The Dodge Challenger Message Board

Went to our first car show here in Paso Robles Ca. The local flying vets calling themselves the Estrella Warbirbs put it on. Lots of retired planes including old WWII trainers and even the F-4 and F14 fighters. Pretty interesting assortment. Some nice cars also.

Anyways here are a couple of pictures.

wow flash back i had a green dart only it was a 72 my buddies called it nixon
anyway nice pics ya gotta love planes and cars

looks like its packed in pretty well

drewcrane wrote:wow flash back i had a green dart only it was a 72 my buddies called it nixon
anyway nice pics ya gotta love planes and cars

looks like its packed in pretty well

Yeah, that Dart was very clean. What does the nickname "Nixon" say about your old ride Drew?

There were around 250 cars overall, not too many Mopars though. I had the only Challenger with lots of interest and pictures of the old gal for sure.

The early arrivals (or well connected) actually got a wing to park under for shade. We managed to set our chairs under an old plane just off the tarmac to stay cool though.

Nixon was prez during those years, so Seth and his buddie Larry (who later bought the car) named it Nixon

but i digress i love those small type shows , and when your the only chally ,you deserve a root beer float

I like those 71 Darts. There is a very clean blue one here in the UK for sale but the last owner when and modified the engine a lot. Shame because it was a perfect restoration.

Id say Ivor would love this show eh Dave??

Great pics!

I'm driving to an air show this weekend in northern France, I hope to have that kind of weather!
The French Connection has been offered the opportunity to have a few cars on display.
And who knows, maybe we'll be able to use the tarmac for our own purposes once the AFB closes down in 2012...

fbernard wrote:

And who knows, maybe we'll be able to use the tarmac for our own purposes once the AFB closes down in 2012...

Get your spoke in early dude, that would be great to be able to use.

Well, her's one pic to show a little bit of what went on last weekend...

Wow, what a great scene.

I'm not up to speed on planes really, what are those two in the backdrop? Are they still in flight duty?

Jon wrote:I'm not up to speed on planes really, what are those two in the backdrop? Are they still in flight duty?

Those are Mirage 2000s, started duty in 1984, still in duty today.

I think they replaced the Mirage III aircraft that were a bit of a nuisance in the Falklands war against Argentina.

dave-r wrote:I think they replaced the Mirage III aircraft that were a bit of a nuisance in the Falklands war against Argentina.

Apples to apples, the Sea Harrier started duty in 1978, and was just a bit more modern that the 17-year-old Mirage III at the time. Both planes are totally different. The Mirage is a fast and heavy plane, the Harrier a slow and very nimble plane.
The Mirage could not slow down enough to effectively fight the Harriers, which carried missiles faster than the Mirages. Oops!

2 Mirages were shot (one in a fight, the other by Argentina's own ground defenses when the plane returned damaged from a mission). Other losses were called Daggers, the first unlicensed knockoff of the Mirage III built by Israel (which could not buy them anymore after invading Lebanon). Israel only used them for 4 years before phasing them out in 1975, I guess that says something about the quality... Those planes had no radar, they were solely built for ground attack (and Israel probably could not steal the plans for the Mirage 5 radar).

Having no radar in a fight, well, that's not good.

The Mirage III was active (in France) from 1961 until 1994.
The Mirage F1 started duty (in France) in 1973 and will be completely phased out in 2013/2014.
The Mirage 2000 is not scheduled for retirement yet.
The Rafale started duty in 2001.

I don't think the Argentinians had much in the way of air-to-air refueling either which meant that their planes had to fly slow to have the fuel to get back.
Also when they dropped bombs from low altitude (to avoid air defences) the bombs (many of which the British sold them years earlier) did not have time to arm themselves so they didn't explode.

I don't think they had thought very far ahead before starting the conflict.

The British lost 1 RAF officer in the conflict. I am not sure how many of the 88 Navy men lost were pilots?
The Argentinian Air Force lost 55 men including 31 pilots and 14 ground crew.

dave-r wrote:I don't think they had thought very far ahead before starting the conflict.

If I remember correctly, one of the two ships sent to the Falklands by the UK has just been sold to Australia, and the second one was scheduled to be decommissioned or something to that effect... I don't know how many other aircraft carriers Britain had back then, but with those two out of the equation, the outcome might have been different.

On the diplomatic front, the Argentinians probably thought that UK wouldn't react, as it had not shown any prior interest in the threats formulated at the UN level, and UK had withdrawn UK citizenship to Fakland inhabitants the year before (and also withdrawn UK forces from the islands and ships from the South Atlantic)

I'd say they had to do it at that time to divert their public opinion from local economic problems, and thought they could get away with it...

Yes I remember there were big defense cuts going on at the time. The Conservative party have a history of cutting taxes and making up for that by cutting spending.
There were big National strikes going on as industries closed and millions were put out of work. Plus the Miners strikes had started as they had found out there were plans to close most of the publically owned coal mines.

I think in better times the Argentinians would have got away with it. But Maggie Thatcher hero worshipped Winston Churchill and as her popularity dropped she saw a way of drumming up national pride and dirverting attention away from how bad things were at home.

Whenever governments have big issues at home they do tend to start a war somewhere to increase their popularity.

dave-r wrote:Whenever governments have big issues at home they do tend to start a war somewhere to increase their popularity.

Naw, that couldn't happen here in the US.

Edit:

Just came across this graph today that pretty much confirms your argument Dave.

Jon wrote: Naw, that couldn't happen here in the US.

You mean, like starting a war in 2003 and be reelected in 2004?

fbernard wrote:

Jon wrote: Naw, that couldn't happen here in the US.

You mean, like starting a war in 2003 and be reelected in 2004?

Exactly! Now the question is where will the current administration strike? How about Wall Street? That would gain them some much needed popularity.