Aircraft VS super thread!

[Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0]

The witty's always look nice and I always hear many good things about them, however I am still anxiously awaiting a company that will make a fairly decently accurate F-14 diecast that can be handled as a toy. I am HOPING the new FOV F-14A fits that bill....but being that its an all new mold, I fear its more of a model than toy.

[Skull Leader]

All that and no comments?

375419[/snapback]

Well, you're pretty thorough, not much to ask about, not that I plan on getting a diecast superhornet! My questions will come once you get the witty Tomcat

[RFT]

David, When you say a diecast is copied off the hasegawa kit- do you know if this is done legitimately or not? It seems a bit dodgy to me.

Anyway, an aside- what's the catalgue number of the Good dragon F-15 you got a few months back. I'd like to get one, or failing that, a newer one that should have the fixes you described on it.

So far, my small collection is all-corgi (The pre-falkands Shar, Gulf War Bucc, and 27th squad Tornado), but i'd like an F-15. I'd like a tomcat as well, but reading all the posts about how no-one makes an accurate one has put me off a bit.

Edited March 2, 2006 by RFT

[David Hingtgen]

Arrgh! MW went down for like 10 mins the MOMENT I clicked to reply, had a nice long reply typed out. Short version of what I said:

Plastic kits are (illegally) copied all the time. Airliners to ships to fighter jets. Very easy to spot. Decals get copied too, errors and all. Dragon can legally copy Hasegawa AFAIK, though they seemed to have copied the horrible Italeria Super Hornet instead of Hasegawa's. They copied the Hasegawa Super Hornet WEAPONS though. (the only real errors in the Hase kit and that's the parts they copied) But most everything else is unauthorized copying. Even plastic kits are often copies of other kits too! Not directly when there's a scale change usually, just "it's very obvious they had this kit sitting right next to them and were very "inspired" by it". And Hasegawa is THE source for copying anything. Strangely, that should imply high accuracy, but it seems copiers have the amazing ability to emphasize errors and minimize accuracies.

The Dragon F-15 I have is this one:

http://www.flyingmule.com/products/DM-50148

It is the most accurate of Dragon's, taking into account everything I can.

However, the Witty F-15 is just as nice. For every thing the Dragon has slightly better, the Witty has something else better than Dragon. They are quite equal overall. Biggest difference really is that the Witty has fixed gear and weapons, but has working rudders, airbrake and canopy. Paint colors are better than Dragon, paint quality could be a bit lower. Accuracy issues are of similar size/nature/number/magnitude. There's about 4 little things wrong on the Witty that Dragon did right, and about 4 little things wrong on the Dragon that Witty did right.

http://www.flyingmule.com/products/WT-WTW72005-1

See which you want, and feel free to ask anything---I'll happily discuss the most minor of details, from tailhook fairings to stub-pylon adapters.

Corgi: I have the 45 Sq. (Honington) Tornado, "Gunfighter" P-51, "Annette" F-4C, and the 899 Sq Anniversary Shar. Will pick up an F-4J when they do a scheme I like. (Well, I like the VF-74 one but they screwed the markings up a lot IMHO, despite researching the real thing at their local museum in the UK--amazing).

PS--anything Corgi calls an F-4B or F-4N isn't a B or N at all. But their F-4C, D, and J are quite nice.

Edited March 2, 2006 by David Hingtgen

[Nied]

I just realized we're almost up to 100 pages in this thread (for all I know this post will do it)! Props to Shin for starting it!

[David Hingtgen]

Gemini just posted pics of their 1/72 Warbirds.

http://www.geminijets.com/aces/

PS---with my forum settings this is page 79 of the thread.

Edited March 2, 2006 by David Hingtgen

[Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0]

I just realized we're almost up to 100 pages in this thread (for all I know this post will do it)!  Props to Shin for starting it!

375741[/snapback]

Thanks man!

Doe has anyone seen pics commemorating the retirement of the JASDF F-1? I know it is sooon if not already overwith...and the JASDF comes up with some awesome commemorative schemes. And to celebrate our 100 pager...

F-8 vs A-4.

The F-8 was a fighter many navy pilots loved. The A-4 was a plane aggressor pilots learned to teach students with and was a manueverable adversary in its own right, though primarily an attack bird.

The last F-8s were used in the French aeronavale'. The last A-4 variant was the A-4R....which was morphed into an a2a fighter.

So fellas....which is the better fighter? The F-8E/J/P or the A-4R?

I say skyhawk gets the avionics advantage but the F-8's got the speed. I say F-8.

Discuss!

[David Hingtgen]

VFA-154's new CAG scheme:

Much better. It's BLACK and red now, instead of grey and red.

EDIT. Arrrgh, I really really really truly verily hate Invision's embedded auto-replace feature. It's screwing up the link. Same reason we keep getting F-14D® in our posts--it auto-replaces our typing into the registered trademark sign, and it's doing the same thing to the URL I'm linking to.

Here's link that this forum doesn't change half the letters in the URL of:

http://www.myaviation.net/search/photo_sea...php?id=00550791

Then just click on "165910" in the description to get all the other pics of it.

Edited March 4, 2006 by David Hingtgen

[RFT]

So fellas....which is the better fighter?  The F-8E/J/P or the A-4R?

I say skyhawk gets the avionics advantage but the F-8's got the speed.  I say F-8. 

Discuss!

375816[/snapback]

I'd go with the F-8, unless the pilot decides to turn-fight with the scooter, then the A-4's probably going to be the better fighter.

[David Hingtgen]

I'd just plain vote for the F-8. Why? Its model designator is F, not A. Plus it has an afterburner. And most important of all, it looks way cooler.

F vs A explanation: while many an "F" plane has become a great attacker (or only really is an attacker) I have yet to hear of an "A" plane doing well in air combat.

PS---I was just posting with an F-8 pilot in another forum and he said the F-8H was hands-down the best version, especially compared to the J. Quote: "J for junk, H for hotrod".

Edited March 5, 2006 by David Hingtgen

[Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0]

Did he care to say what specifically made the H a lot better than the J? I forgot there was an H version.

[David Hingtgen]

Basically:

The key difference between the J and the E was that the J had all the changes made to the E(FN). The E(FN) is the French Crusader. It has double-hinged leading edge flaps, larger stabs, and blown flaps to reduce its approach speed. This was needed for France's smaller carriers. (And the F-8 was never an easy plane to land on a carrier).

However, all those changes added weight, and the blown flaps sucked power and response time straight from the engine when it was most needed. So it actually handled worse, even if it did come in slower.

The US Navy later made some adjustments and added more powerful engines, but it pretty much cancelled out all the approach improvements---so like often happens, they spent a lot of time and money just to get the J back to how it was like before it was converted!

The F-8H was the upgraded D. The D is THE fastest and best-performing of the original Crusaders, period. No others come close. Now, the later H's got even more powerful engines than most J's and didn't have the weight or drag of E/J. I think the H might even be able to outrun the D (same airframe plus more power=faster), but I've never read anything about its performance.

Basically:

The H is the upgraded version of the best-performing Crusader (the D), while the J is the heavier, less responsive version of the E. The J may be more technologically advanced and "survivable", but not better or "more fun" for a pilot. Think about the standard F-15E---sure it's a far more advanced, multirole, more useful plane compared to the F-15C, but for sheer agility and speed the F-15C will beat it, even if the E is stripped down. I think most pilots would rather fly around in a C than an E.

A note he had at the end said that the last F-8 squadron utterly refused to take freshly-converted J's, and wanted the older H's retired from a previous squadron.

Edited March 6, 2006 by David Hingtgen

[David Hingtgen]

Well this is interesting:

http://www.aviationnow.com/avnow/news/chan...ws/030606p1.xml

The parts for the 3rd XB-70 Valkyrie were assembled and converted as a launch platform for satellites?

[ghostryder]

Hornet development - from F-5 to Superbug

Most of you on this thread probably know about the origins of the Hornet, but I though this website was cool as it shows pics of all the various stages, including the Hornet 2000 Eurocanard concept which I haven't been able to find a pic of until now. Looks like they just moved the tailerons up near the cockpit (ugh). That F-20 tigershark is one badass mofo

Just makes it more amazing that the Navy is trying to pass off an F-5 derivative (altough heavily modifed) as a repalcement for the F-14D.

Edited March 6, 2006 by ghostryder

[Apollo Leader]

Well this is interesting:

http://www.aviationnow.com/avnow/news/chan...ws/030606p1.xml

The parts for the 3rd XB-70 Valkyrie were assembled and converted as a launch platform for satellites?

377135[/snapback]

The article references XB-70 Valkyrie: The Ride to Valhalla which I have. From what I remember, something like 80% of Valkyrie number 3's parts and sub-assemblies were completed. There have been attempts by the author and other Valkyrie fanatics to find these parts, but it appears pretty much all of it was scrapped though I think some parts are floating around out there. I don't think it would have been practicle to have finished Valkyrie #3 out of bits and pieces that were built, finished, and scattered all over the place 20 some years earlier.

But the stories of a XB-70 size aircraft flying out of Groom Lake has been around for quite a few years. Testors even had a model out that looked like an A-12 Blackbird on steroids! It had the natural metallic finish with black leading edges.

[Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0]

Hornet development - from F-5 to Superbug

Most of you on this thread probably know about the origins of the Hornet, but I though this website was cool as it shows pics of all the various stages, including the Hornet 2000 Eurocanard concept which I haven't been able to find a pic of until now. Looks like they just moved the tailerons up near the cockpit (ugh). That F-20 tigershark is one badass mofo 

Just makes it more amazing that the Navy is trying to pass off an F-5 derivative (altough heavily modifed) as a repalcement for the F-14D.

377274[/snapback]

Pics where? and its all not in english when I load it up....

[Skull Leader]

Basically:

The key difference between the J and the E was that the J had all the changes made to the E(FN).  The E(FN) is the French Crusader.  It has double-hinged leading edge flaps, larger stabs, and blown flaps to reduce its approach speed.  This was needed for France's smaller carriers.  (And the F-8 was never an easy plane to land on a carrier).

However, all those changes added weight, and the blown flaps sucked power and response time straight from the engine when it was most needed.  So it actually handled worse, even if it did come in slower. 

The US Navy later made some adjustments and added more powerful engines, but it pretty much cancelled out all the approach improvements---so like often happens, they spent a lot of time and money just to get the J back to how it was like before it was converted!

The F-8H was the upgraded D.  The D is THE fastest and best-performing of the original Crusaders, period.  No others come close.  Now, the later H's got even more powerful engines than most J's and didn't have the weight or drag of E/J.  I think the H might even be able to outrun the D (same airframe plus more power=faster), but I've never read anything about its performance. 

Basically:

The H is the upgraded version of the best-performing Crusader (the D), while the J is the heavier, less responsive version of the E.  The J may be more technologically advanced and "survivable", but not better or "more fun" for a pilot.  Think about the standard F-15E---sure it's a far more advanced,  multirole, more useful plane compared to the F-15C, but for sheer agility and speed the F-15C will beat it, even if the E is stripped down.  I think most pilots would rather fly around in a C than an E. 

A note he had at the end said that the last F-8 squadron utterly refused to take freshly-converted J's, and wanted the older H's retired from a previous squadron.

376956[/snapback]

Yeah, an F-8H was a pretty boss ride. I personally can't see any A-4 (regardless of the variant) doing anything but getting it's ass handed to it, but NAS Miramar and NAS Fallon's records are absolutely loaded with classroom hops where Aggressor skyhawks made chumps out of pretty much every F-prefix aircraft the Navy has flown for the past 40 years. I attribute that to pilot skill though. In an even-up skill setting, I'd still say F-8H for the win.

[Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0]

What was the last squadron to use the F-8H? I also think it could beat the skyhawk but if in a turning fight, might have a hard time against the A-4R. however wth an afterburner and higher speed/acceleration, I don't think the F-8 would have a problem outdiving and swooping in for the kill.

[Retracting Head Ter Ter]

Basically:

but NAS Miramar and NAS Fallon's records are absolutely loaded with classroom hops where Aggressor skyhawks made chumps out of pretty much every F-prefix aircraft the Navy has flown for the past 40 years. I attribute that to pilot skill though. In an even-up skill setting, I'd still say F-8H for the win.

377479[/snapback]

Question, unless there are some restrictive engagement parameters; if the guy in the hot-rod F prefix just kept his speed up and boomed-and-zoomed, even if he couldn't get the A-4, the A-4 wouldn't be able to get a reasonable shot in either would it?

I can understand the novice getting his butt kicked if he tried to do the 'drop flaps and gear and let him shoot past me' movie trick or tried to get into a turning fight or tried to do a loop-behind-the-guy-at-your-six party trick but I don't see how an A4 can get a shot in on something like a F-14D if the tomcat pilot didn't slow down.

Or were the novices really that raw?

[Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0]

Im assuming raw, since most pilots going to topgun are mostly used to fighting their squadmates in the same planes....totally different ball game once they fight something smaller handled by an instructor rather than a pilot who probably started out on the same tour as said pilot.

Whoo hoo page 100!

[ghostryder]

Hornet development - from F-5 to Superbug

Most of you on this thread probably know about the origins of the Hornet, but I though this website was cool as it shows pics of all the various stages, including the Hornet 2000 Eurocanard concept which I haven't been able to find a pic of until now. Looks like they just moved the tailerons up near the cockpit (ugh). That F-20 tigershark is one badass mofo 

Just makes it more amazing that the Navy is trying to pass off an F-5 derivative (altough heavily modifed) as a repalcement for the F-14D.

377274[/snapback]

Pics where? and its all not in english when I load it up....

377317[/snapback]

It's not in English, but I don't know why pics don't show up for you

Anyhoo, here's another page with some LWF concepts, if anyone cares. It shows concepts submitted by Boeing, Lockheed, and Vought that I've never seen before:

LWF background

[Skull Leader]

Question, unless there are some restrictive engagement parameters; if the guy in the hot-rod F prefix just kept his speed up and boomed-and-zoomed, even if he couldn't get the A-4, the A-4 wouldn't be able to get a reasonable shot in either would it?

I can understand the novice getting his butt kicked if he tried to do the 'drop flaps and gear and let him shoot past me' movie trick or tried to get into a turning fight or tried to do a loop-behind-the-guy-at-your-six party trick but I don't see how an A4 can get a shot in on something like a F-14D if the tomcat pilot didn't slow down.

Or were the novices really that raw?

377497[/snapback]

I wouldn't call it a matter of being raw so much as perhaps not used to dissimilar combat training. I'm far from being an expert on how USN pilots train in basic combat manueuvers, but our Aggressor squadrons almost universally use different aircraft for the role (F-16Ns, F-5Es, A-4s, etc later Tomcats and Hornets were added to the roster as Flanker and Fulcrum simulators) largely because most of the aircraft we deem our pilots likely to encounter from "the enemy" are smaller and more maneuverable (although except for maybe the case of flankers, "Faster" is doubtful).

I seriously doubt that pilots go into Fighter Weapons School without SOME inkling of the capability of the aggressor jets. Consider, as an analogy, the air war in Vietnam. The Navy was flying arguably "better" (read: more capable) aircraft, while the NVAF was flying the less technologically advanced MiG series (17,19,21). Although our jets were usually much faster (and in the case of the phantom, far more capable in the vertical/high-alpha situations), MiGs still managed to land plenty of kills against our forces. In fact, before the advent of the Navy Fighter Weapons School, (as much as I hate to paraphrase the movie), our kill-ratio was in jepardy of going into the negative. Top Gun taught our pilots to take advantage of the strengths of our aircraft to maintain the upper hand (Hard rule probably often heard in the late 60s/early 70s: "NEVER get into a turning fight with a MiG!")

Knowing something like that I suppose you'd be forced, by default, to consider navy pilots as "raw" until they'd completed the FWS syllabus. In turn, knowing THAT... we could guess that the ratio of wins/losses for the active duty squadrons vs. the aggressors probably flip-flops as the syllabus progresses (reflecting the training of the pilots)

This is all guesswork, mind you, but it makes sense in MY head at least!

Furthermore, with tensions as high as they are constantly with Iran, I'm amazed we're not maintaining an aggressor squadron of F-14As...

Edited March 7, 2006 by Skull Leader

[Nied]

with my forum settings this is page 79 of the thread.

375788[/snapback]

Well change them then. We're all partying here on page 100 while you're still stuck on page 80!

[Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0]

http://www.watch.impress.co.jp/game/docs/20060307/overg.htm

FINALLY a good console sim ASIDE AECA....and plus F-14A/B are in here!!! Makes me want a 360 so bad.

[Phalanx]

Hey guys I have a question that some of you might not considered and I'm not sure if somebody already asked this question earlier in the thread because I didn't look through all those pages but since the Tu-160 Blackjack looks like the American B-1B Lancer, how come Rockwell didn't sue Tupolev Design Bureau o copyright infringement in terms of the design? That really was an enigma to me?

[Sundown]

Hey guys I have a question that some of you might not considered and I'm not sure if somebody already asked this question earlier in the thread because I didn't look through all those pages but since the  Tu-160 Blackjack looks like the American B-1B Lancer, how come Rockwell didn't sue Tupolev Design Bureau o copyright infringement in terms of the design? That really was an enigma to me?

378541[/snapback]

Probably because there's no such thing as international copyright? Copyrights aren't enforceable in a foreign country unless that country agrees to a copyright treaty with the US. That's not likely to happen with your cold-war superpower enemy. You know, all that 80's stuff where we thought we were all going to get nuked.

[Phalanx]

Oh I see. If that's the case, when I start my own aerospace business, I'm gonna start taking designs of my favorite Russian aircraft and make my own under a new name. LOL

[Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0]

So any of you boys picking up OVer G for Xbox 360? I think itll be the BEST console sim out there! And plus the last time we had a realistic F-14 besides AECA(Aero wings/AEro Elite), was Fleet Defender Gold which was....years back.

Also I did notice that you can arm your tomcat with the phoenix in this game....which I did not think was going to happen since this is mostly a dogfighting game. Although I could be wrong since it does have realistic ops and such. This is no ace combat arcadey stuff!

IN other words I love it~!

[Coota0]

Shin have you looked at this sim (it's PC not console) Fighter Ops

[Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0]

Whoa I had not seen that before, that is AWESOME!!! Bout time we get more pc modern fighter sims! GeeZ I miss Jane's!

[Phalanx]

Yo Shin, have you played Jetfighter V and Jetfighter 2015 for the PC?

[Lightning]

So any of you boys picking up OVer G for Xbox 360? I think itll be the BEST console sim out there!  And plus the last time we had a realistic F-14 besides AECA(Aero wings/AEro Elite), was Fleet Defender Gold which was....years back.

Also I did notice that you can arm your tomcat with the phoenix in this game....which I did not think was going to happen since this is mostly a dogfighting game. Although I could be wrong since it does have realistic ops and such.  This is no ace combat arcadey stuff!

IN other words I love it~!

378584[/snapback]

holy crap! I actually have Fleet Defender Gold!

I just hafta find it....

[Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0]

Nope last I played was Jetfighter 3 ultimate. Thing I hate about Jetfighter 3 was the realism of flight model wasn't that accurate. I thought the carrier landings were cool though.

Guys any idea on what kind of plane the JASDF will replace their F-2 and F-15J's with? I heard it was a new FX project but I could be wrong. I also did hear the raptor rumor...a hiko kyodotai raptor would be PWNAGE in camo godsauce.

Also....what does the JASDF use the F-4EJ Kai's for now since the F-15J's are the primary air superiority fighter?

and btw fellas admiral toys just released its 1/18 scale F-86, and i hear this tangoes with the best of them..perhaps beating 21st's 1/18 F-104 for best 1/18 plane!(the XD F-104 was known as the best 1/18 plane to buy for quite some time now).

[Nied]

I imagine that Lockheed will try to push the F-35, I think that Japan would want an F-22J. Eurofighter is gearing up to offer the Typhoon and is working on making some serious concessions to get them to buy it (including indigenous production which I have trouble seeing with either the F-22 or the F-35). Dasault (Rafale) and Boeing (either some form of F-15K derivative or an F/A-18EJ/FJ) will most likely put in offers as well.

My money is on either the Raptor or the Typhoon.

Edited March 10, 2006 by Nied

[Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0]

I imagine that Lockheed will try to push the F-35, I think that Japan would want an F-22J.  Eurofighter is gearing up to offer the Typhoon and is working on making some serious concessions to get them to buy it (including indigenous production which I have trouble seeing with either the F-22 or the F-35).  Dasault (Rafale) and Boeing (either some form of F-15K derivative or an F/A-18EJ/FJ) will most likely put in offers as well. 

My money is on either the Raptor or the Typhoon.

378769[/snapback]

Do you think they would offer up the super bug as a replacement for the F-2? I imagine it could take on its role efficiently and possibly do a better job.