RE: OT: Name that plane / ship (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition



Message

btd64 -> RE: OT: Name that plane / ship (7/17/2017 2:02:03 AM)

Pressure cooker.[:'(]....GP



btd64 -> RE: OT: Name that plane / ship (7/17/2017 2:03:05 AM)

The bottom of a Warp Plasma storage container....GP



Chickenboy -> RE: OT: Name that plane / ship (7/17/2017 2:12:19 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: General Patton

Pressure cooker.[:'(]....GP

It does look akin to some sort of stove, doesn't it?

But that's still wrong. [:'(]



Chickenboy -> RE: OT: Name that plane / ship (7/17/2017 2:13:42 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: General Patton

The bottom of a Warp Plasma storage container....GP


Umm...whut? No.



Shark7 -> RE: OT: Name that plane / ship (7/17/2017 7:01:09 AM)

Hmm, if those are wheels on the base like I think they are, then this may be the anchor weight from a moored sea mine.



Chickenboy -> RE: OT: Name that plane / ship (7/17/2017 11:18:48 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shark7

Hmm, if those are wheels on the base like I think they are, then this may be the anchor weight from a moored sea mine.


Hmmm...you're getting warmer...



Pentakomo -> RE: OT: Name that plane / ship (7/17/2017 1:04:01 PM)

CVE-73 Gambier Bay



MakeeLearn -> RE: OT: Name that plane / ship (7/17/2017 1:07:33 PM)

It's a really big dutch oven.... or a mine not the floating kind but like a port mine, sits on the bottom. Didn't they have cable triggers that were floated above the mine?



Chickenboy -> RE: OT: Name that plane / ship (7/17/2017 1:17:39 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MakeeLearn
a mine not the floating kind but like a port mine, sits on the bottom. Didn't they have cable triggers that were floated above the mine?


You're getting warmer. And not in a Dutch oven way.



Chickenboy -> RE: OT: Name that plane / ship (7/17/2017 1:19:52 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Pentakomo

CVE-73 Gambier Bay


Hi Pentakomo,

The CVE-73 Gambier Bay was from post #332 on 7/15. It was quickly guessed and confirmed on posts #333 and #334



MakeeLearn -> RE: OT: Name that plane / ship (7/17/2017 1:23:02 PM)

1-drifting mine,
2-drifting mine,
3-moored mine,
4-moored mine (short wire),
5-bottom mines,
6-torpedo mine/CAPTOR mine,
7-rising mine


It's a moored mine.


[image]local://upfiles/55056/E97920381525413894636282D6A3A131.jpg[/image]



Chickenboy -> RE: OT: Name that plane / ship (7/17/2017 1:25:45 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MakeeLearn

1 Limpet mines.
2 Moored contact mines.
3 Drifting contact mines.
4 Moored mines.
5 Bottom mines.
6 Bouquet mine.
7 Anti-sweep mine.
8 Oscillating mine.


A moored mine.

[image]local://upfiles/55056/9E71A865FFFE4A7681A93A4F646EDA40.jpg[/image]


Interesting graphic, but you've got your caption for #2 and #3 reversed.



MakeeLearn -> RE: OT: Name that plane / ship (7/17/2017 1:29:12 PM)

quote:

Interesting graphic, but you've got your caption for #2 and #3 reversed.


Several were off, copied the wrong list, corrected. It's 3,4,6 or 7

3-moored mine,
4-moored mine (short wire),
6-torpedo mine/CAPTOR mine,
7-rising mine



Chickenboy -> RE: OT: Name that plane / ship (7/17/2017 2:35:21 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MakeeLearn

quote:

Interesting graphic, but you've got your caption for #2 and #3 reversed.


Several were off, copied the wrong list, corrected. It's 3,4,6 or 7

3-moored mine,
4-moored mine (short wire),
6-torpedo mine/CAPTOR mine,
7-rising mine


No. The object in question is not any of those categories 3, 4, 6 or 7 in your corrected graphic.



AW1Steve -> RE: OT: Name that plane / ship (7/17/2017 3:14:43 PM)

OK. We know it's NOT a mine. Is it a platform to CONVEY mines. As in it transports the mine along a mine rail to the stern of the ship where the mine separates ,and sinks. And the platform is either disposed of or in some way recovered for re-use? [&:]



Chickenboy -> RE: OT: Name that plane / ship (7/17/2017 4:00:48 PM)

Awwww...looks like I'm torturing y'all. Here's the item in question. And it *is* a mine. A bottom magnetic mine (harbor defense), Mk. 18.

The bottom section is packed with 1350 lb. explosives and a search coil is deployed from the 'stove pipe'. The wheels on the bottom are for ease in deploying while rolling off the back of a ML.

[image]local://upfiles/6968/F6C97221454F4C3B827526B0943E45BE.jpg[/image]



Chickenboy -> RE: OT: Name that plane / ship (7/17/2017 4:06:21 PM)

Here's a similar cluster of Mk. 51 mines on land pre-deployment. Looks like a field kitchen doesn't it?

[image]local://upfiles/6968/CA8E9095F8F14F9794070776C8EACC54.jpg[/image]



Chickenboy -> RE: OT: Name that plane / ship (7/17/2017 4:10:57 PM)

Any guesses about this one? (Cough) Steve? (Cough)



[image]local://upfiles/6968/5EFBF68EFA7C4E98A8842B7E6E7E560B.jpg[/image]



AW1Steve -> RE: OT: Name that plane / ship (7/17/2017 4:18:46 PM)

What's with the Ozzie bomb?



AW1Steve -> RE: OT: Name that plane / ship (7/17/2017 4:21:17 PM)

I'm going to say an airborne depth bomb. The explosive was developed by the Australians and quite stable and flexible. They even could use it in the Mk 46 torpedo.



MakeeLearn -> RE: OT: Name that plane / ship (7/17/2017 4:26:25 PM)

This plane ????

[image]local://upfiles/55056/A806CE3125664D07AD53CAC77C9AE096.jpg[/image]



Chickenboy -> RE: OT: Name that plane / ship (7/17/2017 7:53:19 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

I'm going to say an airborne depth bomb. The explosive was developed by the Australians and quite stable and flexible. They even could use it in the Mk 46 torpedo.

You'll have to be more specific. I can't believe you lot never trained with this specifically.



Chickenboy -> RE: OT: Name that plane / ship (7/17/2017 7:53:56 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MakeeLearn

This plane ????

[image]local://upfiles/55056/A806CE3125664D07AD53CAC77C9AE096.jpg[/image]



That's ridiculous. A chicken with teeth? Clearly someone is off their nut.



AW1Steve -> RE: OT: Name that plane / ship (7/17/2017 7:58:47 PM)

I trained with or had dealings with the MK62,MK63 and MK65. This is not configured like , nor painted like , any of those.



Chickenboy -> RE: OT: Name that plane / ship (7/17/2017 8:17:50 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

I trained with or had dealings with the MK62,MK63 and MK65. This is not configured like , nor painted like , any of those.


Maybe a different tail assembly throwing you off?





[image]local://upfiles/6968/92F13152413642D194397998E241C6DB.jpg[/image]



Chickenboy -> RE: OT: Name that plane / ship (7/17/2017 8:20:48 PM)

Dunno. Looks like other Mk. 65s to mine eyes.

[image]local://upfiles/6968/E3DC8A66A80F4069B27A2DE36EC16018.jpg[/image]



Chickenboy -> RE: OT: Name that plane / ship (7/17/2017 8:21:44 PM)

.

[image]local://upfiles/6968/1E880EB603FC4A1990C8EB4B6DC17629.jpg[/image]



AW1Steve -> RE: OT: Name that plane / ship (7/17/2017 9:03:36 PM)

Paint is wrong , inspection hatch is wrong , size looks too small and it's not retarded. I've never seen a air mine that didn't have retarded fins to allow a "gentle" "lay down". With out them or a parachute the chance of going off on water impact is too high. This could be an early "destructor" made to look like a mine. All US mines in the "Quick strike" family are based upon standard bombs. But I really don't know. As someone else might say "Damit Andre , I'm a RADAR operator not a Ordnance man!". [:D] Seriously , I really don't know. I never spent any time around real live ordnance myself ,just "shapes" (concrete phonies). But something about that photo just doesn't look right. [&:] [:(]



MakeeLearn -> RE: OT: Name that plane / ship (7/17/2017 9:22:39 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: MakeeLearn

This plane ????





That's ridiculous. A chicken with teeth? Clearly someone is off their nut.




It's still there...

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/mutant-chicken-grows-alli/
http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2006/02/mutant-chickens-grow-teeth
http://atpeacewithpink.blogspot.com/2016/01/last-year-we-worked-on-jurassic-chicken.html

[image]local://upfiles/55056/F12E14705B6649449B8194CD86313BED.jpg[/image]



AW1Steve -> RE: OT: Name that plane / ship (7/17/2017 10:07:45 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

Paint is wrong , inspection hatch is wrong , size looks too small and it's not retarded. I've never seen a air mine that didn't have retarded fins to allow a "gentle" "lay down". With out them or a parachute the chance of going off on water impact is too high. This could be an early "destructor" made to look like a mine. All US mines in the "Quick strike" family are based upon standard bombs. But I really don't know. As someone else might say "Damit Andre , I'm a RADAR operator not a Ordnance man!". [:D] Seriously , I really don't know. I never spent any time around real live ordnance myself ,just "shapes" (concrete phonies). But something about that photo just doesn't look right. [&:] [:(]

OK, I just looked it up in my 35 year old manual , and your absolutely right. As far as color goes , all the pictures in the book are line drawings , so maybe that is the correct color, or maybe the exposure is off. Or maybe , as the old saying goes, the memory is 1st to go. [:(]



Page: <<   < prev  10 11 12 [13] 14   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.828125