David Hingtgen

1500 isn't fine enough. Start going with 2000, 2500 for starters. That'll make it clear, and glossy enough for most thing. For REALLY crystal-clear, you'll want 4000 to 6000 grit. Also, do not "skip" grits. Use every grit possible. If you're using 1500, and have 4000, don't skip using the 2000. Use many "intermediate" grits between your first and final sanding. Finally, for canopies/polishing, I always sand dry. (The only time I wet-sand is for massive heavy mold-seams, like a 3-foot battleship's keel)

There are special "clear parts" glues. Micro-kystal-kleer (sp?) is one. Also look for watchmaker's cement--for gluing quartz crystals. But diluted white glue is a popular option. PS--don't dare use super glue. Worst thing in the world for clear.

Yeah, but I'm waiting for the Energon repaint now. Hoping he'll get clearanced even further. (Nobody's going to pay 50 bucks for a repaint--well, at least, not many people). (And I'm going to watch the Discovery rocket show sometime this week, I swear)

Compendium says F-14A+Kai, not F-14A+. In real life™ the F-14A+ *is* the F-14B. It is simply a name change. But adding Kai makes it a custom M0 variant of your standard A+. So "A+ Kai" could be an A+, but further upgraded with a D's flush-mounted ECM and dual chin-pod, which would give you what Shin flies. Compendium does list a little of the F-14A/D real-life history, but not nearly comprehensive enough. Especially annoyed with stats---You can't just list "A/D" for every stat, they're all different. Especially weights and range!

Ahh, Heater-Ferris camo. The coolest series of camos ever designed. Though normally they're 3-tone or even 4-tone, not just 2. ::edit:: Is it 3 colors? Or does the light make the wing and nose look different colors?

More of the "ring" (sorry, don't know the name): left engine, left side, below (and part of the left ventral fin):

Same aircraft, same engine, but the left side (and from slightly below--I ruined a pair of pants getting some of these shots): (the "smooth black" areas match up--you'll note that the "segmented ring" forward of the black section is pretty much only visible on the underside---you can't see it on the upper side, even though most kits engrave it a full 360--A's do, B/D's don't)

Italeri--nice kits, totally wrong. I've got their 1/48 "F-14A+". Umm, no. More like, 1970 as-built F-14A... (I just chopped off the ECM bumps, and ended up with that---that's how wrong it is for an A+/B--even has PW engines) Anyways---here's an F-14B's #2 engine, right side.

::tries to think of what to add:: I mean, Nied's right. But I'll just summarize for people: You can make any Tomcat from an F-14A. You can also build them new. Most B's are actually converted A's, but most D's were built as such. But there were B's built as B's, and D's made from A's. (No B to D converserions AFAIK). And Shin's isn't like any of them. F-14B and D are VERY similar structurally. Externally, 99% the same. B and D differences include the dual chin-pod on the D, and the lack of ECM bumps under the wing glove. Most of the differences are the electronics, which of course are mainly in the cockpit. And the D has the new style of ejection seat. NONE of Monogram's kits are 100% a D (nor B) no matter what parts you use, AFAIK. (They release new versions all the time, giving more little details--but still using A-style nibs) Rear fuselage nib fairings are wrong. They are wrong in 99.9% of all F-14B/D kits, even some of Hasegawa's. Yes, they're fairly minor, but since it IS one of the main differences visible between the planes, it's important. Especially since they're part of the engine installation, which is the single most important difference. Re-doing the nibs requires re-molding the fuselage, which is why very few kits are correct--they just want to take an F-14A kit and include a new cockpit and new engines. Well, that's close, but wrong. You need a new, F-14B/D-specific fuselage to do it. (Remolding the A would mean no more A kits, so they won't do that). I can supply any closeups you might want of any F-14B or D features, for I found several of them sitting around at an airshow this summer, and I took plenty of pics.

Because they just do, that's why. It's the government, don't expect any sense at all. Fits in nicely with X being eXperimental, but prefixes and main designators are separate (you could have a YX-19 if you really wanted to)

Wow, that's the most F-14-ish looking VF-1 ever. Neat color, though I could do without the light-colored "legs".

Yeah, we all wanted a shoot-out! "Take that you little gift-giving b*st*rds!"

I've always wanted a 1/400 valk to go with my airliners.

Just a quick note, you'll find F-16D's in combat quite often with a single pilot. It seems -16D's are somewhat more of a pure trainer than an -18D, and if you're using it for combat (as opposed for training) they usually don't have a 2nd guy.

Saw them, very nice. But I wish #2 was *red* and not pink. She almost never wears that outfit in pink, it's only when people play with the brightness turned up too high or something. But she always looks *awesome* in red. (At best, she wears deep magenta/pink, but pale pink is almost non-existant)

One of the most powerful earthquakes of all time happened south of St. Louis. (Made the Mississippi flow backwards) http://www.system.missouri.edu/upress/spri...996/bagnall.htm http://hsv.com/genlintr/newmadrd/ Midwest--far, far fewer quakes, but when they hit, they're big.

I think it's pretty universal that nobody likes Ivy's 2nd outfit, but the 3rd more than makes up for it. Strange, her red "pirate" outfit in SC1 is so much better than the blue one in SC2. If they'd just "tweaked" the red one for SC2 like they did for her "default" costume, it would have been great. This threads pic-less so far, so hopefully this attachment's OK: See, her red one rocks.

Basic advice is to check Target. Yes, other places have had them, but like 95% of sightings are coming from Target. Also check every aisle that sells any sort of toy car. A good chunk of the Target reports say they're (mistakenly) being put in with the diecast and model cars, not even the same aisle as TF's.

Well, for me, one of the big annoyances has always been *time*, simply for dubs. Look, fansubbers can digitally sub an ep in a day, and do a better job than most "real" companies. We should be able to buy subbed, official, licensed series very soon after JP gets them. But instead, we have to wait 2 years for it to be dubbed in English, just so we can buy it and watch it subbed. Us "subbers" are waiting a LONG time for DUBS to be made. If they made separate sub and dub releases and released the subs as soon as they were done, that'd be fine. But they don't, and we're always waiting on the dubs. And then there's always "dubtitles".

Umm, "infra-red". Not "inferred".

I just re-read the appendix last night, and those lines are VERY similar to those said to Aragorn by his mother (the last thing she ever said). ::gets book:: "I gave Hope to the Dunedain, I have kept no hope for myself". Hope capitalized for the whole Estel=hope thing. (translated from Elvish) My fave line: "That still only counts as one!" --Gimli.

Hydraulics are a system of fluid-filled tubes/pipes to move things in a plane. They are literally the muscles of the plane. Identical to how the brakes in your car work. (Same fluid, too---red) The other main component of the system is the pumps that move the fluid. Pumps are powered by the engines, both electrically and pneumatically. (Usually one system has all electric pumps, one all pneumatic, and one with a little of both---redundancy) That A300 was exactly as if someone cut your brake line, and removed the steering wheel from your car. You've only got the throttle, nothing more. More specifically, hydraulics, on the A300 (or any widebody) control the following: Flaps, slats, ailerons, landing gear, nose-gear steering, brakes, thrust reversers, elevators, rudder, h.stabilizer, and spoilers. All primary controls draw from 2, and usually 3 hydraulic sources. Disabling any single pump has no effect, and disabling any single system (either all pumps or loss of all fluid) has little effect---primary controls will lose some sheer power (respond slower) and you'll lose a few secondaries--like individual spoiler panels. Most any aircraft will still be flyable (but slow) even when down to one system. It's technically not a "backup" so much as "redundant". If you normally run off of 2 or 3 simultaneously and equally, there's no "primary" system. "Backup" is generally one of two things: A normal system operating in an unusual matter. (if you lose multiple systems, whatever systems DO work will start opening and closing valves, to stop powering minor systems that it normally would, and start powering important things it usually has the others do---since those important systems have had their hydraulics damaged). The main valve that does this is usually the "priority" valve. It generally shuts off all systems (even important ones) from a hydraulic system, and pumps fluid to the MOST important systems, in order, but only one system of each type. Thus, even if it was system #1, and it normally controlled 2 elevators and 2 ailerons and the 4 most powerful spoilers, it would stop powering those, in favor of a single inboard aileron, a single inboard elevator, the lower half of the rudder, and if it could, the h.stab trim. That way, you would have minimal control of every system at least. Which is way better than full roll control but no pitch control. Every hydraulic system also has its own priority valve, and powers different sets. They'll usually have similar, but different priorities. Generally, which 1 of the 4 (for a 747 for example) of the ailerons and elevators to do, and which 2 or 4 spoilers to do, and which braking system. But they'll almost all go for the lower rudder. A true "backup" system is rare. You'll pretty much only find this on a 727 or L-1011. This is a system which only operates when there is serious damage (usually if EVERYTHING else is gone). They generally siphon fluid from other systems which can no longer use it, and use their own pumps. They do not have a priority valve, as since they only operate in emergencies, they will only ever power the most important systems. But that list of systems they do power is identical to what a normal systems operates when the priority valve is activated. Best example: Pan Am's near-fatal 747 incident at SFO. Long story short, the runway wasn't long enough, and they BARELY got off the ground. So low, the gear and tail clipped the approach lights as it climbed out. Many people severely injured due to the steel beams puncturing the cabin in the rear--people were literally impaled. 3 of 4 hydraulic systems lost, tail and gear physically damaged. 1 inch away from losing all 4 systems (at which point, the plane would have been lost with all aboard). As it was, it was down to 1 of the 4 ailerons, 1 of the 4 elevators, half of the rudder at 1/2 power, low-speed trim control only, 2 spoilers (of 10), LE flaps only, half trailing flaps, half gear via alternate extension, half of main braking, no anti-skid braking, no reverse thrust. Took over one hour to dump fuel and turn around to land back at SFO. Luckily, no fire, or it wouldn't have had time to dump fuel and turn around, and there was no way it could have survived an overweight landing, as the rear fuselage and tail were already structurally damaged, and half the gear wasn't available. After it landed, Boeing and the world learned that a 747 without its inboard gear extended, will tip back on its tail. The basic idea is to have every control surface powered by a different system, and multiple systems. That way, at least one of everything will work, no matter what combination of hydraulics are damaged. And if just one system is damaged, most everything still works--it takes nearly everything to be gone before you start totally losing controls, rather than just having them slow down. But if EVERYTHING's gone, you're pretty screwed. Few large aircraft have survived losing everything. Flaps and slats generally have alternate electrical extension motors for emergencies, so that even if ALL hydraulics are lost with no backups working they can still be used, but it can literally take 15 minutes to get the flaps down via the backup system--time they didn't have with the wing on fire. Could probably get the slats out though--faster and simpler. (Even if a plane loses its flaps, it probably has slats--slats are the highest-priority non-primary system on most airliners---even above gear and brakes) Gear is unique--basically use electrical motors to open to gear doors and locks, and gravity will pull it down. If that doesn't work, there are various manuevers to literally shake the gear out of the wells...

Kind of surprised this showed up here, and got such a good response. I love airliners far more than military planes, and have been following this since just hours after it happened. It wasn't known that it lost hydraulics until days later, then it became apparent just how awesome the pilots were. Article nit-picks: nobody calls the main fan of a jet the "rotor". Rotor is what helicopters have... Also, it does mention how underslung engines make you pitch-up, and that the 720 was hard to fly. However, it does not mention that the MD-11 has the ideal configuration for controlling via engine thrust alone. (It's still impressive that it could do it, I have pics in some MD-11 books of it---but only the MD-11 could do it, or a modified DC-10, and maybe, maybe an L-1011) Finally---the UAL DC-10 was in even worse shape than sheer loss of hydraulics. With the #2 engine out, they were even worse off, since the the plane's thrust centerline was now out of whack. (too low) While a plane like a DC-10/MD-11 is the best for controlling via thrust alone, that's only with all 3 engines running. If the #2 is out, then it's worse than most. (1 and 3 are less important). An L-1011 is inherently worse at engine-only control for pitch, but inherently better for holding pitch in the case of engine failure. (But better at yaw than any other plane except a quad-engine) (There is no perfect plane---it just depends on what the situation is) And also, the UAL DC-10 had its rudder stuck to the right, and both inboard ailerons stuck up. Hard enough to fly a plane with no control, but even worse if said controls are stuck in extreme, contradicting positions.

If day 12 is like 1/48 FAST packs, you know it's someone who knows you well.

imode--most every weapon's different in how it's launched when underwater. Harpoon anti-ship missile: stuffed inside a special "flotation bubble" (basically a sleek capsule), shot out of the sub like a torpedo, floats to the surface, then fires its rocket motor and bursts out of the bubble to fly. Tomahawk: launched like a torpedo until it's 33ft from the sub (lanyard attached), then fires its rocket motor underwater, bursts through to the surface, then once it's above the surface it engages its jet engine. Nuclear missiles: propelled via *highly* compressed air all the way from launch depth to above the surface of the water, then ignites its rocket motor just above the surface. That's why you usually see LOTS of bubbles with an ICBM launch--all the air used to blast it out of the ocean.