The official AHF USA quiz thread
Re: The official AHF USA quiz thread
Gee, Bill, what a big shower you have? (What is this for - elephants? :roll: )
How about ... Mack NM-2 (6-ton)
How about ... Mack NM-2 (6-ton)
All good things in life are either illegal, or immoral, or make you fat.
-
- Member
- Posts: 6341
- Joined: 09 Jan 2004, 00:22
- Location: Georgia USA
Re: The official AHF USA quiz thread
Correct Edge:
Also good for crowd control.
Over to you.
Bill
Also good for crowd control.
Over to you.
Bill
Re: The official AHF USA quiz thread
Please more info - this one is so interesting!
About the purpose - first my thought was some chemical warfare vehicle (removing the chemical residues from other vehicles), later that it is made for washing the airplanes in some dusty environment (B-17 sized). If I understood correctly, this is former military hardwere, put into civilian use? :roll: (As much the crowd control could be "civil" )
About the vehicle - after ruling out Corbitt/White (too square mudguards) I settled on Mack NM series. As only NM-1 to NM-3 have steel cabs, and the model on photo don't have an arc on the front bumper (NM-3 out too), this left me only with NM-1 and NM-2. Since NM-2 was produced in higher number, the choice was an easy one.
So, did I hit the right sub-model? :roll: (It seems there is not much external difference between the two)
Cheers, Edge
About the purpose - first my thought was some chemical warfare vehicle (removing the chemical residues from other vehicles), later that it is made for washing the airplanes in some dusty environment (B-17 sized). If I understood correctly, this is former military hardwere, put into civilian use? :roll: (As much the crowd control could be "civil" )
About the vehicle - after ruling out Corbitt/White (too square mudguards) I settled on Mack NM series. As only NM-1 to NM-3 have steel cabs, and the model on photo don't have an arc on the front bumper (NM-3 out too), this left me only with NM-1 and NM-2. Since NM-2 was produced in higher number, the choice was an easy one.
So, did I hit the right sub-model? :roll: (It seems there is not much external difference between the two)
Cheers, Edge
All good things in life are either illegal, or immoral, or make you fat.
-
- Member
- Posts: 6341
- Joined: 09 Jan 2004, 00:22
- Location: Georgia USA
Re: The official AHF USA quiz thread
Hi Edge:
If the link works you will find the background info here. If not I will transcribe it.
Bill
http://www.firetrucks-atwar.com/C.html
If the link works you will find the background info here. If not I will transcribe it.
Bill
http://www.firetrucks-atwar.com/C.html
Re: The official AHF USA quiz thread
Thanks, Bill (so, it was a fire-truck )
New question - identification:
New question - identification:
- Attachments
-
- bomber_heavy.jpg (27.59 KiB) Viewed 460 times
- Ironmachine
- Member
- Posts: 5822
- Joined: 07 Jul 2005, 11:50
- Location: Spain
Re: The official AHF USA quiz thread
Convair XB-32
Re: The official AHF USA quiz thread
Still a "Consolidated XB-32" then - http://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/factsh ... ?fsID=2580Ironmachine wrote:Convair XB-32
Over to Spain!
All good things in life are either illegal, or immoral, or make you fat.
- Ironmachine
- Member
- Posts: 5822
- Joined: 07 Jul 2005, 11:50
- Location: Spain
Re: The official AHF USA quiz thread
No models of this aircraft were actually built before the project was cancelled:
Re: The official AHF USA quiz thread
MARTIN XB-16 (“Martin Flying Whale”)
The Martin XB-16 was designed by Martin as a long range bomber capable of carrying a 2,500-pound bomb load 5,000 miles. The aircraft was similar in size to the Boeing XB-15, but was to use four Allison V-1710 liquid-cooled inline engines instead of air-cooled radial engines normally used on bombers of the 1930s. The aircraft would have had a wing span of about 140 feet and an estimated top speed of 235 mph.
In 1935 Martin revised the XB-16 design making the aircraft much bigger. The wing span was increased to 173 feet and six V-1710 engines were used; four on the leading edge of the wing (tractors) and two on the trailing edge (pushers). This version had an estimated range of 3,300 miles carrying 2,500 pounds of bombs and a crew of 11 men.
The Martin XB-16 was designed by Martin as a long range bomber capable of carrying a 2,500-pound bomb load 5,000 miles. The aircraft was similar in size to the Boeing XB-15, but was to use four Allison V-1710 liquid-cooled inline engines instead of air-cooled radial engines normally used on bombers of the 1930s. The aircraft would have had a wing span of about 140 feet and an estimated top speed of 235 mph.
In 1935 Martin revised the XB-16 design making the aircraft much bigger. The wing span was increased to 173 feet and six V-1710 engines were used; four on the leading edge of the wing (tractors) and two on the trailing edge (pushers). This version had an estimated range of 3,300 miles carrying 2,500 pounds of bombs and a crew of 11 men.
- Attachments
-
- AA4016_XB-16_real_1.jpg (24.33 KiB) Viewed 442 times
- Ironmachine
- Member
- Posts: 5822
- Joined: 07 Jul 2005, 11:50
- Location: Spain
Re: The official AHF USA quiz thread
Correct, the final design of the XB-16.
Over to Serbia.
Over to Serbia.
Re: The official AHF USA quiz thread
What model of tank & its main armament?
- Attachments
-
- tank_back.jpg (54.08 KiB) Viewed 437 times
Re: The official AHF USA quiz thread
So "heavy", huh? New photo - another view:
- Attachments
-
- tank_front.jpg (53.69 KiB) Viewed 425 times
Re: The official AHF USA quiz thread
Last & most revealing photo:
- Attachments
-
- top_side_view.jpg (33.26 KiB) Viewed 413 times
- Ironmachine
- Member
- Posts: 5822
- Joined: 07 Jul 2005, 11:50
- Location: Spain
Re: The official AHF USA quiz thread
Well - better ever then never!
Photos: Hunnicutt - Firepower (A History Of The American Heavy Tank)
Over to Spain!
Photos: Hunnicutt - Firepower (A History Of The American Heavy Tank)
Over to Spain!
All good things in life are either illegal, or immoral, or make you fat.