1 – 4 of 4
Anonymous dearieme said...

But to nit-pick ... the flame doesn't contain enough smoke: that's aviation gasoline on fire, not a Bunsen burner.

August 30, 2013 at 8:05 AM

Anonymous dearieme said...

I should have said that I was referring to the bottom one.

August 30, 2013 at 1:38 PM

Blogger Donald Pittenger said...

dearieme -- Good question. I've never seen a Bf109 flamed, so have no idea what this might have looked like in reality. Perhaps Valigursky was exercising artistic license for purposes of composition. Or maybe at 300+ mph, smoke couldn't form near the aircraft. Or, given that the P-38 wing man is still firing (but why? if the 109 is already blazing), perhaps the fire hasn't had time to develop (though if this were the case, why not brighter flames?)

I vote for artistic license on all counts -- even for my complaint about the insignia.

PS: We'll wave to you 8 September as we fly over England on our way to Amsterdam.

August 30, 2013 at 2:47 PM

Anonymous dearieme said...

My daughter had her first trip to Amsterdam recently. Loved it. How right she is.

P.S. Beware of the ferrets.
http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/News/Ferret-stowaway-flew-to-Cambridge-on-Hercules-aircraft-reporter-to-border-control-20130829112353.htm

August 31, 2013 at 3:06 AM

You can use some HTML tags, such as <b>, <i>, <a>

You will be asked to sign in after submitting your comment.
OpenID LiveJournal WordPress TypePad AOL
Please prove you're not a robot