"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

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