UK2 BN709 Hawker HurricaneMkIID.jpg

[Joseph Testagrose]

[Andrew Chaplin]

Joseph Testagrose > wrote in
:

>
> begin 644 UK2 BN709 Hawker HurricaneMkIID.jpg
>
> Attachment decoded: UK2 BN709 Hawker HurricaneMkIID.jpg
> `
> end

I think this is just a lower-quality rendering of the shot of BN795, the
shadows, the horizon, the aspect of the a/c are the same, and the control
surfaces are in identical positions. BN795 is supposed to have been
dedicated to the memory of Squadron Leader John Gillan, hence the "Our
John" painted on the cowling. Might this shot have been doctored?
--
Andrew Chaplin
SIT MIHI GLADIUS SICUT SANCTO MARTINO
(If you're going to e-mail me, you'll have to get "yourfinger." out.)

[Andrew Chaplin]

Joseph Testagrose > wrote in
:

>
>

[Claus Gustafsen]

When looking as close as I can (Or rather enlarging) it does look like the
same number, but the lower image is in a poorer resoloution, and therefor
harder to see.

Claus

"Andrew Chaplin" skrev i meddelelsen
...

Joseph Testagrose > wrote in
:

>
> begin 644 UK2 BN709 Hawker HurricaneMkIID.jpg
>
> Attachment decoded: UK2 BN709 Hawker HurricaneMkIID.jpg
> `
> end
>

Attached for comparison. They look to be the same aircraft to me. Why does
the second shot have a different aircraft number?
--
Andrew Chaplin
SIT MIHI GLADIUS SICUT SANCTO MARTINO
(If you're going to e-mail me, you'll have to get "yourfinger." out.)

[joet5]

I believe the 2nd pix is a bad reproduction with the seriel # being
distored to look like BN709. Joe.

On Thu, 18 Aug 2011 05:22:19 -0500, Andrew Chaplin
> wrote:

>Joseph Testagrose > wrote in
:
>
>>
>> begin 644 UK2 BN709 Hawker HurricaneMkIID.jpg
>>
>> Attachment decoded: UK2 BN709 Hawker HurricaneMkIID.jpg
>> `
>> end
>>
>
>Attached for comparison. They look to be the same aircraft to me. Why does
>the second shot have a different aircraft number?