David Hingtgen

Biggest issue I see with using 737's is sheer payload. 737's just don't have the wings to lift anywhere near a -135's load. The super-duper-ultra stretch 739 is almost as long as a -135, but the max weight is way lower, due to smaller wings and a lot less thrust. (Well, a modern 737 has slightly more raw power than a -135A, but far less than a -135E/R/Q etc) Of course, 737's take up quite a bit less ramp space and are much easier/cheaper to operate. Replacing 3 for 2 is probably worth it.

Abusing my power would be to pin my VF-11 and YF-21 for sale threads to the top of every forum. Hint hint. Or would trade YF-21 for a 360 game now. Anyways---I need a new TV. I just remembered I have no component inputs on my TV. And 360 cables cost a lot, and it'd be kinda pointless to spend $$ on composite 360 cables when $$$ would get me a whole new TV. So now I'm looking at buying a new old-school CRT 20in or 24in in the next 48 hours. A 24in with component would give me both a size and DVD pic-quality increase and should hold me over for a little while until nifty flat-screen HD sets are better/cheaper.

Bigger planes are usually more cost-efficient, basic rule of aircraft design. Same reason why bigger planes fly farther with larger loads. A plane twice as big can go three times as far with three times the payload. Square-cube law in reverse, sorta. If you want X amount of fuel carried, cheaper to use 1 big plane than 2 smaller.

Never forget Iran has KC-747's. A 747 can refuel entire squadrons. Though the US has more in sheer numbers and capacity, a 747 or two can support an entire operation, with such range and time-on-station that it can support them coming and going, morning and night strikes. Talk about mobile support... (747's can go over 22 hours without a problem, and if it draws on the tanking fuel and extra crew, it could go well past that) Sigh---one of the most common things you see requested/needed is mroe big refuellers for the USAF. Well then why didn't they order KC-11's in the 90's? The MD-11 was an improved, bigger DC-10, it's exactly what they wanted, and MDC had already drawn up how to make a tanker version (since it used 90% KC-10 parts anyways). Not to mention Boeing should be more than willing to make US KC-747's, since the basic 747 line is just crawling along with almost no orders. What'd be really neat is tankers based on the new, bigger 747ADV...

Neat Su-30MKI pic, check the stab deflection and vectoring: http://www.sukhoi.org/img/gallery/wallpapers/sm/april2.jpg

Yes we do have a dedicated 360 thread, but I didn't feel the need to resurrect it for one little post from me. Mods performing thread necromancy=bad. And every BestBuy around here looked like launch day with the big April 1/2 restock---people lined up, etc. I live in a college town, so like 60% of the population is 18-26. (grad students you know) They ALL want 360's, but we don't have nearly enough stores. We have the 360 demand of a city 10x our size, so there's NEVER any here. Kind of like how we had 2/3 of our theater screens showing SW Episode 3. They could easily accomodate our very atypical demographics for movies. But with the 360, having 10x the expected demand for a city our size can't really be helped. Seriously, I had to hunt for DOA 4, and still don't have a plug and play kit. Not only is the 360 impossible to find, even accessories are wiped out. You can find a wood grain face plate, but that's about it.

Driving through rural Iowa on the way home today I spotted a just-opened Super Walmart off the side of the highway. Middle of nowhere+Super Walmart Grand Opening=360's instock! First one I've ever seen, and now it's mine.

Hmmn, Tomcat Sunset has a lot more stuff than when I last checked. Of course, I checked within about 6 hours of it first going up...

I like the new stuff. (just got back in town, lots of stuff to check, little time to type)

VFX---how'd you do the plaque on the display stand? My USS Lakota currently is on just a black plastic box because I don't know how to do anything better.

Just had a thought from your previous post: The VF-11's kite. Similar to low-vis, but is blue/grey. That's canon and well-known to anyone who's had a Yamato VF-11. Use that.

I still think Sony's game division should meet with their TV division, and make "the ultimate affordable HDTV for gamers". You know they could, and EVERYBODY would buy one. Just clearly advertise right on the box how every issue people talk about (lag, resolution, response, HDMI, 1080p) etc is taken care of and ready to hook up to any next-gen game system. They'd make tons of money. End all forum debate. But they obviously haven't thought of that, or it'd be out already and selling to 360 owners. Or at the very least, already announced for people now buying TV's for the PS3. And one of the best ideas I saw proposed was to have a dedicated "480i with simulated scan-lines" mode, so we can play older systems lag-free and without looking godawful. If you've ever emulated anythng, you know adding in fake scan lines help a LOT when playing something 8 or 16bit on a high-res monitor.

Hot Topic and not a Hot Topic seem backwards with the latest update---the "not a hot topic" has the extra white segments around the rim. And I think "hot topic with new replies that you've posted in" is getting a green skull.

My first act as Vice-Mod was to delete mike's double-post. My second act is to butt in with a semi OT post Anyways---I am now set to buy a 360 as soon as I find one. Whenever that is. (Still haven't seen one around here) So---still looking at HDTV's. Since I am definitely of the "prefer CRT over LCD image" camp and due to location/size demands it must be in the under 30in category, that limits it to a pretty small selection. (If 25in plasmas existed, that's what I'd like) The Samsung TX-R2678WH (26in 16:9) seems to have everything (QAM tuner, HDMI) and amazingly, almost no one complains about it at the A/V forums! But it is now almost impossible to find--I seem to have missed BestBuy's massive clearance of them in January. And I won't buy one online---TV's are the most "quirky and individual" of all electronics, I need to be able to buy locally and return/trade/swap as needed. So currently waiting to see how the Toshiba 26HF66 is. Should be out in a few weeks, and has basically everything. However, I think it's just a minor update of the 26HF85, which (like every TV) has a lot of haters on the A/V forums. 26in CRT HDTV's seem really dead---the Samsung I like is the last one they made, this is likely Toshiba's final 26in. Part of the reason I'd like to get an HDTV now is that what I like/want (small CRT HDTV) is being phased out---it;s buy one now or never, and unless there's one HECK of a breakthrough really soon, no LCD will be acceptable to me nor will plasma be small enough----and I don't expect to see small SED this decade. Plus the price issue. A good 26in LCD is about 3x the cost of a 26in CRT. PS--somewhat worried about lag, as it seems all HDTV's, even CRT, don't upscale from 480i very quickly, and I have a lot of PS2 playing to do until the PS3 gets here. PPS--to make this relevant, we could discuss how the PS3 and 360 are hyping HD resolution so much that it's driving TV sales, and now every gamer in the world is a so-called HD expert, whom spend 90% of their time discussing "LCD 8ms response time vs DLP screen door effect"

My argument is that the VF-0D isn't a trainer, it's a fully dedicated front-line striker. Any plane can be used for training, but that doesn't make it a trainer. And if I was a toy company, I'd make the really cool interesting plane that was on screen a lot (blue/grey two-tone VF-0D) that people keep asking for and voting for in the polls that's new and different from what they have, not the dull boring lackey plane that was on screen for 5 mins, did a Cobra, then flew away on green magic feathers (low vis VF-0A). Nor the "just like your 1/48 Roy, only slightly less angular" VF-0S.

You don't completely redesign the plane for a trainer version. It'd completely defeat the point. If you're going to use a canard-equipped delta-winged VF-0D as a VF-0S trainer, you might as well use a B-2 stealth bomber to train F-15 pilots... Planes vary a lot in handling: F-15E guys do not train in the F-15D, despite the F-15D being a dedicated F-15 trainer. It's too different. The VF-0D is far too different from the VF-0A/S for training. And again---having Edgar in the back seat is about as useful for Shin's piloting technique as a puppy in the back seat. There is nothing trainer-esque about the VF-0D in any way IMHO. Just because all the newbies got them just means they were all being trained in that plane. You don't go train a bunch of random people in random jobs in random planes. The VF-0D guys all train in VF-0D's, and VF-0S guys train in VF-0S's. If it was a mix of VF-0A, S, and D types that would have made no sense, as they'd all have different capabilities and responses and little training could have occured---might as well have trained them one on one instead of a group in that case. Roy can train any pilot because he's just that good. And specifically he was training them in "basic movement and controls of a valk", not anything really specific that a VF-0*D* instructor was needed. But they needed to be flying D's to get used to its specific handling characteristics---you wouldn't put a guy in a D to learn how an A or S handles because it'd handle completely differently. And if Kawamori is keeping up on aircraft trends (as I'm sure he does) he may very well have noticed that some of the biggest trends in the last few years have been canards (especially with delta wings) and the two-seater versions being more prevalent. Perhaps Kawamori was intending to show that dedicated single-seat fighters (VF-0S) are on the way out, with the two-seat multi-role version (VF-0D) as the most common type?

We've seen Kawamori do the XL thing before. VF-11MAXL. He's obviously a big fan of making normal fighters into delta-winged strike fighters. Delta-winged versions of his valks appear in some design works sketches too I think. PS about the VF-0D: If it was a trainer, then there'd be an instructor. You don't send up two rookies doing different jobs in a trainer. Trainers have a rookie pilot in the front, and an experienced pilot in the back. If the VF-0D was a trainer, Roy would have been in the back seat instructing Shin, not Edgar trying to learn how to work a new type of radar. PPS---two-seater fighters are becoming more and more common. The Super Hornet, Super Flanker, Rafale, and I think Typhoon have all seen their orders switched around to become mostly two-seaters. At this rate, single-seaters will become rare and notable.

The B-1B has F101's, not F110's. Though the F110 is based on the 101. So is the 118 (B-2 engine). Prototype F-14B had F101's as well. Just for people reading the thread, the following F-16's have F110's: C and D block 30, 40, 50, 50+ E and F block 60 And don't forget the F-15K with the SG's.

I want a D, and only a D. And only if it's Shin's blue one. I really don't see the fascination with the VF-0A/S design, and am not going to buy one no matter how they paint it. I personally would only buy a D model VF-0 from Yamato. (And really want one)

Only later F-15E's have the higher power engines--1991 and later I think. (Same time as when they got the Type V CFT's with the auxiliary scoops). The original F-15E (1986 to 90) has the same engines as the F-15C and Type IV CFT's. Basic F-15E airframe is about 3,000lbs heavier than a C's IIRC.

The P-38 did poorly in Europe because: 1. NO supercharger. England didn't order them for theirs. Talk about KILLING high-alt performance. 2. Engines not handed. The contra-rotating props on a P-38 are VERY obvious, I've never seen such slow, obvious props on a plane. But England's weren't, and there were severe balance/vibration/torque effects because of it. 3. Bad fuel. No WW2 fighter flown nowadays can come close to its 1940's performance, since the ultra-high octane fuels just aren't around anymore. And England never did have the fuel P-38's were designed for. If the engine was supposed to get 1,000HP, then England only got like 900 because the fuel couldn't deliver any better. Basically, England ordered a cheap, stripped version of the P-38, and it truly sucked. It'd be like ordering an F-15 without afterburners, and running it off of diesel fuel. The US's versions in Europe did better, but still had to contend with British fuel. Also, they were earlier versions, all the kinks weren't worked out. In the Pacific, the US used full-spec late-model P-38's with high-grade fuel, and they kicked ass. No different than P-51A vs P-51D. They're famous for the last, high-power version, not the early version. PS---AFAIK the "fork-tailed devil" name is pure myth brought about by Greene in the 1960's. (Almost everyone here probably has a book or two that credits Greene and/or Swanborough) "Whistling Death" is one of the few nicknames I know to be accurate---what the Japanese called the Corsair. (And Corsairs DO shriek, it's the coolest sound ever---if you've never heard, go to an airshow, Corsairs are common)

I'll add in a bit to agree with the above. IMHO there's too many divisions/categories. All you really need is New Posts, and No New Posts. Everything else just leads to a dozen colors that needs a key. All you need is bold for new posts, and transparent/pastel for no new posts. All anyone ever really cares about is to tell with the briefest of glances, if there's new posts in a thread. I mean, how many of us go to a forum where 90% of the topics are "hot"? It's kinda pointless----and nobody will ever agree on what the cutoff point is for hot vs not. Same thing for "thread you've posted in". It just doubles the number of icons/colors. You should know what you've posted in yourself, and anything already on page 8 of replies is obviously hot. All those divisions just leads to a left column with 25 different icon types. I still liked it best when we just had 2 kites---bold and translucent, for new posts, and not. Polls? They're already differentiated, no need for a custom skull for them IMHO. At most, 3 versions of the Kite. Bold, for new topics. Translucent/pastel for no new topics. And flashing/glowing bold for hot topic with new posts. That's generally what I see at most boards that I like. Instead of a whole new icon for hot, just either add little animated flames like some, or make the red glow redder, etc.

Look at the production F-35. The thing was DESIGNED to be VTOL and they're having serious weight and structural strength problems. (It got fat, and they realized it's too weak---strengthening will only make it fatter, and I don't know if it'll ever be strong enough without removing the forward fuel tank) PS---They have tried making "super fighters" with everything before. It turned out to be the F-111. Super bomber? That was the original concepts for the XB-70, which were so godawfully huge, complex, and expensive that the USAF seriously thought they were a joke, and asked where the REAL concept drawings were. You can't have everything. You're not ever going to have a Mach 3 long-range highly agile VTOL stealth strategic air dominance fighter-bomber recon plane. Now matter WHAT they add to a Super Hornet.

Someday we'll see the F-22 REALLY show off its moves, rather than "gotta be more impressive than a base model Flanker without revealing everything" demos. This probably should have gone in the Aircraft Vs thread, especially with Roy cleaning house lately...

I'm away from home and using a PC I don't trust much (I trust none but my own), so I don't plan to log in much this week----but I'll quick post that I like those new kites a lot better. Though I now think the spot in the upper left looks like a clearly defined white dot, and nothing more. On the "posted in" versions it almost looks like you've made a selection in the upper-left opening. Basically----gradiants etc are fine, nobody wants a single-shade "255/0/0" red icon, but the highlights are still too intensely white. 3/4 of the icon looks great, but then it looks like a snowflake fell on top. Make them shiny if you can, but not at the expense of obvious "whiteness" in spots. Maybe instead of a highlight, add a shadow behind? PS--I am well aware my comments sound nitpicky, but I always try to be constructive----and I know how much work goes into making icons-----I still can't make a basic simple kite with a smooth edge, much less a shiny one...