, a valuable trait for a spotter). Its value to recognition is less about useful identifying information and more about figuring the visual language of aircraft design as something relatable and legible to the average person. And, as an aside, the first AAF coastal interdiction (  ) B-17As with the original tail may be my favorite plane/livery combo in US air power history, I mean come on.   The back page of each issue was used to distribute new and updated identification booklet pages. And if you're unfamiliar with the Nazi attempt to build a disposable C-130 out of balsa wood to invade Britain with, you can see video of it here in the excellent old BBC doc 'The Secret War.' The episode contains an extended firsthand account of flying the thing from noted Nazi test pilot Hanna Reitsch, who is probably the most adorable old lady to have once personally pitched a death cult kamikaze squadron to Literally Hitler. She also somehow manages to make flying the Komet sound like an appealing, uplifting experience. Nazism, man.  For amphib chat, here's the breathless first sighting of Emily, the Kawanishi H8K, incorrectly giving it gull wings.  A rather amusingly blunt approach to illustrating the difficulty in spotting in prevailing field conditions. You have to wonder how many photos were rejected before these were setteled on as the best examples of amorphous blobs. 
HookedOnChthonics fucked around with this message at 11:26 on Dec 11, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2015 11:23
|
|
|
I've actually only got the first six issues (Sep 43-Feb 44). I'm also going to post informational posters and cutaways from Graphic War: The Secret Aviation Drawings and Illustrations of World War II by Nijboer, but unfortunately my copy is in a very bad format for my pro-tier makeshift ipad document camera technique, being a thick-spined glossy paperback of nearly entirely two-page posters. I'm trying to mitigate the creases (and would absolutely spend money on unblemished prints of like half the things in here) but it's gonna be pretty unavoidable—my scanner turned out pretty worthless. Oh well so here's the Sunderland's mooring procedure: More to follow as I upload & format (which is surprisingly arudous on tablet! i mean dunno why I expected otherwise, but)
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2015 22:26
|
|
|
^^^ agreed  Does it work well on double-page art spreads? Because oh boy do I have a whole lot of those. Will try it out for the next batch I do.This post will be focused on Emergency procedures, air-sea rescue, and ditching drills of the RAF but first I'll go ahead and include a recognition quiz—the very first one, on the first page of the first issue. Answers will be spoilered at the bottom of the post. QUIZ 1: THE ALL-IN RAID — British, American and German up to Sep '43 — Contains repeats  Now, on to our main topic:  As an ultra-time-sensitive life-and-death concern, well-conceived and executed air-sea rescue was a huge concern for island Britain, and they developed their techniques to honed perfection. This poster details the interactions of the various components of the channel rescue—and is among my favourites in its little cartoony details:    At some point I'm gonna vectorize that little pilot dude and make an avatar out of it.    A gorgeous depiction of a successful air-sea rescue. I also have a full spread of the lifeboat loading procedure and a cutaway detailing its design and contents if anyone is interested.   I don't need to tell you guys that the prospect of hundreds of exhausted, limping, injured airplanes and crews filling the pitch-black skies of wartime Britain as they struggle home from X country is an air-traffic nightmare.   I feel like this one really captures the inky impenetrability of the blacked-out countryside. A description from a bomber command vet of the sensation of night bombing that's always stuck with me was of increasing dissociation from the wider world—of arming and boarding their planes as British aircrews strategically contributing to the war effort against Germany, then forming up in formation as RAF men flying in force against the Luftwaffe, then entering combat as a single plane and single aircrew, and finally exiting it utterly isolated and alone in your seat.  As a little illustration in the impact graphic design and presentation, take a look at the following poster of the Hampden's parachute ditch drill.   How does this poster make you feel about the prospect of ditching? What does it make you think about and take note of, if you imagine that you will soon find yourself in the R/O seat of a Hampden going over Cologne? And now, ask yourself the same questions about this poster for the Mosquito:  I think the contrast in portrayals is fascinating. While I can't begin to guess which is actually more effective at getting crews to internalize and practice correct procedure, the composition of the technical information being presented absolutely affects the emotional relationship the reader/learner will form with it.  Dinghy, dinghy, time to ditch! Last one out is a son of a bitch!      Anyway, that wraps it up for this post, I think. I've got my workflow down so tomorrow I'll try to do a few posts in quick succession, probably one each on operational/tactical posters, technical drawings, and British intelligence cutaway diagrams of German aircraft. This post was almost entirely UK material, but there are some very interesting American, German, and Soviet examples in those categories. Quiz answers posted:
HookedOnChthonics fucked around with this message at 10:38 on Dec 12, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2015 08:15
|
|
|
I ended up running into some pretty exhausting unanticipated travel difficulties so this is a little later and a little lighter than I might prefer, but... the spirit of fills me with determination. This post is focused on  's goshawks, the fighting hardware of the Luftwaffe.The British cutaways were the product of artists working in secrecy from whatever examples of enemy equipment could be secured—be it fully intact or mangled wreckage. One such artist was Peter Endsleigh Castle, who was officially assigned to a cartography unit as a cover, and here pictured trying to decipher what used to be a Ju-188.  There was little in the way of formally codified technique or instruction, and the pressure on the artists was pretty high—when Castle was drafted, it was into a frantic semi-organized task force whose remit was "stop the Fw-190s from shooting down so many Spitfires, and do it yesterday." By the end of the war he was practiced enough at producing precise drawings of that particular aircraft that in a post-war briefing an impressed Kurt Tank signed one of his cutaways as being essentially definitive:  Now with that bare minimum of interesting historical context established, on with the cutaways:         God the He-117 was a bizarre plane.           Everything below this line is strictly Nur fur den Dienstgebtauch               
HookedOnChthonics fucked around with this message at 04:40 on Dec 14, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2015 04:37
|
|
|
Went ahead and nabbed some (slightly) better quality shots for you—I've been restraining myself from including detail shots to cut down on the image spam, but can happily go back and get stuff people are interested in. Also, the guy on left may be depicted operating a glide bomb?    It was nicknamed 'the flaming coffin' by crews due to the unusual engine setup's tendency towards catastrophic overheats. And have some turrets too. Tomorrow I'll post operational and tactical diagrams.     
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2015 06:57
|
|
|
Unfortunately that's the vast bulk of the more lavish airplane cutaways. There's a few strays I'll toss in before the operational and tactical diagrams that are up next. The introduction actually characterizes the process of assembling this book as frantically calling anyone still alive who would have come into contact with the pieces during the war and asking them to go through their records to see if they had kept anything (you'll notice a lot of visible heavy creasing and tape patches). They were very much seen rush jobs made to show pilots which bits to aim for and no organized archiving effort was made. Stuff from Germany, the USSR, and particularly Japan is even scarcer, with the vast bulk of Axis technical material apparently destroyed outright (if it wasn't Paperclipped). In any case, tomorrow I'll make one post of about this length on the aforementioned tactical stuff, and one on engneering and manufacturing diagrams.  Are you excited? I'm excited. HookedOnChthonics fucked around with this message at 08:52 on Dec 14, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2015 08:48
|
|
|
I thought I had a line on an actual legit scanner but it turned out to be even more of a broken POS than mine. Oh well. Keep your eyes peeled for the vintage 40s racism.                                               
|
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2015 12:48
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:“Darky” is manning a friendly radio station, right? 'Darky' was RAF patois for radio direction-finding stations at friendly airfields. There's probably some joke or reference behind it but military slang kinda is what it is.         An example of Japanese technical material. Chinese air defense posters:      A work-in-progress cutaway  Peter Castle's first airplane cutaway  This guy is just so dang happy with that formation
|
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2015 19:02
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:Could someone point out the racism to someone who's not terminally offended at everything? Look at the lower-right corner of "Radio Aids." "Darky" is an antiquated racial slur the RAF used in their radio jargon; the illustrator of the chart drew their cartoon to match. Offense has nothing to do with it, it is a historical document.  Tupolev SB-2 nose turret  Tu-2  MiG-3  La-7 cockpit schematic Il-2 manual pages:                       
|
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2015 21:47
|
|
|
BMW 323, as installed in the Fw Condor.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 17, 2015 00:07
|
|
|
One last batch for the new page:       This is among my favorite of the images I've posted just because of the sheer disparity between the dryness, technicality and Heller-like modernity-absurdity of the information (an in-depth examination of the ways saving your own life will muck up the beaurocracy of warfare) and the aesthetic beauty of the presentation—these could respectably hold their own opposite Rothkos and Newmanns in exhibition, imo.              This should be a familiar sight for a fair few of you. Il-2 cockpit    
|
|
#
¿
Dec 17, 2015 07:49
|
|
|
Just spotted a pair of GEnxs heading Boeingwards on flatbed trucks. Thought they usually air-haul those exclusively?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 5, 2016 19:13
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:There are significant trucking operations that literally ONLY haul jet engines. A LOT of engines move by truck. Oh, yeah, I'm well aware of that, I've just never seen an engine half as big again as the truck cab rolling up 99.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 5, 2016 20:54
|
|
|
The engines were going north from Tacoma towards KBFI. The super guppy is friggin ace, like everyone else in seattle when we got the FFT I was more hype for the delivery vehicle than the payload (that's a lie, the FFT is amazing too). The pilot, a former shuttle commander, gave a pretty great talk about aero spacelines and what it's like to fly that beast. He also told an amazing shuttle program joke/anecdote that I wish I remembered in its entirety but ended with a NASA controller deadpanning something along the lines of "remember kids, deploying the landing gear is important for reducing drag on the runway."
|
|
#
¿
Jan 5, 2016 21:45
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:Also when 4-ships of NASA livery T-38s would take off and bank along the highway. I think I might legitimately hate you. NASA may be more well-known for spaceflight, but I think I can confidently say their true contribution to mankind is achieving aesthetic perfection in fighter jets. Exhibit b: 
HookedOnChthonics fucked around with this message at 07:15 on Jan 6, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2016 07:08
|
|
|
The Locator posted:My grade school had an actual helicopter (don't remember what type, but Vietnam era, not a Huey) with seats, controls, wiring, pretty much everything except the gear/wheels (they mounted it to the ground with concrete pedestals) and rotors. There were so many loving sharp edges and dangerous parts on that thing (and old oil and fuel residue), and it was the best loving playground toy ever made in the history of the earth. Poor kids today (at least in the US) could never experience something like that. I grew up in the 90s in Cincinnati and had access to what I'm pretty sure was the Last Dangerous Playground in America, located at Lunken Field: in lieu of any purpose-built play equipment was a rusting F-86, a seriously large locomotive and caboose, and very limited supervision. There was also an awesome bike trail that passed right by the end of the runway—we would wait for jets to throttle up and then race through the wash
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2016 21:55
|
|
|
I'm just kinda sad Bombs over Baghdad is no longer topical enough to proliferate, it's a good song. (Not really that sad tho)
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2016 04:41
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:Also they have one of these:  Also Seattle air goons, the 727 prototype will make its final flight tomorrow, departing KPAE at 10:30 and arriving at KBFI 10:45(Real glad random thread happenstance sent me to the website today)
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2016 03:50
|
|
|
Alas I only have potato-quality video equipment but I will eloquently regale u w/ a firsthand account tomorrow  (MoF videography tends to be pretty on-point, they'll likely have a good vid up after)
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2016 04:46
|
|
|
slidebite posted:I had no idea the 727 prototype was still airworthy It's only very temporarily airworthy as that was logistically the simplest way to transit from MoF restoration at Paine Field to the museum itself. God knows how they're planning to handle our Linebacker B-52 when it moves in a few years... The Comet is still much further out at this point but I'm pretty sure will not be flown. e: Also, it'll be in good company--the prototype 737, 747, and 757 all already live at KBFI. Gotta complete the set 
HookedOnChthonics fucked around with this message at 05:16 on Mar 2, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2016 05:06
|
|
|
Nagoya got the 'technical' first prototype 787, ZA001, in recognition of Japanese support for the program. (for those who don't know, the 787 carries the designation it does because 8 is lucky in Eastern numerology--it had previously been the 7E7) HookedOnChthonics fucked around with this message at 08:29 on Mar 2, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2016 08:10
|
|
|
Now granted I get this stuff third-hand at best (and I'm sure there's some Boeing worker bees in thread who could say better than I) but I heard there was a real big internal push for 7E7 as a conscious departure, with the E standing for economical or eco-friendly or e-commerce or whatever other buzzword you care to name--IE they wanted to sell it as different from all those old jets, a full paradigm shift, to the extent that there were people passionately opposed to the 8. It's definitely 100% fact that the change immediately preceded the ANA deal, and that still represents both the first + largest 787 order. e: https://books.google.com/books?id=8...0number&f=false not a definitive answer, but a discussion of both the 7E7 designation (the E turns out to be for either Efficiency or Everett) and the significant Japanese involvement/luckiness of 8. HookedOnChthonics fucked around with this message at 09:13 on Mar 2, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2016 09:04
|
|
|
It's much less superstition than cultural ornamentation. And as far as I know 707 was simply the internal Boeing model number for that aircraft with 727 consciously being numbered as the 'sequel' to capitalize on the massive name recognition and success of the 707, establishing the tradition (note that 717 went unused until it got slapped on the MD-95 after the acquisition). e: everyone interested in the 727 please proceed immediately to http://www.rbogash.com/ual727tx.htm, the adorably amateur webzone of the restoration lead, and leave the man some nice comments and congratulations.  They've done a beautiful job  HookedOnChthonics fucked around with this message at 10:05 on Mar 2, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2016 09:55
|
|
|
Clearly they should just append an iteration number to the front and start the series over again--so the first jet of the new generation, the second 707 if you will, would be the 2-707. 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2016 10:38
|
|
|
CharlesM posted:Ah, so they have two 727s? I didn't realize this was another 727. There's an American Airlines one that flew until 2003. Will they have both on display? The AA was explicitly there as a placeholder for the prototype and will be scrapped. (The Museum actually owned at one point three 727s--the prototype, the placeholder, and a parts donor)
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2016 17:03
|
|
|
Ugh, misjudged my transit and just missed the landing, saw the approach from the road though e: dagsnipe 727 edition  good dog, best f/e 
HookedOnChthonics fucked around with this message at 20:19 on Mar 2, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2016 20:15
|
|
|
Ahem.
HookedOnChthonics fucked around with this message at 22:11 on Mar 3, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Mar 3, 2016 20:54
|
|
|
They didn't specify manpowered, they specifiedCat Mattress posted:working heavier-than-air flying machine that can lift up at least an adult human pilot before gas-powered motors were created And manlifters would satisfy that, no? (Sorry, the post was supposed to come off as intentionally nitpicking on what I assume was an unintentional omission of 'man-powered.' the douchey passive-aggressiveness of 'ahem' sounded sufficient in my head, haha)
|
|
#
¿
Mar 3, 2016 22:10
|
|
|
United's fine; O'Hare is the worst.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2016 06:44
|
|
|
movax posted:Wasn't a Boeing 247D, was it? Museum of Flight has been flying there's lately (IIRC), thought I saw them posting pics of it flying around the East Coast on Facebook. MoF 247D is in blue/white UAL paint and scheduled to make its last ever flight from KPAE to KBFI tomorrow at noon, (Psion take note) so doubt it The Museum's flyable DC-2 would be closer, being a bare-aluminum Douglas with red TWA markings, but AFAIK it's hangared at Boeing Field rn, and also remains stubbornly two-engined  e: (any dc-2 posting must be accompanied by the dc-2 and a half, it is Air Law) HookedOnChthonics fucked around with this message at 07:25 on Apr 26, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2016 07:18
|
|
|
The 247D landing turned out to be kind of a non-event; due to ongoing uncertaintly as to whether or not the brakes would function they set down at the extreme north end of KBFI and did a slooooow roll to the parking lot. It briefly taxied alongside a 737, which was neat, but my photography ended up unpostably bad. Still, seeing a living, breathing survivor of that era of commecial aviation is always satisfying. Also seeing the B-17, -29, and -47 all parked in a row is  as gently caress, if you're in seattle you owe it to yourself to at least roll past on E Marginal.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2016 01:44
|
|
|
I think the RCN has the worst of it. A single destroyer that can't cross the Atlantic, a handful of frigates, and four subs that have spent more time in drydock than underwater.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2016 16:49
|
|
|
How expensive are C-130s to maintain, relatively speaking? I've been staring at a privately-operated one parked at KBFI for the past week—even assuming that it's an early-model/L-100 you'd assume even the RCAF can do economy of scale stuff to run them more cost-effectively than a private owner.
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2016 05:16
|
|
|
Flying boat talk and no SeaMaster? For shame.   Why do 'sublimely beautiful aircraft' and 'ridiculous internecine boondoggle' so often have to intersect? 
|
|
#
¿
May 16, 2016 18:32
|
|
|
Colonial Air Force posted:Yes, they were there from take-off. This was one of the very first attempts with paratroops, there wasn't much to go with, and the Soviets didn't have much else to use. They did figure out a better way, and even used it a couple of times in the war, but not a lot. Uh... are you sure? If something in that report says otherwise I'll take your word for it, but the linked video pretty clearly shows the majority of the paratroopers climbing out through a door to line up along the wing for their drop. You can see a couple of paratroopers dangling their legs over side of the open dorsal gun position, and the officer directs the drop from there, but I don't see any reason to believe a dozen guys would... ride the wing for takeoff, then climb into the fuselage, then climb back out?
|
|
#
¿
May 24, 2016 00:36
|
|
|
 Sat in a very cool chair today 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 24, 2016 03:41
|
|
|
 PCHOOOOO (Air Force One on approach to Seatac)
|
|
#
¿
Jun 25, 2016 05:21
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 16:13 |
|
|
Definitely the most beautiful airplane ever made by people with no business building airplanes (Fouga was a furniture-maker). Although it was designed as a trainer, several ended up on the wrong side of the Biafran war in a makeshift ground attack role.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2016 03:02
|
|