David Hingtgen

YF-17 has superior alpha/instantaneous turn compared to the YF-16 I think. Turn rate suffers though, always did. One of the few areas the F-18 beats the YF-17: sustained turns and roll. I'll give the Shornet the victory over the F-16E. F-16E's heavy and draggy, engine power boost isn't enough IMHO.

We could always bring up the internal gun argument again... (sorry, sorry) Anyways---question for the next few posts: What's the JSF's current/projected non-JDAM PGM capability? JDAM's are decent, but still inferior to laser-guided etc. Would it rely on other planes to designate for it? The main thing about the F-16 Block 60 is having every sensor/designator type that exists built-in. F-35 seems to lack a lot of stuff. Is is effectively JDAM-only? That's not accurate enough for "CNN war", where if you're off by 2 inches it'll be on the news... PS---despite the fact that I argue about planes a lot, I do value discussion like this a lot. I learn more from arguments like this than books and magazines it seems. And sometimes I will make a point just to refresh my memory as to why it's (and I) am wrong...

*Internal* payload. A JSF using its many external hardpoints is non-stealthy, and thus has little reason to exist. Internal payload is like 2,700lbs. (Assuming 2x1,000lb JDAM +2 AMRAAM) Why even have JSF's on a carrier if you're going to use them for non-stealth attacks?

I've always interpreted that shot as them looking at the Milky Way.

Hase decals often don't like many decal solutions. Try HOT water for them. They seem to react to water temp more than any solution. (Of course, every decal sheet always varies, even if it's the "same" sheet) Also, mixing Sol and Set (IMHO) is a bad idea. Don't apply one after the other unless the other was put on long enough ago that the area is bone dry. Of course, I always advocate the method of going SLOW and using ONLY Set. Sol is like the "nuclear bomb" for decals. Yeah, it'll get the job done, but the odds of ruining something are much higher as well. Set can take 15 mins to really work, most people only give it like 1 min to affect the decal before deciding to put Sol on.

With JDAM's, every plane's equally good at them. A B-52, F-16, and a P-51, would all have the same accuracy. There is (IMHO) little point in having large numbers of F-35's to replace F-16's, when the F-22 will do the same, but better/faster/and more of them. We certainly need F-35's to replace the Harrier, but I've long said that's the only thing it can and should replace. Since the Harrier can't carry much, very far, at all fast. F-35's are needed in small numbers to replace/supplement Baby Hornets, ONLY for reasons of "there's no stealth Navy plane" but their payload is so small compared to a Super Hornet, and smaller than a Baby Hornet. And there are many important weapons (notably the HARM, SLAM, SLAM-ER, and Harpoon) that won't fit internally. Put them externally on a JSF, and it's lost it's only reason for being on a carrier--stealth. Basically--I'm all for SOME F-35's. But sure as heck not for thousands of them replacing every F-16 and Baby Hornet.. Finally, kind of reiterating: F-16 vs F-35 speed. My point is that instead of buying F-35's, buy F-22's. Fast enough, with bigger payload. Ok, post-finally: Most front-line USAF F-16's are pretty much either night-attack, or SEAD. F-22's can't hold HARM's inside, nor have any sort of LANTIRN system etc AFAIK. We still need F-16's for those roles---which is 90% of what F-16's do. F-22/35 can't "replace" those planes if they're not filling those roles. Of course, I think there'll be a "more sensors" more attack-dedicated F-22 someday (all internal changes, not an FB-22), but not for a while.

I've never seen anything other than 1.5 for the JSF. And even if we go with the "high" of 1.8, that's still damn slow, especially considering what a massively powerful engine it has. Most powerful fighter jet engine ever, and one of the slowest planes in decades. A clean F-35 has a fairly useless payload/existence IMHO. Since it's not really supposed to fight, (F-22's will do that), you're spending a lot of money to deliver 2 small/medium JDAM's at a time, stealthily. Heck, F-117's can already do that, as can the F-22... We really need more F-22's... (never thought I'd say that). Like the F-35, but superior in every way. (except cost, and "really really expensive" is pretty close to "really really really expensive)

Yes, but the JSF is far slower and merely "comparable" in agility to the F-16, with a much smaller payload. (Especially with it's new, modified, smaller internal bays they just did). 2 AMRAAM's and 2 small JDAM's is nothing compared to say 2 AMRAAM's and 2 HARM's and 2 big JDAM's. More weapons, bigger weapons. And if you add on the wing pylons, then you have a non-stealthy JSF that has little to no advantages over the F-16, which costs a whole lot more... The Hornet's the slowest supersonic fighter since the 50's, the JSF will soon take that title...

Am I the only one who'd like a Pre-Ep 4 SW series? Just before Ep 1 would be good IMHO. Qui-Gon's earlier adventures. Or any Jedi seen in Ep 1-3. KOTOR is too far back, but makes good games.

Hmmn wha? Some sort of Hornet/Tomcat debate? Anyways: Well, if there was no pressing need for long-range high-speed air superiority planes, but instead wanted multi-role attackers, MDC would have a huge F-15E order right now, and the F-22 wouldn't be spending all its test time trying to get the absolute max range from a supersonic-launch AMRAAM attack... Anyways, VF-31 is still scheduled to be the last Tomcat squadron. Remaining squadrons and type: VF-143(B), VF-11(B), VF-31(D), VF-32(B), VF-213(D).

No Hornet can carry AMRAAM's on the tips. Don't know why, but they can't and don't. Now, Super Hornets actually have AMRAAM-capable launchers on their tips, but even they can only carry Sidewinders on them and have dedicated Sidewinder-cooling equipment in them (which is actually one of the ways to tell early production Shornets from later production Shornets) Corgi's gotten better at covering screws lately. The best model by far if you don't want anything like that is the DW F-18. No seams or screws anywhere. It's like one giant single piece, from nose to nozzles. (The F-16 has lots of belly seams)

Yes, Corgi's can remove the gear. It's much easier to install the "closed" gear doors and put them up on a stand, than to get the open gear doors and landing gear struts all aligned and in place. (Though a gear-down Phantom isn't TOO bad, but it took forever to get the Tornado gear down). I also like their Harriers, especially the Sea Harrier. The Harriers have little to no armament though, beware. (And Corgi also tends not to paint stripes on missiles, just pure white) Legacy Hornet gripes: Airbrake and canopy do not fit well closed, must be extended/open to look right. Pilots don't fit in ANY of DW's planes. Main gear is funny--too "up and down", not splayed nearly enough. Wheels off-axis (best to remove and reglue). Biggest gripe: It's designed for AMRAAM's on the wingtips. Hornets cannot do that. Sidewinders fit, but will end up too far aft. Pylons seem angled, like a Super Hornet's, but not as much. Smaller gripes: Not any particular Hornet type. A's forward fuselage, early C tails, late A nose, early C vents, late nozzles. I always think manufacturers just take a bunch of F-16 and F-18 photos and assume they're all the same, because most models are a mix of parts, never one particular type. Since the main difference between the A and C is all the extra antennas on the C, having only about half of the C's antennas (including the prominent ones on the tails) makes it look weird... PS--there was a very hard to get DW Top Gun F-18B, all black. Not as famous as the black Tomcats, but similar paint.

As you might imagine, I nit-pick the hell out of model planes. And I own a few Dragon Warbirds, ask away. As for the F-15's: AFAIK, *all* of them can ONLY have weapons on the wing pylons, and none can carry any drop tanks. Basically, how they come is the only way you can have them, unlike the F-16 and 18 which have many options. IMHO, DW's F-15's all really suck with massive errors on all. C'mon, turkey feathers on an F-15E exhaust? Having the enlarged fin-tip-pod on the WRONG fin? There's LOTS of F-15C photos out there, and every single one will show the LEFT fin has the larger pod... The F-18 is probably the best, but I have issues with it. The F-16 is almost as nice, but like the BBI, is a mix of parts. I STILL can't tell what intake it has, I think it's like a small-mouth size and ECS intake but the big-mouth shape... IMHO, one of the best 1/72 diecast planes out there is the Corgi Tornado. The F-4C and UK Phantoms are nice too. (Don't get a Navy Phantom, they're quite inaccurate)

Yup, F-111's are gone, and even the EF-111 Raven is gone now I think. (EF-111 lasted longer than F-111) It wasn't until the very day they were put out of service that the F-111 even officially had a name. F-15E's have never ever been used for A2A afaik. The "late" engine power is 29,100lbs compared to the standard F-15C engine of 23,400lbs.

hellohikaru---late F-15E's (which is pretty much all the non-SJ ones) have a significantly superior thrust/weight ratio than the F-15C. They've got more power than F-14D's, on a lighter frame. An A2A F-15E would easily beat the C. And the CFT's aren't an issue--they can come off in 15 minutes. Annoyingly, I can't find what a CFT actually weighs...

DVD is about an hour, has AFAIK about all the non-classified YF-23 footage that exists--construction, roll-out, taxi tests, test flights. Also some of both flying together, including a dual pass over the factory. Many interviews with designers, etc. Frankly, it's about the only YF-23 footage there is, asides from the "Wings" episode which is only shown about twice a decade...

When that report on the YF-23 came out, I started a whole new thread on it. (Of course, it was the best news I'd heard in a long time) Not a word since, that's a 6-month old report. PS--related note, I did get my YF-23 DVD, and it's the first time I've ever seen the red hourglass on the belly, and it IS true that it only leaves contrails from one wingtip at a time. (My brother said it did, but I've never heard anyone else say so--but it shows up quite well)

With there being only 1 squadron for the Block 60 at the moment, not very likely. Also (externally), it's little more than a Block 40I with some IRST pods on the nose---just take some from a Flanker kit and add to one of the many Israeli Falcon kits and you've got it. Shin--the loadout on Knight26's plane looks very typical, especially for Desert Storm. Though HARM's would be even more common, 4 (or 6) Mk82's is quite common.

Tranch is Eurofighter for "Block". After changing about 5 times in 5 months, I think the scenario is to sell "Tranch 1" EF-2000's to other nations as soon as Tranch 2 are delivered. Tranch 2 MIGHT have working guns, that changes so often I don't know. Tranch 3 will have working guns I think. Finally--the current Luftwaffe F-4F is very upgraded and quite capable. Similar to the Sea Harrier FRS2, it has Hornet-C-like radar and AMRAAM's. So it's got the same BVR capability as a Baby Hornet, and is much faster. So long as you don't dogfight, it can do air defense very well. Maintenance/age is the primary issue AFAIK, no matter how upgraded, F-4F's are old.

Yeesh, Dassault and/or Lockheed should sue for patent infringement on those...

I've seen about 7, from a combination of YF-22 and YF-23 articles. Only about 4 others were "normal", all the rest weren't even accepted for detailed proposals---usually massively complex aircraft, like 100,000lb Mach 3 swing-wing monsters. The original Lockheed and General Dynamic designs were ugly IMHO, though there was also neat rather F-16XL-like stealth---delta with a serrated trailing edge. The final 4 designs (Lockheed, MDC, Northrop, and Boeing) were accepted, and it would be so expensive to make prototypes that the 4 companies formed into 2 teams--Boeing/Lockheed, and Northrop/McDonnellDouglas. PS---as you might guess, Boeing submitted a big-mouth X-32-like proposal---one huge intake feeding both engines. SOMEBODY at Boeing really likes ugly intakes... Thankfully Lockheed "won" that part and the YF-22 had normal intakes. PPS--of all, the YF-23 ended up closest to the original proposal. The YF-22 originally looked more like an F-117N. Ugly, but not as ugly as Boeing's... Truly ironically, the Lockheed YF-22 looks most like the final MDC F-15 concept, before it was made into the F-15 we have today. YF-22's still a generation behind IMHO...

I heard about the ghosts a while back, but still haven't found them. I think I spent half of one mission just flying around looking... Never heard about the 50th Ann. one though, will have to go look.

True (about color of USAF planes). We should be thankful the Navy has loosened up on color rules---in the mid/late 80's, even the CAG plane would have NO color whatsoever. You need to go back to the 1960's to have colorful USAF planes---but many of the century-series planes were quite colorful.

Wow, a scheme that fits the model. Of course, IMHO it's pure dumb luck. They could probably pick another dozen states, all with Blokc 42's and 25's... PS--NY is the 174th Wing. I was talking about the 174th Squadron. (Since there can be multiple squadrons in a single wing, I usually refer to the squadron number, not the wing.). NY(Syracuse) is the 138FS, 174FW. 174FS is the 185FW, Sioux City, IA. With our big black vampire bat tail.

Yeah, kind of ironic that the ANG decals they offer are all for "non Block 30" planes, even though the ANG is *the* place to find early Block 30's. (Unless they did recent NY decals, I don't remember all the squadrons they offered) Annoying rant: anybody who knows F-16 squadrons knows that the 174th, from IA, had truly kick-ass tail logos. And they were early Block 30's, exactly like BBI made. Yet that is NOT one of the decal designs. The one squadron that it IS accurate for--you can't get. (The 185th is where most of NY's Block 30's came from---now the 185th has KC-135's) 175th has probably THE coolest tail (South Dakota) and I think also had Block 30's (quasi sister squadron to the 174th)--and are also not one of the decal options.