Some planes from today

tfinch2

Lifer
Feb 3, 2004
22,114
1
0
http://www.tfinch.org/pics/planes/1.jpg
http://www.tfinch.org/pics/planes/2.jpg
http://www.tfinch.org/pics/planes/3.jpg
http://www.tfinch.org/pics/planes/4.jpg
http://www.tfinch.org/pics/planes/5.jpg
http://www.tfinch.org/pics/planes/6.jpg

These are the only ones I've converted from RAW and resized for the web. I'll have time to finish the rest tomorrow.

I took a 10 image sequence of a B17. I'm working on a panoramic to print for my grandfather who flew on it. The first attempt turned out decent, and when cropped the res was 9000x1600
 

illusion88

Lifer
Oct 2, 2001
13,164
3
81
I assume the spikes on the propellers are to prevent birds from landing on them correct? ARe birds really that much of a problem?
 

tfinch2

Lifer
Feb 3, 2004
22,114
1
0
Originally posted by: illusion88
I assume the spikes on the propellers are to prevent birds from landing on them correct? ARe birds really that much of a problem?

I thought that was what they were for too, but that bird didn't have a problem landing. They didn't seem to be much of a problem. That was one of the few that I saw, and it was really clean.
 

skyking

Lifer
Nov 21, 2001
22,775
5,937
146
oh yeah, birds are a problem. If they did not have those spikes, some really large bird would roost on there, and leave huge white streaks of poo down the propeller. It looks pretty tacky in comparison to those clean photos.:thumbsup:
 

cavemanmoron

Lifer
Mar 13, 2001
13,664
28
91
Originally posted by: tfinch2
Originally posted by: illusion88
I assume the spikes on the propellers are to prevent birds from landing on them correct? ARe birds really that much of a problem?

I thought that was what they were for too, but that bird didn't have a problem landing. They didn't seem to be much of a problem. That was one of the few that I saw, and it was really clean.

:)
 

Yossarian

Lifer
Dec 26, 2000
18,010
1
81
Originally posted by: SilentZero
Taking pictures on a military installation is a federal offense.

not necessarily. I got permission to take photos of F16s on the flight line at March ARB.
 

OutHouse

Lifer
Jun 5, 2000
36,410
616
126
Originally posted by: skyking
oh yeah, birds are a problem. If they did not have those spikes, some really large bird would roost on there, and leave huge white streaks of poo down the propeller. It looks pretty tacky in comparison to those clean photos.:thumbsup:

well the last picture negates that.
 

SilentZero

Diamond Member
Apr 8, 2003
5,158
0
76
Originally posted by: Yossarian
Originally posted by: SilentZero
Taking pictures on a military installation is a federal offense.

not necessarily. I got permission to take photos of F16s on the flight line at March ARB.

I am speaking in general.
 

skyking

Lifer
Nov 21, 2001
22,775
5,937
146
well the last picture negates that.

That little bird is not what I am talking about. The big buggers with the high capacity bombays, they make a real mess of propellers. Those spikes do prevent a sucessful landing for that size of bird:)

The aircraft I fly have two bladed propellers, and we always position them horizontal. The birds usually leave that alone. It's the three and 4 blade jobbers, it is impossible to not leave a tempting perch up.
 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
102,402
8,574
126
Originally posted by: SilentZero
Taking pictures on a military installation is a federal offense.

pictures of old planes on display? i don't think any federal prosecutor in their right mind would do anything.
 

TerryMathews

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
11,464
2
0
Originally posted by: SilentZero
Taking pictures on a military installation is a federal offense.

Not correct.

Photography on a military installation in non-designated areas is a federal offense. Planes set up on display would be construed as a designated area, especially since they have signs that indicate what they are; most people in the Air Force would recgonize a F-15 on sight.

Also, your comment is funny in itself. Everything on a military installation is a federal offense; state law can't take jurisdiction on a federal installation. Even a speeding ticket would go to the local federal magistrate.

I've got some drop-dead gorgeous pics from the USAF Museum taken with my D70, but they're all still raw and way too huge for posting.

Is it just me, or is there something not quite right about that F-15? The cockpit looks wrong somehow, and I'm not just talking about the fake canopy. The actual shape looks incorrect.
 

jadinolf

Lifer
Oct 12, 1999
20,952
3
81
Originally posted by: SilentZero
Taking pictures on a military installation is a federal offense.

I guess I'm in big trouble.

Took my basic training at Lackland.
 
Nov 5, 2001
18,366
3
0
Originally posted by: TerryMathews

Is it just me, or is there something not quite right about that F-15? The cockpit looks wrong somehow, and I'm not just talking about the fake canopy. The actual shape looks incorrect.

no, it's correct. I think the angle of the photo gives the radome a foreshortened look which makes it look weird.
 

amol

Lifer
Jul 8, 2001
11,680
3
81
Originally posted by: otispunkmeyer
whats this RAW format you guys are on about?

can any digi cam do it?

RAW from Wiki

All cameras shoot in RAW (I think), but normal P&S use the sensor to convert it to JPEG. DSLRs keep the RAW file.

I <3 RAW. Easier color correction and exposure correction FTW!
 

KillerCharlie

Diamond Member
Aug 21, 2005
3,691
68
91
I should dig up the pics I have from Whiteman AFB. They let us take as many pictures as we wanted of their A-10s and Apaches. I also took a ton of pictures up close of a B-2 they had on display for us. Unfortunately they only let us take pictures of the front half for security reasons, but we got to walk around it.