 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups General ModelsRailroadsRocketsRadio Controlled Air ModelsHelicoptersLand ModelsWater ModelsModelGeeks.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Model Forum / General / Models / April 20041/32 F-14D & 1/350 Missouri diorama
Any comments appreciated! 1/32 F-14D diorama http://www.naritafamily.com/Scalemodel/airplanes/photo_frame.htm 1/350 Missouri diorama http://www.naritafamily.com/Scalemodel/ships/photo_frame.htm Masa > Any comments appreciated! > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Masa VERY nice!!! Dumb question, but did you scratch build the flaps/slats yourself?...I'll be watching for your coming construction article!  Signature- Rufus Yes, I scratch built the flaps and slats. Also I did seamless air-inlet, too. Those two were building challenge. Thanks, Masa > > Any comments appreciated! > > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > VERY nice!!! Dumb question, but did you scratch build the flaps/slats > yourself?...I'll be watching for your coming construction article! Great job. Signature- Rufus > Yes, I scratch built the flaps and slats. Also I did seamless air-inlet, > too. Those two were building challenge. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >>VERY nice!!! Dumb question, but did you scratch build the flaps/slats >>yourself?...I'll be watching for your coming construction article! Hey, That is so cool! I like it, the flying planes add so much to it too. And that water, looks like you could get yourself wet! The detail on those ships, nice very nice! Mike G. > Any comments appreciated! > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Masa Just looked at the F-14D diorama, great job, can almost hear the noise...lol. My dad served aboard an aircraft carrier, so he had lots of photos. Looks just right! Mike G. > Any comments appreciated! > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Masa Remembered the name of the ship....USS Midway, Dad took two tours on it. Mike G. > Just looked at the F-14D diorama, great job, can almost hear the > noise...lol. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > > > Masa Great job on the models...and on the excellent photographs and other postings on your site. Wonderful! ---Scott > Any comments appreciated! > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Masa > Any comments appreciated! Technically, they're great. However, I must say the weapons loadout of the Tomcat looks a bit odd to me. Some missiles for self defence make sense on a bombing run (as this one apparently is), but would a Phoenix be part of the mix? Dumping the Phoenix, and moving the Sparrow to the wing station would seem a more logical loadout. Having said that, I'm no specialist on Tomcats, so this might well be a historicaly correct load, but it still strikes me as odd. Rob I did not notice it until your comment. Yes, I think you are right! I have just followed Tamiya's instruction. Masa > > Any comments appreciated! > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Rob A more representative loading would be: 2 x GBU-10 (or 12)/2 x AIM-9/1 x AIM-7 (on the glove) and LANTIRN. Signature- Rufus > I did not notice it until your comment. Yes, I think you are right! I have > just followed Tamiya's instruction. [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >> >>Rob >>Any comments appreciated! > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Rob Concurr - the aircraft is grossly loaded out of CG limits as depicted. A few of the loadings proposed in the Tamiya instruction sheet are in error...I do know that if anything is loaded on the forward pallets, the aft Sparrow bay is unusable and should be empty. And that two GBU-24 in the tunnel should be staggered fore/aft on left/right pallets to be correct. Signature- Rufus I am not familiar with actual loading method. But following 2 photos shows Bomb+phoenix combination. Is this only for training purposes? http://www.naritafamily.com/new/tomcat1.jpg http://www.naritafamily.com/new/tomcat2.jpg Masa > >>Any comments appreciated! > > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > aft Sparrow bay is unusable and should be empty. And that two GBU-24 in > the tunnel should be staggered fore/aft on left/right pallets to be correct. This is a combat loading in this photo, but what is noteworthy is that the bombs mounted in the tunnel are 500 pound weapons (Mk82's from the look of it) - what you mounted on your kit are 2000 pound weapons (GBU-24's)...the combination of the two 2000 pound GBU-24, and guessing 1000 pounds each of Phoenix and LANTIRN would put roughly 6000 pounds of gear at a far forward point on the aircraft. The 500 pound weapons on the jet in your photo reduces the load at that position by roughly 3000 pounds, and if the aft stations are loaded (which we can't see in you photo) then there is another 1000 pounds located farther aft to further balance the forward CG. I think I've also heard that the other reason for not mounting GBU-24 side by side in the tunnel is that there isn't enough room for the fins to open during ejection. GBU-24 is a BIG weapon...the ones we see in kits are given to us in the loaded (fins stowed) configuration. The aft airfoil group has rather large fins which rotate open after release. This article has a good set of pictures of the weapon: http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/smart/gbu-24.htm Signature- Rufus > I am not familiar with actual loading method. But following 2 photos shows > Bomb+phoenix combination. Is this only for training purposes? [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > > correct. My friend who is the photographer on the USS Carl Vinson answered this question. He is saying that "Generally what's on that photo is what we flew during the Afghan war. The only thing that *might* be unusual is that we often didn't have a Sparrow on with two GBU's, but that wasn't a hard-and-fast rule." Masa > This is a combat loading in this photo, but what is noteworthy is that > the bombs mounted in the tunnel are 500 pound weapons (Mk82's from the [quoted text clipped - 48 lines] > > > > correct. Wish we could see more of what's in the tunnel in your picture - I have a number of friends whom are Tomcat RIOs and have been discussing loadings for my Tomcat kits (I have one Revell one completed, another on the bench, and two more Tamiya ones waiting) with them for some time. Without fail they have all told me that 2 GBU-24 on the forward pallets is not possible, and that having anything on the forward pallets doesn't allow loading of a missile in the aft Sparrow bay. In fact, many of the loadings depicted in the Tamiya instructions are in error - the best bet is to look at pictures of operating aircraft and load your model as evidenced. I'm doing my current Revell project as a VF-41 Bombcat - I'm told VF-41 was the first Tomcat squadron to take the LANTIRN pod into actual combat over Bosnia, so there's some history there to be built. I'm using the Tecknics cockpit and LANTIRN pod, Cutting Edge AIM-9's, CAM GBU-10's and decals, and odds and ends from the Eduard exterior sets meant for the Tamiya kit...and doing a ton of scratch building on the landing gear and in the wheel wells. Most Bombcat pictures I have seen have had 500 pound LGBs loaded - GBU-12, I think. That's what I want to put on my current project, but I've only been able to find GBU-10s. My RIO friends tell me that 2 x GBU-10 is acceptable, but that usually that much "bang" isn't required to get the job done (and that they wouldn't prefer to fly with that sort of load - again because of forward CG considerations)- the preferred weapon is the 500 pound one, as evidenced by the pictures I've seen, and also the picture you've shown me. I bet my choice of GBU-10 is actually wrong for Bonsnian operaratons, but I haven't been able to find any actual combat photos so I'll stick with my current choice unless I can find two 500 pound GBU in 1/32, as I do know that the 2000 pound class weapon is all wrong. I suppose I could scratch build them, as the airfoil group and CCU are the same - I'd just need some 500 pound bomb bodies and a razor saw... My current plan is: LANTIRN/2 x AIM-9/1 x AIM-7/2 x GBU-10. Still looking forward to your construction article! I'm curious as to why they would have mounted any Phoenix...they are virtually unopposed in the air over Afghanistan, so I'd think that AIM-9's would have been the self defense weapon of choice...but I'm not their mission planner. Signature- Rufus > My friend who is the photographer on the USS Carl Vinson answered this > question. He is saying that "Generally what's on that photo is what we flew [quoted text clipped - 59 lines] >>> >>>correct. OOPS!!! - now I have to correct myself...GBU-10's are 2000 pound weapons (Mk84 body - same weight, but a bit smaller than GBU-24)...now that we've been talking about this, I've convinced myself NOT to use these. I need to find some 1000 or 500 pound GBU's for my project! Signature- Rufus > Wish we could see more of what's in the tunnel in your picture - I have > a number of friends whom are Tomcat RIOs and have been discussing [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > AIM-9's would have been the self defense weapon of choice...but I'm not > their mission planner. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.