UK2 JX485 Consolidated CoronadoGR1 ex USN 7192 PB2Y-3B Helensburgh.jpg

[Joseph Testagrose]

[Syke[_2_]]

Is that a 3 blade prop and a 4 blader?
Regards

Syke

[Syke[_2_]]

On 06/10/2013 09:05, Syke wrote:
> Is that a 3 blade prop and a 4 blader?
> Regards
>
> Syke

Responding to my own question, it seems the answer is, sometimes;

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=consolidated+coronado&lr=&safe=images&hl=en&source=lnms&tbm=isch

But not always;

http://www.aircraftaces.com/photos/pby-coronado-1.jpg

How odd!

Regards

Syke

[Lab Lover]

On Sun, 06 Oct 2013 09:15:53 +0100, Syke >
wrote:

>On 06/10/2013 09:05, Syke wrote:
>> Is that a 3 blade prop and a 4 blader?
>> Regards
>>
>> Syke
>
>Responding to my own question, it seems the answer is, sometimes;
>
>https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=consolidated+coronado&lr=&safe=images&hl=en&source=lnms&tbm=isch
>
>But not always;
>
>http://www.aircraftaces.com/photos/pby-coronado-1.jpg
>
>How odd!

Some interesting history on the Coronado:

http://www.history.navy.mil/branches/hist-ac/pb2y-5r.pdf

[Syke[_2_]]

Very interesting, especially as the 3-view drawing shows a mix of 3 and
4-blade props. I wonder why this would be?

Regards

Syke

[John Szalay[_2_]]

Syke > wrote in news:pse4u.18783$xL5.844
@fx31.am4:

> Very interesting, especially as the 3-view drawing shows a mix of 3 and
> 4-blade props. I wonder why this would be?
>
> Regards
>
> Syke

The two inner engines were fitted with four-bladed reversible pitch
propellers; the outer engines had standard three-bladed feathering props

REF:
Bridgeman, Leonard. "The Consolidated Vultee Model 29 Coronado". Jane's
Fighting Aircraft of World War II. London: Studio, 1946. ISBN 1-85170-493-0

[Lab Lover]

On Sun, 06 Oct 2013 09:39:21 -0500, John Szalay <john.szalayatatt.net>
wrote:

>Syke > wrote in news:pse4u.18783$xL5.844
:
>
>> Very interesting, especially as the 3-view drawing shows a mix of 3 and
>> 4-blade props. I wonder why this would be?
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Syke
>
>The two inner engines were fitted with four-bladed reversible pitch
>propellers; the outer engines had standard three-bladed feathering props
>
>REF:
>Bridgeman, Leonard. "The Consolidated Vultee Model 29 Coronado". Jane's
>Fighting Aircraft of World War II. London: Studio, 1946. ISBN 1-85170-493-0


Do you know why? Was this for enhanced maneuverability on water?

[John Szalay[_2_]]

Lab Lover > wrote in
:

> On Sun, 06 Oct 2013 09:39:21 -0500, John Szalay <john.szalayatatt.net>
> wrote:
>
>>Syke > wrote in news:pse4u.18783$xL5.844
:
>>
>>> Very interesting, especially as the 3-view drawing shows a mix of 3
>>> and 4-blade props. I wonder why this would be?
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> Syke
>>
>>The two inner engines were fitted with four-bladed reversible pitch
>>propellers; the outer engines had standard three-bladed feathering
>>props
>>
>>REF:
>>Bridgeman, Leonard. "The Consolidated Vultee Model 29 Coronado".
>>Jane's Fighting Aircraft of World War II. London: Studio, 1946. ISBN
>>1-85170-493-0
>
>
> Do you know why? Was this for enhanced maneuverability on water?
>


reversible pitch , do make it easier to handle on the ground & water.

ever seen a plane back up ? watched C-130s do it and its impressive.

[Lab Lover]

On Sun, 06 Oct 2013 15:28:36 +0100, Syke >
wrote:

>Very interesting, especially as the 3-view drawing shows a mix of 3 and
>4-blade props. I wonder why this would be?
>
>Regards
>
>Syke


As Szalay pointed out, the 4 bladed props were reversible pitch. I
believe this was done for maneuverability while taxiing.

[Richard[_8_]]

On 10/6/2013 10:37 AM, Lab Lover wrote:
> On Sun, 06 Oct 2013 09:39:21 -0500, John Szalay<john.szalayatatt.net>
> wrote:
>
>> > wrote in news:pse4u.18783$xL5.844
>> @fx31.am4:
>>
>>> Very interesting, especially as the 3-view drawing shows a mix of 3 and
>>> 4-blade props. I wonder why this would be?
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> Syke
>>
>> The two inner engines were fitted with four-bladed reversible pitch
>> propellers; the outer engines had standard three-bladed feathering props
>>
>> REF:
>> Bridgeman, Leonard. "The Consolidated Vultee Model 29 Coronado". Jane's
>> Fighting Aircraft of World War II. London: Studio, 1946. ISBN 1-85170-493-0
>
>
> Do you know why? Was this for enhanced maneuverability on water?


Just as a wild guess...

It may be that the outboard engines get shut down in flight?
Seaplanes need a LOT of power to get off the water.
But not that much for cruise.

[[email protected]]

On Sun, 06 Oct 2013 11:41:57 -0500, John Szalay <john.szalayatatt.net>
wrote:

>Lab Lover > wrote in
:
>
>> On Sun, 06 Oct 2013 09:39:21 -0500, John Szalay <john.szalayatatt.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>Syke > wrote in news:pse4u.18783$xL5.844
:
>>>
>>>> Very interesting, especially as the 3-view drawing shows a mix of 3
>>>> and 4-blade props. I wonder why this would be?
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>>
>>>> Syke
>>>
>>>The two inner engines were fitted with four-bladed reversible pitch
>>>propellers; the outer engines had standard three-bladed feathering
>>>props
>>>
>>>REF:
>>>Bridgeman, Leonard. "The Consolidated Vultee Model 29 Coronado".
>>>Jane's Fighting Aircraft of World War II. London: Studio, 1946. ISBN
>>>1-85170-493-0
>>
>>
>> Do you know why? Was this for enhanced maneuverability on water?
>>
>
>
>reversible pitch , do make it easier to handle on the ground & water.
>
>ever seen a plane back up ? watched C-130s do it and its impressive.

Even more so with a C-17...

[Bob Taylor]

Syke wrote:
> Is that a 3 blade prop and a 4 blader?
> Regards
>
> Syke
Apparently the performance characteristics of the inboard engines are
different from the outboard.

http://hartzellprop.com/faq/technical-questions/

Regards, Bob Taylor

[Ramsman]

On 06/10/2013 17:41, John Szalay wrote:
> Lab Lover > wrote in
> :
>
>> On Sun, 06 Oct 2013 09:39:21 -0500, John Szalay <john.szalayatatt.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Syke > wrote in news:pse4u.18783$xL5.844
>>> @fx31.am4:
>>>
>>>> Very interesting, especially as the 3-view drawing shows a mix of 3
>>>> and 4-blade props. I wonder why this would be?
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>>
>>>> Syke
>>>
>>> The two inner engines were fitted with four-bladed reversible pitch
>>> propellers; the outer engines had standard three-bladed feathering
>>> props
>>>
>>> REF:
>>> Bridgeman, Leonard. "The Consolidated Vultee Model 29 Coronado".
>>> Jane's Fighting Aircraft of World War II. London: Studio, 1946. ISBN
>>> 1-85170-493-0
>>
>>
>> Do you know why? Was this for enhanced maneuverability on water?
>>
>
>
> reversible pitch , do make it easier to handle on the ground & water.
>
> ever seen a plane back up ? watched C-130s do it and its impressive.
>

The first aircraft I ever saw do this was a Blackburn Beverley, back in
the 50s.

--
Peter

[Ramsman]

On 06/10/2013 14:56, Lab Lover wrote:
> On Sun, 06 Oct 2013 09:15:53 +0100, Syke >
> wrote:
>
>> On 06/10/2013 09:05, Syke wrote:
>>> Is that a 3 blade prop and a 4 blader?
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> Syke
>>
>> Responding to my own question, it seems the answer is, sometimes;
>>
>> https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=consolidated+coronado&lr=&safe=images&hl=en&source=lnms&tbm=isch
>>
>> But not always;
>>
>> http://www.aircraftaces.com/photos/pby-coronado-1.jpg
>>
>> How odd!
>
> Some interesting history on the Coronado:
>
> http://www.history.navy.mil/branches/hist-ac/pb2y-5r.pdf
>

I thought I'd research the Coronado in my own library, so took out my
book on testing at Boscombe Down during WWII. It took a couple of
minutes to work out why the Coronado wasn't in the index...

--
Peter

[Lab Lover]

On Mon, 07 Oct 2013 11:00:39 +0100, Ramsman >
wrote:

>On 06/10/2013 14:56, Lab Lover wrote:
>> On Sun, 06 Oct 2013 09:15:53 +0100, Syke >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 06/10/2013 09:05, Syke wrote:
>>>> Is that a 3 blade prop and a 4 blader?
>>>> Regards
>>>>
>>>> Syke
>>>
>>> Responding to my own question, it seems the answer is, sometimes;
>>>
>>> https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=consolidated+coronado&lr=&safe=images&hl=en&source=lnms&tbm=isch
>>>
>>> But not always;
>>>
>>> http://www.aircraftaces.com/photos/pby-coronado-1.jpg
>>>
>>> How odd!
>>
>> Some interesting history on the Coronado:
>>
>> http://www.history.navy.mil/branches/hist-ac/pb2y-5r.pdf
>>
>
>I thought I'd research the Coronado in my own library, so took out my
>book on testing at Boscombe Down during WWII. It took a couple of
>minutes to work out why the Coronado wasn't in the index...


And....?

[Ramsman]

On 07/10/2013 18:43, Lab Lover wrote:
> On Mon, 07 Oct 2013 11:00:39 +0100, Ramsman >
> wrote:
>
>> On 06/10/2013 14:56, Lab Lover wrote:
>>> On Sun, 06 Oct 2013 09:15:53 +0100, Syke >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 06/10/2013 09:05, Syke wrote:
>>>>> Is that a 3 blade prop and a 4 blader?
>>>>> Regards
>>>>>
>>>>> Syke
>>>>
>>>> Responding to my own question, it seems the answer is, sometimes;
>>>>
>>>> https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=consolidated+coronado&lr=&safe=images&hl=en&source=lnms&tbm=isch
>>>>
>>>> But not always;
>>>>
>>>> http://www.aircraftaces.com/photos/pby-coronado-1.jpg
>>>>
>>>> How odd!
>>>
>>> Some interesting history on the Coronado:
>>>
>>> http://www.history.navy.mil/branches/hist-ac/pb2y-5r.pdf
>>>
>>
>> I thought I'd research the Coronado in my own library, so took out my
>> book on testing at Boscombe Down during WWII. It took a couple of
>> minutes to work out why the Coronado wasn't in the index...
>
>
> And....?
>

I felt foolish.

--
Peter

[Lab Lover]

On Mon, 07 Oct 2013 23:22:04 +0100, Ramsman >
wrote:

>On 07/10/2013 18:43, Lab Lover wrote:
>> On Mon, 07 Oct 2013 11:00:39 +0100, Ramsman >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 06/10/2013 14:56, Lab Lover wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 06 Oct 2013 09:15:53 +0100, Syke >
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 06/10/2013 09:05, Syke wrote:
>>>>>> Is that a 3 blade prop and a 4 blader?
>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Syke
>>>>>
>>>>> Responding to my own question, it seems the answer is, sometimes;
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=consolidated+coronado&lr=&safe=images&hl=en&source=lnms&tbm=isch
>>>>>
>>>>> But not always;
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.aircraftaces.com/photos/pby-coronado-1.jpg
>>>>>
>>>>> How odd!
>>>>
>>>> Some interesting history on the Coronado:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.history.navy.mil/branches/hist-ac/pb2y-5r.pdf
>>>>
>>>
>>> I thought I'd research the Coronado in my own library, so took out my
>>> book on testing at Boscombe Down during WWII. It took a couple of
>>> minutes to work out why the Coronado wasn't in the index...
>>
>>
>> And....?
>>
>
>I felt foolish.


I only tug once on the cheese.

[Ramsman]

On 08/10/2013 14:13, Lab Lover wrote:
> On Mon, 07 Oct 2013 23:22:04 +0100, Ramsman >
> wrote:
>
>> On 07/10/2013 18:43, Lab Lover wrote:
>>> On Mon, 07 Oct 2013 11:00:39 +0100, Ramsman >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 06/10/2013 14:56, Lab Lover wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, 06 Oct 2013 09:15:53 +0100, Syke >
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 06/10/2013 09:05, Syke wrote:
>>>>>>> Is that a 3 blade prop and a 4 blader?
>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Syke
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Responding to my own question, it seems the answer is, sometimes;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=consolidated+coronado&lr=&safe=images&hl=en&source=lnms&tbm=isch
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But not always;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.aircraftaces.com/photos/pby-coronado-1.jpg
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How odd!
>>>>>
>>>>> Some interesting history on the Coronado:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.history.navy.mil/branches/hist-ac/pb2y-5r.pdf
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I thought I'd research the Coronado in my own library, so took out my
>>>> book on testing at Boscombe Down during WWII. It took a couple of
>>>> minutes to work out why the Coronado wasn't in the index...
>>>
>>>
>>> And....?
>>>
>>
>> I felt foolish.
>
>
> I only tug once on the cheese.
>

That sounds rather rude.

Have a look in Google Maps for Boscombe Down, the site of the UK's
Aeroplane & Armament Experimental Establishment, and you'll see what I mean.

--
Peter

[Lab Lover]

On Tue, 08 Oct 2013 14:57:21 +0100, Ramsman >
wrote:

>On 08/10/2013 14:13, Lab Lover wrote:
>> On Mon, 07 Oct 2013 23:22:04 +0100, Ramsman >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 07/10/2013 18:43, Lab Lover wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 07 Oct 2013 11:00:39 +0100, Ramsman >
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 06/10/2013 14:56, Lab Lover wrote:
>>>>>> On Sun, 06 Oct 2013 09:15:53 +0100, Syke >
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 06/10/2013 09:05, Syke wrote:
>>>>>>>> Is that a 3 blade prop and a 4 blader?
>>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Syke
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Responding to my own question, it seems the answer is, sometimes;
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=consolidated+coronado&lr=&safe=images&hl=en&source=lnms&tbm=isch
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But not always;
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.aircraftaces.com/photos/pby-coronado-1.jpg
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How odd!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Some interesting history on the Coronado:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.history.navy.mil/branches/hist-ac/pb2y-5r.pdf
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I thought I'd research the Coronado in my own library, so took out my
>>>>> book on testing at Boscombe Down during WWII. It took a couple of
>>>>> minutes to work out why the Coronado wasn't in the index...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> And....?
>>>>
>>>
>>> I felt foolish.
>>
>>
>> I only tug once on the cheese.
>>
>
>That sounds rather rude.
>
>Have a look in Google Maps for Boscombe Down, the site of the UK's
>Aeroplane & Armament Experimental Establishment, and you'll see what I mean.

There was nothing rude about the comment. I asked for you to elaborate
on your original, incomplete thought and you would not do so, instead
you responded with a feeble attempt at facetiousness.

I spend enough time trying to read my wife's mind due to the female
propensity for expression through the use of incomplete thoughts.

Now, you try and send me on a silly research project just to uncover
the final sentence of your thought? No thanks.

[Ramsman]

On 08/10/2013 17:37, Lab Lover wrote:
> On Tue, 08 Oct 2013 14:57:21 +0100, Ramsman >
> wrote:
>
>> On 08/10/2013 14:13, Lab Lover wrote:
>>> On Mon, 07 Oct 2013 23:22:04 +0100, Ramsman >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 07/10/2013 18:43, Lab Lover wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 07 Oct 2013 11:00:39 +0100, Ramsman >
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 06/10/2013 14:56, Lab Lover wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sun, 06 Oct 2013 09:15:53 +0100, Syke >
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 06/10/2013 09:05, Syke wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Is that a 3 blade prop and a 4 blader?
>>>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Syke
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Responding to my own question, it seems the answer is, sometimes;
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=consolidated+coronado&lr=&safe=images&hl=en&source=lnms&tbm=isch
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But not always;
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://www.aircraftaces.com/photos/pby-coronado-1.jpg
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> How odd!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Some interesting history on the Coronado:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.history.navy.mil/branches/hist-ac/pb2y-5r.pdf
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I thought I'd research the Coronado in my own library, so took out my
>>>>>> book on testing at Boscombe Down during WWII. It took a couple of
>>>>>> minutes to work out why the Coronado wasn't in the index...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> And....?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I felt foolish.
>>>
>>>
>>> I only tug once on the cheese.
>>>
>>
>> That sounds rather rude.
>>
>> Have a look in Google Maps for Boscombe Down, the site of the UK's
>> Aeroplane & Armament Experimental Establishment, and you'll see what I mean.
>
> There was nothing rude about the comment. I asked for you to elaborate
> on your original, incomplete thought and you would not do so, instead
> you responded with a feeble attempt at facetiousness.
>
> I spend enough time trying to read my wife's mind due to the female
> propensity for expression through the use of incomplete thoughts.
>
> Now, you try and send me on a silly research project just to uncover
> the final sentence of your thought? No thanks.
>

I didn't mean you were rude to me, I meant it sounded like a euphemism!

--
Peter

[Lab Lover]

On Tue, 08 Oct 2013 14:57:21 +0100, Ramsman >
wrote:

>On 08/10/2013 14:13, Lab Lover wrote:
>> On Mon, 07 Oct 2013 23:22:04 +0100, Ramsman >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 07/10/2013 18:43, Lab Lover wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 07 Oct 2013 11:00:39 +0100, Ramsman >
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 06/10/2013 14:56, Lab Lover wrote:
>>>>>> On Sun, 06 Oct 2013 09:15:53 +0100, Syke >
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 06/10/2013 09:05, Syke wrote:
>>>>>>>> Is that a 3 blade prop and a 4 blader?
>>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Syke
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Responding to my own question, it seems the answer is, sometimes;
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=consolidated+coronado&lr=&safe=images&hl=en&source=lnms&tbm=isch
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But not always;
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.aircraftaces.com/photos/pby-coronado-1.jpg
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How odd!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Some interesting history on the Coronado:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.history.navy.mil/branches/hist-ac/pb2y-5r.pdf
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I thought I'd research the Coronado in my own library, so took out my
>>>>> book on testing at Boscombe Down during WWII. It took a couple of
>>>>> minutes to work out why the Coronado wasn't in the index...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> And....?
>>>>
>>>
>>> I felt foolish.
>>
>>
>> I only tug once on the cheese.
>>
>
>That sounds rather rude.
>
>Have a look in Google Maps for Boscombe Down, the site of the UK's
>Aeroplane & Armament Experimental Establishment, and you'll see what I mean.

Rude, no, not at all. You expressed a partial thought. I was
interested enough to ask you to finish the thought. In reply, you
made a feeble attempt at facetiousness, I responded in kind.

I expend more than enough effort attempting to read my wife's mind. It
is just too much effort to try and read the mind of a Usenet poster
and it is certainly far too much effort to go to Google maps to
evaluate a site I am intimately familiar with just so I can guess the
meaning of your cryptic comment.

Rude? No, it was simply my way of saying I am going to leave your
mouse trap alone and not play the game.

All of this silliness could have been avoided if you had simply
expressed a complete thought initially.

[Ramsman]

On 08/10/2013 21:39, Lab Lover wrote:
> On Tue, 08 Oct 2013 14:57:21 +0100, Ramsman >
> wrote:
>
>> On 08/10/2013 14:13, Lab Lover wrote:
>>> On Mon, 07 Oct 2013 23:22:04 +0100, Ramsman >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 07/10/2013 18:43, Lab Lover wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 07 Oct 2013 11:00:39 +0100, Ramsman >
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 06/10/2013 14:56, Lab Lover wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sun, 06 Oct 2013 09:15:53 +0100, Syke >
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 06/10/2013 09:05, Syke wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Is that a 3 blade prop and a 4 blader?
>>>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Syke
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Responding to my own question, it seems the answer is, sometimes;
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=consolidated+coronado&lr=&safe=images&hl=en&source=lnms&tbm=isch
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But not always;
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://www.aircraftaces.com/photos/pby-coronado-1.jpg
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> How odd!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Some interesting history on the Coronado:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.history.navy.mil/branches/hist-ac/pb2y-5r.pdf
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I thought I'd research the Coronado in my own library, so took out my
>>>>>> book on testing at Boscombe Down during WWII. It took a couple of
>>>>>> minutes to work out why the Coronado wasn't in the index...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> And....?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I felt foolish.
>>>
>>>
>>> I only tug once on the cheese.
>>>
>>
>> That sounds rather rude.
>>
>> Have a look in Google Maps for Boscombe Down, the site of the UK's
>> Aeroplane & Armament Experimental Establishment, and you'll see what I mean.
>
> Rude, no, not at all. You expressed a partial thought. I was
> interested enough to ask you to finish the thought. In reply, you
> made a feeble attempt at facetiousness, I responded in kind.
>
> I expend more than enough effort attempting to read my wife's mind. It
> is just too much effort to try and read the mind of a Usenet poster
> and it is certainly far too much effort to go to Google maps to
> evaluate a site I am intimately familiar with just so I can guess the
> meaning of your cryptic comment.
>
> Rude? No, it was simply my way of saying I am going to leave your
> mouse trap alone and not play the game.
>
> All of this silliness could have been avoided if you had simply
> expressed a complete thought initially.
>

This is becoming tedious.

If you're intimately familiar with Boscombe Down, then surely you
realise why it was a mistake to look for the Coronado in a book abut the
place?

--
Peter

[Indrek[_7_]]

"Ramsman" > wrote in message
...
> On 08/10/2013 21:39, Lab Lover wrote:
>> On Tue, 08 Oct 2013 14:57:21 +0100, Ramsman >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 08/10/2013 14:13, Lab Lover wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 07 Oct 2013 23:22:04 +0100, Ramsman >
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 07/10/2013 18:43, Lab Lover wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 07 Oct 2013 11:00:39 +0100, Ramsman >
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 06/10/2013 14:56, Lab Lover wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Sun, 06 Oct 2013 09:15:53 +0100, Syke
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 06/10/2013 09:05, Syke wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Is that a 3 blade prop and a 4 blader?
>>>>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Syke
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Responding to my own question, it seems the answer is, sometimes;
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=consolidated+coronado&lr=&safe=images&hl=en&source=lnms&tbm=isch
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> But not always;
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://www.aircraftaces.com/photos/pby-coronado-1.jpg
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> How odd!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Some interesting history on the Coronado:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://www.history.navy.mil/branches/hist-ac/pb2y-5r.pdf
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I thought I'd research the Coronado in my own library, so took out
>>>>>>> my
>>>>>>> book on testing at Boscombe Down during WWII. It took a couple of
>>>>>>> minutes to work out why the Coronado wasn't in the index...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And....?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I felt foolish.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I only tug once on the cheese.
>>>>
>>>
>>> That sounds rather rude.
>>>
>>> Have a look in Google Maps for Boscombe Down, the site of the UK's
>>> Aeroplane & Armament Experimental Establishment, and you'll see what I
>>> mean.
>>
>> Rude, no, not at all. You expressed a partial thought. I was
>> interested enough to ask you to finish the thought. In reply, you
>> made a feeble attempt at facetiousness, I responded in kind.
>>
>> I expend more than enough effort attempting to read my wife's mind. It
>> is just too much effort to try and read the mind of a Usenet poster
>> and it is certainly far too much effort to go to Google maps to
>> evaluate a site I am intimately familiar with just so I can guess the
>> meaning of your cryptic comment.
>>
>> Rude? No, it was simply my way of saying I am going to leave your
>> mouse trap alone and not play the game.
>>
>> All of this silliness could have been avoided if you had simply
>> expressed a complete thought initially.
>>
>
> This is becoming tedious.
>
> If you're intimately familiar with Boscombe Down, then surely you realise
> why it was a mistake to look for the Coronado in a book abut the place?
>
> --
> Peter

Perhaps your interlocutor is unfamiliar with English geography.

So, for the benefit if the uninitiated, Boscombe Down is a long way from any
stretch of water where a flying boat could land. Hence the impracticality of
searching for information about a flying boat in a book dealing with
activities at Boscombe Down.

Please excuse my butting in here, but there a few enough contributors left
in the newsgroup and it would be a pity to spoil the generally amicable
tenor of the messages due to a minor misunderstanding.

Cheers,

Indrek Aavisto

--
Criticism is easy; achievement is difficult W.S. Churchill

[Lab Lover]

On Tue, 8 Oct 2013 19:16:17 -0400, "Indrek" >
wrote:

>
>
>"Ramsman" > wrote in message
...
>> On 08/10/2013 21:39, Lab Lover wrote:
>>> On Tue, 08 Oct 2013 14:57:21 +0100, Ramsman >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 08/10/2013 14:13, Lab Lover wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 07 Oct 2013 23:22:04 +0100, Ramsman >
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 07/10/2013 18:43, Lab Lover wrote:
>>>>>>> On Mon, 07 Oct 2013 11:00:39 +0100, Ramsman >
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 06/10/2013 14:56, Lab Lover wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 06 Oct 2013 09:15:53 +0100, Syke
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 06/10/2013 09:05, Syke wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Is that a 3 blade prop and a 4 blader?
>>>>>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Syke
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Responding to my own question, it seems the answer is, sometimes;
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=consolidated+coronado&lr=&safe=images&hl=en&source=lnms&tbm=isch
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> But not always;
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.aircraftaces.com/photos/pby-coronado-1.jpg
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> How odd!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Some interesting history on the Coronado:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://www.history.navy.mil/branches/hist-ac/pb2y-5r.pdf
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I thought I'd research the Coronado in my own library, so took out
>>>>>>>> my
>>>>>>>> book on testing at Boscombe Down during WWII. It took a couple of
>>>>>>>> minutes to work out why the Coronado wasn't in the index...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And....?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I felt foolish.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I only tug once on the cheese.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That sounds rather rude.
>>>>
>>>> Have a look in Google Maps for Boscombe Down, the site of the UK's
>>>> Aeroplane & Armament Experimental Establishment, and you'll see what I
>>>> mean.
>>>
>>> Rude, no, not at all. You expressed a partial thought. I was
>>> interested enough to ask you to finish the thought. In reply, you
>>> made a feeble attempt at facetiousness, I responded in kind.
>>>
>>> I expend more than enough effort attempting to read my wife's mind. It
>>> is just too much effort to try and read the mind of a Usenet poster
>>> and it is certainly far too much effort to go to Google maps to
>>> evaluate a site I am intimately familiar with just so I can guess the
>>> meaning of your cryptic comment.
>>>
>>> Rude? No, it was simply my way of saying I am going to leave your
>>> mouse trap alone and not play the game.
>>>
>>> All of this silliness could have been avoided if you had simply
>>> expressed a complete thought initially.
>>>
>>
>> This is becoming tedious.
>>
>> If you're intimately familiar with Boscombe Down, then surely you realise
>> why it was a mistake to look for the Coronado in a book abut the place?
>>
>> --
>> Peter
>
>Perhaps your interlocutor is unfamiliar with English geography.
>
>So, for the benefit if the uninitiated, Boscombe Down is a long way from any
>stretch of water where a flying boat could land. Hence the impracticality of
>searching for information about a flying boat in a book dealing with
>activities at Boscombe Down.
>
>Please excuse my butting in here, but there a few enough contributors left
>in the newsgroup and it would be a pity to spoil the generally amicable
>tenor of the messages due to a minor misunderstanding.
>

It was my impression the Coronado was an amphibian like it's little
brother the PBY-5 Catalina. I certainly could be wrong.

[[email protected]]

On Tue, 8 Oct 2013 19:16:17 -0400, "Indrek" >
wrote:

>
>
>"Ramsman" > wrote in message
...
>> On 08/10/2013 21:39, Lab Lover wrote:
>>> On Tue, 08 Oct 2013 14:57:21 +0100, Ramsman >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 08/10/2013 14:13, Lab Lover wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 07 Oct 2013 23:22:04 +0100, Ramsman >
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 07/10/2013 18:43, Lab Lover wrote:
>>>>>>> On Mon, 07 Oct 2013 11:00:39 +0100, Ramsman >
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 06/10/2013 14:56, Lab Lover wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 06 Oct 2013 09:15:53 +0100, Syke
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 06/10/2013 09:05, Syke wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Is that a 3 blade prop and a 4 blader?
>>>>>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Syke
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Responding to my own question, it seems the answer is, sometimes;
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=consolidated+coronado&lr=&safe=images&hl=en&source=lnms&tbm=isch
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> But not always;
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.aircraftaces.com/photos/pby-coronado-1.jpg
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> How odd!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Some interesting history on the Coronado:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://www.history.navy.mil/branches/hist-ac/pb2y-5r.pdf
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I thought I'd research the Coronado in my own library, so took out
>>>>>>>> my
>>>>>>>> book on testing at Boscombe Down during WWII. It took a couple of
>>>>>>>> minutes to work out why the Coronado wasn't in the index...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And....?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I felt foolish.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I only tug once on the cheese.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That sounds rather rude.
>>>>
>>>> Have a look in Google Maps for Boscombe Down, the site of the UK's
>>>> Aeroplane & Armament Experimental Establishment, and you'll see what I
>>>> mean.
>>>
>>> Rude, no, not at all. You expressed a partial thought. I was
>>> interested enough to ask you to finish the thought. In reply, you
>>> made a feeble attempt at facetiousness, I responded in kind.
>>>
>>> I expend more than enough effort attempting to read my wife's mind. It
>>> is just too much effort to try and read the mind of a Usenet poster
>>> and it is certainly far too much effort to go to Google maps to
>>> evaluate a site I am intimately familiar with just so I can guess the
>>> meaning of your cryptic comment.
>>>
>>> Rude? No, it was simply my way of saying I am going to leave your
>>> mouse trap alone and not play the game.
>>>
>>> All of this silliness could have been avoided if you had simply
>>> expressed a complete thought initially.
>>>
>>
>> This is becoming tedious.
>>
>> If you're intimately familiar with Boscombe Down, then surely you realise
>> why it was a mistake to look for the Coronado in a book abut the place?
>>
>> --
>> Peter
>
>Perhaps your interlocutor is unfamiliar with English geography.
>
>So, for the benefit if the uninitiated, Boscombe Down is a long way from any
>stretch of water where a flying boat could land. Hence the impracticality of
>searching for information about a flying boat in a book dealing with
>activities at Boscombe Down.

The same reason I an woefully unsuccessful picking up pretty young
women when I tell them I'm a General at the US Coast Guard base in
Fargo, North Dakota...

(Strangely enough: http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=3a3_1238648539 )

>Please excuse my butting in here, but there a few enough contributors left
>in the newsgroup and it would be a pity to spoil the generally amicable
>tenor of the messages due to a minor misunderstanding.
>
>Cheers,
>
>Indrek Aavisto

Seconded,

Bob ^,,^

[Ramsman]

On 09/10/2013 00:16, Indrek wrote:
>
>
> "Ramsman" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On 08/10/2013 21:39, Lab Lover wrote:
>>> On Tue, 08 Oct 2013 14:57:21 +0100, Ramsman >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 08/10/2013 14:13, Lab Lover wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 07 Oct 2013 23:22:04 +0100, Ramsman >
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 07/10/2013 18:43, Lab Lover wrote:
>>>>>>> On Mon, 07 Oct 2013 11:00:39 +0100, Ramsman >
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 06/10/2013 14:56, Lab Lover wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 06 Oct 2013 09:15:53 +0100, Syke
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 06/10/2013 09:05, Syke wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Is that a 3 blade prop and a 4 blader?
>>>>>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Syke
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Responding to my own question, it seems the answer is, sometimes;
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=consolidated+coronado&lr=&safe=images&hl=en&source=lnms&tbm=isch
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> But not always;
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.aircraftaces.com/photos/pby-coronado-1.jpg
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> How odd!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Some interesting history on the Coronado:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://www.history.navy.mil/branches/hist-ac/pb2y-5r.pdf
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I thought I'd research the Coronado in my own library, so took
>>>>>>>> out my
>>>>>>>> book on testing at Boscombe Down during WWII. It took a couple of
>>>>>>>> minutes to work out why the Coronado wasn't in the index...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And....?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I felt foolish.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I only tug once on the cheese.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That sounds rather rude.
>>>>
>>>> Have a look in Google Maps for Boscombe Down, the site of the UK's
>>>> Aeroplane & Armament Experimental Establishment, and you'll see what
>>>> I mean.
>>>
>>> Rude, no, not at all. You expressed a partial thought. I was
>>> interested enough to ask you to finish the thought. In reply, you
>>> made a feeble attempt at facetiousness, I responded in kind.
>>>
>>> I expend more than enough effort attempting to read my wife's mind. It
>>> is just too much effort to try and read the mind of a Usenet poster
>>> and it is certainly far too much effort to go to Google maps to
>>> evaluate a site I am intimately familiar with just so I can guess the
>>> meaning of your cryptic comment.
>>>
>>> Rude? No, it was simply my way of saying I am going to leave your
>>> mouse trap alone and not play the game.
>>>
>>> All of this silliness could have been avoided if you had simply
>>> expressed a complete thought initially.
>>>
>>
>> This is becoming tedious.
>>
>> If you're intimately familiar with Boscombe Down, then surely you
>> realise why it was a mistake to look for the Coronado in a book abut
>> the place?
>>
>> --
>> Peter
>
> Perhaps your interlocutor is unfamiliar with English geography.
>
> So, for the benefit if the uninitiated, Boscombe Down is a long way from
> any stretch of water where a flying boat could land. Hence the
> impracticality of searching for information about a flying boat in a
> book dealing with activities at Boscombe Down.
>
> Please excuse my butting in here, but there a few enough contributors
> left in the newsgroup and it would be a pity to spoil the generally
> amicable tenor of the messages due to a minor misunderstanding.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Indrek Aavisto
>

I apologise for my apparently feeble effort at self-deprecation and levity.

When encountering names of people, places or aircraft with which I am
not familiar, my first response is to look them up, either on the
Internet or in a book. I should not have assumed that other people do
the same. I hadn't considered the possibility that anyone would think
the Coronado was an amphibian.

The Sunderland wasn't either, but
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ZfVEoZmt-c

--
Peter

[®i©ardo[_3_]]

On 07/10/2013 08:07, Ramsman wrote:

>
> The first aircraft I ever saw do this was a Blackburn Beverley, back in
> the 50s.
>

Ah, yes, the amazing Beverley.

When paratrooping from this one I noticed, when standing in the door
awaiting the "green on - GO" order, that the big wheels were going round!

;-)

Ri©ardo

--
Moving Things in Still Pictures!

[PVK]

On 08/10/2013 23:05, Ramsman wrote:
>
> If you're intimately familiar with Boscombe Down, then surely you
> realise why it was a mistake to look for the Coronado in a book abut the
> place?
>

The futility of initially looking up the history of a pure flying boat
in a book about an inland airfield probably wouldn't have occurred to me
either. ;0)

Regards

Paul

[Ramsman]

On 10/10/2013 12:02, PVK wrote:
> On 08/10/2013 23:05, Ramsman wrote:
>>
>> If you're intimately familiar with Boscombe Down, then surely you
>> realise why it was a mistake to look for the Coronado in a book abut the
>> place?
>>
>
> The futility of initially looking up the history of a pure flying boat
> in a book about an inland airfield probably wouldn't have occurred to me
> either. ;0)
>
> Regards
>
> Paul
>

The only excuse I can offer is that the book happened to be on my desk
because I'd previously been looking something else up. The thought
process was on the lines of: it's from WWII and the RAF had some, so it
must have been tested at Boscombe Down. Then the brain cells reconnected
and I realised it couldn't have been.

--
Peter