Skip to comments.Obscure Historical Photos II
Posted on 04/22/2014 3:10:37 AM PDT by Reaganite Republican
Oh cool! A Bleriot! The Montgolfier Bros.’ balloon!!
More than simply obscure. There’s a discernible sense of surreality about it, slightly off-kilter, efinitely from an earlier age.
It’s the contrast between the opulent surroundings, with bunting and elegantly-draped curtains, and the aircraft. We’re so used to seeing aircraft, even balloons, in an industrial/technological setting celebrating the engineering aspect, rather than the romantic aspect, of flight.
Thanks for the link.
The BATF, EPA, DEA, BLM, TSA, FBI, DHS, and IRS would have a field day with this town today. They would probably close it all down within 24 hours.
Ah, but think of the progress we so “bureaucratically” and deliberately despise today ...
One real-world example:
In 1908, build a runway and airport for the latest and greatest airplane then flying.. The ones we see above in the photo.
You need: One each grass pasture about 100 feet wide. A tent, and a can of gasoline. Use the fence around the pasture to keep the cows off of the grass.
The plane: No canopy, two seats (maybe), and cloth wings with a wooden propeller.
Now, just 40 years later, build an airport.
You need a 300 foot wide runway built of reinforced concrete over a crushed stone foundation almost 6 feet thick and 14,000 feet long for a plane with a take-off weight approaching 420,000 lbs, with the B-52 on the drawing boards at 480,000 pounds take-off weight.
Add two more runways for crosswinds, a few taxiways just as long as the runways, and several dozen acres of reinforced concrete for the planes to sit. (This one airport in 1948 will require more concrete than was ever poured prior to the (not-yet finished!) Panama Canal, and more pavement than even existed in 1908 in the entire world!)
Add hangers larger and wider than any building in the world for maintenance and rebuilding, with moving doors alone larger than most structures in 1908. Add a couple of Fuel tanks to hold few hundred thousands tons of fuel for the bombers, plus all of their piping. A power plant that exceeds the generating power of most cities.
Throw in housing for 10,000 mechanics, flyers, and crews; plus dependents and office staff. Spares, engine and machinist buildings and electronics shops and radar and ground control and security and fire fighting and sewage and water plants and maintenance facilities. Throw in parking and housing and shopping and base support for all of the above .. (Comes to a few thousand acres by itself. )
And that is just ONE airport in Maine. There are dozens elsewhere in the world like it, and 47 other states in the continental US, Alaska, Hawaii and Canada. Panama Canal .
Mary Tyler Moore was a hottie back in the day.
Sorry. Missed the miniature mock-up.
Look at the center bottom of the picture. It is an exact replication of the same balloon. I don’t care if it not the original, or not, compare it to any sourced picture OF the original, and you might agree.
So, I take it you are against the United States having a heavy bomber force?
(What in tarnation is the ‘PE’?)
To answer in reverse order, “PE” is Professional Engineer.
And, uhm, did you understand the “admiration” I was expressing for how far we had grown in only 40 years of design, experiment, applications, and assembly? From a grass pasture to a B-52 requiring
Dear Professional Engineer Robert A. Cook,
As a former aerospace/aircraft/avionics/NASA/DoD-paid engineer, I was not aware that such a thing as ‘the guild’s eternal three levels’ applied. In my 24 years in the field, there was only ‘engineer’, or, ‘idiots who can’t figure what they did wrong’, which included quite a few various company inspectors, as well.
Your ‘tongue-in-cheek’ admiration, as an objective view of how much has changed from the grassfields of Nieuports, Spads, Pfaltz, Fokkers, to Messerschmitts, Focke-Wulfs, Spitfires and Hurricanes, and the associated heavy bobmers, changed with the American intervention to steel-plate runways and concrete, was noted.
I was stationed at U-Tapao Royal Thai Naval AirBase, Rayong Province, Republic of Thailand, from 1971 - 1974. There were many aircraft of both turboprop and jet turbine power, that came through that place. There were a few piston-powered aircraft, as well. We were the first airbase to receive the Lockheed Galaxy C-5a on 1972, which, um, still had unaddressed hydraulic systems issues, and did stay at our airbase for, a few weeks. (The base was better built for it, than Don Muang airbase, at the international airport in Bangkok, of all things!)
re:C-5a. I was stationed at Dover AFB, 1971, when we received the inaugural first one of them, establishing a squadron there of C-5’s. Ina full ceremony, the aircraft taxied up to the ‘erector set’ loading platform designed for it, and when the pilot configured the aircraft to ‘sit straight down’, there was a lovely pink flowing of liquid down the sides of the fuselage, from before to just behind, the wing root! After that aircraft was moved back to its new, and yes, very large, maintenance hangar, they never sat the aircraft down, but rather nose down, or butt down, for the next few years.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.