Author: Rick |
June 28, 2010 |
In: Funny, Photo of the Day, U.S. Navy
theBrigade wants to find the best Photo of the Day
If you think you got That Photo, send it to brigadesubmit[at]gmail[dot]com
Um well its clearly photo-shopped, so I don't see any humor or creativity at all. Mods delete this page please.
how is this a photo of the day…?
I really like the post and especially the picture. That's an mazing idea to land a B-52 Bomber on a Nimitz class aircraft carrier which is it self a huge thing that needs to seen. I really admire the work that is being done by the editor in order to place it their in a right manner. Keep it up…
Total BS. The Air Force and Navy would never cooperate like that.
photoshopped……could never be done…plain simple
wow…can I land a Titanic in there?
I believe it. My wife almost got the car into the garage once. So that bomber could well be real.
Comment: True story…bet the bad guy's satellites went berserk looking at this one…! (And it wasn't the Navy paying off a bet against AF!)
While this may look like a gag shot, it is actually a "transport of a transport" necessity. The B-52 was in Beirut, Lebanon undergoing routine fuel tank cleaning. Workmen accidently damaged the bladder system and had to install the bladders from smaller C-130s temporarily. The plane was flown to nearby McCollough air base where it was lifted upon a barge bound for Tyre on the Mediterranean. Once there it was off-loaded onto the carrier deck for transport to Crete where the appropriate tank bladders were installed. It was then flown back to Beirut. Military cooperation in action.
the cost alone makes your story a laugh
why are 52's in beruit ?
find me cranes big enough to load a 52 onto a carrier
52's and 130 fuel systems are not compatible
fuel tanks dont get routine cleaning least of all in beruit
heh why bother going on your wrong
Wrong. The B-52 has a wingspan 86 feet less than the width of the deck of the Nimitz.
wow great !!
Scrmble the alert 5 fighters!… Shit!
No, it's a fake…here's the original shot:
Besides, the scale is actually off.
landing a bomber with a length of 48m and a wings span of 56m without clearing the run way for landing and the proportion to the carrier is out. TOTALLY PHOTOSHOP
the plane is real the shiip is real but the picture is not it so photo shop
and plus it is impossable to land a plane of that size on a ship that small (expesialy if they have trouble whith the small ones) and the ship would be a lot more in the water if not sinking
Now that's BS, a B-52 parked on a carrier deck would be nonsense, as it would lose it's strike capability, but the carrier would certainly not sink. 200 tons on top of nearly 100 000 tons is almost negligible.
Negative Ghost Ryder…………The pattern is full !
Wow, there sure are a lot of very gullible people here. Don't you think for even a few seconds before blindly accepting that this could be real?
There are a lot of people with no sense of humor, either. Delete the page because you don't like the photo? Oh, boo hoo!
Like other have said, the ship is WAY too small to have the plane land on it. It takes that plane A LOT of space to land and come to a complete stop. There is no single ship around that can handle a plane that size landing or taking off on it. Anyone who knows anything about the military can tell you that.
If only huh?! You wouldn't be able to fit many of those on the carrier even if they could land and take off. Maybe they should build bigger carriers?
Clear, informative, spimle. Could I send you some e-hugs?
I recently came across your blog and have been reading a lot. I thought I would leave my first comment. I don't know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Nice blog. I will keep visiting this blog very often. Thanks.
theBRIGADE on Facebook