PDA

View Full Version : Whats this?



XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 01:07 PM
Can anyone guese what this is?

<A HREF=http://www.divetheworld.com/Stories/Me109-France/</A>Me109-3.jpg">


http://www.divetheworld.com/Stories/Me109-France/Me109-4.jpg


http://www.divetheworld.com/Stories/Me109-France/Me109-5.jpg


http://www.divetheworld.com/Stories/Me109-France/Me109-2.jpg


here is the web site, very interesting!

http://www.divetheworld.com/Stories/Me109-France/



ick
http://home.comcast.net/~ick_352nd/ ( <A HREF=)" target=_blank>http://home.comcast.net/~ick_352nd/</a>


http://home.comcast.net/~ick_352nd/

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 01:07 PM
Can anyone guese what this is?

<A HREF=http://www.divetheworld.com/Stories/Me109-France/</A>Me109-3.jpg">


http://www.divetheworld.com/Stories/Me109-France/Me109-4.jpg


http://www.divetheworld.com/Stories/Me109-France/Me109-5.jpg


http://www.divetheworld.com/Stories/Me109-France/Me109-2.jpg


here is the web site, very interesting!

http://www.divetheworld.com/Stories/Me109-France/



ick
http://home.comcast.net/~ick_352nd/ ( <A HREF=)" target=_blank>http://home.comcast.net/~ick_352nd/</a>


http://home.comcast.net/~ick_352nd/

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 01:20 PM
Definatly a 109 as the website says, and easy to spot by the shape of the wheel wells.

I'd never join a club that would have ME as a member!!.

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 02:45 PM
the wingendings look pretty edged, so i'd say an early version, probably an Emil.

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 02:45 PM
Not to mention the spindly legs on the last shot..LOL

<CENTER>http://www.world-wide-net.com/tuskegeeairmen/ta-1943.jpg <marquee><FONT COLOR="RED"><FONT SIZE="+1">"Straighten up.......Fly right..~S~"<FONT SIZE> </marquee> http://www.geocities.com/rt_bearcat

<CENTER><FONT COLOR="ORANGE">vflyer@comcast.net<FONT COLOR>
<Center><div style="width:200;color:red;font-size:18pt;filter:shadow Blur[color=red,strength=8)">99th Pursuit Squadron

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 03:05 PM
great pics. thx

http://www.endlager.net/fis/pix/banners/fis_banner_01.jpg



http://www.dugg.ca/

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 03:16 PM
Interesting photo's!

do you know what depth of water it is sat in?

I'd hazard a guess that it was a F or later version as it has the redesigned radiator mountings on the wings, and F and later flap layout. Plus, there are no ammo drum covers for wing mounted cannons or weapon ports on the leading edge (although these were absent in some Emils I believe).

"As weaponry, both were good, but in far different ways from each other. In a nutshell, I describe it this way: if the FW 190 was a sabre, the 109 was a florett, or foil, like that used in the precision art of fencing." - Gunther Rall

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 03:22 PM
good point about the MG/FF's.
yes i think youre right, so no Emil, more likely a Friedrich or Gustav. the wing endings seem edged because of the waterplants. i was fixed to much on the edged looking wings than on the other parts. also the front part doenst look like the emil one's.

i dont like water wrecks /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif
i dont like water in general. just not airy enough /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif .

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 03:36 PM
NegativeGee wrote:
- Interesting photo's!
-
- do you know what depth of water it is sat in?
-
The website says 45 meters. Looks like a great dive. As an Advanced Scuba diver and Aviation history enthusiast this one really appeals to me. And it's not too far to go!!/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

I'd never join a club that would have ME as a member!!.

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 03:48 PM
45, metres wow..... I "looked" shallower....!

You are right- it would make an amazing dive- have to make the most of the limited bottom time....../i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif



"As weaponry, both were good, but in far different ways from each other. In a nutshell, I describe it this way: if the FW 190 was a sabre, the 109 was a florett, or foil, like that used in the precision art of fencing." - Gunther Rall

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 03:57 PM
Look at the landing gear area, it's a 109.

Cheers,

fluke39
10-28-2003, 04:00 PM
NegativeGee wrote:
- Interesting photo's!
-
- do you know what depth of water it is sat in?
-
- I'd hazard a guess that it was a F or later version
- as it has the redesigned radiator mountings on the
- wings, and F and later flap layout. Plus, there are
- no ammo drum covers for wing mounted cannons or
- weapon ports on the leading edge (although these
- were absent in some Emils I believe).


i think the shape of the wing- tips alone show it to be an F model or later - as far as i now all E versions had square cut tips.


can anyone suggest a reason the landing gear is down - instead of up - surely having the gear down isn't a good idea if ditching in the water (i suppose the damage may have been such it was a crash instead of a ditch) - or do you think his hydraulics were shot out?

<center><img src=http://mysite.freeserve.com/Angel_one_five/flukelogo.jpg>

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 04:18 PM
The landing gear is odd. I would not have thought the pilot would not have intentionally lowered if he was ditching and in fully in control of the plane. If the gear had been down, I don't think it would have survived the landing.

Possibly the gear ended up lowered after the plane hit the water?

"As weaponry, both were good, but in far different ways from each other. In a nutshell, I describe it this way: if the FW 190 was a sabre, the 109 was a florett, or foil, like that used in the precision art of fencing." - Gunther Rall

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 04:27 PM
Have you folks seen the Pic of the Sonar Image of what they think is a Stirling at the bottom of the North Sea? People there think it might be a Single Fin B-24, but if you look closer, it looks like a B-17C.

Hot Space

Death is so final and Life is just boring.....

Message Edited on 10/28/0303:28PM by hotspace

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 04:30 PM
Here's a Link to it as the other one seems dead.

http://www.divetheworld.com/Projects-team/index.htm

Hot Space

Death is so final and Life is just boring.....

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 04:31 PM
- looks dead /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

S!

M0NS (authorized P39 pyrotechnician)



"Blow up the outside world"

http://www.flugwerk.de/images/01k.jpg
My garage!

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 04:32 PM
Try mine again. I've just tried it and it still works/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Hot Space

Death is so final and Life is just boring.....

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 04:43 PM
hotspace wrote:
- Have you folks seen the Pic of the Sonar Image of
- what they think is a Stirling at the bottom of the
- North Sea? People there think it might be a Single
- Fin B-24, but if you look closer, it looks like a
- B-17C.

Where's the link then?

NegativeGee wrote:

- The landing gear is odd. I would not have thought the
- pilot would not have intentionally lowered if he was
- ditching and in fully in control of the plane. If the
- gear had been down, I don't think it would have survived
- the landing.


Good point!


I'd never join a club that would have ME as a member!!.

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 05:02 PM
As a diver also, I would love to check the mystery plane out! I'm not completely sure we're looking at a high-load "Davis wing'. It may NOT be a Stirling or B-24 variant. Keep in mind that it sure looked like Elvis's face on Mars until the angle of the viewer was changed a couple of degrees.

Anyway,as the mule skinner said "Someone back home is thinkin', 'Why don't he write?'"



<center> <img src=http://server2.uploadit.org/files/271003-StrictlyGI320.jpg>
</center>
<center>"Strictly G.I." Personal photo from the waist position of my dad's A/C. Minutes later, she was hit by flak. Her second and last mission. 5 KIA, 4POW. Ludwigshafen.</center>

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 05:08 PM
maybe the plane was upside down with lowered gear at the moment of the crash, due to some strange incidents? maybe the pilot wanted to slow the plane down for bailing therefore lowering the gear (more drag) and rolling the plane on its back (was common procedure for bailing) but was alread to low?

or, other thing, would the lift of the airfilled tires be enough to raise the gear out of the wings if the locks and hydraulic were deactivated?

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 05:18 PM
Look at the shadow of the Tail.....

Me still thinks it's a B-17C and 90 Squadron R.A.F lost one over the North Sea.

Hot Space

Death is so final and Life is just boring.....

fluke39
10-28-2003, 05:28 PM
of the "unknown" plane:


from the wingspan - at first i would have said it was a stirling - but for the strange long "nacelles" where the outboard engines are -
i wouldn't have said privateer - as one of the distinguishing features is the long wingspan - longer then the fuselage usually (IIRC) also the tailplane is nothing like the privateer - However from the link given in the first post in the guest book, the scan is almost identical to the scan there - so i would say it was a privateer - albeit one with an unusual tailplane, and wingspan.

basically,to me, neither plane looks like a privateer, but the two scans are almost identical - so if one is known to be a privateer i'd say the other one is too.

<center><img src=http://mysite.freeserve.com/Angel_one_five/flukelogo.jpg>

fluke39
10-28-2003, 05:32 PM
o and also - if it is a privateer - then it must surely be a different varient to the one shown in the sillouhette -that or the angle it is viewed at is very obscure

<center><img src=http://mysite.freeserve.com/Angel_one_five/flukelogo.jpg>

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 07:57 PM
As far as the "Mystery Aircraft" goes,I'm not sure the horizontal stabilizers are a reliable way to determine what aircraft this is. To me, the left stabilizer looks like it's partially submerged in sand while the right one looks like the tip has been ripped off. The first impression I get,is that this is an early model B-17. Not sure though....../i/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

Edit:Nah,I'm wrong about part of the horizonal stab being submerged. I didn't notice the shadow. Too bad you can't see the vertical stabilizer.....

<center>47|FC <img src="http://rangerring.com/wwii/p-47.jpg"<

Message Edited on 10/28/0301:00PM by necrobaron

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 09:21 PM
Getting back to the 109, it can't be a Friedrich either. They had round wheel wells. This clearly shows the squared outsides introduced with the Gustav. Too bad we can't have a couple nice shots of the tail assembly with the wheel setup, that could really narrow it down.

<center>http://flygirl.dhs.org:8080/jg51/Alpine-Thunder.jpg


3./Jagdgeschwader 51
www.jg51.com</center> (http://www.jg51.com</center>)

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 10:22 PM
Here's my theory on the mystery bomber. It is a Privateer. Take a good look at the sonar image. I believe the plane is upside down, which is why it's not laying flat on the sea floor. A shadow of the vertical stabilizer is clear, but not the object itself, because the plane has flipped. The vertical stabilizer, perhaps partially broken, is propping it up, so it has to fall off to one side. In this case it leans to the left, putting the right wing into the sand, and lifting the left wing up in the air which gives us clear shadows. Notice that they bend to the increasing height of the wing. Now look at the darker area on the fuselage, where the wing's leading edge joins in. This is exactly where the left-front bomb bay door is, probably it either was jarred loose and floated off, or fell in, causing a disruption in the fuselage surface, and giving us that dark area. In regards to the shorter wing span, remember we aren't looking at it from straight above, or below, as it is upside down. It has fallen off to an angle, which make the wings look a little shorter. The outboard engines are still exactly half way between the wing root and wing tip. The most convincing evidence that this is a Privateer comes in the form of those side bulges on the fuselage, half way between the wings and tail. They are very clear in the sonar picture, and match in size and location to the Privateer's bulges. The Stirling, B-24, B-17, and such do not have anything that could be mistaken as these. Only the Privateer has them, and that is what this aircraft is.

<center>http://flygirl.dhs.org:8080/jg51/Alpine-Thunder.jpg


3./Jagdgeschwader 51
www.jg51.com</center> (http://www.jg51.com</center>)

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 11:06 PM
Stecher_3.-JG51 wrote:
- Here's my theory on the mystery bomber. It is a
- Privateer. Take a good look at the sonar image. I
- believe the plane is upside down, which is why it's
- not laying flat on the sea floor. A shadow of the
- vertical stabilizer is clear, but not the object
- itself, because the plane has flipped. The vertical
- stabilizer, perhaps partially broken, is propping it
- up, so it has to fall off to one side. In this case
- it leans to the left, putting the right wing into
- the sand, and lifting the left wing up in the air
- which gives us clear shadows. Notice that they bend
- to the increasing height of the wing. Now look at
- the darker area on the fuselage, where the wing's
- leading edge joins in. This is exactly where the
- left-front bomb bay door is, probably it either was
- jarred loose and floated off, or fell in, causing a
- disruption in the fuselage surface, and giving us
- that dark area. In regards to the shorter wing
- span, remember we aren't looking at it from straight
- above, or below, as it is upside down. It has
- fallen off to an angle, which make the wings look a
- little shorter. The outboard engines are still
- exactly half way between the wing root and wing tip.
- The most convincing evidence that this is a
- Privateer comes in the form of those side bulges on
- the fuselage, half way between the wings and tail.
- They are very clear in the sonar picture, and match
- in size and location to the Privateer's bulges. The
- Stirling, B-24, B-17, and such do not have anything
- that could be mistaken as these. Only the Privateer
- has them, and that is what this aircraft is.
-

I agree with most of your observations and that it is a Privateer, but I believe we are looking at the top of it. You can see quite clearly the two circular openings in exactly the right places for the top turrets.

I'd never join a club that would have ME as a member!!.

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 11:33 PM
Well, I see the dark spot just behind the wings, which may or may not be the missing turret, but I don't see any indication of the forward one. I guess I'm not seeing what you are. I still think that it's upside down though. The absence of the vertical stabilizer with the presence of its shadow, along with the perfect location and dimensions of the bomb bay door matching that dark area is hard for me to get over. If in fact it is right side up, then only the right landing gear must be down, because something is propping that side up.

<center>http://flygirl.dhs.org:8080/jg51/Alpine-Thunder.jpg


3./Jagdgeschwader 51
www.jg51.com</center> (http://www.jg51.com</center>)

XyZspineZyX
10-29-2003, 01:38 AM
You could be right,but you should know that early B-17s also had these waist bulges.... Also if this plane is upside down,why don't we see the bottom of the engine nacelles or the landing-gear wheel wells(or landing gear for that matter)?

<center>47|FC <img src="http://rangerring.com/wwii/p-47.jpg"<

Message Edited on 10/28/0306:42PM by necrobaron

XyZspineZyX
10-29-2003, 02:01 AM
The first photo clearly shows an inline 20mm cannon, so I think it's an F model or later. Since we can't see the top of the engine cowling it's hard to tell if it's a G model or not.

Just a guess, but I think it's a late F model.



http://home.comcast.net/~ick_352nd/

Message Edited on 10/29/0301:02AM by Ick_352nd

XyZspineZyX
10-29-2003, 02:06 AM
As I said, the F models have a rounded wheel well, unlike the one in the picture. It's a Gustav.

<center>http://flygirl.dhs.org:8080/jg51/Alpine-Thunder.jpg


3./Jagdgeschwader 51
www.jg51.com</center> (http://www.jg51.com</center>)

XyZspineZyX
10-29-2003, 02:13 AM
necrobaron wrote:
- You could be right,but you should know that early
- B-17s also had these waist bulges.... Also if this
- plane is upside down,why don't we see the bottom of
- the engine nacelles or the landing-gear wheel
- wells(or landing gear for that matter)?

True re: the bulges on early B-17's, but the plan form of the plane is all wrong for a Fortress. The wings are too narrow and their position relative to the Fuselage is wrong.

On the other hand, it dose not look 100% Privateer either. The fuselage forward of the wing roots is too short, and the fuselage as a whole looks a bit on the narrow side.

Still, it is difficult to be certain, and plus you have consider the possibility of object distortion as a result of the method of imaging. Maybe the front fuselage of the plane is destroyed?

Finally, a general observation. If you look carefully at the bottom of the image at the "sonar shadow" there appears to be a narrow shadow between the tail planes- caused by the remainder of the Fin perhaps?





"As weaponry, both were good, but in far different ways from each other. In a nutshell, I describe it this way: if the FW 190 was a sabre, the 109 was a florett, or foil, like that used in the precision art of fencing." - Gunther Rall

XyZspineZyX
10-29-2003, 02:13 AM
thats a cool shot and cool detective work. I wasnt sure of the model but the spindly 109 legs was a give away

now lets raise that sucker up and get it to flying condition /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

<center>http://www.blitzpigs.com/john/BP-johann-9-4-03.gif <center>

XyZspineZyX
10-29-2003, 02:14 AM
Great site...well worth checking out.

There must be thousands of planes in similiar resting spots in the channel and coastal areas...

Wonder what happened to them...gradually rust away, picked apart by divers...?

http://palpatine.chez.tiscali.fr/Dilbert/Fist-Of-Death.gif


ALICE FOR MODERATOR!

XyZspineZyX
10-29-2003, 02:16 AM
Noting like having your gear down for a water landing!

See you in the fence.....

Asus P4B533 i845E
P4 2.4
Asus GF4 Ti 4200 128MB (45.23)
1 GIG DDR RAM (PC 2100)
SB Audigy
MSFF2
XP Home

XyZspineZyX
10-29-2003, 03:05 AM
- True re: the bulges on early B-17's, but the plan
- form of the plane is all wrong for a Fortress. The
- wings are too narrow and their position relative to
- the Fuselage is wrong.
-
- On the other hand, it dose not look 100% Privateer
- either. The fuselage forward of the wing roots is
- too short, and the fuselage as a whole looks a bit
- on the narrow side.
-
- Still, it is difficult to be certain, and plus you
- have consider the possibility of object distortion
- as a result of the method of imaging. Maybe the
- front fuselage of the plane is destroyed?
-
- Finally, a general observation. If you look
- carefully at the bottom of the image at the "sonar
- shadow" there appears to be a narrow shadow between
- the tail planes- caused by the remainder of the Fin
- perhaps?


The nose of the Privateer was glass, some with turret, some without. It probably got smashed up and so it looks a little shorter than it should. Still, it is much too long to be a B-17.
Also, notice how much the shadow is stretched vertically. That long thin shadow of the vertical stabilizer may be of only a few feet of what's left of it. So this would explain the long shadow, but unseen stabilizer. Privateers had relatively high set wings, so with one gear down, or maybe even not, it would probably tip over like that being right side up. But it still makes sense being upside down too. The gear retract clean into the wing so maybe they wouldn't show up on sonar. Can't really know I guess. Either way, I'm sure we are looking at a PB4Y Privateer.

<center>http://flygirl.dhs.org:8080/jg51/Alpine-Thunder.jpg


3./Jagdgeschwader 51
www.jg51.com</center> (http://www.jg51.com</center>)

T_O_A_D
10-29-2003, 04:38 AM
Hmm Nis thread for sure . I stumbled on this one last night. No pretty pics to be found as of yet though.
http://www.cdnn.info/industry/i020124/i020124.html

<Left>
131st_VFW_CO_Toad (http://www.geocities.com/vfw_131st/index.htm)

<Left>
/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif MY Track IR Fix read the whole thread (http://forums.ubi.com/messages/message_view-topic.asp?name=us_il2sturmovik_ts&id=zwqtg)


<Center>http://home.mchsi.com/~131st_vfw/Mad_toad.jpg </a>

After eating an entire bull, a mountain
lion felt so good he started roaring. He kept it up until a
hunter came along and shot him...
The moral: when you're full of bull, keep your mouth shut.

XyZspineZyX
10-29-2003, 08:06 AM
Interesting link,TOAD. A gruesome end to some brave fellas./i/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif However,I'm not getting how the plane can be in "excellent" condition after being submerged for 60 years. I wonder if a retreival and restoration will be in store.

<center>47|FC <img src="http://rangerring.com/wwii/p-47.jpg"<

eskimo-FHmod
10-29-2003, 08:19 AM
couldnt it be possible that the gear extended while it sank to the bottom ?
i think we cant make assumptions as to whether it entered the water upright or upside down. surely while sinking it would spin, wouldnt it ?
maybe after the crashlanding the gear extended due to damage, locked in place and while sinking it turned upside down ?

the wings are not torn off and for a crash it looks in rather good condition. wouldnt that mean it was a crash landing ?

www.vaaf.com (http://www.strikemepink.com)

XyZspineZyX
10-29-2003, 11:10 AM
a question with regards to that mystery airplane. How many had escape hatches on top?

I'm a crappy pilot, but one hell of a shot.

XyZspineZyX
10-29-2003, 11:53 AM
I´d say the sonar picture shows a upside down Privateer
on the seabed. Look at the waistgunner blisters on both sides, these were not on the Stirling (were they?)

fluke39
10-29-2003, 01:21 PM
just out of interest - has anyone else done what i put in my first post and compared it to the scan shown in the first post of the guest book?

it's a scan of a privateer about 60 ft down in a lake - and i think you'll agree this scan along with the points raised above (nice point about the plane being tipped to one side stecher- as this is a good explanation for the apparent lack of wingspan - which was the one thing making me doubt it being a privateer - ) that it makes for a pretty certain ID as a privateer.

link to the other scan:

http://www.nwrain.net/~newtsuit/recoveries/lkwash/pb4y2/pb4y2.htm

<center><img src=http://mysite.freeserve.com/Angel_one_five/flukelogo.jpg>


Message Edited on 10/29/0312:24PM by fluke39