David Hingtgen

A.F.M representing! Aberfoyle Spring Water!

Most recent pic out there of YF-23 #2 shows the wings have been removed---that's not a minor operation, they would have had to have a good reason. Also---as was mentioned, a lot of the ways to reduce IR signature is the same way to reduce noise, which airliners have been doing for years. Heat=noise (since wattage/power=decibels). Literally, jet noise is the noise of hot air being rapidly introduced into a cooler environment----same as lightning.

Want really good, really close pics of Air Force One? Check airliners.net for pics taken in foreign nations. You can get REAL close when it's not in the US, ironically. There's even pics of it from planes flying OVER it. Europe and Australia seem to be the best places by far to get close. Same situation as the F-117. Even recently I've had guards tell me off for taking pics from 100 ft away, but you can go buy a panel-by-panel walk around book... (And the next week, that same plane will show up at a different air show, only they'll have a stand set up so you can climb up and get really good, close shots of it) There's a zillion close-up photos out there of every plane out there, but they just don't want YOU to take any. F-22: They're not going to let you take pics any time soon at an airshow, even though there's ultra-super close pics at every jet photo site on the net showing better detail than you could ever hope to get with a non-pro camera.

I'm enjoying KOTOR a lot too, only SW book I'm currently reading. (Asides from Tag and Bink of course) Who else thinks yellow will be the saber color of choice now for KOTOR 3?

I doubt flares and chaff---nothing's visible. There's IR jammers for each engine and APU, they're clearly visible. But that's no different than many other VIP jets. (Though Air Force One is among the few that has one for the APU) Also, flares and chaff only really work if you can get out of the way. No point in dropping flares then sitting where you were---the missile's track won't change much. While 747's are more agile than you'd think, they can't move out of the way enough to make use of most countermeasures. An F-15 can drop flares then move quickly over and the missile will miss it by 50 feet. But on a plane with a 200ft span, that just means the missile hits wing rib #20 instead of #14. Finally---a 747 has the biggest radar signature on the planet, no amount of chaff is going to attract a missile off the greatest target a missile could ever have. Similar for flares---four 56,000lb thrust engines produce a lot of heat. A flare is intense, but small. IR jammers work in a totally different way so they actually work for a plane like that---which is why you they're used on VIP planes.

::completely re-written:: Ok, here's my newest kite. Rounder and a better transition to the transparency. Let me know if you think it's worth making some blue versions, etc. ::edit:: Darn, it looked so much better with my grey test background, I'll have to start working with pale blue backgrounds to make it match better. Off to tweak it more.

I mainly want a brush with really "even" bristles for dry brushing. Neither soft nor stiff (maybe slightly soft), and a "perfectly even tip". Flat brush, basically cut straight across. I want no bristle to be longer or shorter than any other. Otherwise you'll have some places getting more, and some getting less, than you want. (I drybrush cockpit instruments, and that's how I do it) Here's an SR-71 panel I did:

Mr Color thinner might work---I think I read something that mixing Mr Color Thinner and Tamiya putty is basically home-made not-so-fine-grained Mr Surfacer.

My only request to Graham is to keep bugging them about how much we want the VF-0D. Roy's VF-0S is still too "VF-1S-esque" for me to buy. It's too similar to what I already have. But a VF-0D--that changes everything, and is one of my fave valk designs.

That's pretty fanciful. It's equally likely to have lasers, railguns, and micro-missiles, as pop-out turrets. Basically--there's no seams or openings for them. Air Force One's seams/panels/rivets are identical to a normal 747-200B, except for some apparent armor/reinforcement for the forward cabin. (Where the president's room is) Though the real question is---what's in the belly. That's the biggest unknown part of the plane. With little cargo to hold, there's lots of room for mods. There's 2 sets of retractable stairs installed, and possibly an elevator at the rear, but that's all that's really known. (Though the odds are good there's a very large cooler/fridge/food storage area down there as well, possibly with its own elevator---the main galley is HUGE and would require as much food storage as a small restaurant)

My main point would be it's pointless. If you see a B-2, then it's obviously within visual and gun range. Which means it's also close enough to get a missile lock on from just outside the B-2's gun range. Blast away from afar. No plane is so stealthy or has so little engine heat that an F-15 or something couldn't lock on when it's that close. Radar reflection goes up with the cube of the distance--- 3 times closer is 27 times the strength. 5 miles vs 25 miles means 125 times stronger signal. It doesn't matter if a B-2 has 1/1000 the signal return of a normal plane--once you get close the reflection will increase exponentially. And at that range, a Sidewinder can lock onto anything that's decently warm. Plenty of trains in Vietnam were taken out by Sidewinders locked on to the locomotives. An F-117 or B-2 is "invisible to most radars in search mode at a distance". They are not "invisible to a high power air-to-air radar in tracking mode at close range". Stealths are supposed to not be found in the first place, as they have no defense when found. It's very easy to hide when no one knows you're there, and are far away. But no matter how stealthy you are, a dedicated search of a small area where something is known to be will find you.

I personally want the kites, and nothing else. Everything else should be the board default, mainly for size reasons. (And I view at 1024x768, which should be pretty common) Either all kites, or all skulls, just for the left-most column. Anything else makes the forum look like an icon/avatar test at Robotech.com---too much all over.

My comment about the B-2 WAS for daylight. Trust me, 36118 Gunship Grey is the perfect color for a B-2 at 50,000ft in daytime. There's a reason almost every USAF bomber is that color. Old RAM paint is black, I don't know about new stuff. There's the black "paint in a bucket", the new sprayable stuff, the sheets (which are mostly black), the "quilts" which I have no idea what color they are, and the stuff on the F-16 and Legacy Hornet. Kind of surprising that RAM's never been seen on an F-15. Then there's structural RAM, which is generally the same color as the non-stealthy version of it--kevlar, carbon fiber, etc. The F-22's paint is the subject of much debate. Officially, it's exactly the same colors and paint as on the 1980's F-15, F-18, etc. Never mind the fact that it's prismatic silver in most light... Here's a really neat recent photo that'd be a great background---I was going to post it yesterday anyways as neat photo of the week: http://www.defenselink.mil/transformation/...F-2295B-035.jpg F-22 wins the "least colorful fighter EVER" award. That's the full markings for the 94FS, my fave F-15 squadron. Well, F-22 squadron now. PS--never mind that they look metallic silver, the Air Force says it's the same paint as the F-15's had...

Js---Don't go for "pastel" by altering the tint or value, go for "grey" by altering the tone. If you want "not so intense" colors, mix in grey, not white. That'll help match some of the blues I think on MW.

And there's always the Super Hornet's Whisper Passâ„¢

The F-117 is notably quieter than others, and though I haven't heard one, they say the B-2 is very quiet. Visually, both the SR-71 and B-2 dump chemicals into their exhaust when on missions so that they don't leave contrails. If you've ever read any "chemtrail" conspiracy theories, that fact is incredibly ironic. Also the B-2 is grey because that's what blends in. If you've ever seen footage, that grey is the perfect color at altitude. Heat---plenty of theories on how to dissipate it, not sure of any practical implementations. I think most people assume that the engines are the only real concern, as you can't detect anything else at long range. Sure, modern heat-seeking missiles can detect leading edge heat, but only at very short ranges. Other: there's plenty of WEIRD theories there, like the electro-plasma charged leading edges the B-2's said to have. (that's up there with Mach 6 SR-71's though)

A problem when talking stealth is that there is no real definition for stealth. By 1960's standards, a Super Hornet is really stealthy. There's no "magic number" for radar cross section or "detection range by XYZ-type radar" where something is or isn't stealthy. The more I read about the Shornet, the stealthier I think it may be. Some places even credit it approaching the B-1B. Plus AFAIK they're developing stealthy cases for the weapons, and they already have special attachments and fairings to make the pylons stealthy---you can sometimes see some of them when carrying air-to-air missiles. (They go over the sway fittings). Super Hornets have a special set of "extra" fittings/fairings/RAM that is applied only in times of war. Like many stealth coatings/seals/panels they are hard to maintain in top condition, so they are only used when needed. So basically, when it needs to, a Super Hornet could have the 'stealthy' panels/seals used, add the stealthy radar fitments to the nose and canopy, add the stealth parts to the pylons, and in the future, use the stealth covers over the weapons. Plus most planes don't have published numbers, and a lot of "good guesses" are totally wrong. AFAIK a F-22 beats (and possibly by a wide margin) the F-117 for radar detection, which is a big part of the reason it's being retired. And then "stealth" usually has people talk only about radar, when heat is another big factor. People often talk about the F-22 for that, for if you're supercruising you've probably got a lot of heat on you leading edges, and the raw heat of the engines heating up the aft fuselage skin. And then there's age-old "radio silence" which is part of the reason for in-air datalinks etc. Stealth is supposed to mean ALL aspects of detection, but usually just means radar in common usage.

Most aircraft are already as light as they can be. To change to better materials would require redesigning the aircraft. Brand-new F-15's don't weigh any less than 1972 models, despite 30+ years of material advances. One of the few cases I know of to really lighten a plane is the 747-300 to 747-400. It changed to a new alloy for the outer wing skins. But that required a total redesign of every rib, stringer, etc. RAM isn't as good mainly because of weight/strength/durability issues. Having "aluminum painted grey" that's inherently of a stealthy shape will be lighter and stronger than funky carbon-fiber-epoxy-graphite-whatever RAM skin panels. And regular paint over aluminum is of course lighter than "liquid uranium" RAM paint. Also, aluminum is easily repaired, composites aren't.

I personally still find the "new posts" icons pastel overall and not enough difference between new posts and no new posts. Especially the green ones, they look very similar. And the white shine in the upper right bugs me, but I think that's just me. I like the 3 final ones---moved, locked, etc. But again, don't like the shine effect. Too strong in the upper right corner, especially the locked icon.

Just a note: RAM is generally used when you cannot make specific parts of the airframe itself stealthy. RAM is kind of a "last resort". It's inferior to a stealthy shape, is expensive, and many types weigh a ton. You could make a stealth F-15 if you put enough RAM on it, but then it'd be so heavy it couldn't fly. (RAM paint is said to be so dense than two men are required to lift a small bucket of it) F-22 makes use of a lot of structural RAM to make it equal to the YF-23 AFAIK. That was part of Lockheed's promise to the Air Force--they said they could make the YF-22 as stealthy as the YF-22, they'd just need a bit more money to develop new materials. Well, they did, but required a LOT of money and time to do it. The YF-23 was stealthy because of its shape, with minimal RAM. The F-22 needed it's intakes wings and tails redesigned and coated with or made of RAM to equal the -23. If the YF-23 had a extra couple billion to develop new high-tech RAM that didn't exist when it flew, it'd be insanely stealthy in a production version.

Now I'm thinking it's actually my viewer, and not the .gif. I'll try this: And I think the kite should be the main logo seen/used, both aesthetically and "importance to Macross". The kite is for the whole UN Spacy, skulls are just one squadron. ::edit:: Yup, that seems to work, at least viewing it here. Nice simple kite with no effects or anything. I must admit I do not like the shine/flare on some of the proposed ones. Also, the "less intense" ones are not "less intense enough". New vs no new posts need a greater difference. Or actually, I think it's the opposite--the "new posts" ones aren't bold/intense enough, the flare/shine adds too much white, washing them out. Just my opinion, but I liked it best when we had ONLY the two kites like 2 days ago, for new posts and no new posts. Leave everything else the board default. People understand them, and they're small and distinct.

I'd feel like such a hack including ads in my sig. But if I don't get any more offers this weekend I think I'll do it.

I would think the main problem would be the wing glove seal area---that's always been a problem just to get smooth airflow over, much less make stealthy. One of the "problems" with current stealth design is that now the average person simply cannot look at a design and have any clue as to how stealthy it is or isn't. The F-117 is angular simply because that's all the computers could handle--2D objects. The B-2 is so precisely made that if you changed the outer skin shape by an inch or two, it'd have the signature of a 747. A B-2 that's off by one inch would look VERY stealthy to the average person, as it'd look identical---heck, any model kit of the B-2 isn't that accurate, it's within an inch or two. Having angled tails and intakes are usually a compromise for aerodynamic or production reasons---they're better than "whatever you want" for stealth, but not as good as an optmized curved surface. But it takes a lot of computing power to calculate 3D curves of an entire aircraft. Also, "type of radar encountered" has a tremendous affect. The Aerofax F-117 book (the best of the early F-117 books, and still among the best) has some great diagrams showing how different shapes reflect radar, and how different radars have different pulse patterns etc. Basically--you could design a plane that's utterly invisible to one type of radar, yet would show up 100 miles away on another. It's all compromises.

My point is, I basically want cash now to buy stuff. I'm not looking for the max price, I just want it sold. If 25 bucks is the highest offer, it sells for 25.

IMHO the kite works because it's small, round/simple shape, and only 2 colors. Icons shouldn't be complex. Just triangles, circles, and squares. And simple colors. A skull and bones or Minmei is just too much to have on a page 2 dozen times in a row. Also, here is (I think) a bit better version of the basic kite, 27x27 .gif ::edit:: Ack, forgot to make the background transparent, give me a while, that's always hard for me. Edit 2. I just can't get it to SAVE transparent. I can get it to look transparent, and all the previews are transparent, but when I actually open up the final version, it's still got the white background. I spent way too long trying to get around it, something to do with Indexed vs RGB. If someone can give me a transparent version of the original larger one, I do believe I could nicely shrink it. I just can't get transparency tonight.