Nevermind that they kept reusing the same flying footage over and over... it was a great show!
That is Bernard Zee in a message he sent to Yahoo group interested in airplanes, his photo essay covers the Planes of Fame Air Show in Chino, Ca.
I have no idea what he is writing about there, so YouTube [black sheep squadron] and see it is a show that features the Corsiar.
Missed that completely. I look back and nothing matches. Not even heard of it. Not even a crossword answer. That must have been when Dad was stationed on Mars and we lived on Phobos.
Joke.
Nor had I heard this.
A major problem for Japan was replacing pilots lost. The selection and training process for pilots could not keep up with the attrition rates. Moreover, experienced pilots were not brought back as instructors to teach lessons learnt on how to deal with the enemy. By the end of the war, most everyone flying were basically inexperienced in combat - being straight out of flight school. Training on the job (for the Japanese fighter pilot) tended to be very fatal...
Little wonder then, that the Kamikaze concept took hold and become the primary offensive method of using planes against the U.S. invasion fleet at the close of the war.
The zero was the first model I put together. We both received model planes. Gifts from one of Dad's friends. First thing, right off the bat out there in 'the patties' the word for off-base housing right next to airbase, among the ganglia of organic footpaths that became streets that over decades a template of another city is daubed until transformed to another.
Glue all over the place.
Worst model ever.
A complete mess. A kid does not trust a dot of glue, it must be a glob. Every touch of glue pulls a thread of glue that does dry quickly to a web of glue connecting every part to each other encapsulating the whole project. It was the smallest plastic model that is possible to buy, easiest of all to assemble, fewest parts of all models and I used a whole tube of glue. That thing really held together.
Glue actually melts plastic, did you notice that?
Glue actually melts plastic, did you notice that?
And the decals sucked. Those take some finesse to put on.
I remember this odd fellow well. Small slight man. At one point he wanted to demonstrate to my father how hard his stomach is and he lifted his shirt and hit himself in the stomach with a bottle whap whap whap and insisted my dad hit him too. So he did. And hurt him. Then felt bad. We thought he was nutters. He was very pleased to emphasize the Zero outclassed our planes while giving me a model of one. Come to think of it, the guy had issues.
Smoke on wingtips shows wind turbulence and vortices.
The show goes on and on and on, plane, plane, plane, pew, pew, pew. The array of airplanes is dizzying, both flying and static.
When you need a crew to come with a ladder to get you down from your jet then I just don't see these things as practical from a consumer's point of view. I do not see much of a consumer aftermarket for these.
Thud. Then tanks.
Then a war enactment that turns out to be the most fun part of the whole day.
I am impressed with the photography. He is using a D-40 and D-200. His framing is competent. He has very good pictures compositionally. And I bet so do a lot of other people.
Canons, Nikon, telephoto lenses.
Here is the thing about telephoto lenses. I'm tempted to draw a picture to explain what I mean. I loved the idea of telephotos because I imagined it was like taking my eyeball out and putting it up there where the ram is on the mountain, closer to where I can see it more clearly, where it is larger in my field of vision and not a tiny speck far away.
And it does.
It does that by compressing space. It compresses rounded subjects with depth into cards. The resulting photograph is like a card with a picture of a bush in front of a card with a picture of a rock, in front of a card with a picture of a ram in front of a card with a picture of another bush and so on, all compressed together with no space between them. You have no idea whatever the distance between bush, rock and ram. The ram could be hiding behind the bush or the bush could be well ahead of the ram. By way of example.
So. To my eye, both actually, some photographs of distant airplanes, especially double airplanes, seem flat. Can you easily tell which plane is in front of the other?
You can work it out, but do you see what I'm noting about flatness? I am not commenting on the photography, that is excellent, I am talking about telephoto lenses. Yes, you are up there and now you are flat. When you get right into it and crop out everything but the one little detail that defines the depth then the flatness affect I'm complaining about disappears.
Quick before the whole post disappears. It is hosted on Comcast and I did not know Comcast offers webspace. I wonder if everything disappears when the customer stop subscribing.
Then a war enactment that turns out to be the most fun part of the whole day.
I am impressed with the photography. He is using a D-40 and D-200. His framing is competent. He has very good pictures compositionally. And I bet so do a lot of other people.
Canons, Nikon, telephoto lenses.
Here is the thing about telephoto lenses. I'm tempted to draw a picture to explain what I mean. I loved the idea of telephotos because I imagined it was like taking my eyeball out and putting it up there where the ram is on the mountain, closer to where I can see it more clearly, where it is larger in my field of vision and not a tiny speck far away.
And it does.
It does that by compressing space. It compresses rounded subjects with depth into cards. The resulting photograph is like a card with a picture of a bush in front of a card with a picture of a rock, in front of a card with a picture of a ram in front of a card with a picture of another bush and so on, all compressed together with no space between them. You have no idea whatever the distance between bush, rock and ram. The ram could be hiding behind the bush or the bush could be well ahead of the ram. By way of example.
So. To my eye, both actually, some photographs of distant airplanes, especially double airplanes, seem flat. Can you easily tell which plane is in front of the other?
You can work it out, but do you see what I'm noting about flatness? I am not commenting on the photography, that is excellent, I am talking about telephoto lenses. Yes, you are up there and now you are flat. When you get right into it and crop out everything but the one little detail that defines the depth then the flatness affect I'm complaining about disappears.
Quick before the whole post disappears. It is hosted on Comcast and I did not know Comcast offers webspace. I wonder if everything disappears when the customer stop subscribing.
