"Modern" fish mounts
 

This is just wrong.
http://www.flamedfish.com/Paint%20Gallery.htm

Frank Reid
(though the "Huskers" amberjack is kinda cool)

"Modern" fish mounts
 

On Oct 21, 9:24*pm, Frank Reid © 2010 wrote:
This is just wrong.http://www.flamedfish.com/Paint%20Gallery.htm

Frank Reid
(though the "Huskers" amberjack is kinda cool)

Not very natural or authentic - but pretty wild. It takes all kinds.

"Modern" fish mounts
 

On Oct 22, 3:45*am, "Joel *DFD*" wrote:
On Oct 21, 9:24*pm, Frank Reid © 2010 wrote:

This is just wrong.http://www.flamedfish.com/Paint%20Gallery.htm

Frank Reid
(though the "Huskers" amberjack is kinda cool)

Not very natural or authentic - but pretty wild. It takes all kinds.

An interesting exercise in trying to see the world (or, a slice of it,
anyway) from a different point of view. The materials, the
techniques, and the patterns (for the most part) come to us from the
world of fast cars, I believe. Looks to me like they got it bass
ackwards. Given the efficiency with which fish (generally) move
through a fluid medium, somebody should be paying more attention to
designing automobiles to more closely resemble fish insofar as is
practical. And then, hell, you might as well paint them to look like
fish. There is even a historical precedent of sorts. During WWII the
engine cowlings of American fighter aircraft were sometimes painted to
look like sharks, barracudas, etc., albeit the intended message had
more to do with ferocity than with fluid dynamics.

giles
all that said, de gustibus non est disputandum, i guess.

"Modern" fish mounts
 

On Oct 22, 8:07*am, Giles wrote:
On Oct 22, 3:45*am, "Joel *DFD*" wrote:

On Oct 21, 9:24*pm, Frank Reid © 2010 wrote:

This is just wrong.http://www.flamedfish.com/Paint%20Gallery.htm

Frank Reid
(though the "Huskers" amberjack is kinda cool)

Not very natural or authentic - but pretty wild. It takes all kinds.

An interesting exercise in trying to see the world (or, a slice of it,
anyway) from a different point of view. *The materials, the
techniques, and the patterns (for the most part) come to us from the
world of fast cars, I believe. *Looks to me like they got it bass
ackwards. *Given the efficiency with which fish (generally) move
through a fluid medium, somebody should be paying more attention to
designing automobiles to more closely resemble fish insofar as is
practical. *And then, hell, you might as well paint them to look like
fish. *There is even a historical precedent of sorts. *During WWII the
engine cowlings of American fighter aircraft were sometimes painted to
look like sharks, barracudas, etc., albeit the intended message had
more to do with ferocity than with fluid dynamics.

giles
all that said, de gustibus non est disputandum, i guess.

Take a good look at the F-4.

Designed from the "keel" up to be as streamlined as a shark.

And it is not a coincidence that the B-2 resembles a Manta.

cheers

oz, just back from the AF museum in Dayton OH (Wright-Patterson AFB)

"Modern" fish mounts
 

On Oct 22, 12:48*pm, MajorOz wrote:
On Oct 22, 8:07*am, Giles wrote:





On Oct 22, 3:45*am, "Joel *DFD*" wrote:

On Oct 21, 9:24*pm, Frank Reid © 2010 wrote:

This is just wrong.http://www.flamedfish.com/Paint%20Gallery.htm

Frank Reid
(though the "Huskers" amberjack is kinda cool)

Not very natural or authentic - but pretty wild. It takes all kinds.

An interesting exercise in trying to see the world (or, a slice of it,
anyway) from a different point of view. *The materials, the
techniques, and the patterns (for the most part) come to us from the
world of fast cars, I believe. *Looks to me like they got it bass
ackwards. *Given the efficiency with which fish (generally) move
through a fluid medium, somebody should be paying more attention to
designing automobiles to more closely resemble fish insofar as is
practical. *And then, hell, you might as well paint them to look like
fish. *There is even a historical precedent of sorts. *During WWII the
engine cowlings of American fighter aircraft were sometimes painted to
look like sharks, barracudas, etc., albeit the intended message had
more to do with ferocity than with fluid dynamics.

giles
all that said, de gustibus non est disputandum, i guess.

Take a good look at the F-4.

Designed from the "keel" up to be as streamlined as a shark.

And it is not a coincidence that the B-2 resembles a Manta.

cheers

oz, just back from the AF museum in Dayton OH (Wright-Patterson AFB)- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Yeah, and the F-4 without engines flies as well as a shark. Its got
the glide ratio of a brick.
Frank Reid

"Modern" fish mounts
 

On Oct 22, 12:48*pm, MajorOz wrote:

Take a good look at the F-4.

Been there. Saw them live, up close and personal at the retirement of
a U.S. Coast Guard captain in Miami Beach long about 19aught71 or
thereabouts.....afterburners....flying straight up.....noise....all
that ****.

Designed from the "keel" up to be as streamlined as a shark.

I was more (and earlier, I believe) impressed by the resemblance
between the f-104 and sharks, of which I first became aware due to a
pair of photographs advertising some obscure book or other in "The
Last Whole Earth Catalogue,".....Stewart Brand and all that
****.....remember?*

In any case, neither of the above is a fast car, nor a WWII fighter
with imaginative painting on the engine cowlings. Not that this is a
reason to discount them as interesting objects in the own
rights.....but it clearly disqualifies both as germaine to the subject
under consideration. Moreover, Both clearly lack a dorsal fin, thus
rendering them somewhat dubious as a model for sharks......not to
mention the widespread belief in scientific circles that sharks
probably predated both anyway.

And it is not a coincidence that the B-2 resembles a Manta.

I believe my left hand bears a closer resemblance to mantas than does
a B-52, of which I saw numerous examples at a MUCH closer range than I
was comfortable with "near" K.I. Sawyer back in the late 60s and/or
early 70s.....remember? I dunno.....ask Steve Irwin.

cheers

prosit.

oz, just back from the AF museum in Dayton OH (Wright-Patterson AFB)

giles, just back from stacking wood.
*can ANYBODY help me find the famous photograph of the airplane (i
THINK it was an f-104) with all its armaments arrayed on the tarmac in
front of it, and which served as the model for the photo on the back
of one of pink floyd's albums (meddle?) which showed their presumably
private jet with all of the band's musical paraphernalia arrayed in
similar fashion?

"Modern" fish mounts
 

On Oct 22, 2:30*pm, Frank Reid © 2010 wrote:


Yeah, and the F-4 without engines flies as well as a shark.

Not all that surprising. I believe neither was actually designed to
fly without engines. :)

Its got the glide ratio of a brick.

Makes a MUCH more spectacular splash, though.

giles

"Modern" fish mounts
 

On Oct 22, 7:21*pm, Giles wrote:
On Oct 22, 12:48*pm, MajorOz wrote:

Take a good look at the F-4.

Been there. *Saw them live, up close and personal at the retirement of
a U.S. Coast Guard captain in Miami Beach long about 19aught71 or
thereabouts.....afterburners....flying straight up.....noise....all
that ****.

Designed from the "keel" up to be as streamlined as a shark.

I was more (and earlier, I believe) impressed by the resemblance
between the f-104 and sharks, of which I first became aware due to a
pair of photographs advertising some obscure book or other in "The
Last Whole Earth Catalogue,".....Stewart Brand and all that
****.....remember?*

In any case, neither of the above is a fast car, nor a WWII fighter
with imaginative painting on the engine cowlings. *Not that this is a
reason to discount them as interesting objects in the own
rights.....but it clearly disqualifies both as germaine to the subject
under consideration. *Moreover, Both clearly lack a dorsal fin, thus
rendering them somewhat dubious as a model for sharks......not to
mention the widespread belief in scientific circles that sharks
probably predated both anyway.

And it is not a coincidence that the B-2 resembles a Manta.

I believe my left hand bears a closer resemblance to mantas than does
a B-52, of which I saw numerous examples at a MUCH closer range than I
was comfortable with "near" K.I. Sawyer back in the late 60s and/or
early 70s.....remember? *I dunno.....ask Steve Irwin.

cheers

prosit.

oz, just back from the AF museum in Dayton OH (Wright-Patterson AFB)

giles, just back from stacking wood.
*can ANYBODY help me find the famous photograph of the airplane (i
THINK it was an f-104) with all its armaments arrayed on the tarmac in
front of it, and which served as the model for the photo on the back
of one of pink floyd's albums (meddle?) which showed their presumably
private jet with all of the band's musical paraphernalia arrayed in
similar fashion?

....sorry

Once again, I apologize for intruding upon your private domain.

oz

"Modern" fish mounts
 

On Oct 22, 7:41*pm, MajorOz wrote:


...sorry

Once again, I apologize for intruding upon your private domain.

oz

Actually, this is an eminently public forum.

You may post whatever you like.

Some of the rest of us will undoubtedly do likewise.

Does this strike you as being somehow unfair?

g.
still searching (evidently in vain) for the kid gloves.

"Modern" fish mounts
 

*can ANYBODY help me find the famous photograph of the airplane (i
THINK it was an f-104) with all its armaments arrayed on the tarmac in
front of it, and which served as the model for the photo on the back
of one of pink floyd's albums (meddle?) which showed their presumably
private jet with all of the band's musical paraphernalia arrayed in
similar fashion?

Don't think it was the 104 (which I worked on). Pretty much AIM 9,
AIM 7 and guns. However, the F-4 carried a LOT of crap in its day.
http://up-ship.com/blog/?p=6097
Frank Reid