UK2 XA335 Fairey GennetAS1 1959.jpg

Sorry guys but this is an UGLY airplane.

On 01/05/2012 01:39, wrote:
Sorry guys but this is an UGLY airplane.

Well, it certainly doesn't have a monopoly when it comes to ugliness,
plus it had the great advantage that it worked and!

http://www.diseno-art.com/encycloped...-1_salmon.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairey_Gannet

--
Moving things in still pictures

®i©ardo wrote in
:

On 01/05/2012 01:39, wrote:
Sorry guys but this is an UGLY airplane.

Well, it certainly doesn't have a monopoly when it comes to ugliness,
plus it had the great advantage that it worked and!

http://www.diseno-art.com/encycloped...ockheed_xfv-1_
salmon.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairey_Gannet

I think it can reasonably be argued that the Gannet was the ugliest fixed-
wing aircraft to go into operational service since the Second War.
--
Andrew Chaplin
SIT MIHI GLADIUS SICUT SANCTO MARTINO
(If you're going to e-mail me, you'll have to get "yourfinger." out.)

On 01/05/2012 12:20, Andrew Chaplin wrote:
wrote in
:

On 01/05/2012 01:39, wrote:
Sorry guys but this is an UGLY airplane.

Well, it certainly doesn't have a monopoly when it comes to ugliness,
plus it had the great advantage that it worked and!

http://www.diseno-art.com/encycloped...ockheed_xfv-1_
salmon.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairey_Gannet

I think it can reasonably be argued that the Gannet was the ugliest fixed-
wing aircraft to go into operational service since the Second War.

I have to disagree. IMO the Gannet (apart from the AEW.3) is a handsome
aircraft, although not beautiful by any means. If you want ugly, look at
the McD Phantom and the Apache. I never liked the Valiant much, either.

--
Peter

Ramsman wrote in
:

On 01/05/2012 12:20, Andrew Chaplin wrote:
wrote in
:

On 01/05/2012 01:39, wrote:
Sorry guys but this is an UGLY airplane.

Well, it certainly doesn't have a monopoly when it comes to
ugliness, plus it had the great advantage that it worked and!

http://www.diseno-art.com/encycloped.../lockheed_xfv-
1_ salmon.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairey_Gannet

I think it can reasonably be argued that the Gannet was the ugliest
fixed- wing aircraft to go into operational service since the Second
War.

I have to disagree. IMO the Gannet (apart from the AEW.3) is a
handsome aircraft, although not beautiful by any means. If you want
ugly, look at the McD Phantom and the Apache. I never liked the
Valiant much, either.

Apache is not part of the mix, since rotary-winged aircraft have to be
ugly in order for them to be repelled by the Earth and thus fly.

I think the Phantom II was a great looking aircraft.

YMMV. "De gustibus non disputandem" and all that.
--
Andrew Chaplin
SIT MIHI GLADIUS SICUT SANCTO MARTINO
(If you're going to e-mail me, you'll have to get "yourfinger." out.)

On 02/05/2012 11:17, Andrew Chaplin wrote:
wrote in
:

On 01/05/2012 12:20, Andrew Chaplin wrote:
wrote in
:

On 01/05/2012 01:39, wrote:
Sorry guys but this is an UGLY airplane.

Well, it certainly doesn't have a monopoly when it comes to
ugliness, plus it had the great advantage that it worked and!

http://www.diseno-art.com/encycloped.../lockheed_xfv-
1_ salmon.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairey_Gannet

I think it can reasonably be argued that the Gannet was the ugliest
fixed- wing aircraft to go into operational service since the Second
War.

I have to disagree. IMO the Gannet (apart from the AEW.3) is a
handsome aircraft, although not beautiful by any means. If you want
ugly, look at the McD Phantom and the Apache. I never liked the
Valiant much, either.

Apache is not part of the mix, since rotary-winged aircraft have to be
ugly in order for them to be repelled by the Earth and thus fly.

True, but many are a lot less ugly. The Lynx, for example, wasn't too
bad originally, but it's now got all sorts of lumps and bumps all over it.

I think the Phantom II was a great looking aircraft.

YMMV. "De gustibus non EST disputandem" and all that.

My M does indeed V. "We shan't argue about this disgusting bus"? :-)

--
Peter

Ramsman wrote in
:

On 02/05/2012 11:17, Andrew Chaplin wrote:
wrote in
:

On 01/05/2012 12:20, Andrew Chaplin wrote:
wrote in
:

On 01/05/2012 01:39, wrote:
Sorry guys but this is an UGLY airplane.

Well, it certainly doesn't have a monopoly when it comes to
ugliness, plus it had the great advantage that it worked and!

http://www.diseno-art.com/encycloped...es/lockheed_xf
v- 1_ salmon.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairey_Gannet

I think it can reasonably be argued that the Gannet was the ugliest
fixed- wing aircraft to go into operational service since the
Second War.

I have to disagree. IMO the Gannet (apart from the AEW.3) is a
handsome aircraft, although not beautiful by any means. If you want
ugly, look at the McD Phantom and the Apache. I never liked the
Valiant much, either.

Apache is not part of the mix, since rotary-winged aircraft have to
be ugly in order for them to be repelled by the Earth and thus fly.

True, but many are a lot less ugly. The Lynx, for example, wasn't too
bad originally, but it's now got all sorts of lumps and bumps all over
it.

I think the Phantom II was a great looking aircraft.

YMMV. "De gustibus non disputandem [est]" and all that.

My M does indeed V. "We shan't argue about this disgusting bus"? :-)

We obviously went to different schools--you have my deepest sympathies.
The verb usually goes at the end and in this particular tag is
understood.
--
Andrew Chaplin
SIT MIHI GLADIUS SICUT SANCTO MARTINO
(If you're going to e-mail me, you'll have to get "yourfinger." out.)

On 02/05/2012 12:50, Andrew Chaplin wrote:
wrote in
:

On 02/05/2012 11:17, Andrew Chaplin wrote:
wrote in
:

On 01/05/2012 12:20, Andrew Chaplin wrote:
wrote in
:

On 01/05/2012 01:39, wrote:
Sorry guys but this is an UGLY airplane.

Well, it certainly doesn't have a monopoly when it comes to
ugliness, plus it had the great advantage that it worked and!

http://www.diseno-art.com/encycloped...es/lockheed_xf
v- 1_ salmon.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairey_Gannet

I think it can reasonably be argued that the Gannet was the ugliest
fixed- wing aircraft to go into operational service since the
Second War.

I have to disagree. IMO the Gannet (apart from the AEW.3) is a
handsome aircraft, although not beautiful by any means. If you want
ugly, look at the McD Phantom and the Apache. I never liked the
Valiant much, either.

Apache is not part of the mix, since rotary-winged aircraft have to
be ugly in order for them to be repelled by the Earth and thus fly.

True, but many are a lot less ugly. The Lynx, for example, wasn't too
bad originally, but it's now got all sorts of lumps and bumps all over
it.

I think the Phantom II was a great looking aircraft.

YMMV. "De gustibus non disputandem [est]" and all that.

My M does indeed V. "We shan't argue about this disgusting bus"? :-)

We obviously went to different schools--you have my deepest sympathies.
The verb usually goes at the end and in this particular tag is
understood.

Wiki says both are correct, but that's Wiki for you. I can't remember
when I first came across the expression.

My Latin education lasted only two years, as I opted for the science
syllabus. It was such a good school that they merged it with the
secondary modern next door and then closed the whole thing down.

It must be something to do with me, as both the houses I grew up in have
been demolished, and all the RAF bases where I went to summer camp with
the ATC have closed. A few places I've worked at in the past have gone
as well.

--
Peter

Ramsman wrote in
:

On 02/05/2012 12:50, Andrew Chaplin wrote:
wrote in
:

On 02/05/2012 11:17, Andrew Chaplin wrote:
wrote in
:

On 01/05/2012 12:20, Andrew Chaplin wrote:
wrote in
:

On 01/05/2012 01:39, wrote:
Sorry guys but this is an UGLY airplane.

Well, it certainly doesn't have a monopoly when it comes to
ugliness, plus it had the great advantage that it worked and!

http://www.diseno-art.com/encycloped...cles/lockheed_
xf v- 1_ salmon.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairey_Gannet

I think it can reasonably be argued that the Gannet was the
ugliest fixed- wing aircraft to go into operational service since
the Second War.

I have to disagree. IMO the Gannet (apart from the AEW.3) is a
handsome aircraft, although not beautiful by any means. If you
want ugly, look at the McD Phantom and the Apache. I never liked
the Valiant much, either.

Apache is not part of the mix, since rotary-winged aircraft have to
be ugly in order for them to be repelled by the Earth and thus fly.

True, but many are a lot less ugly. The Lynx, for example, wasn't
too bad originally, but it's now got all sorts of lumps and bumps
all over it.

I think the Phantom II was a great looking aircraft.

YMMV. "De gustibus non disputandem [est]" and all that.

My M does indeed V. "We shan't argue about this disgusting bus"? :-)

We obviously went to different schools--you have my deepest
sympathies. The verb usually goes at the end and in this particular
tag is understood.

Wiki says both are correct, but that's Wiki for you. I can't remember
when I first came across the expression.

My Latin education lasted only two years, as I opted for the science
syllabus. It was such a good school that they merged it with the
secondary modern next door and then closed the whole thing down.

I went to a decent school that will celebrate its 90th birthday this
year: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glebe_Collegiate_Institute. My Latin
teacher had, I think, the best legs in the school at a time (the early
'70s) when miniskirts were in vogue--what a motivator!

It must be something to do with me, as both the houses I grew up in
have been demolished, and all the RAF bases where I went to summer
camp with the ATC have closed. A few places I've worked at in the past
have gone as well.

Let's see... air stations I served at--Lahr-Schwarzwald, Baden-Soelingen
and CFB Chatham--all closed; army bases I served at--Shilo, Gagetown,
Petawawa, Valcartier, Kingston--all still going strong. --
Andrew Chaplin
SIT MIHI GLADIUS SICUT SANCTO MARTINO
(If you're going to e-mail me, you'll have to get "yourfinger." out.)