You're as much of a tank buff as I am an aircraft buff, who knows, we could be related.K.Rokossovski wrote:
Yeah a Pzkfw III. It's long-barreled though with a large turret, so a pretty late model, maybe late 1941 or 1942? Ausf. at least J, but it's not a popular N.Since most Pz.III's were obsoleted by the time of the Normandy invasion, and the background seems too temperate for the Med or the steppes, I guess it must be on the Eastern front, and since the weather is good, I'd say it is around Kursk in 1943. Crimea or Voronesh area in 1942 is also possible. And it could also be a trick question, shot on a training ground in Germany)))
WADUP panzers!
hi! the names tanki junky! like my name in my gaming account, easy to find if you look up tankijunky you'll probably find tons of stuff i do on other websites. i actually decided to just join and see if i can get some good out of talking with other players. as of my intro im a huge fan of german blitzkreig and world war era weaponry course i dont support nazism (hate nazis) i still like german things, specifically tanks.
Post a Reply
Please log in to post a reply.
155 Replies
Once again, no idea. Best with tanks myself, but not as good as our friend above haha.injinji wrote:
A biplane from WWII
The barn has what appears to be Czeck writing on it, and with the radial engine, I would say an Avia bh 33injinji wrote:
A biplane from WWII
Jack London, White Fang
My parents once told me not to play with matches, so I built a flamethrower
Nuke is correct! Now for a carrier.NukeRaider33 wrote:
The barn has what appears to be Czeck writing on it, and with the radial engine, I would say an Avia bh 33injinji wrote:
A biplane from WWII

Despite the sepia tone photo and the misleading label of the jpeg image, that appears to be the new USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN 7injinji wrote:
Now for a carrier.
, the lead ship of the U.S. Navy's new class of aircraft carriers. The sharply angled cant of her bows beneath her flight deck and about 30-feet above the waterline was what got me looking at images of the previous carriers of the Nimitz class. Also, the island is partly obscured by distance and angle, but the islands of the USS Enterprise and the Nimitz-class carriers were distinctly different.I see my noob level photoshoping and file renaming did nothing to fool you. However, why did you check the file name?MontanaBB wrote:
Despite the sepia tone photo and the misleading label of the jpeg image, that appears to be the new USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN 7injinji wrote:
Now for a carrier., the lead ship of the U.S. Navy's new class of aircraft carriers. The sharply angled cant of her bows beneath her flight deck and about 30-feet above the waterline was what got me looking at images of the previous carriers of the Nimitz class. Also, the island is partly obscured by distance and angle, but the islands of the USS Enterprise and the Nimitz-class carriers were distinctly different.
Because I was trying to get a better resolution of the image, so I clicked on the little magnifying glass in the lower righthand corner and the image file name popped up.injinji wrote:
However, why did you check the file name?

Don't you just LOVE the guy watching the back? Gives it a kind of "touring car" feeling! But... what is it?
Ah, ha! I found it. My first reaction was that (a) it did not look like a standard German-designed and German-manufactured armored car, so (b) it was probably Czech-designed and Czech-manufactured in German-occupied Czechoslovakia. But then I couldn't find anything produced by Skoda or Tata that looked anything like the photo.K.Rokossovski wrote:
Don't you just LOVE the guy watching the back? Gives it a kind of "touring car" feeling! But... what is it?
So, in desperation, I searched "German armored cars of WW2" and found a list of WW2 German vehicles, which had a subsection for armored cars. The armored car in the photo is apparently a Steyr ADGZ, a pre-war Austrian-designed and manufactured armored car that was primarily used for police work (according to the Wikipedia article). One other piece of good trivia about the ADGZ was that it was a "pushme-pullyou" -- it had no front and back and had steering controls at both ends.

Okay what aircraft is this? You WW2 Airplane bois may be tricked. (Hint look at the fuselage and compare to B-24)
It is currently a B-24A, however this one was one of the original batch of export LB-30Bs (sometimes mistaken for a transport, but there was no difference from the B-24A). It was restored as a B-24A in 2012. You may be able to fool the bois, but not the gurls.JCS Darragh wrote:
Okay what aircraft is this? You WW2 Airplane bois may be tricked. (Hint look at the fuselage and compare to B-24)
Oh, From what I read it is a C-87 Liberator Express. Guess I couldn't ful da gurls
I'm fairly confident that aircraft in the photo is a C-87, the cargo transport version of the B-24. I'm not certain, however, because the image resolution of the photo does not permit me to examine the bottom of the fuselage for bomb bay doors, but the presence of the extra windows on the middle to lower fuselage would seem to indicate a C-87 cargo transport, not a B-24 bomber.JCS Darragh wrote:
Okay what aircraft is this? You WW2 Airplane bois may be tricked.
The C-87 was a hurry-up modification project to provide better high-altitude cargo transport in south Asia, where the British and Americans were fighting in India, Burma and Southeast Asia, while also attempting to transport critical supplies and personnel to their Chinese allies. The two-engine C-47 (DC-3) did not have the needed high-altitude performance to transport heavy loads over the Himalayas, and the B-24 variant (with its four big radial engines and oxygen system for its crew) did.
The B-24 was a workhorse heavy bomber that is now often overlooked in favor of its more famous sisters, the B-17 and B-29, but the B-24 filled several hugely important roles in the USAAF, RAF and U.S. Navy. The B-24, and its navalized variant PB4Y-2, played a huge role in winning the Battle of the Atlantic because it had the range, speed and bomb load to effectively deal with U-boats in the so-called "mid-Atlantic gap."
How 'bout this one?

Actually, Monty's right, I didn't see the windows and forgot Diamond Li'l was a C-87.JCS Darragh wrote:
Oh, From what I read it is a C-87 Liberator Express. Guess I couldn't ful da gurls

Wow.
Okay. I found a higher resolution version of Injinji's photo by searching "C-87 Liberator Express," and could then read the aircraft nickname painted on its nose, "Diamond Lil." Then by searching "B-24 Diamond Lil," I found this particular aircraft's rather unusual history. From the Wikipedia summary:
"Built as B-24A at Consolidated San Diego. Intended for RAF as AM927. Involved in landing accident during training flight. Returned to San Diego for repairs and not sent to England. Converted to use as transport aircraft, flying between San Diego, Fort Worth, New York, and Washington D.C. Following WW2, sold to Continental Can Co. and used as executive airplane until 1955. Then sold to Petroleos Mexicanos. Purchased in 1969 by CAF. In 1971 restored in livery of 98th Bomb Group, Pyramiders of the 9th Air Force. Converted in 2006 to B-24A. Since 2012 wears livery of "Diamond Lil." Along with 44-44052, one of only two airworthy B-24s."
So, this airframe was built as a B-24A, modified to a C-87 transport standard after a crash, and was later restored as a B-24A over 60 years after it was originally built.
And for the record, most if not all C-87s had the glass bombardier's nose replaced with a solid aluminum alloy nose, but the heavy bomber version did not have multiple windows under the wing and in the middle fuselage, but instead had a single machine-gun bay window on either side, higher and closer to the tail assembly.
Well, you just had me rummaging through online photos of Soviet-built fighters, but I cannot find one that matches the exact details. I would guess that it is a variant of either the Yak-1 or Yak-9, but several details are wrong. Specifically, the protuberance(s) on the engine cowling below the exhausts and the spine running from the top of the rear fuselage to the tail assembly don't match any Yak fighter photos I could find.injinji wrote:
How 'bout this one?
Ask @K.Rokossovski. He's our resident expert on Soviet aircraft and equipment.
A red star does not make it Soviet.

This should be SUPER EASY to identify. But, What is it and what service is it in?
Yeah, the white circle around the star isn't Soviet. It's bound to be a communist country though, and I think this is a post-war fighter, but most of the usual suspects (Poland, Czechoslovakia) didn't use the star afaik... maybe Yugoslavia, or Romania? Anyway it doesn't look like any of the Yak's to me too... maybe something home-made?
Post a Reply
Please log in to post a reply.



