Infos on Different Nikon bodies

Les Sarile said:

They are beauties!



I have firsthand info on the Blackbirds but I would have to kill you after I tell you . . .

I personally prefer the radial engine types myself.

Click to expand...

...need some help to identify : The midt a/c isn´t a "Harvard" right ? But what is it ? You shot this birds at La-Ferte´-Alais ?
with regards

Middle aircraft looks like a Hawker Sea Fury.

trendland said:

...need some help to identify : The midt a/c isn´t a "Harvard" right ? But what is it ? You shot this birds at La-Ferte´-Alais ?
with regards

Click to expand...

David's correct that the 2 trailing planes are Hawker Sea Furies Dreadnought (2nd) and Howard Pardue (3rd) at a Reno Air Race event. The lead plane is the Rare Bear - F8F Bearcat that I believe one the unlimited class that year.
For full disclosure, these are from three different slides taken at different events during the day and manipulated into one image.

Les Sarile said:

I have firsthand info on the Blackbirds but I would have to kill you after I tell you . . .

Click to expand...

I had a top secret security clearance when I was in the Army (as a signal intelligence analyst). You can tell me. LOL

One of the standard F3's flaws was that it was easily dented - especially the prism. I've seen so many in such a shape. Also, the top plate on the left side was vulnerable to a good whack which could render the camera dead as it would break the circuit board underneath it. The titanium models are much sturdier, especially the P versions as those also had extra seals to prevent ingress of dust/moisture.

Of course, Nikon should have just made the base model with a little thicker gauge metal (brass alloy?)

trendland said:

...need some help to identify : The midt a/c isn´t a "Harvard" right ? But what is it ? You shot this birds at La-Ferte´-Alais ?
with regards

Click to expand...

The far right aircraft is a Grumman F8F. Looks like Rare Bear, a well-known Reno air racer. The middle aircraft is also a well-known Reno air racer -- Dreadnought. It's a modified Hawker Sea Fury, sporting a 4-blade prop instead of its original 5-bladed one. This is a significant air machine because of its modifications. The original Bristol Centaurus sleeve valve engine was replaced by one of the largest piston engine radials ever made -- the Pratt and Whitney R4360, a 4,360 cubic inch, 28 cylinder, four row radial that had an output of somewhere around 4,000 hp. Compare that with the two-row R2800 found in the F8F, rated at about 2300 hp or the original two-row 18-cylinder Centaurus, which developed over 2400 hp. The third aircraft is also a Hawker Sea Fury with a replacement prop, that tells me it probably also sports a Pratt and Whitney engine.

Now about Nikons -- I am a big fan of both the F2 and the F3 (I own three F2s and one F3, as well as an F and an F4), but I dunno if I would have chosen either together based on their looks. The F3 is, by far, a sleeker looking camera. The F2 is much more svelte than its predecessor, the F, but the F2 finders have always been large and blocky. Although the non-metered finder does look very nice and sleek. It does tend to transform the looks of the F2 when mounted. So yeah, maybe the F2 with eye level prism and the F3, I could see that pair being chosen for their looks. Another Nikon that I've always liked just for its simple elegance is the FE. Even though the FM looks almost the same, there are differences in the pentaprism area and I like the FE's looks up there better than the FM's. The FE offers a simple, uncluttered, to the point design that's iconic and hard to beat.

Now as far as the titanium models go, I've never owned any. But it seems that whenever I saw them, the F2 Titan was shown and treated with great reverence, whereas the champagne F3 was regarded as a solid workhorse. But sure, mint ones would be sought after as collectibles, but the original intent for those cameras was to be able to duke it out in the press corps wars. I can recall, years ago, when the F4 was still pretty new, back when I lived in the Los Angeles area, the LA Times dumped their champagne F3s and replaced them with F4s. For a brief period, there were quite of few of these ex-LA Times champagne F3s being sold at local camera shows. And let me tell ya, those cameras had been thrashed. They were heavily abraded, scratched and worn and generally looked pretty ugly. But! I never spotted a dent or ding on any of them anywhere. So that titanium did its job amazingly well.

These days, I think I'd rather own a champagne F3 than an F2 Titan. I'd be afraid I'd put a mark on the F2, whereas I know that if I took the F3 out and put it through its paces, it should survive the experience relatively unscathed. Besides I just think the champagne finish looks cool, utilitarian purposes notwithstanding.

Les Sarile said:

David's correct that the 2 trailing planes are Hawker Sea Furies Dreadnought (2nd) and Howard Pardue (3rd) at a Reno Air Race event. The lead plane is the Rare Bear - F8F Bearcat that I believe one the unlimited class that year.
For full disclosure, these are from three different slides taken at different events during the day and manipulated into one image.

Click to expand...

Ok I see - a "Harvard" would not win any air race.....

with regards

trendland said:

Ok I see - a "Harvard" would not win any air race.....
with regards

Click to expand...

Actually, they're a class to themselves -> https://airrace.org/portfolio-item/t-6-class/

Vincent Peri said:

I had a top secret security clearance when I was in the Army (as a signal intelligence analyst). You can tell me. LOL

Click to expand...

I always thought that with the security clearance I could access everything but there is still that additional need to know stipulation . . .

Nikon...F2...camera...F3...alloy....fjsduensdk m aueid.
Anyway -
Why did The Germans (was it only them) mount some of their Motors/V12 in the "up side down" arrangement.?
Was it just to accommodate the physical space or aerodynamics of a certain plane, or was there some other benefit to doing it that way.?
Thank You

CMoore said:

Nikon...F2...camera...F3...alloy....fjsduensdk m aueid.
Anyway -
Why did The Germans (was it only them) mount some of their Motors/V12 in the "up side down" arrangement.?
Was it just to accommodate the physical space or aerodynamics of a certain plane, or was there some other benefit to doing it that way.?
Thank You

Click to expand...

..look - this is a DB 605 ( very expensive in full flying condition and waste of money for air/speed racing ) :


this picture showes pretty clear the main reason :

the center of gravity ( if it is low like here) give an advantage in design (flying stability,aerodynamic profile, pilots view = visability). With the double design of DB 610 :

..the center of gravity isn´t that low in comparison to DB605 but it isn´t usable to one prop a/c it was used in 2 prop versions.

An other reason is a couple of advantages and disatvantages from engine couling and the so called "dry sump" lubricating system with better oil suply and higher g-loads. Last - not to forget the oportunity ( that mai be indeed the "exclusive issue" ) to build in a cannon
in the center of the engine !

Back to topics :Concerning the F3 I remember that some proffessionals were not amoused about the F3 bayonet reliability. Nikon solved this problem after protests of press photographers via a better metal alloy !

So it was very hard to understand to me that Nikon used lens bajonets from plastic ( years later with amatheuric Nikons ).......

with regards

My two favorite manual focus SLR’s.