Osprey?

[A4sForever]

That's why I asked the question, guys .... inquiring minds and all. I'm still not "sold" ... I read other stuff, too --- much of it critical. But I respect the perspective of knowledgeable people and especially .... (Phrog) .... operators. But the -46 ??? 1950's and early 1960's design (?) ... I'm quite sure the -22 would be "impressive" by comparison.

How about combat?? The crucible. That's where it counts ... Generals and Congressmen won't be flyin' it .... into a hot LZ.

Thanks 'Joe and 'Phrog --- seriously --- some people on this forum think if you ask a question or offer a different opinion --- you are "arguing". That's not the case, I assure you. Why am I even saying this .... ???

I appreciate your illumination.

 

[HeyJoe]

That's why I asked the question, guys .... inquiring minds and all. I'm still not "sold" ... I read other stuff, too --- much of it critical. But I respect the perspective of knowledgeable people and especially .... (Phrog) .... operators.

Thanks 'Joe and 'Phrog --- I appreciate your illumination.

We can hash it out over that drink at Duke's

 

[Crowbar]

Here's an even better shot of MV-22B paint scheme (VMX-22 operating off USS Wasp):

How many real pictures had to give their lives to make that abomination?

 

[HeyJoe]

How many real pictures had to give their lives to make that abomination?

In the words of A4, huh?

 

[Crowbar]

Not a dig at you, Joe. Just a comment on the horrible, horrible 'work' done by whoever made that picture.

 

[HeyJoe]

Not a dig at you, Joe. Just a comment on the horrible, horrible 'work' done by whoever made that picture.

Are you referring to the paintscheme?

 

[Crowbar]

Am I the only one who thinks the Osprey on the deck is fake? I'm not talking about the paint scheme. I'm talking about having the whole aircraft (and yellow shirts and blue shirts) airbrushed onto a different picture.

 

[HeyJoe]

Am I the only one who thinks the Osprey on the deck is fake? I'm not talking about the paint scheme. I'm talking about having the whole aircraft (and yellow shirts and blue shirts) airbrushed onto a different picture.

It is real as they come. Straight from PH3 on Wasp. I don't "deal" in photoshopped images (unless needed to reduce size for posting).

 

[Crowbar]

I believe the aircraft is real. I believe the ship is real. I believe the men on the flight deck are real. I just don't think they all occupied that same space at that same time on that same day in history.

 

[HeyJoe]

Well, believe what you want then. I'm not going to the trouble of getting the PH3 that shot it to testify that it wasn't "doctored". First off, for the source wher eit came from, it simply isn't allowed and it is an official Navy photo from a trusted source, not something off someone's PC. I am a photographer and have tens of thousands of photos to my credit so I'd be the first to cry foul. The new paintscheme is surreal looking...I'll couldn't stop looking at it when I first saw it at Pax. The shots of F-22 in same paint over Ft Monroe have same surreal look by the way. Hope it's easier to keep clean.

Taken a few minutes later after dash 2 had landed....nobody is that good and airbrush wouldn't have been the technique used anyway.

 

[Crowbar]

After examining the high res version I'm still having a hard time believing it.

 

[Carno]

Why specifically do you think it's fake?

 

[Crowbar]

Overall it just looks (to me) doctored. Check under the right engine nacelle. I can't find any visible exhaust, which can be seen under the left nacelle and under both engines on the approaching Osprey.

 

[KBayDog]

Alright, Crowbar, you've got me nearly convinced...

What is the red pad on which the starboard rear wheel is sitting?

 

[A4sForever]

...
What is the red pad on which the starboard rear wheel is sitting?

It's called a wheel chock. I've even known some with two arms, one head, and two legs over the years ...