The Motor Forum

SpecB · Posted: Thu Oct 15, 2009 10:33 pm Post subject: The Henry Ford

I am not going to post all of the pictures from my recent USA trip but here are some of my favorites: -

_________________

Mark

Matt · Posted: Thu Oct 15, 2009 10:59 pm Post subject:

Love this one.

_________________

Small car, big heart.

SpecB · Posted: Thu Oct 15, 2009 11:13 pm Post subject:

I think that one is the very favourite of mine as well.
_________________

Mark

Boxer6 · Posted: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:59 am Post subject:

TimR · Posted: Fri Oct 16, 2009 1:39 pm Post subject:

That looks lovely.

Great place to go and chill out looking at old machinery.

Maybe they could rename it The Henry Ford Clinic.

DradusContact · Posted: Fri Oct 16, 2009 1:52 pm Post subject:

Apart from being very striking, is there something special about that plane, did it set some sort of record?

Its beautiful anyway, imagine trying to keep that clean when it was flying!
_________________

SpecB · Posted: Fri Oct 16, 2009 4:43 pm Post subject:

TimR · Posted: Fri Oct 16, 2009 5:35 pm Post subject:

SpecB · Posted: Fri Oct 16, 2009 5:38 pm Post subject:

DaveGibson · Posted: Fri Oct 16, 2009 10:21 pm Post subject:

SpecB · Posted: Fri Oct 16, 2009 11:06 pm Post subject:

DaveGibson · Posted: Fri Oct 16, 2009 11:17 pm Post subject:

Just under 2500 hours per year of service. Its use probably tailed off in its later years and it has spent about half its life in the museum.

DradusContact · Posted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 9:32 am Post subject:

Its so lovely to look at though. Not like the ugly things we fly in now. I think the last truly beautiful airliner where the comets of the 60's.
_________________

TimR · Posted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 9:45 am Post subject:

Boxer6 · Posted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 11:07 am Post subject:

TimR · Posted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 11:35 am Post subject:

I've been twice in the last 10 years and it's definitely worth a trip.

One time they had the maintenance hangar open and we just wandered in at which point my dad started chatting to the old boys rebuilding from scratch (it appeared) a Bristol Blenheim - the plane, obviously.
Thought we were going to be there for days

DradusContact · Posted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 11:49 am Post subject:

They fixed the problem with the comet though. If it didnt happen to that plane it would of happened to the next one, it was a learning curve. Boeing and the like simply learnt from out mistakes.
_________________

TimR · Posted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 12:09 pm Post subject:

I know. Otherwise we wouldn't have Nimrods.

Funnily enough I've just read 'No Highway' by Nevil Shute.
It deals with exactly what afflicted the Comet but was written in 1948

Dr. Hfuhruhurr · Posted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 1:26 pm Post subject:

I don't agree that post-Comet airliners are less attractive. That would rule out Concorde, which has to be the most beautiful of all. And I reckon the 707 is the perfect iteration of the swept-back, underwing engine look. And the 747 400 has a galleon-like grace that most widebodies lack, again because of the sweep of the wings, and the winglets on the ends.

DaveGibson · Posted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 1:47 pm Post subject:

To my mind, the VC10, with the engines at the back and its clean engine-free wings, was better looking than the 707 but I agree that Concorde was the best.

DradusContact · Posted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 1:57 pm Post subject:

Of course concorde is a big exception.

I'm talking about 747,'s 767's etc. Theyre just not pretty. Function over form all the way.
_________________

TimR · Posted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 2:33 pm Post subject:

I think standard 747s have a certain something about them, especially in a nice 1970s colour scheme - usually predominantly white with the bit in front of the windscreen painted black.

Dr. Hfuhruhurr · Posted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 2:35 pm Post subject:

So do I, they get away from the tube-with-wings look of planes like the A330/340.

TimR · Posted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 2:42 pm Post subject:

You wouldn't believe that I've spent the last 10 minutes or so trying to find a decent online photo of an early 747 in that kind of colour scheme and I can't find one in colour.

They all seem to be taken from the ground with the aircraft in nose-up stance with the wheels just off the deck

DradusContact · Posted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 2:57 pm Post subject:

I must admit, this is quite a nice image:

_________________

Dr. Hfuhruhurr · Posted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 3:01 pm Post subject:

I see what you mean! However, this merits inclusion anyway:

DradusContact · Posted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 3:26 pm Post subject:

Must be a photoshop?
_________________

Boxer6 · Posted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 5:19 pm Post subject:

TimR · Posted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 6:00 pm Post subject:

It's probably just perspective. There's nothing on the ground in the photo to give you any impression of the angle so although it looks like 90 degrees it isn't.

DradusContact · Posted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 6:12 pm Post subject:

I suppose the fact you can read the signs next to the runway suggest its not that steep.
_________________

woof woof · Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2009 11:35 am Post subject:

Even with a long lens surely another plane shouldn't be that close to one taking off? Photoshop?
_________________
woof woof's defence lawyer claimed that "Booze played no part in his typo's."

Confucius says "all reckless speeding is caused by accidents."

DradusContact · Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2009 12:34 pm Post subject:

Thats true, where was the guy with the camera waiting?
_________________

TimR · Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2009 12:37 pm Post subject:

Perhaps it was taken by Superman?

woof woof · Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2009 12:40 pm Post subject:

Lets not be sexist Tim, Superperson.
_________________
woof woof's defence lawyer claimed that "Booze played no part in his typo's."

Confucius says "all reckless speeding is caused by accidents."

TimR · Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2009 12:41 pm Post subject:

Well remember there was a Superwoman as well so maybe the photo was taken by him (DCs question remember) but Superwoman was holding onto his ankles - or something - so he didn't fall as he held the camera

woof woof · Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2009 1:10 pm Post subject:

"...but Superwoman was holding onto his ankles..."

That is an interesting image Tim but a more interesting one would be superwoman holding onto her own ankles.

I'm not too sure where the camera might be.
_________________
woof woof's defence lawyer claimed that "Booze played no part in his typo's."

Confucius says "all reckless speeding is caused by accidents."

TimR · Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2009 1:28 pm Post subject:

woof woof · Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2009 1:49 pm Post subject:

I'm sure he'd have something in his hands.
_________________
woof woof's defence lawyer claimed that "Booze played no part in his typo's."

Confucius says "all reckless speeding is caused by accidents."

DradusContact · Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2009 1:49 pm Post subject:

Maybe they used this?

http://www.guzer.com/videos/familyguy_wonderwoman.php
_________________

Big TC · Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2009 5:01 pm Post subject:

How did this thread go from a superb pic of a 747 taking off, to a thinly-veiled description of kinky sex between a super hero and a super herione, whilst being photographed by them? Huh?

(LOL anyway!)
_________________

It's a '57 Pontiac Star Chief, dontchaknow.

DaveGibson · Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2009 6:56 pm Post subject:

Well, let me see if I can get back to the 747. What fascinates me is the amount the wings are bowed upwards, which illustrates the way they flex under load.

As an aside, some years ago, when Boeing had engine supply problems, the unfinished aircraft had to be parked with concrete blocks mounted in place of the missing engines to ensure that the wings adopted the correct shape.

DradusContact · Posted: Wed Oct 21, 2009 9:08 am Post subject:

Its quite worrying i always think when you see the wings flexing as you fly, the tolerance on them is quite amazing though, during testing they flex them up so theyre practically 45' from the planes body.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pe9PVaFGl3o
_________________

Dr. Hfuhruhurr · Posted: Mon Oct 26, 2009 1:47 pm Post subject:

I like the 777 300 as well: the extra fuselage length avoids the usual widebody chubbiness, and I also like the sharp cut-off at the back of the fuselage, and the B52-style tail fin:

TimR · Posted: Mon Oct 26, 2009 2:17 pm Post subject:

It's ok but the front looks weak - as it does on most new airliners.

It probably needs something like a proper nose - nothing extreme, 747esque would do - to give a bit more visual drama to the cockpit area.

How big is the 777 relative to a 747?

DaveGibson · Posted: Mon Oct 26, 2009 2:40 pm Post subject:

TimR · Posted: Mon Oct 26, 2009 3:27 pm Post subject:

It hides its size well then.

I would've said that was about the same size as a normal airbus.

Dr. Hfuhruhurr · Posted: Mon Oct 26, 2009 3:40 pm Post subject:

TimR · Posted: Mon Oct 26, 2009 3:56 pm Post subject:

Scouse · Posted: Mon Oct 26, 2009 5:30 pm Post subject:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5X_7Xt2ga-s&NR=1&feature=fvwp

Check out the wing flex of the jumbo in the 3rd clip
_________________
Scouse

SpecB · Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2009 12:21 am Post subject:

I'm going to have a heart attack over your constantly changing sig pics.

My wife is now seriously suspicious of this forum though.
_________________

Mark