The new Jolly Rogers look--High-Vis Bug

[David Hingtgen]

I don't think it's a *rule*, just that squadrons do think it's neat to have the modex match the squadron number. And since the rule is only 2 high-vis planes per squadron, they have to "sacrifice" a plane that normally is high-vis. And it's best not to anger the CAG by giving him low-vis, as he outranks the CO.

It's rare enough that it's pretty much up to the squadron how they want to do it, if the numbers match up. The only squadrons that currently can do it are 101, 102, 103, and 211 AFAIK. (And 211's currently transitioning to Shornets). (105 is 4xx, as I explained earlier, 106--not sure, they're brand-new and currently "borrowing" 103's Shornets until they get enough of their own)

As for that VFA-111 Shornet: If the modex is to be 161 (unlikely for many reasons) then the accent stripes on the tail shouldn't be yellow. That's not a VF-111 thing, that's a "because their modex was 2xx" thing. (VF-111 always followed old-school rules for colors when most every other squadron had abandoned them) Same for the grey tail leading edge--F-14 thing, not a VF-111 thing. Their F-8's and F-4's didn't have it. Sharkmouth is angled wrong. And what's with the VFA-1 having "132" yet being designated as the CAG-bird?

Edited November 27, 2004 by David Hingtgen

[cyde01]

Anyway, this is far afield of the topic of this thread.

Not tryin' to start a fight or anything, but (cough) the shornet supporters started it!! (cough)

Just playin'. Guess if the real military guys keep debating about the F-14vsF/A-18E/F thing without being able to agree, then guys like us aren't gonna be able to reach one conclusion either, except agreeing to disagree (I dunno about you, but I'm no real military guy, just a guy who likes military aircraft).

I have another q about hi-viz and low-viz birds. Do planes like the shornet that have a primary role as strike fighter mostly conduct their strike missions at night? Would hi-viz birds be limited to strike missions at night because of their colorful markings, or does it really matter?

and my screen name is cyde01, not clyde.

[Retracting Head Ter Ter]

Navalised YF-23 kinda sounds like that... 

(If you configured the front and rear missile bays like a B-1B---have a movable bulkhead---then you could easily fit some Phoenixes inside by removing the bulkhead---the YF-23 has a deep, long bay as opposed to the -22's wide, shallow bay)

I don't think the 23 even needs the Phoenix to kick ass all over the skies.

BTW, how long does it take to do a quickie repaint of an aircraft? If there was sudden war and that High-Viz bird needed the colours covered can they just do a 5-minute spray of the coloured areas (ignore aesthetics) or is there a more complicated process?

Edited November 27, 2004 by Retracting Head Ter Ter

[ewilen]

Not a real military guy, but I think citizens are well advised to inform themselves on military matters. Debate is good; I'm just a little tired of this particular one since the same points & rebuttals keep popping up whenever people talk about the Super Hornet, so my comments tend to get briefer and briefer.

[David Hingtgen]

1. Yes, you can quickly repaint with temporary paint. They just skip 90% of all the little warning labels and "no step" marks if they're in a hurry. EVERY British Tornado was done like this. Heck, most any desert-camo plane in Desert Storm was done like that. Also, all you'd really need to repaint are the tails, not the whole plane.

2. But the Navy doesn't/didn't. Desert Storm was full of high-vis CAG planes going to war. Notably the Freelancers and Fist of the Fleet, with full rainbow stripes. Actually, their whole wing had a "unified" CAG scheme of black-tailed with rainbow stripes.

3. Overall, they don't really care about high-vis too much for actual "combat effectiveness". Most any pilot says they prefer low-vis, but really, you can't tell much at a distance. I mean, you're not even supposed to get IN that range, unless you're a P-51. There's recent pics out there of the Black Aces CAG doing missions in full color, as well as the Red Devils's CO. (Marine planes don't do CAG, their numbers start at 1 not 0, their colorful plane is the commander's) Strangely, that was one of the few fully air-to-air configured Hornets you see on an actual mission, so they were fully prepared to take a red-tailed plane into air combat. (And the Fist of the Fleet also were on CAP for Desert Shield)

Edited November 27, 2004 by David Hingtgen

[Noyhauser]

Okay, guys. Yes, clyde01, I have heard it before. Just go to the airplane vs. thread and you can find me, Shin, David, and others going back and forth about it.

wha?

Hey ewilen you forgot me!

(really I just posted that as an excuse to use my favorite smiley)

[Skull Leader]

I believe this new scheme is probably about as good as can be expected for their new Super Hornets.... I have to say, if they stick with this style (which they may or may not, I was under the impression that nose stripes were going the way of the dinosaur) I'll be fairly impressed. The more I look at super hornets (in my grief that my fav. squadron is having to "drink the cool-aid", I am trying to develop an appreciation for them) the more I think I'll be able to accept this tragic event.

are you listening, NAVAIR? *THAT* scheme looks decent... let them have it on the battlefield!

[Commander McBride]

It's not bad, but I've never liked how far forward that long part of the wing ( don't know what to call it) comes forward on the bug. It kinda breaks up the nose stripe.

[David Hingtgen]

It's a LERX, often shortened to LEX. Actually, it's shorter (but wider) on the Super Hornet than the Baby Hornet. They "re"designed it to be like the original YF-17 design. Otherwise it'd be even longer!

Anyways--it'll probably look better with customized fuel tanks. Jolly Rogers have been big on that lately, and fuel tanks don't seem to be as "regulated" with regards to their paint. Either black tanks with the stripe in outline, or grey tanks with a full-color stripe. (low-vis planes get grey tanks with outline stripes)

Fuel-tank decoration is a whole genre unto itself. Few squadrons do it to any great degree, usually just those with nose-stripes like Jolly Rogers or Diamondbacks. Most just put a tiny little low-vis logo, if anything. Sundowners always put sharkmouths on theirs.

Edited November 28, 2004 by David Hingtgen

[Commander McBride]

Painting fuel tanks always seemed a bit pointless to me, with the odds of them being dropped into the ocean and all.

[Panzer]

So Bandai and the USAF uses the same skull graphic?

I didn't know that.

[David Hingtgen]

1. NAVY, not Air Force.

2. That's the "factory" skull. Jolly Rogers skull has changed over the years. Boeing apparently doesn't have the stencil the Jolly Rogers currently use. It'll probably change once they get back (JFK should be in port mid-December, 103 give up their Tomcats in Jan)

3. Skull Squadron has never matched any of the Jolly Rogers skulls. Similar yes, but never identical. Obvious when placed side-by-side.

Finally--Commander McBride---actually, they're rarely dropped. I don't think any Navy plane's dropped its tanks since Desert Storm, and even then, that was only 2 of them. Same for the Air Force, though quite a few F-15's did drop them---but when you KNOW you're going into combat, they have special "disposable" tanks they use in those cases. Not the "nice" tanks they carry 99% of the time. (I do not think F-14's have disposable tanks available)

Edited November 30, 2004 by David Hingtgen

[Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0]

Man it's certainly decent but lacks glamour man. I mean fuel tanks might look good on it, but if they are trying to make an impression on all of us, they should have bigger stripes like the 80's jolly roger's cats. Now those ROCKED. And insignias based on VF-84's phantoms would be kind of neat too.

[KingNor]

they really needed to come up with something that looked specifically good on the 18 and not tried to force something designed for the 14 to fit on it.

my 3 cents

[David Hingtgen]

I can't help but think the whole design would look more "balanced" if it had black and yellow ventral fins...

Maybe they can paint up some black and yellow-finned AMRAAMs and put them on the fuselage corners... Custom missiles are rare, but do exist. Most often see decorated AIM-9's on ANG F-16's.

Edited December 1, 2004 by David Hingtgen

[KingNor]

why didn't they go with something more along the lines of the blue-angels layout? those stripes and stuff look great on a f-18. i don't understand why they thought they should force a f-14's scheme on a plane with a diffrent profile.

[ewilen]

Lack of imagination, partially, but also keep in mind that some of elements "must" be there for the Jolly Rogers, while others are particular to the aircraft. David can probably separate them better than I can, but one example: You might think that the diagonal stripes under the cockpit are just optional trim. OR you might think that the color/placement of the stripes was mandatory. Neither is true: the stripes carry on a tradition from the old VF-84 Vagabonds, but they looked a lot different on the VF-84 F-4 Jolly Rogers scheme. On the F-4's, they were on the back, and in some versions they were yellow stripes with black chevrons.

http://www.almansur.com/jollyrogers/jollyrogers.htm (Look at "hijacking" and the following item.)

Also http://www.jolly-rogers.com/airpower/f-4.htm

I wonder what it would look like if they returned the stripes to the back of the Super Hornet? Or even spanning the wings in a big chevron?

[Skull Leader]

Sounds like I may get a pass to Oceana this march when the VF-103 "officially" changes over to VFA-103 Another friend of mine from Aircraftresourcecenter.com is going and I may get to go as his assistant (if Brian Marbrey comes through that is!) I'm excited... I've never been on the east coast, much less NAS Oceana!

[David Hingtgen]

I was just thinking last night they should have put the stripe on the back---it just doesn't work on the nose (though VFA-102's stripe loooks fine there, as does VFA-2). VFA-131 puts their stripe angled on the back, and it looks much better there.

[F14Tomcat]

the F18 sucks compared to the F14

[Coota0]

the F18 sucks compared to the F14

Said the guy with the name of F14Tomcat and an Avatar of an F-22

[Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0]

the F18 sucks compared to the F14

Said the guy with the name of F14Tomcat and an Avatar of an F-22

LOL. I wonder that too.

On a personal note, I think the JR's should just make an all new color scheme, retain the skull and crossbones, but make it something especially for the super bug. The comment before earlier about it being weird conforming to a tomcat color placement is dead on. It just doesn't look right.

[David Hingtgen]

I agree---every new plane has had a new scheme. This is the first "same scheme, different plane" and it doesn't quite fit.

IMHO, their F-8C's had the all-time best scheme. Ironically, it lacked a skull and bones.

[cyde01]

I agree---every new plane has had a new scheme. This is the first "same scheme, different plane" and it doesn't quite fit.

IMHO, their F-8C's had the all-time best scheme. Ironically, it lacked a skull and bones.

Huh, that's odd. Not trying to start another debate, but maybe it's because they aren't as prepared emotionally to part with the old plane as they were all the other times.

Excited about new plane = new paint scheme to signify the beginning of a new era?

[Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0]

Well every jolly roger's plane had a different type of decal placement. The phantoms and tomcats of VF-84 looked remarkably different but retained the skull and crossbones. That's what we are saying about the super bug, it should have superbug specific jolly roger's decal placement, not a tomcatrehash.

[cyde01]

Yeah, and I agree with you that every new plane should have a new scheme. YET, for some reason, they didn't give the super h. a new scheme even though they did with every other new plane. What I'm saying is, maybe they didn't give this new plane a new scheme because they're not too excited about getting THIS new plane. They might be having Tomcat withdrawls er somethin (I AM ).

As stated by others, I also think that the stripe looks ugly with the LERX getting in the way and should be placed somewhere else.

Edited December 3, 2004 by cyde01

[Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0]

That might b true. Across the boards I read, a lot of people are saying in the tomcat community, VFA-41 black aces is the ONLY squadron happy about transitioning to the super bug. They also said VF-154 black knights were not too happy and a bunch of others don't want to transfer either. And most of the converted squadrons have crap decals now since they are using the tomcat templates. VFA-102 loooks bland and so does jolly rogers.

[whytwolf]

Personally I think it's a little too slick--says 'corporate graphic artist' to me. Previous color birds for the JR always had more of a made in the wardroom feel to me in terms of their design--this seems more a marketing gimmick than anything IMHO.

Sean

[David Hingtgen]

Oh yeah---VFA-27 touched up their CAG bird, and it seems to violate every "Super Hornet painting rule" there is! Multi-color stripes on the rudders, black all over the top of the plane (more than the Jolly Rogers) and they even painted the "do not paint no matter what" trailing edge bit of the rudders. (That grey bit always messed up VFA-103 and VFA-14's black tails).

[Nied]

I was just thinking last night they should have put the stripe on the back---it just doesn't work on the nose (though VFA-102's stripe loooks fine there, as does VFA-2). VFA-131 puts their stripe angled on the back, and it looks much better there.

I think the stripe is too far back on the nose. The Bounty Hunters' strip bisects the US roundel, and the Diamondbacks' is well ahead of it, that's why they both look better than the one here (where it bumps awkwardly into the LERX). BTW does anyone have a good big sideview schematic of the F/A-18F? I'd like to try my hand at painting the rhino in a more suitable JR scheme.

[Fatalist]

I have a good idea. With all this complaining of how it should look, why dont all you PS guru's dream us up a new scheme that would look better and post it here in the forums for all to see.. We all know thats the temp one due to the JR's still being on deployment and nothings final untill they get back, sooooo....... GET TO WORK!

Edited December 3, 2004 by Fatalist

[Nied]

That's exactly what I was talking about doing. I just need a suitable sideview.

[Coota0]

I agree---every new plane has had a new scheme.  This is the first "same scheme, different plane" and it doesn't quite fit. 

IMHO, their F-8C's had the all-time best scheme.  Ironically, it lacked a skull and bones. 

Huh, that's odd. Not trying to start another debate, but maybe it's because they aren't as prepared emotionally to part with the old plane as they were all the other times.

Excited about new plane = new paint scheme to signify the beginning of a new era?

Could just be a lazy C.O. too

[David Hingtgen]

Uhh, no, the CO has already made his plans on how to repaint it once they get back. Boeing did OK, he plans to do better. First and most importantly, move the tailcode to the inside of the tails to make room for a bigger, better skull. Maybe he'll move the stripe too.

[ewilen]

Well every jolly roger's plane had a different type of decal placement. The phantoms and tomcats of VF-84 looked remarkably different but retained the skull and crossbones.  That's what we are saying about the super bug, it should have superbug specific jolly roger's decal placement, not a tomcatrehash.

You make it sound like these are made out of polystyrene. Maybe that would be a good idea. Super-light, and I'll bet it has a negligeable RCS.

Switching gears, the F-8 schemes were really more "Vagabonds" than JR, n'est-ce pas?

As for why they're sticking (at least temporarily) with the F-14 scheme, I suspect it points to an ossification of culture. That is, what started as a grass-roots initiative bubbling up from the ranks has been institutionalized.

In that vein, hey, why not go back to the F-8 scheme for inspiration and put some flames on the nose? Then have the stripe on the back or wings and the skulls on the tails as David says. Personally, I'd get rid of the yellow fin accents as much as possible.

Edited December 3, 2004 by ewilen