Question for the group in Hawker

On 24/02/2014 11:41, Charles Lindbergh wrote:
On Sun, 23 Feb 2014 19:41:32 +0000, ®i©ardo wrote:

On 23/02/2014 19:22, Charles Lindbergh wrote:
On 22 Feb 2014 04:26:12 GMT, "Jess Lurkin." wrote:


"Beauty is in the eye of the beholder"

That said, for my nickel a disproportionate number of
British A/C designs are ugggg-leeee. Yes, yes, the
U.S. has had their share of ugly ducklings. But the
Brits are far and away the leader of the pack.

The one exception to this is the Hawker livery. The
postings of Joseph T and many of the others in here
have led me to believe that Hawker has apparently
never hatched an ugly bird. Even the bi-planes look
like works of art (to me).

So, I was wondering if any or all of you would be
willing to post any or all of your Hawker pics?

I'm trying to see if there is a Hawker that gives
me pause in my opinion.

Anyone know of a Hawker with a gag-factor?

The Supermarine Spitfire and the de Haviland Mosquito were amongst the most
beautiful airplanes ever produced, IMHO. As an American, I would rank the above
aircraft right up there with the P-51D Mustang, the B-29, the B-47, P-38, F-86,
707 and SR-71


...and even the P-51D Mustang only achieved immortal fame because of its
British engine - the same engine that powered the Spitfire and the Mosquito!

The Merlin was an outstanding engine, but it did not contribute to the visual
aesthetic appeal of the Mustang. In my opinion, it was the tear-drop canopy in
the D version which turned it into aviation eye candy.


....where as the P51 Mustang 1...

Remember, the Lancaster had four Merlin engines and it was no beauty.


But it had a certain purposeful grace - and it did an excellent job!

--
Moving Things In Still Pictures