Any chance of you reposting your AW Aries/Armadillo here?
I never did find a sideview of the Hyena. So, I had to (ick, ack!) paint one myself.
Do you have more views of Panther mailplane? A 3-view would be lovely.
Cheers Bladerunner. The CF-189 retouch was fun. I probably overdid the weathering on the CF-18 but wanted it to look suitably beat-up (don't want to outshine the new kid!).That's gorgeous and it's got a great family resemblance to both the CF-100 and the C-102.
Next up is an alternative-alternative take on Litvak's AltCan scenario. There's a backstory for the CX-112 but it's a bit too long for here.
That's gorgeous and it's got a great family resemblance to both the CF-100 and the C-102.
That's gorgeous and it's got a great family resemblance to both the CF-100 and the C-102.
Now we need a 1/72 C102 Jetliner to build all these beautiful birds. :)
Now we need a 1/72 C102 Jetliner to build all these beautiful birds. :)
One for Tophe ;)Very nice blend of Noratlas and AT3.
Brilliant!!! :)
I am quite sure the RCAF flew these. Do you have a picture of these one bad boys in 428 SQN markings?
Thanks EH. And now for something a little more bellicose -- the Avro Belenus bomber.Agree 100%.
Belenus ('brilliant'), BTW, was the celtic Sun-God. Seemed to fit for a nuclear-armed bomber.
Brilliant!!! :)
I am quite sure the RCAF flew these. Do you have a picture of these one bad boys in 428 SQN markings?
Nooooo! 408 Sqn. ;)
Tricky but not impossible.Nope, PSR, repeat, PSR, repeat ... ;)
Thanks Greg. Reshaping the leading edge/original intakes would the tricky bit, I'd think.
RCAF Belenus: I've dodged the 408/428 bun-fight (since everyone will remember that RCAF Belenus on Black Bucks didn't carry unit markings or even serials).
So here she is: a 4x8 Sqn Belenus inbound to Port Stanley. Just spotted by an Argie patrol boat, the FE is launching flares while the pilots start jinking...
Thanks lads. One puzzle on the Belenus is where to put the air brakes. I'm guessing outboard from the Vulcan position (which would be directly in front of the Belenus' intakes).
Thanks lads. One puzzle on the Belenus is where to put the air brakes. I'm guessing outboard from the Vulcan position (which would be directly in front of the Belenus' intakes).
How about split aileron arrangement?
([url]http://www.wallpaperpimper.com/wallpaper/Military/A6_Intruder/A6-Intruder-3-BK420SUXGH-1024x768.jpg[/url])
net photo
I believe the B-2 bomber has it as well.
... Perhaps the Belenus could also have airbrakes on the top and bottom of the fuselage?
Nice Defiants!
I thought Kwangsi AF was independent and used the triangular markings for a bit after 1934?
Nice Defiants!
Thank EH. [Edit: here's a pair of desert Defiants ... can ya tell I have a thing about S-Guns?]
Another oldie: a tandem rotor Hercules derivative.Makes as much sense as the Mil Mi-12 though I prefer some of the more recent gyrodyne Hercules derivative.
I seem to recall there being a real proposal along these lines.Which lines? The gyrodyne Hercules proposal is fairly recent. A Hercules fuselage was mooted for the proposed technology demonstrator for the Quad Tilt Rotor (kinda want to see that done with an AN-12 fuselage to give a tail gun) but I don't remember seeing this particular twin-rotor variant of the Hercules fuselage. OTOH, I can see such an aircraft using the rotors from the CH-53E to deal with all the power there.
Evan: There's a very short piece in Flight for 28 Feb 1963
[url]http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1963/1963%20-%200295.html?search=Lockheed%20California[/url] ([url]http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1963/1963%20-%200295.html?search=Lockheed%20California[/url])
Flight described the Lockheed-California concept as a "Hybrid Helicopter" capable of V/STOL take-off. That suggests powered rotors but isn't really conclusive.
The image came from the Lockheed-California Newsbureau which described the design (rather redundantly) as a "Hybrid Heli-Plane", saying that this "cargo carrier ... would be able to take off and land helicopter-style." Again, not really conclusive.
A bit of silliness (inspired by Tophe) ...:-* Congratulations! This is better than I could have done myself!
Back to airborne targeters ... this is the CA-142 Gonzo Gunship ;)
([url]http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=351.0;attach=1460;image[/url])Missed this one ... I love what you did with the clunk! :-*
Back to airborne targeters ... this is the CA-142 Gonzo Gunship ;)
I was going to make a comment about the little known 1998 Beaver, Otter, Moose and Elk (BOME) pronounced Boom, uprising that almost over threw the Canadian Gov't if were not for Gonzo taking care of the ring leaders, Castor canadensis. With few well placed rounds of the 40MM cannon into the secret rebel HQ which was later revealed to be an unassuming Beaver Lodge located in Algonquin Park on the Lake of Two Rivers, just a few hours away from Ottawa. It was taking place right under our noses. Close call folks.
Gonzo saved the day.
A pair of armoured vehicles from Upnorth's Austria storyline. Both are air defence derivatives of the Canaan IFV.
[url]http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=358.msg8457#msg8457[/url] ([url]http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=358.msg8457#msg8457[/url])
Left: CCV ADATS (aka Medium Armoured Mobile Air Defence Vehicle) of 119 Bty, Royal Canadian Artillery. CFB Gagetown, May 1994.
Right: Canaan Mk.VI (Oto Melara SIDAM 25 turret) refurbished and upgraded for an unannounced export customer. On display (alongside Canaan Otomatic prototype in similar scheme) at Eurosatory 2006.
Any chance of you incorporate a Krauss-Maffei Wildcat 30mm SPAAG turret, or the South Korean K-30 Biho (Flying Tiger) SPAAG turret? Which I believe was itself an adaptation of the Wildcat system
Great stuff! Can't wait for more when you get time. :)
That is a great family of tracked vehicles, in fact, you've given me an idea, and I have an old ROCO miniatures gepard spaag just waiting to be molded and produced in these guises
Cheers Brian. Here's an oldie more to your tastes ... ¡Viva la República!
P.S. Generalissimo Francisco Franco is still dead.
How about an air-racing Buchon with a low-drag canopy and the Merlin replaced by a Griffon?
A less successful Type 294 descendant was the Vickers Wellington (aka 'Twin Wellesley'), a twin-engined bomber.Is the Twin in the name just for twin-engined or also for twin-fuselage? ;)
Thanks lads. Now just a bit of silliness based on the Wellesley...
The first is the Type 294 Wellesley PR Mk III, immediately distinguished by its Rolls-Royce Merlin I engine. But the Type 294 was actually a twin-engined design. Where the observer's cockpit had been, sat a 'slave' Rolls-Royce Kestrel XVI driving a large Bentley blower to boost the Merlin's high-altitude performance.
Is the Twin in the name just for twin-engined or also for twin-fuselage?
Wow, great three-engined version, will you pixelize it?
I'm not as thorough as you Tophe :-[My English is not fluent enough to be sure, but I think I disagree: YOUR profiles are thorough indeed, according to me, I mean: both perfect and inventive and pleasant and nice (well not "both" but "fourth"?) hehe... ;)
Where the observer's cockpit had been, sat a 'slave' Rolls-Royce Kestrel XVI driving a large Bentley blower to boost the Merlin's high-altitude performance.
Why "believable"? Is it a fake picture? It seems so perfect, I am pretty sure this is true, not fake, am I wrong?
JCF: Yep, 'Roots' would've been my pre-aphasia choice of names :-[
Thanks guys. Here's an oldie that may appeal to Brian ...
JCF: Yep, 'Roots' would've been my pre-aphasia choice of names :-[
JCF: Yep, 'Roots' would've been my pre-aphasia choice of names :-[
Cool, so an installation like the classic front-mounted GMC 6-71 blower use in hot-rods and dragsters
before the top-mount arrangement became dominant:
([url]http://allshops.org/community/CommunityAlbum/9990119731829.jpg[/url])
My take on ysi_maniac's Advanced Britannia [url]http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=957.15[/url] ([url]http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=957.15[/url])
My take on ysi_maniac's Advanced Britannia [url]http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=957.15[/url] ([url]http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=957.15[/url])
Yowsa that's sleek and stunning! You & Mr Ysi would make a top-notch design bureau!
Very nice indeed. That needs to share an airport concourse with a tilt-rotor Dash 8 and a Dash 8/Rotodyne cross.Yowsa that's sleek and stunning! You & Mr Ysi would make a top-notch design bureau!
Cheers Brian. The YsiApo OKB perhaps? "We can paint it any colour you like but spats are mandatory!"
The Dash 8/Q Series keeps popping up elsewhere on the forum so here's an oldie ...
Hmmm, advanced Brittannia, eh?
... and seeing as I have a 1/144 CL-44 in the stash ... :icon_fsm:
Hmmm, advanced Brittannia, eh?
... and seeing as I have a 1/144 CL-44 in the stash ... :icon_fsm:
Jon: Advanced Yukon? ;D
Nah, I'd keep it [Loftleiðir]
^ Ooo ooo!!! Any chance of a 2-tone Mediterranean blue/white Coastal Command one? The Uxbridge looks great!
^ Ooo ooo!!! Any chance of a 2-tone Mediterranean blue/white Coastal Command one? The Uxbridge looks great!
2-tone Mediterranean blue
Yowsa that's sleek and stunning! You & Mr Ysi would make a top-notch design bureau!
Cheers Brian. The YsiApo OKB perhaps? "We can paint it any colour you like but spats are mandatory!"
The Dash 8/Q Series keeps popping up elsewhere on the forum so here's an oldie ...
EH: Thanks for the refs. When I first heard of this scheme for Beauforts I was envisoning a 'solid' upper scheme of Dk Med Blue. But, if I understand correctly now, it was actually a 2-tone upper scheme of Dk and Lt Med Blue?
Thanks! I had in mind a cheap, early '60s COIN aircraft -- wing pylons, tip tanks/rocket pods, etc. I don't know if the steel-tube frame of the T-6/Harvard fuselage is actually wide enough to accommodate an ejector seat but the Sabre 6 canopy plopped on there nicely ;D
That looks great, and surprisingly un-Japanese.
Cheers,
Logan
Thanks for the links Jeffry. That Stanley seat looks ideal ... and the timeframe is perfect for what I had in mind :)
If you are working on this project in 1/48th scale you are in luck, Squadron Mail Order offers a resin 1/48th scale Stanley seat ([url]http://www.squadron.com/ItemDetails.asp?item=TD48424[/url]) in their True Details product line.
I've kept the 'Japaneseness' for this one. Following from Greg's suggestion that the Japanese may be operating aircraft alongside their British allies.Kept the roundel, but in a RAF camo, this is weird and funny... or crazy, gently crazy I mean ;)
Kept the roundel, but in a RAF camo, this is weird and funny... or crazy, gently crazy I mean ;)
It does need a 'Malcolm Hood' though.
Thanks guys! Here's another oldie ...
Logan: Glad you like her. I was intrigued by Greg's suggestion of Japan coming into the war on Britain's side as per WWI. An ETO Japanese AAF aircraft didn't offer sufficient marking variation to tempt. I am toying with doing an RAAF version though. If Japan was an Ally, it rather makes sense for Australia to source imported aircraft from slightly closer to home.
Go on...do a Dart powered Ta-152!!!
Or a double dart post war Spanish development of the Do-335...
Not a Dart engined one, but did someone say Turboprop Do-335?
([url]http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/melbsyd/335c3.jpg[/url])
I don't know how you guys feel, but I think an FAA Rufe would go down well right about now.
Weren't they built under licence in a Scotish factory?
They were built in Canada by Canadian Car and Foundry (CCF) along side the Hurricanes . ;D
Soooo...tempted get another A-10 kit....but where to get Afghan decals?
That is gorgeous, apophenia. When's the model coming out to go with the box art? :D
Cheers,
Logan
:icon_bofh:The more I look at that last one, the more it looks like a RR Griffon engine from a Shak or Lincoln! Now that would be impressive!
What do these ones scream Litvyak? ;D
Stiamo arrivando per voi, vaffanculi britanni! ;D
Griffon-powered Mustangs came up elsewhere. So, here is the P-51G ...Belated thanks for this one.
The North American XP-51G were converted XP-51Fs with British Merlin 145Ms driving 5-bladed propellers. In November 1944, the second XP-51G
yes, nice - obviously Caproni had a hand in it too !
At last, I made what I dreamed of from your one, thanks!Griffon-powered Mustangs came up elsewhere. So, here is the P-51G ...Belated thanks for this one.
The North American XP-51G were converted XP-51Fs with British Merlin 145Ms driving 5-bladed propellers. In November 1944, the second XP-51G
Thanks Tophe. Love your P-51GB -- I guess the P-51BG would have to radial-engined and have the cockpit moved back to the base of the fin ;DThanks Apophenia, I love your idea.
The Italians are weird.
They make absolutely gorgeous cars and the people generally aren't hard to look at, but their trains and airplanes are, with a few exceptions, pretty awful looking. :P
I'm glad I'm not the only one who occasionally inverts the fuselage to see what it would look like! :)Don't forget our Brian da Basher that built a "Latecoère" from an inverted Heinkel 219... He nicely gave it to me, and I am proud of it.
... and the people generally aren't hard to look at ...
I have a plan to do a Ba88 with either BMW801s or DB605s
AND, check out that snazzy FAF uniform worn by Lance Margon (who looks amazingly like Col. Roscoe Turner in this photo :D).
Nice idea Tophe! I started work on a Mustang similar to the P.12 but somehow it kept crying out Navion to me. So, here's a civilian mid-engined Mustang derivative that turns into a jet-for-four.Well, I tried also, getting a result somehow. Thanks again! :)
I see a distinct Latécoère 298 look happening here.
'North: as promised, here's some more Namao-based heavies.
The Keewatin filled a gap between tactical and strategic transport for the RCAF. Another windy backstory but, long story/shorter: CC-152A is a Kawasaki C-1 outfitted for the RCAF by Canadair. The CC-152B was a trials conversion to BE.53 Pegasus (Bristol Aero Engines Canada). The production STOL variant was the CC-152C.
Next installment for the alternative AltCan: the Canadair-Douglas CC-233 Labrador.
With Douglas ending C-133B project, the time was right for a joint venture. A shortened C-133 fuselage was mated to CL-44 wings, tail, and Tyne turboprops. The RCAF used the CC-233 Labrador to shuttle NATO fighters to Europe.
Unfortunately for Douglas, the USAF didn't bite. Hopes had been pinned on riding on USAF CL-44 orders. When that [RW] MATS order fell through, so too did any chance of a USAF 'C-233'.
Any chance of one of these in an RAAF scheme???
I understand the CC-233 was a real 'dog' in RAAF service...
... but how not quite right in the Italian ones!
I don't use the word sexy very often but if I did.......
spats[/b]!
I never thought I'd say that, but with the Mk. II, I've finally seen a Blackburn that's easy on the eyes!
A Uhu with Griffons and five blade props?! Hell, yeah!!! :)
Is that your finger in the photo, Greg?
It looks like it's out on the starboard wing to me (= asymetric layout ;) ) Obviously it'd need an exposed drive-shaft across to the fuselage then a V-drive up to the prop !!
Is that your finger in the photo, Greg?
Err...yes... :-[
Here are some more I took:
([url]http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/photo-33.jpg[/url])
What's that big white thing in the back ground? ;D
If it were a twin-boomer with 2 fins and 2 engines, I guess there would be contrarotating propellers in the nose, no?It looks like it's out on the starboard wing to me (= asymetric layout ;) ) Obviously it'd need an exposed drive-shaft across to the fuselage then a V-drive up to the prop !!Or is it actually a twin-boomer with cross shaft drives? >:D
It's the Ling-Temco-Vought XC-142A transport-turned-demonstrator. Under the Defence Production Sharing Agreement, the US was to develop a 4-engined tiltwing transport (the C-142A) while Canada developed a 2-engined tiltwing transport (the Canadair CL-84 Dynavert)
It's the Ling-Temco-Vought XC-142A transport-turned-demonstrator. Under the Defence Production Sharing Agreement, the US was to develop a 4-engined tiltwing transport (the C-142A) while Canada developed a 2-engined tiltwing transport (the Canadair CL-84 Dynavert)
Or possibly the XB-70 if that is the big thing referred to...
Or possibly the XB-70 if that is the big thing referred to...
I didn't know about the shared developed between the CL-84 and C-142.
I'm keen on buried mid-engines for fighters. But are they enough?
That's quite the Fw-190 concept, but that intake duct along the side for the second engine is going to be a huge drag penalty.
Could you not just design the underbelly radiator housing in such a way that the intake could be incorporated into it?
Yep, that'd be a nice, simple solution 'north! I was originally thinking a Jumo 213 in front and a DB603 in the centre. Luftwaffe erks would've loved that!
Raafif's Corsair rearrangements got me musing ...
[url]http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=852.165[/url] ([url]http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=852.165[/url])
What if that honker of an engine was put in the middle?
.That's quite the Fw-190 concept, but that intake duct along the side for the second engine is going to be a huge drag penalty.
Could you not just design the underbelly radiator housing in such a way that the intake could be incorporated into it?
Yep, that'd be a nice, simple solution 'north! I was originally thinking a Jumo 213 in front and a DB603 in the centre. Luftwaffe erks would've loved that!
Ooo, I like a lot. It's like a Dutch PZL.23 Karas.
I'm keen on buried mid-engines for fighters. But are they enough?
Sorry to hear THAT! But I can relate - I once lost over 1000 drawing files. Save, schmave!
Now do the turboprop version...Or a twin-turboprop version with exhausts more or less where the Sea Hawk exhausts are.
Nice. Inspired by the Me 509?
Oh, damn, that looks nice!!Nice. Inspired by the Me 509?
Perhaps subconsciously?
Now here's Evan's turboprop version (the Turbo Hawk with AS Twin Boas)
Damn! Now I know what to do with that SeaHawk kit...My thoughts as I have an Eastern Express/Novo/Frog kit to do something with. that looks most enticing.
Launch or leave sounds interesting(?) but I was thinking Lend-Lease
And here she is ... the early version Grumman Model 51 as an operational FAA Tigercat FR.Mk.IIA
Thanks folks. [arc': "LL" as in 'Launch and Leave' or ... ?]
This time it is a whif. What if Grumman persisted with the XF5F theme but scaled up for larger engines? I present the F7F-1 Tomcat (original RW name for the Tigercat).
Very beatiful aircraft, have you considered using a Sea Fury canopy?
Like to see EF 044 as 1/72 kit.
A Hungarian Ju-169 with Jendrassik turboprop engines could be interesting
The extended rear glazing is a local modification performed by the Valtion lentokonetehdas.Wonderful improvement, great!
Post-Armistice adaptations of the Dewoitine D.520.Damn, I really like that second one. I could see it doing quite well in that use, too.
Top is a Luftwaffe trainer on loan to l'aviation de LVF in Belarus, July 1942. This unit was formed to support the Légion des Volontaires Français fighting alongside the Wehrmacht in the Soviet Union. This 1er Groupe fighter retains a spirale-schnauze but ALVF insignia cover other German markings.
Aircraft of l'aviation de LVF were to wear the 'Fleury cross' but the dominant red of this roundel was deemed unwise on the Eastern Front. Instead, a simple balkan cross was applied over the Luftwaffe crosses. The hache à double emblem of Maréchal Pétain was used as a squadron insignia.
Bottom is a D.520F of the Ilmavoimat. The D.520Fs were ex-AdlA fighters rebuilt for Finland to a German contract. Other than substituted German equipment, the D.520Fs also received Soviet M-105 engines and armament. All Finnish D.520Fs were assigned to LeLv 32. The extended rear glazing is a local modification performed by the Valtion lentokonetehdas.
further developments of the Dewoitine D.520. I've got a few of those in the works ...teasing... I wish today is next week... :icon_crap: ;)
Elsewhere, Volkodav suggested "SAAB Draken IV, similar in concept the Mirage IV".
[url]http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=695.msg33403#msg33403[/url] ([url]http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=695.msg33403#msg33403[/url])
I present the SAAB Fáfnir supersonic bomber in Flygvapnet service.
Elsewhere, Volkodav suggested "SAAB Draken IV, similar in concept the Mirage IV".
[url]http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=695.msg33403#msg33403[/url] ([url]http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=695.msg33403#msg33403[/url])
I present the SAAB Fáfnir supersonic bomber in Flygvapnet service.
Elsewhere, Volkodav suggested "SAAB Draken IV, similar in concept the Mirage IV".
[url]http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=695.msg33403#msg33403[/url] ([url]http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=695.msg33403#msg33403[/url])
I present the SAAB Fáfnir supersonic bomber in Flygvapnet service.
Volkodav: Thanks! I was thinking licenced Speys.
Logan: I had imagined a scaled-up version of the Viggen main gear (although I haven't checked to see if any of this would actually work as a scale-o-rama). I like that two-tone camouflage! Maybe this bomber starts out as a Mirage IV-style nuclear strike aircraft and turns into a fast-and-low conventional bomber?
arc': Mjölner sounds good (and Thor's hammer fits). I went with Fáfnir because his technique of spreading poison as a deterrent seemed to suit a nuclear bomber somehow ;)
EH: Absolutely! As soon as that 1984-era Tornado F2 had a lock on with its top-shelf Blue Circle radar, that poor Sleipnir would be toast ;D
The prototype I.Ae.26, combining French-made and Argentine parts, flew in December 1945.:-* I love this one. Belated congratulations!
[BTW, both the D.580 and D.590 were real projects ... but I have absolutely no idea what they woiuld have really looked like!]Do you want me to check my Trait d'Union magazines collection? Maybe they're illustrated inside.
Do you want me to check my Trait d'Union magazines collection? Maybe they're illustrated inside.
I love your new ones, both, while my favourite is the 521M :-*
I like both the D.527 & M.521M :-* The 521 fuselage looks a bit wrinkled tho - did it have a crash ??? ;D
Apophenia, I love your PCV model...
Just a question, as your French seems so perfect: are you a French man joking with the famous PCV letters? (see [url]http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/PCV_(t%C3%A9l%C3%A9phonie)[/url] ([url]http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/PCV_(t%C3%A9l%C3%A9phonie))[/url] ). In France this is very famous for phone calls paid by the receiver. I prefer your own PCV, nicer... ;)
makes you wonder about a similar update to C-141B's with two of the same engines going into the C-5M. Mind you, I had considered an upgraded C-141B using 4XCFM56 engines and with a mod forward of the refueling receptacle to add a probe allowing use of any tanker aircraft out there.
... I had considered an upgraded C-141B using 4XCFM56 engines and with a mod forward of the refueling receptacle to add a probe allowing use of any tanker aircraft out there.
I always thought the Il-76 glass nose was anachronistic, this is definitely a good fix for that.
Thanks folks. The following are likely the last of my belaboured Dewoitine musings ...Belated congratulations. The notify tool failed to wake me up and come seeing and clapping my hands... :-*
M.520TP
M.780
Thanks lads. These unbuilt projects are sort of like whifs ... or that's what I tell myself ;)
Shipboard Dewoitine D.520 Derivatives for the Aéronautique Navale
The Dewoitine D.780 (another real project) was intended to provide a modern naval fighter for PA-16 carriers, the Joffre and Painlevé. In reality, the Aéronautique Navale received only standard D.520s. But this is whifland ... so, here is the prototype Dewoitine D.780. After its sea trials aboard the Béarn, the D.780 was transferred to Esq AC3 at BAN Cuers-Pierrefeu in SE France.
Later, AC3's D.520s and the D.780 were joined by the first 2-seater, the prototype D.782 (a whif). Intended as a light attack fighter for the Joffre, the D.782 lacked the manoeuvrability of the single-seaters. To acheive a better balance, the ventral radiator bath was to be moved to the nose. The prototype was returned to Toulouse but the
conversion work had just began when France fell to the Wehrmacht.
Cheers! That wing-fold mechanism was actually stolen off an obliging Avenger. Truth be told, I'm not quite sure how you'd arrange the folding of a single-spar wing like the Dewoitine :oSomething like that of the Avenger would be the most probable, with some interesting fittings and structure at the folding joint. I suspect, though, that there'll be some interesting locking mechanisms there to prevent problems.
The Atlas Airfreighter introduced a swing-nose allowing cargo carriers to unload pallets and containers rapidly at airports.this swing nose avoids the need for a twin-boom layout alas... ;)
Really liking these Komets on cats man!!! Seeing as how the underside is already sort of boat hull shaped, how about a sculpting it completely and having them simply make water landings and then get craned aboard ship? I know unpowered water landings aren't the safest but they sound like they might be a better option then the hook. Just my $0.02 Looking forward to more Komets 8)
:-* Beautiful silhouettes! :-*Indeed and a comment about the Myrski you mentioned. Had the Finnd had access to modern foreign designs as the VG.33 the Myrski (which was a very poor design) would either not be started or dropped as soon as the weakness of the design was obvious
If you don't mind a minor nitpick, though? The slogan on the Russian one should have 'za', not 'dlya'.
Has quite a Me309 look.
Has quite a Me309 look.
... in several countries, we are not allowed to clap our hands for a swastika-wearing warbird... :(
But as a silhouette, I feel free to enjoy it, very inspiring! :-*
Too bad it was unsuccessfully pitched to the Czechoslovak air force. I'd love to have seen some in service schemes. :)
Oooooo and guess who has an idle An-124 kit. ;)
Thanks folks. Here's a quickie 'sœur jumelle' for Tophe ...Very lovely! Thanks a lot! And congratulations...
Bell XP_76B is outstanding!
So, these two stayed with Severski rather than return to Italy to work for Caproni Reggiane? That could change a lot. Willl the EF200 evolve much along the lines of the Re.2000 ---> Re,2006 evolution, but with Allied instead of Axis engines?
Thanks folks ... more to come!Well, I've got several books on that line of aircraft, starting back with one of my first purchases back in 1972. As I said, "along the lines", but not tied to it. Very clean line of development that kept it small rather than growing as the Republic line of development did; I can see this following a similar pattern but not identical nor mirroring. Still, for grins, a Vulture-powered equivalent of the Re.2004 would be interesting.So, these two stayed with Severski rather than return to Italy to work for Caproni Reggiane? That could change a lot. Willl the EF200 evolve much along the lines of the Re.2000 ---> Re,2006 evolution, but with Allied instead of Axis engines?
I knew that someone would recognize Bob and Tony ;D And, of course, the base aircraft. As for the EF200 evolution, let's say 'inspired by Reggiane' but not tied to it. ;)
Beautiful aircraft and story, but one typo. "...undraught carburettor ..." should be "...updraught carburettor ...". Still, I like the way things are evolving here.
Evan: Hmmm, hadn't thought of a Vulture ... though Bob would approve of doing a Re.2004! Any idea what the size difference would be between the IF Zeta and a Vulture?I can't find exact dimensions for comparison, but looking at pictures, they appear of comparable dimensions. With a bit more development, the Vulture could be a most useful engine.
"undraught carburettor" = fuel injection ??
raafif did up a float-fighter version of the Airabonita for my 'Canadian Cobras' story line.Have you seen the blue one built by Ericr? at http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=3546.30 (http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=3546.30)
[url]http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=3320.msg49233#msg49233[/url] ([url]http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=3320.msg49233#msg49233[/url])
That inspired a float version of the production CanCar Cobra:
Thanks for the feedback.You're welcome
GIB is nav/radio op (like the Fulmar or Firefly).Okay, I see your point. I was wondering if you have considered employing it as a hybrid observation/ground-attack aircraft with the back-seater acting as an observer?
That inspired a float version of the production CanCar Cobra:
Fascinating alternate take on history!Yes, great! (for the evil side, though)
Nice work on the 123!
Maybe someone should do the same with the Hawker Fury...oh, that's right they did - it was the Hurricane. ;D
I wonder...landplane/fighter development of Supermarine S.6B?
... wouldn't it be right for them to see realistic things?
Have a good recovery, apophenia... Take your time. We mostly need you alive, more than enjoying a constant rate of creations. ;)
'Persian Harrier' - Napier-powered Hawker Fighter
The Imperial Iranian Air Force was the only buyer for the Dagger-powered Hawker Houri.
I was planning to build a Dagger Hurricane, it'll be a lot easier now I've seen it for real. Nice job. :))
In an Iraqi example you could always claim it is an oil cooler. :);D
Nice - the Cohort has a somewhat IL-2 Sturmovik look to it. Maybe a ground attack variant is in the future?? ;)
In the end, the Navy preferred the Brewster entry (bought as the XF2A-1) and a revised Grumman design (bought as the XF4F-1).So, this XF13C of 1935, if selected, could have been as famous a warbird as the Buffalo and Wildcat? Wow!
... if the Model 75/P-36 has already an in-line engine, what will justify the P-40 code? ...
France placed orders for 250 Curtiss Model 76FR fighters in three batches (75 x Curvet-powered Model 76FR-1s , 75 x HS 12Y-45-powered Model 76FR-2s, and 100 x Curvet-powered Model 76FR-3s)They are so nice... If I were the President, the order would have been 2,500+750+1,000...
I'll take a dozen of the top one, please!
Cheers Logan! Were I doing it again, I think the XP-40 would get an extended rear fuselage (she looks a little nose heavy with that engine-cooling fan up front).
By the way, did you figure out the scale on that R-1830? It looked a little small, to be honest.
The top one looks very much like the Arsenal VG-33.
Nice stuff Apo, one note though, the reason Helipro, and others, were doing the shortening
of L and N model airliners for the logging market (I worked on the Helipro project in the mid-90s)
is because Transport Canada would not allow ex US military SH-3As to operate in Canada. The
military paperwork wasn't up to snuff, in their opinion, and that model had never received a civil certification, unlike the airliner variants.
Beautiful!! Perhaps a re-engining at some point. I believe the CT7/T700 would be adequate as would the equivalent engine from PWAC; the latter might also be an easier sell.
Very nice stuff. :)I agree!
A DHC-8 full of electronics? That could be a great entry in the group build "The Snoops, Sensors, Spooks, & Spies etc GB"
[url]http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?board=52.0[/url] ([url]http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?board=52.0[/url])
Boeing realized that this 'Gonzo' layout could be readily adapted to the maritime patrol role. Adding bubble windows for observers and fuselage side armaments racks. Boeing dubbed the 1986 maritime patrol Dash 8 derivative the Triton. For ASW, Triton was to have 4 underwing pylons and 2 fuselage hardpoints (for Harpoon or Exocet missiles ). A MAD tail 'stinger' was to be installed along with the usual maritime search radar and other sensors.
Fully equipped, the Triton's endurance was to be more than 11 hours. Boeing offered their Triton as a general maritime patrol aircraft based on a short-bodied DHC-8-200 airframe and a stretched-fuselaged Dash 8M-300 ASW Triton. In the absence of Canadian Forces interest in this proposed series, it is small wonder that no export orders for Triton were forthcoming. Boeing dropped the Triton concept and, shortly afterwards, sold off De Havilland Canada.
Boeing of Canada Ltd.'s interest in its de Havilland Division only lasted a half decade. In 1992, Boeing finally found a buyer for DHC – Bombardier Aerospace of Dorval, PQ – which continued Dash 8 production as their Q Series. Bombardier has made a few token efforts at promoting the Q Series airframe for maritime patrol. But it has been the systems integration specialists that have actually delivered in that area. In the US, Sierra Research produced the E-9A Widget adaptation for the USAF. Most of the Dash 8/Q Series adaptations for maritime patrol (or surveillance) have been for Coast Guards and other non-military users. So, Boeing of Canada was on the right track. They had just pitched to the wrong customers.
Ignore what?
Ignore what?
Exactly ;) Anyway, what possible use could hippies and aged yuppies have for a Dash 8 on floats anyway?
I love the Alison-engined D.522s: very modelable! :)Yes agree I though I had today today when at my local toy / model shop and saw a Tamiya Dewoitine on the same shelf as a raft 1/48 Alison Mustangs and P-40s
Also, how many VBs did the ground crewman consume before painting that Aussie roundel on the underside of the wing? It's looking a bit fuzzy. :icon_beer: ;D
Cheers,
Logan
For Old Wombat: A nautical CAC CA-14A 'blank' (somehow Sea Wallaby just sounds wrong!)
Thanks folks! Here's another stab at the 'Sea Wallaby', now in a late British Pacific Fleet scheme as recommended by Old Wombat.
Thanks folks! Here's another stab at the 'Sea Wallaby', now in a late British Pacific Fleet scheme as recommended by Old Wombat.
Next installment of the 'Super Boomer' - CAC CA-14 Wallaby story ...Belated congratulations for the bubble CA-14, so nice! :-*
Now, that's one sleek little aeroplane! :DExactly what I was thinking when I saw that image. Definitely a rather large and impressive brute of an aircraft.
Kinda reminds me of the CAC CA-15 (only not as squared off at the tips). ;)
Nice silhouette!
Google does not know this Fokker F.40 at all, it seems, does it come completely from your imagination? (that would be even better...) ;)
Just one question: are those tail markings on your Fokker also whiff?
Well spotted Vuk! Not an intentional whiff, I just put on the Dutch flag upside down :-[
This ones for Vuk...
I wonder how they'd react to those at work? Those do look intriguing. The aft clamshell doors for ro-ro (roll on - roll off) mission pallets?
I notice the (much smaller) clamshell doors are still on the top one... Is that for passengers? :)
I got to thinking that it might be really useful as a multi-purpose mission bay.As I said, ro-ro mission pallets.
Possible uses, in addition to the transport of reloads to an FOL, would include:
- Carriage/Deployment of unmanned systems: UGV,USV and UAV
- Internal carriage of extended range fuel tankage, saving pylon space
- Special electronics fit: Equipment needed for special missions such as ECM/EW, ELINT or systems required for advanced weapons. The sensors can then go on the pylons
- CSAR crew recovery
- Sensor deployment, including sonobouys or the various surface-movement detectors
Could be a unique capability.
Thanks folks!
Since the EC 645 T2 came up elsewhere ... an almost-is rather than a whif ;)
You could participate to the current Floaty GB, yes!
The Apalachee (like a Mi-24? with tandem cockpit and central passengers?) is impressive! ;) Thanks!
The Kosher Hustler - the B-58i Ariyyáhu, my entry into the Extended Service Life and/or Back dated GB:
[url]http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=5433.0[/url] ([url]http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=5433.0[/url])
For those interested, there is also the B-58A Hustler armed with the British Blue Steel missile:
[url]http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=5345.msg90554#msg90554[/url] ([url]http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=5345.msg90554#msg90554[/url])
M.A.D.: Thanks for that.
My laptop is in the shop right now, so I must wait to see what data is recoverable. If the original B-58A sideview is still there, I'll have a go at an RAAF Hustler.
That Ki-62 has a distinct Heinkel look going on around the cockpit and front end.
has it a meaning?
has it a meaning?Not quite the same as the French basilic...https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basilisk
Full disclosure ... I am not a big fan of the stacked-engined English Electric Lightning. So, when I found out that English Electric had developed a single-engined Lightning for ER.134T, [1] I had to whif it :)
English Electric put forward at least P.6 variations for ER.134T - the stacked-engined P.6/2 (in swept and delta-winged variations), two mid-wing engined twins (the straight-winged P.6B and the trapasoid-winged P.6D). [2] And then there is the single-engined P.6/1 :
So, in my whif, the English Electric P.6/1 is chosen for ER.134T in place of Bristol 188 (whose stainless steel construction, the Air Ministry was concerned might delay the research program). The prototype P.6/1 research aircraft, WG760, is powered by a Rolls-Royce RB.106 producing 19,500 lb.st in full reheat. On 25 November 1958, the P.6/1 became the first British aircraft to exceed Mach 2.
English Electric had never intended the P.6/1 to be a pure research platform. For the outset, the aircraft had been designed to be suitable as an operational fighter. The Lightning was powered by a Rolls-Royce RB.106 Tamar two-shaft turboshaft generating 21,750 lb.st. Lightning interceptors served the RAF from the F.1A of early 1960 to the longer-range F.6 which finally retired in 1988.
__________________________
ER.134T = Experimental Research, Tender, a research programme for Mach 2 flight.
__________________________
Ive had the idea of putting an F-15 fin on a Mig-21 w Lightning wings forever as a single engine lightning, just havn't gotten around to it yet :icon_crap:
Rather bizarrely, the Free Syrian Army has captured 5,000-odd WW2-era MP44 automatic rifles.
Was anyone ever able to provide an explanation as to how they got there in the first place?
Was anyone ever able to provide an explanation as to how they got there in the first place?
I've seen two stories...
One was that the FSA captured the armoury where the MP44s had been stored since the '50s.
The second story - a bit more plausible, IMHO - is that the Sturmgewehr had been dug out of storage by the Assad regime with the idea of selling them off to Western collectors. The MP44s were stuffed into ISO containers for shipment out of Syria but UN regulations hung them up until the FSA arrived on the scene.
The only problem with story #2 is trying to imagine Assad's export efforts being thwarted by UN regs. Other international laws haven't slowed him down at all ... nor the FSA, come to that :P
My take on M.A.D.'s revamped Qantas Ilyushin IL-76CFM:
[url]http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=6108.msg103614[/url] ([url]http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=6108.msg103614[/url]) ...
In my scenario, the three Qantas IL-76CFM conversions are VH-ILQ 'Scotty Allan', VH-ILM 'Norman Brearley', and VH-ILN 'Lores Bonney'. Although not assigned to any particular airframe, the MAFFS III firefighting systems were also name - 'Black Saturday', 'Ash Wednesday', and 'Black Tuesday'.
[Top/Inset] IL-76CFM VH-ILQ shortly after arrival. As delivered, the Qantas IL-76CFMs had an overall white scheme with red vertical tail markings and pale grey cowlings.
Note that this aircraft is missings its Qantas cowling markings. Nor has the name 'Scotty Allan' been applied to the nose (where standard Ilyushin Ил-76ТД/IL-76TD markings remain).
VH-ILQ was delivered with its original Russian suite - RLS-N weather radar and an under-nose RLS-P Koopol/Duran-B navigation set. These Russian radar sets were replaced soon after arrival.
[Below] IL-76CFM VH-IMQ in its final configuration. The Russian radar sets have been replaced by a Northrop Grumman APN-241 radar - for its terrain-following capabilties and commonality with RAAF C-130J and C-27J transports). The superfluous lower radome has been replaced with a fairing for a UV line scanner (forward) and a semi-retractable Wescam MX-20 E/O turret (aft).
VH-IMQ is shown here in near-full Qantas livery. The lower fuselage has been stripped (to lessen the maintenance burden of repairing chipped paintwork) and the forward anti-glare panel has been painted over. The aircraft's name 'Norman Brearley' has been applied to the nose and Qantas logos to the rear of each engine cowling. Eventually, (likely during the first engine major overhaul) the cowlings will be resprayed in 'fuselage white'.
_________________________________
Chuffed to have my Ilyushin added to your story Pioneer. Cheers!
you fooled me! I thought those ASLAV 4x4 were real!!! :-[
A shame such didn't get built, it probably would've reduced the accident rate NATO-wide.I tried to find with Google/Pictures "starfighter 2-seat" and I got several photographs. Is such a trainer a complete Apophenia invention (after other ones tried also)? or just the Canadian version is invented?
The MB.326C is a rather attractive design, even if it only made it to mockup status.
I actually find it quite ugly:
Gorgeous!! A shame such didn't get built, it probably would've reduced the accident rate NATO-wide.
Tophe: Lots of 2-seat F-104 conversion trainers were made. My whif was supposed to be a 'lead-in' trainer ... that is, smaller, cheaper to operate, and more forgiving of trainee pilot error. The idea sprang from the 'widow-maker' reputations of the RCAF's CF-104 Starfighter - which had a loss rate amounting to nearly 40% of the Canadian fleet.Thanks for the explanation!
I actually find it quite ugly:
Whereas the CC-129 Dakota radar trainer was able to maintain its svelte, fighter-like good looks ;D
Tophe: Lots of 2-seat F-104 conversion trainers were made. My whif was supposed to be a 'lead-in' trainer ... that is, smaller, cheaper to operate, and more forgiving of trainee pilot error. The idea sprang from the 'widow-maker' reputations of the RCAF's CF-104 Starfighter - which had a loss rate amounting to nearly 40% of the Canadian fleet.
Resembles a MAD boom. Were they looking for iron deposits?
Resembles a MAD boom. Were they looking for iron deposits?
Resembles a MAD boom. Were they looking for iron deposits?
Aeromagnetic surveys are used to locate all sorts of deposits.
Great!: that is a whole family!
Resembles a MAD boom. Were they looking for iron deposits?
Theys are, basically, MAD booms.
The F-16 cockpit gives a very modern look to the A-4, let me buy two dozens for a billion $...
however as to basing, NAS Seattle at Sand Point would be more likely for training as the first Catalina to arriveit depends in which universe you live, in my dreams the date of arrival at Whidbey is 2042... ;)
at the seaplane base at Whidbey didn't arrive until December 1942
however as to basing, NAS Seattle at Sand Point would be more likely for training as the first Catalina to arriveit depends in which universe you live, in my dreams the date of arrival at Whidbey is 2042... ;)
at the seaplane base at Whidbey didn't arrive until December 1942
Cool, however as to basing, NAS Seattle at Sand Point would be more likely for training as the first Catalina to arrive
at the seaplane base at Whidbey didn't arrive until December 1942, and then it had to land out in the bay as the harbour
was choked with logs.
Love the AP-40B 'SeaHawk' - now do a later model one based on the longer fuselage P-40N / Kittyhawk Mk IV.
The AP-40E's oil cooler remained under the nose (but was moved back to fair into the wing centre-section leading edge).Yes, the new nose makes the difference, with enhanced beauty, thanks!
Another change was in tail assembly. The AP-40's ventral fin provided the needed side area but could also slow take-off runs should it 'dig in' to choppy seas. Accordingly, the AP-40E abandoned the ventral fin approach in favour of an extended tail. This provided sufficient side area and employed standard P-40E vertical fin and rudder surfaces.I noticed this difference at first glance, and your explanation is good, thanks!
but I miss the big chin.So different feelings... (The big chin removal was the very reason of my loving this profile)... :)
Any chance of some RAAF ones?
Old Wombat: Apologies, still no sea-scooper nose ;)
maybe some floatplane P-40s could make it into civilian schemes for the post war revival of the Schneider Trophy (Non Military GB Suggestion)And maybe the winner is here! (of the Scheider Trophy II and/or the Non-Military GB) ;)
Hmmm...maybe some floatplane P-40s could make it into civilian schemes for the post war revival of the Schneider Trophy (Non Military GB Suggestion)
Hmmm...maybe some floatplane P-40s could make it into civilian schemes for the post war revival of the Schneider Trophy (Non Military GB Suggestion)
That almost sound like a future GB, Post War Schneider Trophy competition, maybe with different classes, sprint, long range, light and heavy.
Oh you could fool people with that 'photo' ;)
Thanks for all this! It is so uncommon, is this all Photoshop dreams of nowadays? or unknown archives of that time?
Ahem, this looks like counter-smile ??? , and I still don't know if this is archives or dream (I refuse the negative word "fake"). Anyway I love your profile of streamlined Buffalo :-*Thanks for all this! It is so uncommon, is this all Photoshop dreams of nowadays? or unknown archives of that time?Tophe: All strictly unknown archive material from that time. What is this "Photoshop" you speak of? ;)
... wondering why it never occurred to me before to put an Allison on a Buffalo.
The bubble-Buffallo is cute! like an elegant pig lady... ;)
Many thanks for the Boeing Model 278A/XP-32, Jon. It really does look like the spawn of a Buffalo and a Peashooter! :)
KiwiZac mentioned a backstory for a tricycle geared Supermarine Attacker. I have no such backstory but 'Zac's concept put me in mind of a straight-winged Swift.
[url]http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=3359.msg109710#msg109710[/url] ([url]http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=3359.msg109710#msg109710[/url])
So, here it is: the Attacker Trike. I based the images on the Czech Master Resin kit box (with artwork done by Juanita Franzi ... I think).
The name alone could be a reason the Australians didn't let that happen.
It is a love child between a Sea Fury and a regular Thunderbolt. Hmmm ......
Looks wrong because it no longer looks like member of it's Seversky/Republic P-35/P-41/P-43 design lineage, the T-Bolt wasn't thick because of the Turbo, it got the Turbo for the same reason it's P-43 predecessor got the Turbo - fuselage volume inherent to theI disagree: it looks right because dreamers don't care much of such practical details... ;)
basic Kartveli design.
Also remember the deep belly under the wing of the P-47D was a fairing to cover the belly tank plumbing and attachments that was added during C production.
I seem to remember someone modelling one like this a while back...
I seem to remember someone modelling one like this a while back...Howling Mouse(?) is not a member here? Finished product on this page.
[url]http://www.whatifmodellers.com/index.php/topic,18835.255.html[/url] ([url]http://www.whatifmodellers.com/index.php/topic,18835.255.html[/url])
Where's the fastback? I wanna buy one! :-*
Where's the fastback? I wanna buy one! :-*
Good luck Old Wombat. Only 1,198 of those mid-1965 model Stallion GTX fastback were built, making them much sought-after by collectors.
Shown here is the Stallion GTX fastback with some options included - 6-Pack carburetors/carburettors and ram-air hood-scoop, chromed sidepipe exhausts, and reverse-aerofoil rear 'spoiler' wing. Options not taken up on this car were front and rear bumperettes, twin raked AM/FM radio antennae, and wire wheel rims.
For the 1966 Stallion GTX fastback, the wire rims option was replaced by 5-spoke 'mag' wheels and the sidepipe exhausts introduced heat shields.
Another whack at the AAV ... this time on wheels (from the Iveco Centauro to keep it in the BAE family).
any thoughts or critiques?My thought is that it looks fine! Thanks! ;)
Getting rid of the G__-Awful canopy might be the next move. ::)I argee
Thanks for the feedback, folks. Old Wombat: Were you referring to the sliding canopy or the windscreen? I always thought that the latter looked odd but, apparently, that rather upright windscreen was good at shedding rain on approach.
I was also working on a new approach to a single-seat Skua derivative ... which does have a revised windscreen (the Skua windscreen accommodated a gun sight but I wanted thicker, bullet-resistant glass as well).
The whole lot! Ugly! :-X
Merlin C powered design to spec A.39/34...
Any chance we will see a floatplane version of your new creations?
a retractable-hull flying-boat fighter.So uneasy to draw... but you succeeded, congratulations! :-*
Any chance we will see a floatplane version of your new creations?Because a regular Roc isn't, quite, ugly enough, we need to put floats on it... ;D
Reminds me a great deal of the XP-77
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/1/13/Bell_XP-77.jpg/300px-Bell_XP-77.jpg)
Looks like that's where the canopy came from. :)
Great new profiles! :-*
Google finds no CEMA test center, but on the what-if planet this is different all right. In France "AA test center" is more "centre de test de l'AA" than "AA test centre", but who knows on the what-if planet? ;)
Have you ever seen a photo of the Lignel 10?Sorry, in the magazine are just photographs of the Lignel 16, 20, 30.
(Bottom) A Bell Model-15F-1 of GC III/1 while based at Chantilly-Les Aigles in May 1940. The Allison-powered Model-15F-1Your 15F-1 is very beautiful :-* :-*
Apophenia, I do love your Bell invented ones :-* I will probably transform them into Mustang derivatives but it is hard to choose the best one among so many marvels... :)Here is the (beautiful) source of the Mustang 51D design, I guess: ;)
... Maybe also some Soviet ones?
Those tiny tails are giving me a bit of a Ki-44 vibe.
:-* Your XP-76 is a marvel, thanks!I cannot resist the temptation to present the (beautiful) Mustang derivatives of this XP-76 (tanks again!)
As much as I'm loving these Bells I really hope we get to see a Griffon F-11!!! Would this be with the Shackleton-esque annular radiator or a more svelte boom?
about the Hughes F-11B/R-11B. Attached is part of a GA blueprint for the unbuilt XF-11B. I believe that to be the only image that survives of the proposed 'B model.Wonderful picture! While... texts are blurred, I cannot see if the line from the canopy is "antenna" or "fuselage" (either triplex-fuselage twin-engine layout or asymmetric twin-fuselage single-engine)... That makes me dream. I am willing to illustrate these dreams, and at the same time I would like to know which one is true.
... Also any chance of a PR P-45?? ...
just to dispel any rumours about internment in the Red Star GB re-education camp ;)
Sure comrade...you just keep telling people that. Your stint in the re-education camp will do you wonders...
Da, very refreshing! Currently, GLONASS coverage is excellent (outages of between one-to-three months being well within acceptable productivity quota goals).
You been selling 'favours' to the commandant again comrade? That's obviously the only way you would get such favourable treatment.
The Goodyear XF4G-1A 'Turbo Corsair'Thanks Apophenia for your pleasant profile of a bubble-Corsair with the canopy moved backward. Let me close it moving the windscreen to the rear instead of the bubble to the front (XF11G)… and that creates also a nice twin-plane (F11G), easy to read, thanks again!
I guess I'll just have to build one of apo's bubble-topped 'regular' Corsairs with the left over
bits from the SH and Tamiya kits.
;D
Nice - any chance of a XP-2 in colour?
Berliner-Joyce received a contract to produce a prototype as the XSFJ-1.Wonderful! Thanks! :-*
Like the Archon, looks really good! :smiley: :smiley:
Thanks for the new profiles and explanations :-*
Is this pure imagination or History (of true projects)? Congratulations anyway.
development of the Beagle B.206 Srs 3.Then I asked Google to show me this source (like https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8185/8398242704_8b4c5f05c2_b.jpg ) and now I like your transformation, thanks! :smiley:
I think I have never seen a tandem-seat Bloch of the 150 series, are you the inventor of it? :smiley:
snip!
Hunting's Revived Emphasis - Jet TrainersI love your Master imaginative aircraft! :-*
The outcome of the 'Super Provost' studies was initially known as the Hunting Headmaster. Differing from the Jet Provost mainly in its tandem seating, this type entered RAF service as the Hunting Master T.Mk.1.
Aging Avros - The Late-Version Type 774G Archon InterceptorsI love your Archon! :-*
Due to the lack of a suitable replacement, updated Avro Type 774 Archons served on later in RAF service than expected. The penultimate update [2] was the Archon F.Mk.4A
... I had a slightly different back story in mind ...
With hindsight, I'm thinking that the afterburner exhaust nozzles are likely underscale. Also, maybe the tailfin should have been more highly modified (more sweep, for example)? Any other critiques or thoughts?
The hybrid Tempest/Fury racer G-SCHTBelated congratulations for your Tempest/Fury racer, so pretty... :-*
So San Francisco's Chinatown seceded?Perhaps they couldn't stand living in the Peoples Democratic Socialist Republic of California?
So San Francisco's Chinatown seceded?
The bubble-canopy Wildcats are great! :smiley:
More to come ... ;)You are teasing... More is possible but "better" seems impossible, doesn't it? ;)
Unmanned Wildcat can be USN46 "cruise missile". Even used in Korea.
Unmanned Wildcat can be USN46 "cruise missile". Even used in Korea.Could be good testbeds for systems intended for operational Loon and Regulus cruise missiles. It would be interesting to see one launched from a surfaced submarine using RATO bottles. It could not be as spectacular as the first Loon launch from a surfaced submarine when the rocket boosters exploded on ignition and set off the missile's fuel.
Not so plausible but fun to do :DThe fun is not only in making the drawing (you) but also in seeing it (us), thanks ;)
Of course you could always posit that construction of the heavily navalized version
woud be offloaded to someone else, so the designation would then be based on
whichever company got the contract.
Nice, how about a T tail version?
Of course you could always posit that construction of the heavily navalized version
woud be offloaded to someone else, so the designation would then be based on
whichever company got the contract.
That makes sense Jon. Maybe the NAF takes over Havoc production for the USN so that El Segundo can concentrate on Invaders?
Nice, how about a T tail version?
I went the bifurcation route instead :D
The GAF Gibson was a twin-tailled variant with rear-loading. The N-23F was developed for the Royal Flying Doctor Service, the rear-loading doors making it quicker and simpler to load stretchers and gurneys into the aircraft. The GAF N-23C was the standard, non-medevac cargo-carrying version of the Gibson.
The GAF N-23M was a military variant which was distinct in having an actual loading ramp (in place of simple hinged doors). The N-23M could be fitted out for medevac which dedicated mission kits but the aircraft was intended for the military utility role.
Although named for the famous and fearsome Gibson Desert, the Australian Army never adopted GAF's Gibson moniker. Instead, the Army's N-23M was invariably referred to as a 'Twin Nomad'.
Boeing built early model A-20s to ease Douglas production issues, so, Boeing Aircraft of Canada, Ltd. builds
the navalized Havocs alongside the Cansos and PB2Bs.
T2B-1 as the designation perhaps?, which would be appropriate on several levels as the TB-1 were
Boeing built Martin T4M.
How about some in post war civilian service - maybe for aerial survey work, water bombing, mail transport etc?
That has to be one really wide bubble canopy on the Boston. Really like it though! Perhaps a smaller bubble on the left half of the fuselage? Or two, one for the pilot and another for the co-pilot, sort of like on the Douglas Mix-Master.
John: Actually, the A-20 Havoc didn't have a co-pilot
Hmmm ... back at ya. Might just have a go at that over the weekend ;)
Who could have imagined such a thing?
... Adding AAM to the mix certainly gives it a more dangerous look.
I always loved the look of the IAR 15 and wished it had been produced in series. Your IAR 60s capture the look of a developed IAR 15 even though they are based on the PZL platform. Love 'em!My thoughts exactly!!!
Looks a natural in RAF colors and I especially like the bottom one.
Excellent work and very easy on the eyes too!
Brian da Basher
Outstanding on all of these, especially the Viggens+1
Thanks folks!No, one without the vectoring thrust nozzles; let's not make things over-complicated. What's really funny is that the JT8D likely would not have originated, or at least not as early, if it wasn't for RR's arrogance. They had the original engine the 727 was designed around (from size, I'd have to say the Medway) and their refusal to build a US support and overhaul facility meant that a strong early user of the 727 was going to back out due to getting burned by poor support of the Dart engines on the Viscount used by that airline. Boeing got frantic and called P&W who managed to whip up a fan engine with a J52 core (if you look, the J52 is classed as a JT8B by P&W) and the rest is history.
Evan: On the Medway, do mean an afterburning version retaining the RB.142's vectoring thrust nozzles?
It seems that, at the time, interest in the Medway was being eclipsed by the Spey. Of course, the The RB.177 (advanced Medway) was originally in the running to power the Viggen. According to Flight, the "Lack of British Government support swung the balance in favour of [P&W]."
https://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1962/1962%20-%201015.html (https://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1962/1962%20-%201015.html)
I suspect that the outcome was more complicated than that. The Swedes rightly wanted a proven core and one that wouldn't leave them operating an 'orphan'. The RAF not ordering any aircraft powered by the RB.177 was likely a big part of what pushed Sweden towards the JT8D.
Back to the 'Bou ...
Updating the 'Bou (Two)
Another take on re-engining the Australian Caribou fleet. This time, instead of the Avco (Lycoming) LTC4C-10, I'm going more Real World ... kinda.
Here, the RAAF transports receivetwin 2,850 hp GE T64-GE-4 turboprops. These are the same powerplants as were installed in the first prototype Caribou airframe when modified as an engine testbed in September 1961. [1] As on that testbed, the GE T64s are 'inverted' with their exhaust pipes routed above the wings.
Other than revised nacelles and engine mounts, the only major change was the blanking-off of the forwardmost cabin windows - which happened to be in line with the propeller discs. The complete aircraft has also been fitted with the nose radome from the related DHC-5 Buffalo.
________________________________________________________
[1] Although photographed in RCAF markings, the YT64 flight tests for the US Navy for whom the GE engine was being developed. The Canadian Department of Defence Production was co-sponsor for this project.
No, one without the vectoring thrust nozzles; let's not make things over-complicated. What's really funny is that the JT8D likely would not have originated, or at least not as early, if it wasn't for RR's arrogance. They had the original engine the 727 was designed around (from size, I'd have to say the Medway) and their refusal to build a US support and overhaul facility meant that a strong early user of the 727 was going to back out due to getting burned by poor support of the Dart engines on the Viscount used by that airline. Boeing got frantic and called P&W who managed to whip up a fan engine with a J52 core (if you look, the J52 is classed as a JT8B by P&W) and the rest is history.
I would imagine that it wuld have the potential to make a rather nifty gunship.
I can just see it lifting off vertically from some hot LZ somewhere.
Evan: I like your contoured inlet concept. I wonder is screens might work? I recall seeing a photo of an EE Lightning fitted with a mesh stone guard. Perhaps such a thing could be made neatly retractable?Well, screens would work for ground running (I believe that was what they were used for with the EE Lightning but you need simple inlet contours, like those of the SU-27, for retractable screens to work. I'm thinking a contoured inlet would be far simpler to design. I can think of some other possibilities, but those require, again, more work.
I know this is kind of odd. Back in 2012 you did a series of profiles on the so-called Supermarine Spiteful. Is there any chance you could do a three view, or at least provide the dimensions, especially wingspan?
... However, why the Buzzard engine? This was developed in the 20s, and didn't get much interest even then.
I may have to hunt down a 1/72 bubble-top Spit & A 1/72 Whirlwind to try to piece together a Shrew based on that image. It's kinda cute! 8)
I may have to hunt down a 1/72 bubble-top Spit & A 1/72 Whirlwind to try to piece together a Shrew based on that image. It's kinda cute! 8)
Too bad you sold a 1/72 Airfix Whirlwind to someone isn't it...……. :-[
it is funny to make that kind of exchanges, and they look nearly natural ;)
I really like the temp markings on that export version!I agree with Sir Brian. You can see where the French roundel and rudder stripes will go, but there's nothing showing to spoil a civil registration.
The first one captures that 1930's Bomber Command aesthetic perfectly and the modernized version is, dare I say it, dead sexy!
If you were to follow the usual routine, when Bomber Command were finished with a type then is was passe on to Coastal Command and/or Transport Command. Just a suggestion.
H.P.55
I like it. Would like right at home beside a B-18 Bolo.
The next Handley Page installment is Real World ... sort of. An illustration of a twin-engined medium bomber (inset) was featured in the 14 May 1936 edition of Flight magazine. According to the caption, the image had originally appeared in a corporate journal, The Handley Page Bulletin. [1]
The design depicted is probably just the imaginings of a marketing department artist. However, this artist's concept does have a decidedly Handley Page feel about it - especially in the wings. And its stylish nose cap anticipates changed coming for the H.P. 51 Hampden prototype. Indeed, although few specific features overlap, the concept does evoke the production Hampden in a very general way.
That said, other features - like the single tail fin and rudder - aren't really Handley Page-like at all. Still, I find this artist's concept oddly appealling. So, here is that notional 1936 medium bomber as a wartime aircraft I suspect that this aircraft might have been a bit underpowered, so I've depicted it in a night bomber finish (in the markings of No.83 Squadron, RAF).
I've added a few operational details - exhaust muffs, antennae, etc. - as well as fixing the retractable tailwheel in the 'down' position (which seemed to happen with most RAF types of the day).
______________________________________
[1] Flight noted the design being "somewhat similar to the H.P.53 type" - the planned Swedish version of the RAF's H.P. 51 Hampden. Flight also noted what seemed to be "liquid-cooled Rolls-Royce engines."
The tail is similar to that of the H.P. 47 ...
Nope, the Doh!! moment was me forgetting to bring with backstories with me at the same time as the images :-[
!'m thinking the B-25 might be more inspiration in regard to the tail gun shown here.
The real world H.P. 65 Super Halibag.
Exactly, except skinnier and no turbo Hercules 38s. But the single-spar laminar-flow wing stays
BTW: This is another case of no images showing for me (maybe because of the whatifmodellers link?).
If you're playing with the J22, any chance of a standard one in Ethiopian markings to serve alongside their real world B-17s...
For sure, maybe doped silver to match the B17s ... or desert camo?Your choice.
For sure, maybe doped silver to match the B17s ... or desert camo?Your choice.
Love the floatplane version :smiley:
The mention of the J21makes me wonder how one would go shoehorning a DB605 into the J22....
This could also be an interesting development:
([url]http://photos.smugmug.com/BTS-2/i-VS3MhSw/0/30307a48/O/HP65_02.jpg[/url])
All D turret were twin .50.
The S was a tail turret, I have no info on who in the
US was to be the manufacturer.
I like the eyeball. ;D
That canopy is a natural on a 109 as well.
Most excellent, apophenia!
Brian da Basher
What's the canopy on the J24C from - a late model Avia S-199?
The real life canopy in question I believe:
What if they got talking to Hawker & went for the more stable wide-track landing gear of the Hurricane? ;)
Here's another scenario: The Soviet invasion of Finland on 30 November 1939 called a lot of concern in the rest of Scandinavia. Whilst the so-called Winter War officially ended in March 1940, the concern remained. In June 1941, Germany launched Operation Barbarossa. Coincident with this, the Finnish Defence Forces launched their own offensive. This war would become known as the Continuation War. Whilst not wanting to get officially involved in the German led war against the USSR, the Swedish Govt did allow for 'volunteers' to fight with the Finnish Defence Forces. As part of this a 'volunteer' unit equipped initially with Fiat CR.42s operated in Ilmavoimat markings. Later in 1943, the CR.42s were replaced with FFVS J22s also in Ilmavoimat markings...
How'd you know I have at least four P-51s in the stash?
Sometimes it's like you've got a camera on me or sumthin'...
The Planet NA-50 is a co-production with Antarki Models of Peru, Amaru Tincopa
and friends, who did the research and patterns, it's a nice kit. They've been
working on Douglas O-38 and 8A kits as well.
The Defiant is absolutely ripe for the treatment and you've come up with some magnificent permutations!
Best I could manage in plastic was a single-seat fighter kinda like a poor man's Hurricane.
I plan to do a RN FAA version with folding outer wings (containing a couple of machine guns), arrestor hook etc as a alternative to the Blackburn Roc
Now that would be a huge improvement for the FAA! :D
Feel free to profile it should you wish.
<snip>
On your Defender's vac canopy, Squadron does a 1/72 vac canopy for the Ki-27. Wonder if your's was for a Nate?
<snip>
Photoshop Expert Level: Unlocked!
Wow Mr. A. I never would have considered a Lancaster with an inline nose. This is so cool!
other Sea Defiant variants were proceeding down the Wolverhampton production lines.
Ha! Strange coincidence. I was actually in Wolverhampton when I read this.
I really like the inline Macchis. Any chance of one of these (or even a radial engined variant) in service on the Carrier Aquila?
Lovely floatplane !
Going to extend this post-war with Merlin-powered versions of the MC.202/205V airframe or perhaps a hot-rodded one with a Griffon?
Beautiful and quite plausible. From what I can find, including SEM's conversion kit, the C.204 had an Isotta-Fraschini Asso L121 RC.40 of some 900-1000 HP, making it an excellent lead-in trainer, but this was never pursued to actual hardware.
Speaking of natural, your rendering of that natural wood is outstanding!
Brian da Basher
C.204/A38 front end reminds me of the unbuilt, V-16 powered Rider-Miller:
I wonder...maybe the Spanish HA-1205s could get Merlins (or even Griffons) post war similar to the real world HA-1112-M1Ls or Fiat G.59s... ;)
One could easily see the C-4T being nicknamed the “Cyrano de Bergerac“*snicker* I like that idea.
:smiley:
One could easily see the C-4T being nicknamed the “Cyrano de Bergerac“
Good grief! Even a soft deck landing & that radome is ending up in the crew compartment! :oI'll have to agree, there. But it is a beautiful rendering of the concept. May we now have one of the top-mounted radome?
the Air Ministry
the Air Ministry
Which Air Ministry?
Good grief! Even a soft deck landing & that radome is ending up in the crew compartment! :o
Anybody have suggestions for indigenous names for Aussie trade winds?
Just say it was just out of the shop and still requiring work. ;)
Interestingly, in the real world, the first two prototypes (shown below) did have in-line Gipsy Major/Gipsy six engines but were found to be under-powered. This is why they went to the 175hp Warner Scarab.
To get M.A.D's desired advantage, you'd need more span to clear larger-diameter props (or go multi-bladed as per C-130J).
Or just move the engines further out along the wing, like how the A400 does it. The prop wash just about covers the whole wing ---
... how about dual TP400s mounted above the wing to restore the original ground clearance on the C-130? I know the TP400 testbed had it mounted normally, but that wasn't mean to land in rough airfields at all. You can take timed out C-130Hs that need a new wing box and just give them a new wing with twin TP400s as sort of a budget C-130J competitor.
Hmmm...TP400 powered flying boat anyone?
Hmmm...TP400 powered flying boat anyone?
Seagull style.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/57/Supermarine_Seagull.jpg)
That bottom profile has a bit of a Henschel Hs 129 look to it Steven --- :smiley: Needs a dirty great big cannon sticking out the front ;)
Bring QCA back from the dead. :smiley:
Perhaps a Beriev A-40 or Shinmaywa US-2 in the black and yellow livery. ;D
... do steampunk coal-fired aircraft too.
The lower one looks a bit like a flying bus.
Those cockpit windows in the first one give a little Buck Rogers/Flash Gordon look.Flash Gordon, yes; but it's entirely too aesthetically appealing to fit in with the craft of the future depicted in the original Buck Rogers serial.
The lower one looks a bit like a flying bus.
Or a tram. Proof that an excessive number of wings wasn't Curtiss' only problem in civil aviation ;)
Interesting what-if with your usual gorgeous art. I do believe, though, that it was the Boeing 247 not 249, that obsoleted the Condor II.
P.S. FYI the Transports GB has been extended two weeks until July 14th if memory serves.
Curtiss Scooter.
The bomber prototype reminds me of the Martin B-10 export version. If it had liposuction and a make-over by a professional stylist.
The bomber prototype reminds me of the Martin B-10 export version. If it had liposuction and a make-over by a professional stylist.
Cheers Brian. I toyed with a B-25 style gun position but couldn't figure out how to get around that tailwheel :P
So, will we be seeing a Reggiane equivalent of the Fiat G.59? I quite enjoy your evolution so far.
([url]http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=351.0;attach=24570;image[/url])
Very nice!! Shifting to a more Mustang-style radiator installation?
<snip>
What about a RR Griffon-engined variant?
Anyone care to guess what they are?
Anyone care to guess what they are?
From a point of pure ignorance, I'm going to guess that you had to move the markings below the rear cockpit glazing back & up to get them off of the canopy rails.
It's cool, SBD, the "quote" thing can be a touch tricky on this site. For some reason it won't let me add a quote once I'm in the reply box but it will allow me to start a reply by clicking quote.
It's all too techmamologimacle for me! :-\
SBD: Welcome aboard Small Brown Dog! I've admired your work too. And by 'admired', of course, I mean that I've stolen your concepts shamelessly :-[
... I was building a website for all this but to be honest I can't be bothered because I have had a gut full of web development in the past. Besides, this seems like the ideal place to put the content ;)
It is indeed. And no need for SEO, we on the lunatic fringe are already here ;D
Unfortunately, this upright V-12 could not accommodate a motor gun. Armament was going to be a challenge.
Cheers Brian :smiley:
Jon: There certainly seems to be plenty of room for a cannon barrel between the cylinder banks:
[url]https://www.darwinaviationmuseum.com.au/wp-content/uploads/allison-v-1710-2-648x486.jpg[/url] ([url]https://www.darwinaviationmuseum.com.au/wp-content/uploads/allison-v-1710-2-648x486.jpg[/url])
I'm guessing that a cannon installation would work best with the V-1710-39's raised thrust line. Obviously, an updraught carburretor would also be needed to clear space for the big gun's breech.
BTW, the Armstrong-Whitworth backstory was predicated upon licencing PZL designs to make use of AW's metal construction experience. Here's the operational outcomes (for P.11/24 and a P.23 evolution).
Thanks folks!With the number of IK-3 kits I now have, these definitely tempt me as subjects. One thought, the IK-3 (and for that matter, the B.135) shares a basic engine with the Dewoitine D.520. I can't help but wonder if the exhausts from that aircraft would improve the IK-3 (or, again, the B.135). It's a tempting easy whiff to try.
As mentioned, the VVJK decided to allocate all available 'war-booty' Klimov M-105 engines to fighter programs. Engines lacking gun synchonization went to Zmaj to re-engine Hawker Hurricanes with worn-out Merlins. The result was the 'Hariken-S'.
[Bottom] A newly refurbished 'Hariken-S' of 35. Grupa, 5. Lovacki Puk/3. Brigada, Leskovac (prior to dispatch to Thessaloniki, Greece). Note that White 7's markings are only partially applied - white paint has yet to be added to the fuselage roundel and the fighter's new, Luftwaffe-style individual aircraft number.
Synchronized Klimovs went to Rogožarski for IK-3/II re-engining and new-production IK-3/III Jastreb (Hawk) fighters. The later was readily distinguishable from early IK-3s by the upper cowling bulges for its synchronized 12,7 mm Breda-SAFAT guns (a third Breda fired through the hollow propeller shaft).
[Top] An IK-3/III Jastreb of 32. Grupa, 2. Lovacki Puk/1. Brigada at Krusevac. Fuselage mottling on 'Red 4' is more extensive than normal (with grey mottling extending into the recognition panels and even forms a 'Spiralschnauze' on the spinner!).
______________________
Thanks Evan, glad you liked 'em. Good idea on your Dewoitine concept :smiley: Quickboost does aftermarket D-520 exhausts in 1:72nd and 1:48th.*chuckle* I know and I'll be buying some to whiff both the B.135 and IK-3, probably in Bulgarian markings since they flew both the D.520 and B.135 (might also see a three-bladed constant speed propeller added to the B.135); if the production facilities were not destroyed, I could see Bulgaria flying IK-3s, too.
Now I've got a visual for my Centaurus powered MB5
Thanks folks!Now I've got a visual for my Centaurus powered MB5
Ooo, looking forward to that. I'd wondered about alternative-engine MB.3s but using the MB.5 gets around the ground visibility issues :smiley:
I've already done a Sabre engined one, a Sabre VIII to be exact.
I've already done a Sabre engined one, a Sabre VIII to be exact.
Yes, nice one Robert ! I remember your Long-Ranger (and loved those markings!) :smiley:
[url]http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=8367.msg150388#msg150388[/url] ([url]http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=8367.msg150388#msg150388[/url])
Also just very cool keeping Sir James' designs in the Napier family ;)
I had to look twice at the NA-73X it's that convincing!What he said. Beautiful work and an elegant alternate to the NA-73X.
Few have your talent at rendering a natural metal finish, apophenia. Pardon the pun, but your work really shines here.
Outstanding!
Wasn't the Spiteful wing similar to the Mustang wing?
... The closest you'll find to a Spiteful wing is on an Supermarine Attacker jet, which is what I used on my model because at the time I built it, I didn't know of any 1/72 Spiteful kit that was available.
I built this a while ago mating a Spiteful fuselage to a Spitfire wing
<...>
Looks like I will have to now build my J-20 as a CF-200. <...>
Do the avionics come with built in backdoors, to allow remote access? ;D
Hmmm....one of these would look good with a ducted spinner me thinks... ;)
And a bubble canopy ---
That bubble top looks great Stephen :smiley: :smiley: :smiley: :smiley: :smiley: :smiley: :smiley: :smiley: :smiley:
... I wonder if they ever developed an inline version...
The 177A is the one with inlines, the larger 177 had radials. ;)
But here's a chart of the engines proposed for the Model 179, including the R-3350, so ...
Of course the 177A would have to be escorted by Bell Model 3 fighters. ;D
I like this one a lot apophenia, but I can't help seeing it with just one radial up front.
I like this one a lot apophenia, but I can't help seeing it with just one radial up front.
In the thumbnail it does look like a big honkin' radial in the nose with a small cockpit way back towards the tail.
Okay, couldn't resist. Here is the single-engined Martin Mutt aka Model 177YOY ...
snip
While they were developing the R-4360 they mocked up various configurations including:
5 row, left-hand spiral, 7 cylinders per row (R-2800 cylinders) = 35 cylinders 5,444 in3 disp.
6 row, in-line, 5 cylinders per row (R-2180 cylinders) = 30 cylinders 4,671 in3 disp.
6 row, in-line, 6 cylinders per row (R-2180 cylinders) = 36 cylinders 5,605 in3 disp.
I think it'd be hard to see under all the ducting needed to cool the bugger. ;D ;D :icon_fsm:While they were developing the R-4360 they mocked up various configurations including:
5 row, left-hand spiral, 7 cylinders per row (R-2800 cylinders) = 35 cylinders 5,444 in3 disp.
6 row, in-line, 5 cylinders per row (R-2180 cylinders) = 30 cylinders 4,671 in3 disp.
6 row, in-line, 6 cylinders per row (R-2180 cylinders) = 36 cylinders 5,605 in3 disp.
Whoa, thanks for that Jon! An R-5605 would be something to see :o
I think it'd be hard to see under all the ducting needed to cool the bugger.
;D Hmmm, if the 1930s GB does go ahead, I think I'll work up a 4-row R-1830 derivative for wing-buried applications.
So-o, an American (Lockheed) Beaufighter equivalent. Neat! :smiley:
Thanks Robert. Yes, Coulson's Fireliner is an impressive bit of kit ... not sure about that name, though!
My Q-series preference would be for internal tanks as well. There's more up-front conversion costs but also much less added drag (a couple of fairings and drop hatches, basically, instead of that great midriff bulge).
One goal of my proposal was to try to catch the impetus of the current political pressure. That would mean getting government funding in place soon ... which favours a more 'proven' solution. Since Conair/Cascade's Q400-MR is the only Dash 8 air tanker conversion out there, I felt that I couldn't ignore it.
OT: I was impressed by the simplicity of Voyageur Aerotech's Dash 8-100PF conversion approach. It is also clever from a business point-of-view. The Voyageur Airways side of the operation already uses Dash 8s. And Voyageur is owned by Chorus Aviation which is now wondering what to do with all those trade-in Q100s and Q200s ;D
Use 1/72 Coulson C-130 decals?
(https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/UW0AAOSwPc9WvapY/s-l500.jpg)
https://www.ebay.com/itm/1-72-Coulson-C130Q-Hercules-Water-Bomber-Decals-for-Italeri-model/201522238813 (https://www.ebay.com/itm/1-72-Coulson-C130Q-Hercules-Water-Bomber-Decals-for-Italeri-model/201522238813)
Small world. Guess who is my newest customer in the real world. ;)
No. The support at this stage is to their C-130s.
With the J model C-130 replacing the older ones are there E and H model Hercs available for firebombers?
Wouldn't that be 7000L ?
Inspired by this: [url]http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=805.msg164723#msg164723[/url] ([url]http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=805.msg164723#msg164723[/url])
Would work? Dunno. Depends how snug the supercharger is to the front spar, I guess ...
BTW: I couldn't see a way to extend the tailplane à la the FG-2 Corsair so I gave her a new, broader tail fin and rudder.
Inspired by this: [url]http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=805.msg164723#msg164723[/url] ([url]http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=805.msg164723#msg164723[/url])
Would work? Dunno. Depends how snug the supercharger is to the front spar, I guess ...
BTW: I couldn't see a way to extend the tailplane à la the FG-2 Corsair so I gave her a new, broader tail fin and rudder.
Thanks folks! The XF8B-1's Aeroproducts AD7562-XB contra-prop and spinner would look great (and lessen potential tip speed problems).
I'm guessing there'd be weight gain up front though. So, maybe a longer rear fuselage to compensate?
I'm guessing there'd be weight gain up front though. So, maybe a longer rear fuselage to compensate?
These are beautiful! :-* Interesting just how much the different radome changes the look.
Love your MiGs. Perhaps a later update/rebuild of the SAPAC-LL Guerrier Étoilés will use Mirage F.1 radomes and ATAR 9K50 engines?
That does cry out for a profile or two.Love your MiGs. Perhaps a later update/rebuild of the SAPAC-LL Guerrier Étoilés will use Mirage F.1 radomes and ATAR 9K50 engines?
That would make sense. I had the Guerrier Étoilés going to Greece as MAP aid. So, yeah, ... 9K50s and Cyrano IVs to match the Hellenic AF's Mirage F1CG fleet :smiley:
That does cry out for a profile or two.
Just one thing, though, as built, a production Hound would have been fitted with a 100 / 130hp Clerget 9b engine, rather than the Gnome ...
Over on Secret Projects there was a thread speculating about Sea Kings for all branches of the Canadian Forces. So ...Makes you wonder why that particular version was not acquired in larger numbers than the few that were. Great to see in Canadian markings!
Makes you wonder why that particular version was not acquired in larger numbers than the few that were...
Travel Air R is similar with two struts.
Maybe a whiff within a whiff could be a Ecuadorian CR.42...
:smiley: ;D
That's a convoluted path the exhaust pipes take to the turbo.
Did Petter consult on the design? ;D
That's a convoluted path the exhaust pipes take to the turbo.
Perhaps an R-2800 would work on a Typhoon too.
Perhaps an R-2800 would work on a Typhoon too.
Very nice Greg! Is that a P-60E cowling?
Nope. P-47
Kind of an obvious Type 224 whif. I'm not sure that BdB would have approved of the spatsectomy ... but that float gear could be though of as the world's largest trousered undercarriage ;)
__________________________
Rejected as a land-fighter, the Type 224 prototype K2890 was modified as Supermarine's submission to meet Air Ministry Specification F.8/34 for an RAF float fighter. The modified prototype was put through its paces over the Solent by Capt. 'Mutt' Summers in early August 1935. However, by then, the specified Rolls-Royce Goshawk engine had lost is shine with the Air Ministry and the RAF had developed doubts about the need for fighters on pontoons.
beautiful floatplanization : nearly as beautiful as spats ;)
As Ralph Pegram's Beyond the Spitfire makes clear the racers and Spitfire were
atypical of Mitchell's design work. The float trousers wouldn't be outré coming from
his pencil.
;D
Thematically they fit the 1930s Brit design "look", along with other nations like say,
France.
;D
HD.780 seaplane fighter:
([url]http://airwar.ru/image/idop/fww2/hd780/hd780-1.jpg[/url])
Robert: Thanks for the 'Narvik Nightmare' image :smiley: My original thought was that, while Mitchell worked on other projects, this conversion work had been passed on to Arthur Shirvall. So, as floats were Arthur's forte, he stick with something more Schneideresque :D
I have one of these in the stash too:
(https://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/GTwiner142/sinifer-sn48008-48-dewoitine-hd-780_1_0f4a95a1f22f4051579ee8c3302e7bed_zpswgxe6fra.jpg)
Maybe also a post war target towing one in this sort of scheme:
Don't forget a Sea Defiance for the FAA!
<...> The mid-'60s vintage Airfix Hampden Mk.III kit in 1/72nd <...>
Any chance of a carrier based Sea Defiant? Inclusion of turret welcomed too.
[Edit] Just remembered that I had already done a Sea Defiant :-[
-- [url]http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=351.msg151117#msg151117[/url] ([url]http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=351.msg151117#msg151117[/url])
Doh! I forgot that one too.
you start wondering what your synapses are doing with all their spare time
you start wondering what your synapses are doing with all their spare time
In my case, trying to work out which route the lorries carrying the wings for the Paladins would take, from the CBAF, to Boulton Paul at Pendeford...
That original, back-country road lorry routing proved quite impractical - the infamous occurrence between a juggernaut and that sheep farmer's gate along Ridding Lane outside of Wednesbury being but one of a series of major incidents!
Well, with all these new-fangled lorries, omnibuses, and no end to to-doings, can we really blame the poor bloody sheep-farmers for keeping a low profile?
More likely to be the Tiptonites, stealing the sheep, and anything else they could get their hands on . . .
"Sport25ing sent me a clever Ecuador scenario. That reminded me that I promised (threatened?) to write up the end of my Ecudador vs Perú saga. In short(ish) form it was this ..."
Thx ;D
I've tried a pixelbash of a Shturmovik with a Defiant turret, but IIRC the turret seemed a little wide for the fuselage...
Well, look here, truth is stranger then fiction...
Okay, compounding failures here. I started off trying to tweak the Blackburn Botha (call me weird, I like its shape!). Gauging the best-case outcome as turning a sow's ear into a hog's ear, I briskly moved on ...
One Botha variation had been mid-winged. That had me wondering if that layout would be better applied to the de Havilland DH.95 airframe. I decided to give it a bash ... but this is as far as I got.
I can't see how this aircraft would have any advantage over the RW Hudson. On top of that, a DH patrol bomber would've used up UK production space that could be put to more strategic use. Oh well, call this one a fail :-[
The Ōtaka may fool a few otaku.
Are you sure there's an element of whiffery in this? ???
Yeah, but nobody flew the 84 as well as Lt. Usagi.
art by Steve Gallacci.
Well lookie here...Amusing Hobby releasing a new 1/35 kit:
... you will have the Sgt Major after you for not covering those lights up ...
...I now need to fight the urge to start looking at the IBG Pioneer gun tractors...
... you will have the Sgt Major after you for not covering those lights up ...
"But Sergeant Major, the war is over now ..." :(
I spied two of the feline foe myself on my walk this morning ... the fight will never be over!
Not sure where you were taught Doganese but I'm afraid that "Ruff! Grrr! Rurr-ruff! " translates to "excuse me while I sniff your butt"I spied two of the feline foe myself on my walk this morning ... the fight will never be over!
Ruff! Grrr! Rurr-ruff! (Translation: Ready, Aye Ready!)
BTW, exercise extreme caution. There are known felid-fraternizers on this very discussion group :o
Not sure where you were taught Doganese but I'm afraid that "Ruff! Grrr! Rurr-ruff! " translates to "excuse me while I sniff your butt"
and yes, I am a aware of the fifth column element.
Of course, Canidesian dialects vary. Locally, body language is a critical component. Nuances such as agitated quivering, hackle-raising, eye-bulging, and lower canine exposure all contribute. Butt-sniffing goes without saying but, in polite company, overly inflammatory terms like 'Cxt' or 'Squirrex' are strictly avoided ;)
Whilst you're on a Panzer III theme, how about an anti-aircraft version?
:smiley:
Kind of plays into a scenario I have toyed with whereby the reformed Deutsches Heer is only equipped with tank destroyers (and their ilk) for their primary armoured vehicle. Conventional tanks are thus not there so no M48 or Leo 1. Maybe some reconditioned Jagdpanthers or even a small set of Jagdpanzer E 100 (which was the trigger for the idea and the model I wanted to build in post war colours) before leading to the Kanonenjagdpanzer and even Stridsvagn 103. Essentially the reformed Deutsches Heer is given a defensive only posture.
Given the Swedish involvement here, are we likely to see a Svenska Flygvapnet Swift F.10? Perhaps as the J 34?
Apophenia's posts tend to do much stash searching/ebaying!
I wonder...were the RAAF Lances sold to anyone... ;)
Kim: My guess on the Type 333's reversed gull was Supermarine obsessing on the mountains of data gleaned from wind tunnel tests on R-R's He 70. The question is: were the added manufacturing headaches worth the aerodynamic benefits?
And now on to another unbuilt project ...
'Swords' into Claymores - the Canadair CL-76
For some time, I've been curious about what the Canadair CL-76 project would have looked like if built.
Canadair had hoped to produce a number of evolved CL-13 Sabre designs. Among these unbuilt projects were the CL-13G 2-seat trainer (akin to North American's TF-86F) and the CL-13J with a simplified Bristol afterburner (as compared with the afterburner originally planned for the CL-13C). Later, with the writing on the wall for further 'Sword' production, Canadair made more radical plans.
The 1958 CL-76 project was intended to produce a 2-seat NATO attack aircraft using the maximum number of F-86 and CL-13 components. There were three variants of the proposed CL-76. The first two kept fairly close to the F-86/CL-13 pattern other than being powered by twin engines, pod-mounted on the rear fuselage.
The baseline CL-76 was to be powered by compact Pratt & Whitney Canada JT12 (US military designation J60) fitted with afterburners. The CL-76A proposal was essentially similar to the CL-76 other than being powered by slightly larger Bristol Siddeley Orpheus BOr.12SR turbojets. These engines (TJ37s in the US designation system) would produce 6,810 lbf dry, with 8,170 lbf reheat.
There was also a CL-76B proposal but it involved much more radical airframe changes - 'internal' engines, high-mounted wings, etc. Obviously, the CL-76B was no longer an exercise in recycling exiting F-86/CL-13 components. Rather, those components were to be modified out of all recognition. However, none of these Canadair proposals was taken up by Canada or any other NATO member.
Here, I've shown what I imagine service CL-76 Claymores would have looked like. She's no looker but, to me at least, it was still an interesting design exercise by Canadair.
(Top) A former RCAF Claymore Mk.1A (2 x J60s) in Yugoslav markings. To prolong airframe life, the Yugoslavs removed their Claymores outer weapon pylons.
The Claymore Mk.1s had no fixed gun armament. This aircraft sports a false radome like all RCAF Claymores (the targetting radar was omitted from Canadian airframes as an economy measure).
(Bottom) A Claymore Mk.3 (2 x TJ37s) near the end of its RAF service. This aircraft lacks both inboard and outboard weapon pylons since it is being employed on Claymore pilot refresher courses.
@Apophenia - I do like where you are going with this Lansen idea. One of my many slow cooking projects is to try and turn the Lansen in to an ersatz F-86C/YF-93 ([url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_YF-93[/url]). Yes, a bit far fetched but it does kind of/sort of resemble an F-86 Sabre if you stretch your imagination.
I love your ersatz F-86C/YF-93 idea. Are you going North American or Saab origin for this concept?Not really sure at this point who would be prime contractor on it. IIRC the U.S. provided MDAP funding via or through NATO to have AVRO Canada produce the CF-100 for the
... This is an Alt-History so would it really matter if the OTL plant was closed down? ...
I wonder ...post war B-33 converted to Maritime Patrol. Maybe in some of the P-2 Neptune operator schemes?
... makes me wonder about a Rolls-Royce Vulture engined Wellington as well.
No real backstory here. I got a suggestion from sporting25 for the Invasion of Japan/Japan ‘46 GB concept. This involved USMC use of a re-engined Beech Grizzly. However, in the end, I pilfered the Marine content and expanded it for my P-61 derivative:
[url]http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=9576.msg179626#msg179626[/url] ([url]http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=9576.msg179626#msg179626[/url])
Still, an Allison V-3420-powered XA-38 Grizzly was too cool a concept to just abandon. So, I've done it up as a prototype re-engined by Beechcraft to get around their engine supply problem (since the B-29 had priority for the XA-38's original R-3350 radials). In reality, of course, Beechcraft faced other supply problems with their XA-38. Eg: the Grizzly's GE remote-controlled barbettes and their fire-control system were ear-marked for the Douglas A-26/A-26B.
I modelled my fictional XA-38B cowlings on those of the V-3420-powered Lockheed XP-58 (but removed its unnecessary turbochargers). Again reality rears its ugly head ... the 'Chain Lightning' programme was abandoned after Wright Field examiners realized what a maintenance hog it was. Adding paired V-3420 engines to that mix wasn't going to help :P
Hmmm...one of these in Biafran war markings... ;)
Another thought ...
...Would the torpedo have been carried semi-exposed, partially within the bomb bay or carried on an external rack?
Doesn't look silly. Looks pretty cool! 8)+1
One thing that struck me in numbers scaling was the wing area. The RW area was 262 sq ft (24.3 m2). So, at 70%, that becomes 183.4 sq ft (17.04 m2) ... which actually compares rather nicely with the opposing Bf 109E's 174 sq ft (16.7 m2).
Thanks Jon. Alas, I think I've just created the Martin-Baker Emu! It may look imposing but is incapable of flight :-[
... I might be troubling you for permission to do something in 3D.
Engine commonality between the F-5E and Learjets covers all the 20-series Learjets. It would cost a bit more, but the Learjet wing could be modified to take up to six underwing pylons (I've seen concepts from their AD folks - and this was long ago). One other thought, if you have radar in one enlarged tip tank nose, you could put EO capability in the other.
The pods shown above contain 30mm DEFA cannon. One could also go with something lighter such as a 7.62mm one for 'warning' purposes:
The pods shown above contain 30mm DEFA cannon. One could also go with something lighter such as a 7.62mm one for 'warning' purposes:
Thanks. Yep, the 7.62 mm pods (loaded with plenty of tracer rounds) would do the trick :smiley:
Another robunos rip-off ... this time, based on the de Havilland Australia Sun Moth:
[url]http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=9672.0[/url] ([url]http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=9672.0[/url])
The de Havilland Australia Sun Moth II name is all but forgotten today. A major improvement over the original, more cramped Sun Moth I, the prototype Sun Moth II was let down by its underpowered de Havilland Gipsy Six engine. [1] And that might have been the end of the story had the RAAF not experienced some overheating problems with the Armstrong Siddeley Cheetah in their Avro 643 Cadet biplane trainers.
In anticipation of new RAAF Avro Anson patrol aircraft, Canberra funded an improved version of the British engine. The result was the Commonwealth CAC-7 Cricket [2] 7-cylinder radial - with the same displacement as the British Cheetah but with enlarged cooling fins on the cylinder barrels. [3] The Cricket did all that was hoped for it but, before the first Anson entered RAAF service, a pre-production CAC-7 was used to re-engine the prototype DHA-2 Sun Moth II. The intended market, once again, was the Australian Aerial Medical Service. But the 'Flying Doctors' lost out to the RAAF.
In service, the DHA-2M became the de Havilland Australia Dingo - famed for its low-level air drops to jungle-fighting troops in New Zealand. The 375 hp CAC-7 Cricket provided enough power for the Dingo to hang over the Diggers' position on its Handley Page slats while dropping urgent supplies through its belly hatch. (Such mad aerial antics probably being responsible for the DHA-2M's 'Drongo' nickname.)
Illustrated is the prototype 'Panacea II after its conversion to DHA-2M standards.
____________________________________
[1] That original, inline layout being immortalized in the de Havilland Australia logo.
[2] The CAC Cricket was named for the buzzing Black field cricket (Teleogryllus commodus).
[3] Minor changes to better-suit Australian manufacturing practices and a switch from Claudel-Hobson to US Stromberg NA-R7A carburettors were other modifications. The parallel CAC Cicada - a 420 hp, 1,072 cid (17.57 L) 9-cylinder radial - was not proceeded with (Commonwealth ultimately license-building the Pratt and Whitney Wasp instead).
... the small differences, reminds me of a Buffalo cowling...
Thinking about it, I've already posted the first part of one of my sequences, with the OWB Sopwith Pup and Hound. I have the Camel, Snipe and Salamander still to do.
[1] Yeah, I know that there was a real M.S.460 project. It was a 1940 (or 1939?) single-seat fighter but who knows what it looked like?
Wouldn't an airliner derivative look more like the original He111C or G?
Any chance of a turboprop variant of the above - maybe using the BT-67 as inspiration?
Turbomeca Astazou?Sure looks like it, or a similar Turbomeca engine.
I'm tempted to do a twin turbo prop one with either PT6As or RR Darts.
I also have a plan for a Zwilling one meted with an airliner version so as to create a Zwilling HE111 airliner.
Cheers Daniel :smiley: I linked to the Group Build above but probably should have also made a direct link to my Halfway House Hawkers thread: [url]http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=9845.0[/url] ([url]http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=9845.0[/url])
B737-200
Gaah, a pet peeve, Boeing does not preface their model numbers with the letter 'B'...
If I was a tank gunner, I'd be spoiled for choices to aim at! Oh, that luvverly shot trap under the turret! :-*
Hey, I love your work on Swedish armour. :smiley: :smiley: :smiley:
A quick-n-dirty Matilda II/T-34-85 mashup. Just needed to find that extra 11 inches of turret ring diameter ;)
A quick-n-dirty Matilda II/T-34-85 mashup. Just needed to find that extra 11 inches of turret ring diameter ;)Looks so right! :-* :-* :-*
A quick-n-dirty Matilda II/T-34-85 mashup. Just needed to find that extra 11 inches of turret ring diameter ;)
Yay, bigger gun, bigger turret, still cramped. :smiley:
:icon_fsm:
I went with the mid-mounted turret on the Ratel 6x6 so I could grab a standard vehicle off the line and it shouldn’t need any modifications to the lower hull or powertrain to accommodate the T-34 turret...
Really digging your Swede ideas. Hmm.
Speaking of Swedes, have you been following Ramba's Strv 103C recce vehicle adaptation?
... Perhaps a diesel A15 would have resiulted. ;)
... A Kestrel based 6 diesel would probably be a whole hell of a lot lighter than a GM 6-71 for a similar output, but I have to wonder about durability...
...I have a junked Cromwell Models A9 Cruiser that obstinately refused to play nicely ...
your Churchillian SP just says: "We're big, we're lumbering, and we'd probably destroy you even if we didn't want to ... but we really, really do want to!"
https://www.baesystems.com/en/heritage/hawker-harrier (https://www.baesystems.com/en/heritage/hawker-harrier)
Looks vaguely Belgian (as in a Renard fighter) to me!
https://www.baesystems.com/en/heritage/hawker-harrier (https://www.baesystems.com/en/heritage/hawker-harrier)
Yup, most of the alliterative names for Hawker aircraft end getting recycled (both RW and whif).
Mind you, somebody at Kingston thought that 'Hedgehog', 'Hornbill', and 'Hoopoe' were evocative names for airplanes ???
Any chance of any going to Sweden...perhaps with Bristol Pegasus radial engines?
I dunno the Hoopoe is pretty cool looking...
Origins of the RCAF CC-188 Polaris Strategic Transport ...
It has a bit of a Sperrin look to it, doesn't it ----
To my eye, the whif Birmingham is more like 'what if a B-47 had been designed in Britain?'
It was a great try, unfortunately by the time development and testing was done and it finally entered service in 1971 it was extremely obsolete.
If it had a bulldozer blade at the front it would be an ideal combat engineer vehicle. :smiley:
Screams APC variant to me...
I quite like those!
The nose of the DC-8 looks like it could be rigged out for EW tasks as well.
Maybe some special version for 414 Squadron to play with. ;)
The St Chamond Engineering Tank got me thinking about using a Matilda hull, with a similar boxy superstructure.
The base vehicle was reliable enough, weight might be a problem though and it is somewhat narrow
Thanks folks!
I like the EW idea. The next installment reveals the updated CP-140M Arcturus patrol aircraft. Part of that update involved the replacing of the 'recycled' CP-107 sensors and avionics with CP-143 Orion kit.
For reasons of economy, the ASV 21 nose radome was retained on the CP-188M despite Raytheon's AN/APS-137 antenna being quite a bit smaller. So, plenty of room in that schnozz for EW emitters. In fact, this was a big airplane, plenty of room everywhere for EW kit
______________________________
The final installment in the CC-188 Polaris Strategic Transport Aircraft story:
-- https://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=10044.msg191139#msg191139
Hmm! interesting ! This will be a CE-150 (T) when it's finished ...
...The aircraft I'm building a model of is a BAe 844, this concept appeared in various aviation magazines around 1984 in a Marconi advert...
I've always like the alternative option of the DC-8 as a basis for an AWACS (like the E-3 Sentry) because I've always thought the DC-8 looked sleeker than the 707. It looks especially good with the CFM56. Great profile!
Actually, you could do the entire brochure in 1/72 - although that would mean a hen's teeth Aeroclub C-23A Sherpa for the Shorts 330 :o
Actually, you could do the entire brochure in 1/72 - although that would mean a hen's teeth Aeroclub C-23A Sherpa for the Shorts 330 :o
You mean this kit ;)
My plan is to build what's on the brochure Stephen --- :smiley: I've actually got all the kits to do it too ---
That's the one! And looking forward to seeing the built collection :smiley:
... and Puma (?) ...
... and Puma (?) ...
Question mark indeed! The helicopter drawing in that brochure is dreadful but - based on engine position alone - I'm wondering if that was supposed to represent an EH101 ???
You mean this kit ;)
My plan is to build what's on the brochure Stephen --- :smiley: I've actually got all the kits to do it too ---
That's the one! And looking forward to seeing the built collection :smiley:
Going back to jet trainers ... Upnorth's story had the RCAF wearying of unspecified technical flaws with the Canadair CL-41. It struck me that a simpler backstory would be an RCAF flip-flop on tandem versus side-by-side seating preferences for its primary jet trainer.
Of course, if it went that way, Canadair may well have developed a tandem-seat Tutor. So that got me wondering how such a 'Tandem Tutor' might appear. Well ... not much of a looker as it turns out :P
What about using the "long nose" of the proposed CL-41T dedicated ground attack version?
...
Monash Medium originally built with Tylor JB.4, as per the Whippet A, in place of the US Beaver engines.
It was later re-engined with Tylor Tiger engines. ;)
A bit of futuristic silliness ...
https://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=10104.msg191828#msg191828
I hope the Arrow Astres didn't rust out as quickly as the Pontiac product of the same name!
I like where this is going with the LRDG Half-Track Patrol Vehicle. Great concept and it makes you wonder if the LRDG ever considered using half-tracks for patrol vehicles.
... Citroen-Kegresse P17 or P19B from the interwar period...
...The Finns used some cut down M3 halftracks postwar as prime movers for their AA guns...
I wonder why "cut down' ... was this just to save weight for towing heavy AA pieces?
In 1947, the Finnish heavy vehicle producer Vanajan Autotehdas bought 425 M2 half-track vehicles from the Western Allied surplus stocks located in France and Germany. The vehicles were delivered without armor. Some 359 units were converted into field and forest clearing vehicles, some were scrapped for parts and 60 units were equipped with conventional rear axles and converted into 4×4 or 4×2 trucks. They were badged as Vanaja VaWh. The last units were sold in 1952.
This was prompted by one of those vague, whiffy notions of 'Hey! What would a [blank] look like with [blank feature] added on?' Lame, I know. But I really wanted to see a Polish 7TP on a Czech suspension.
... I know a guy who has enough of both in his model closet.Frank: I love to see an 8TP or 8TP nc built!
One of two unarmored half track vehicles to ever go into full production. Mechanically the T17 was
fairly identical to the M-series armored half-tracks of WW II: White 160 AX, six-cylinder, 386 cubic
inch engine with four speed transmission and two-speed transfer. Front tires we 8.25x2O mounted
on combat rims, and the rear steel-cable and-rubber track was 121/4 inches wide. The wheelbase
was 135.5 inches. The majority of these Autocars went to the USSR under the Lend-Lease program.
A normal Autocar commercial cab was fitted, and the hood and radiator shell were modified to suit
the vehicle, while retaining the Autocar identity. The fenders and headlamp assemblies appear to be
the same as those used on the armored versions.
Not at all farfetched. ;)
The T5E2 variant had a 10" wide track version of the Cunningham suspension.
Here's a so-so shot from Hunnicut of the 10" suspension assembly. The vehicle itself was the same as the T5.
Can't wait to see the profiles for this one.
I love the B.Mk.1 :-*
Well if Avro Australia can rename the Lancaster, than why cannot Avro Canada too. So how about the Avro Abbotsford?
For my Australian Lancaster build, I've been thinking a nose like the MR you have there put on the B.1 at the top. And I've found that F7F R-2800 cowlings fit on Shackleton nacelles very well with almost no modifications to do so I'm going to use them. I'm also thinking of using Lancaster Mk.IV wings because I'm going to use some larger diameter propellers and I need to space the outer nacelles further out, and also use the squared off at the bottom fins/rudders too. And I think I'll do the canopy a bit like your MR too.
A single finned tail version could be an interesting development - a bit like the Liberator to Privateer developments.
Robert: Interesting about the R-3350s on an enlarged Shackleton. I wonder if that would have gone up against a Bristol version of the Canadair CL-28
And how about Avro Penhold ;) Mind you, I think it would really need a name of a town where the Lancaster could have been made (other than Malton) so it would have been somewhere down east where the population was/is.
And how about Avro Penhold ;) Mind you, I think it would really need a name of a town where the Lancaster could have been made (other than Malton) so it would have been somewhere down east where the population was/is.
And how about Avro Penhold ;) Mind you, I think it would really need a name of a town where the Lancaster could have been made (other than Malton) so it would have been somewhere down east where the population was/is.
Why does it have to be back east? Avro Abbotsford...
And how about Avro Penhold ;) Mind you, I think it would really need a name of a town where the Lancaster could have been made (other than Malton) so it would have been somewhere down east where the population was/is.
Why does it have to be back east? Avro Abbotsford...
As I said, that was where the most population was, but it could be in other places too. Some companies in Calgary for instance, built sections of the Liberty Ships which were then shipped by train to the shipyards in Vancouver.
Howzabout Avro "Mount Royal". ;)
Since this naming-game started with the Adelaide, I presume that we're talking about the Lancaster 10MP. If it has to be Central Canadian, how about an island name? I'm thinking Avro Anticosti (WW2 U-Boat attack connection) or - if it must be anglocentric - maybe Avro Amherst?
And another. This time a response to Clave's Turboprop Spitfire...
I'm calling it the Supermarine's 'Sacrilege' - a Type 356 Spitfire F.Mk.24 converted to the one-off 'Propeller-Turbine' conversion.
Is that F.23 using a Spiteful fuselage? The cockpit seems raised a bit.
Concept went over on SPF like excessively damp flatulence :P
Taking up one of Robert's notions - combining the raised fuselage of the Spiteful with the wings from the Spitfire F.Mk.21 ... So, here is the first Castle Bromwich-built Spitfire F.Mk.23 (PK678) in postwar RAF colours.
(Based on a Richard J. Caruna profile of a Spitfire F.Mk.24.)
I don't recall seeing it there.
Mmmmm.... what number would a Seafire have, much like Seafire 47 but with raised cockpit? 48?
Seafire FR.48 looks right!
There's something really powerful looking about that nose, and the raised cockpit makes it look even more muscular.
Also, if you do go for the long nose or even longish nose, perhaps there is a need to also go for tricycle undercarriage
You know Stephen, you probably don't need the turbo-prop so far out in front like that. Griffon Spitfires had up to 250lb of counter weight installed between the last two frames of the fuselage and just before the tail assembly joint (depending on what engine and prop combo was installed). Removing it all and then placing the turbo-prop in a position suitable would probable make it look a bit more eye-catching.
p.s. there's also no need to slavishly duplicate the Viscount nacelle when adding a Dart...
Now in this scenario the Attacker was designed around a different, axial flow engine. Was the fuselage a different diameter? ...
... I gather the fuselage was lengthened forward of the wing. How much was it lengthened?
([url]http://soyuyo.main.jp/spitd/19side.gif[/url])
Can I ask where you get these scale drawings from as I am after a source of decent drawings for late Spitfires and, well, just about anything.Those are drawings by Jumpei Temma of Japan. There is more at http://soyuyo.main.jp/top2.htm (http://soyuyo.main.jp/top2.htm)
Can I ask where you get these scale drawings from as I am after a source of decent drawings for late Spitfires and, well, just about anything.Those are drawings by Jumpei Temma of Japan. There is more at [url]http://soyuyo.main.jp/top2.htm[/url] ([url]http://soyuyo.main.jp/top2.htm[/url])
Dont' let the Japanese texts scare you. The drawings enlarge nicely when you click them, or the link that he sometimes puts below the small image.
For late Spitfires/Seafires, start at [url]http://soyuyo.main.jp/spit47/spit47-1.html[/url] ([url]http://soyuyo.main.jp/spit47/spit47-1.html[/url])
... To my knowledge, it's the only aircraft to have flown in glider, piston, all-jet, combination, and turboprop configurations...
Yup. And almost as dramatically, the undercarriage variations - fixed (XG-20?), semi-retractable (YC-122), fully-retractable (C-123), and the wonderfully bonkers Pantobase (YC-134A).
I do wonder what the Provider's fate would have been had Fairchild addressed some of its major shortcomings a bit earlier - especially 'wet' wings in place of those nacelle tanks and a wider track main undercarriage. Stroukoff was heading towards more STOL performance but I doubt that was what the USAF was looking for. Probably the C-123's lack of cabin pressurization was what really killed further development.
There were so many good tactical transports in the '50s, but I think what really killed most of them was the inspired greatness and continued evolution of the C-130 that is ongoing even today.
There were so many good tactical transports in the '50s, but I think what really killed most of them was the inspired greatness and continued evolution of the C-130 that is ongoing even today.
Agreed - it is interesting to speculate about what may have resulted if the superlative C-130 hadn't been created.
So, was there any remaining market for twins?
I've always liked the idea of a twin-engined 'Short Herc' (maybe in a related scenario, Fairchild nailing together Lockheed-supplied parts). But, if reality raised its ugly head, would any air force actually be willing to buy half a Hercules? Note sure.
The Caribou had a role that most military/air forces are using "work around"s for, largely because the number of times they need those specific flight characteristics doesn't justify the expense of keeping a similar aircraft on the books.
Aren't too many aircraft, not even the Herc, that can approach at as steep an angle & stop in as short a distance as the ol' 'Bou. :smiley:
Plenty of inspiration here:
(https://www.crecy.co.uk/images/9781910809167.jpg)
I've got a book called 'War Prizes', there's hundreds of photos of Air Ministry numbers on captured aircraft.
I like the idea of "post-Juli Plot markings"
I've got a book called 'War Prizes', there's hundreds of photos of Air Ministry numbers on captured aircraft.
Ooo, that would've been handy! I was just making up markings from memory :-[
I'm not sure what the RW serial iTS474' was applied to. But TS472 was a captured Ju 88S-1 so, I figured, close enough ;)
Depending on the results for my last medical test I have to have done, will decide if I'll have to find some good homes for my book collection
Some fighters in similar markings would be interesting.
Depending on the results for my last medical test I have to have done, will decide if I'll have to find some good homes for my book collection
Whoa! That sounds grim Robert :o Fingers crossed (twice)!
Some fighters in similar markings would be interesting.
... Dig your 'Finnic Federation' concept too :smiley:I recall needing the Federation so that I could put a Finnish Border Guard aircraft in an Asiatic group build ;)
Bottom Messerschmitt Bf 109G-2/R6 of III./SG 3 while at Feldflugplatz Vinschai (Vincai) in southwestern Lithuania, February 1945. 'Weiße A' is in a typical late-war camouflage scheme with post Juli-Plot markings overpainted in the field. The 'erks' got the asymmetrical underwing markings right but missed the 'bars' on the fuselage roundels.It is a little surprising to see a G-2 with the bumps required by the bigger machineguns on the nose.
I recall needing the Federation so that I could put a Finnish Border Guard aircraft in an Asiatic group build ;)
I wonder...will we see any Allied types in Juli-Plot markings? Some Typhoons or Tempests? P-51s or P-47s?
...But what do you get if you take a G-2 and mount the bigger machineguns on it, in addition to the wing guns?
perttime: I think you're right ... I've obviously misidentified that Bf 109G-2/R6 :-[
__________________________________________________
Top Messerschmitt Bf 109G-10 in the stripped finish typical of Bf 109Gs and 'Ks rebuilt or finished at the Wertheim facility. Although in full operational markings, this aircraft has been retained for armaments trials (performed by Wertheim test pilot, Flugkaptän Anton Riediger). As a result of these trials, paired mounts for 27 kg Raketengeschosse became an optional fit on Wertheim Bf 109 rebuilds (although supplies of the British 60lb SAP No2 Mk.I rockets to the Bundesluftwaffe remained spotty).
...
Bottom Another Messerschmitt Bf 109G-10, this time in an overall aluminum paint scheme. This Gustav has been supplied to the Latvijas gaisa aizsargi (Latvian Air Guard) which was now under US supervision. [1] 'Balts 4B' (White 4B) is a strafer armed with additional underwing MG 151/20 guns. (Other Latvian Messerschmitts were locally fitted with kanoe mounts for US 50-cal Brownings.)
...
[1] The new name literally meant 'Latvian Air Defenders'. Why it was felt necessary to change the post-collapse name from the established remains unclear.
All was not forgiven in the aftermath of the Juli-Plot. After an Armistice was agreed with the pushed-back Soviets, German forces were to be disarmed and stood down.
So the Western Allies give tentative, but not overt, support to the Germans while they continue to fight to stabilise the Eastern front and reach an armistice with the USSR?
... As to the concept of post-Juli markings, I think it's doubtful that they'd return to the Imperial cross pattée as, in aerial combat, it would be easily confused with the former marking. Some sort of roundel seems more likely.
...(although admittedly half thought-through scenario since I don't even have a MacGuffin to explain the sudden split between Stalin and the Western Allied leaders).In the Real World, it didn't take all that long for the falling out to happen, after hostilities with Germany were over.
...
The Kawasaki Ki-61-IV Hien canopy has some Heinkel He 112B in it, to my eyes. Or perhaps it is just the logical way to do it. I'm pretty sure that Heinkel's fighter designs inspired the Ki-61 anyway.
... I've been thinking that a further development with bigger engine and possibly cut down rear fuselage would be cool.
The Kawasaki Ki-61-IV Hien canopy has some Heinkel He 112B in it, to my eyes. Or perhaps it is just the logical way to do it. I'm pretty sure that Heinkel's fighter designs inspired the Ki-61 anyway.
Yes. The imported He 100s definitely influenced Kawasaki. Although that immediately reminds me of Logan's brilliant Nakajima Ki-63 Haitaka :)
-- https://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=144.msg77354#msg77354
Yep. Logan's He 100 derivatives are great. I've been thinking that a further development with bigger engine and possibly cut down rear fuselage would be cool.Thanks for the kind words, guys! Those were definitely planned, but gradually stopped doing profiles a few years ago. These look great! Talos and I had planned the full Ki-61/100 treatment including cut down canopy and eventually radial with no belly scoop.
Ki-88 strikes me as looking like the illegitimate offspring of a Bf. 109 and a P-51D.
... Those were definitely planned, but gradually stopped doing profiles a few years ago...
... Those were definitely planned, but gradually stopped doing profiles a few years ago...
Thanks Logan. Would you object to me bodging together 'low-back' Ki-63 variants based upon your profiles?
Have at it and let me know if any of the profiles in a different form (on a white background, for instance) would make your job easier.
I like though I suspect that canopy might require some bracing.
... Of course, another option might be for this to be done to the Australian Centurions... ;)
Bottom Centurion C.26 - DFSV (Direct Fire Support Vehicle) variant mounting a Bofors 57 mm LPT gun. This automatic cannon was very similar to the Bofors 57 mm L/70 Mk 3 arming Canadian Navy Halifax class frigates. Outwardly, the Teledyne LPT looked very similar, inwardly it was specifically adapted for the 57 mm L/70 gun and its ammunition. [1]
The vehicle shown is one of the last serving Centurion variants in Canadian service. By the time of the CF deployment to Kandahar, all Centurion C.23 tanks had been replaced by Leopard 2A6Ms. But DND's Multi-Mission Effects Vehicle (MMEV) programme had fallen seriously behind schedule. As a result, the Centurion C.26 was the only DFSV type available for deployment. Lack of preparedness was partly revealed by the 'bum bustle' surrounding a tacked-on air conditioning unit. More anti-RPG 'fencing' shielded the base of the LPT itself.
Another 'Kandahar mod' was the fitting of a 'rooftop' Protected Weapon Station armed with a C6 GPMG. [2] Here that PWS is being used to 'check 6' - that weapon system's optics being superior to the C.26's rear vision cameras. This vehicle
As the Canadian Force prepared for their withdrawl from Afghanistan, vehicle training for Afghan National Army crews began on the DFSV Centurions at Camp Nathan Smith. Upon withdrawl, the ANA commenced operational use of the Centurion C.26s. Although left with considerable stocks of spares, C.26 servicability was poor in ANA service and the Afghan Centurions were idle by mid-2016.
With the end of Canadian Forces operations in Afghanistan, this last CF Centurion variant was finally retired. However, the 57 mm LPTs were refurbished and updated by BAE Systems to arm the LAV-MGS (Mobile Gun Systems) - part of DND's MMEV (Multi-Mission Effects Vehicle) system. A heavier, anti-tank variant was also proposed within the MMEV scheme. This concept was not realized. Instead, the rebuilt 105 mm L7 LPTs were installed on the new CCV-MGS (Close Combat Vehicle) based on the Swedish CV90 hull.
______________________________
[1] The Bofors L/70 gun's smaller rounds - 57 × 438 mm R versus 105 × 617 R for the tank gun - allowed a larger ammunition carousel (carrying 15 ready rounds instead of only nine).
[2] C6 GPMG is the Canadian designation for the FN MAG 58. The PWS was a Canadian-built version of the Israeli Rafael Mini-Samson remote weapon system. Later the PWS would be classed under the US Joint Army-Navy Nomenclature System as the AN/MWG 505 RWS.
Hey apophenia, I just had an idea you might like to play with. I recently read that Brazil donated some of its retired M108APs to Uruguay. ...
I think you could either replace the gun in the existing M108 turret or do a full turret upgrade with the T7 turret that they tried out on the LAV III...
Can you share this & the other RCAC Cent LPT on the Canadian What If page? https://www.facebook.com/groups/228625345167056 (https://www.facebook.com/groups/228625345167056)
(I'm on my 6th 30-day FB ban this year, so no posting for me again)
But, unless my eyes deceive me, the turret ring seems to become rather narrow behind that chain skirt. :-\
Since we're on the theme, I thought it was worth reposting some of your older work:
I've got more Swedish stuff in the queue but, first, here's a quickie response to Logan's M108 suggestion ...
__________________________________
This is an Ejército Nacional del Uruguay AP-122 M108 (Autopropulsado de 122 mm - M108) at the Centro de Instrucción de Artillería de Campaña y Antiaérea (CIACA) in Montevideo. Former Brazilian vehicles, the AP-122 M108 have been refurbished and re-armed - their original M103 L/30 105 mm howitzers being replaced with 122 mm D-30 L/38 gun-howitzers.
Within the ENU, the AP-122 M108 act as back-ups to Uruguay's premier SPH - the AP-122 2S1 'Clavel' ('Carnation'). Note that the AP-122 M108 has been re-armed with a standard D-30 field piece (which lacks a bore evacuator but retains the multi-baffle muzzle brake).
I always thought the S tank , once retired from actual tank duty, would have made a great ATGM carrier. A low profile TOW turret or similar and upgraded to Javelin or some such.
I always thought the S tank , once retired from actual tank duty, would have made a great ATGM carrier. A low profile TOW turret or similar and upgraded to Javelin or some such.
... Any chance of you doing an M108 with the Denel G7 105mm gun in the original turret?...
What about the Strv 103s again having their 105mm gun removed but then replaced by an articulated elevating missile launcher fitted with ATGMs ...
Now where can I find myself an articulated arm in 1/35 or other?The solution might be found with the one Italeri 1/24th scale Commercial Truck Accessory Set that contains a HIAB type hydraulic crane which would be a good start towards your elevated device. The other less desireable option would be to stock up on plastic from Evergreen or similar and build it from scratch. I think the Italeri accessory might be the best option and it is "affordable" if you know where to look.
Now where can I find myself an articulated arm in 1/35 or other?
Here might be a good place to start; https://www.miniature-construction-world.co.uk/jlg_models.html (https://www.miniature-construction-world.co.uk/jlg_models.html)
Here might be a good place to start; https://www.miniature-construction-world.co.uk/jlg_models.html (https://www.miniature-construction-world.co.uk/jlg_models.html)
Nice! I note that there are a bunch of 'zoom boom' telehandlers in 1/35 available ... but all seem to be diecast and quite pricey!
... Any chance of you doing an M108 with the Denel G7 105mm gun in the original turret? ...
Now where can I find myself an articulated arm in 1/35 or other?
De Havilland Comet Inflight Refuellers Down Under - Part Two
From Singapore-Changi, RAAF fighters could readily deploy to forward bases during the final years of the 'Malayan Emergency'. In the opening phases of Australia's involvement in the Vietnam conflict, RAAF Sabres re-deployed to the Royal Thai Air Force Base Ubon. By this stage in the early '60s, the aging Comets had lost their cachet as VIP transports. Well-used Comet A87-101 was retired and sold off. [1] But the remaining three No. 33 Squadron Comets could now be dedicated to IFR and trooping. But, to the surprise of all, inflight refuelling by Comets would play a critical role in RAAF operations in South Vietnam.
In December 1967, it was decided to forward-deploy Sabres at Vung Tau in the Republic of Vietnam to support the 1st Australian Task Force in Phuoc Tuy province. The Sabres were operating in high heat and humidity, while often carrying heavy ground-attack ordnance. Whenever possible, the RAAF fighter took off 'light' and refuelled enroute to targets. Two Comets would trade off doing circuits over SE Vietnam to top-up the Sabres. [2] The pace was relentless. By the beginning of 1970, both the Sabres and the Comets were withdrawn from Vietnam. Having played essential roles in supporting 1 ATF on the ground, both aircraft fleets were worn out. The last Sabre was retired in 1971. The Comets lingered on in storage at RAAF Base Woomera until August 1975 when the surviving trio were sold for scrap.
Image De Havilland DH.106 Comet Mk.4CR of No. 33 Squadron, RTAF Base Ubon, eastern Thailand, December 1967. Inset is a probed CA-27 Sabre Mk.33 fighter. Note the tropical fading of the Sabre's camouflage by comparison with Comet A87-102's newly applied paintwork.
In common with most other RAAF aircraft deployed to SE Asia, large black serials have been applied to the rear fuselage. [3] This dictated the unusual moving of the Australian roundel forward (almost to the nose). An Australian flag is displays above the fin flash but the camouflaged Comets carried few other markings.
______________________________________________
[1] This sale, in part helped provide funds for the purchase of an ex-Qantas Boeing 707-138B. The appropriately-named 'City of Canberra' (VH-EBC, c/n 17698) was returned to Boeing in October 1961. At Renton, she was refitted for the government VIP role and returned to Australia in February 1962.
[2] A third IFR Comet was always kept in reserve in Australia - while usually also undergoing maintenance and repair to keep the overworked RAAF Comet fleet airborne.
[3] The camouflaged Sabres were also exceptional in this. In contrast to the deployed Comets, Canberras, and Caribous, the Sabres worn their 'last three' numerals on their noses. Their roundels remained on the rear fuselage.
Any chance of a standalone profile of your probed CA-27 with with Aim-9B Sidewinder's??
https://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=7486.msg206749#msg206749Okay, now you are tempting me to acquire the necessary bits and pieces to model this one. it certainly looks "right".
Evan suggested an upgraded IDF S.199 with its service life extended by replacing worn-out Jumo 211F engines with Merlins using the Hispano Aviación installation. This would certainly have simplified the Israeli's supply chain - since their Spitfire IXc fleet used similar engines.
So, I present an IDF Avia S-199M S'faradiy ('Spaniard') upgrade in 101 Squadron service.
This image is based on an S.199 profile by Helmut Schmidt. I've substituted a Czech sliding hood for the original Erla Haube. The nose is a standard HA-1112-M1L Buchón cowling and spinner.
Both the Israeli Buchon-ish S-199 and the Bloch MB 153 look great! Both are easily buildable from existing kits. The S-199 needs the canopy from an Eduard or KP S-199.
Elsewhere, M.A.D requested operational Avro (Australia) Adelaides fitted with Rolls-Royce Nene turbojets on the outboard positions. And, here at Apophenia Industries, customer satisfaction is 'Job One'!
For others, here is the original Adelaide in context ...
-- [url]https://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=351.msg195123#msg195123[/url]
The bottom version is basically just a jet-assisted Adelaide B.1(J) in post-1950 No. 10 Squadron markings.
The top version is a late-1950s Adelaide B.1A(J). This airframe has been fully modernized - with gun turrets deleted and Adelaide MR.2 glazings substituted. Heat-reducing 'titanium white' paint has been extended to some cockpit glazings.
Metal wingtips have replaced the wooden originals and incorporate tip tanks for kerosene. It was common to add the No. 10 Squadron slogan - "Strike First" - to these tanks. Hi-viz paint has been added to the tip tanks, fore-and-aft fuselage panels, as well as the upper tail fins.Any chance of a standalone profile of your probed CA-27 with with Aim-9B Sidewinder's??
Sorry, M.A.D. I can't find any trace of psd files for that CA-27 Sabre ... I must have deleted them :(
Errr...would that work?
Hmmm...I wonder about doing some remote controlled T-55s
Hmmm...I wonder about doing some remote controlled T-55s
Another idea (and dare I say hope) would be for some Achzarits to be supplied to Ukraine.
Hmmm...would a Gepard turret fit on a BTR-4 (see below). I suspect not but still...
Israel is upgrading the BTR-60 for foreign sales (higher roof & new engine). Maybe an upgrade for the BTR-80/90 series ?
Could the British form a Ethiopian squadron for use in North Africa after the East African Campaign?
Israel is upgrading the BTR-60 for foreign sales (higher roof & new engine). Maybe an upgrade for the BTR-80/90 series ?
Another idea (and dare I say hope) would be for some Achzarits to be supplied to Ukraine.
The Ukrainians had the BMP-55 a T-55 based APC, so not far off...
Thanks folks.
Frank: I hadn't thought about the thicker plastic of a SnapTite-style model ...
Attached is a HAWK-totting Centurion (as per Gingie's request ...
-- https://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=2618.msg207384#msg207384
I've done this without any sort of onboard targeting radar (assuming that missile-carriers would be slaved to a single radar system and launch control).
NB: The Centurion hull is based on an image of an ATV Club AVRE build.
... Since the US is giving both the Stryker and Bradley to Ukraine, image giving to them as well both the M1128 MGS Strykers and M6 Lineback ADVs.
I wondered if repositioning the launcher pivot point futher to the rear and the launch rails as far back as not looking silly...
... Or a launch rail like a Neva-125.
Oh man! Had know that the Neva-125 existed, that's what you'd have got ;D
To accommodate the M192 'box', the Centurion's R-R Meteor engine is moved forward into the former turret location. Since the 'box' sits higher than the original driveshaft, the latter can simply be extended back to the final drive system. Power takeoffs from that extended shaft drive twin generators which charge banks of lead-acid batteries to provide power for the the M192 'box'.
In the section views (based on a Bovington drawing), the revised layout is a little hard to 'read'. So, I've colour-coded many of the hull's component changes.
BTW, the view with missiles mounted features a commander's hatch (the lower view had just duplicated the driver's hatch).
That looks very buildable & may get added to the space-time warping list of projects to be done, as I have several Centurions & a Hawk launcher. :smiley:
Thinks for a couple of seconds;
Mind you, my Royal Australian Marines use Merkavas; & I have a pair of the venerable Tamiya Merkava 1's amongst my 6-or-7 Merkava kits which might make good AAM carriers. ;)
That looks very buildable & may get added to the space-time warping list of projects to be done, as I have several Centurions & a Hawk launcher. :smiley:
Thinks for a couple of seconds;
Mind you, my Royal Australian Marines use Merkavas; & I have a pair of the venerable Tamiya Merkava 1's amongst my 6-or-7 Merkava kits which might make good AAM carriers. ;)
The front engined Merk allows for the AD crew to be situated in the rear hull...an ADATS turret on a Merk would be better than real life!
Dunno why but I have a soft spot for the Sunbeam Alpine - the ugly duckling of 1960s British sports cars.Beautiful!! Now do one from a Sunbeam Tiger.
One of the more intriguing variants was the Le Mans series of 'fixed top' mods by Thomas Harrington & Sons - especially the series D with Jag E-Type style rear hatch.. Harrington tanked in 1966. So, I'm reviving the firm as the what-if Harrington & Sons Coachworks circa 1970 to do aftermarket upgrades of existing Sunbeam Alpine and Tiger sports cars.
Here, I present the Harrington series F modification - aka Sunbeam Alpine Le Mans GTE (for Harrington series E).
Beautiful!! Now do one from a Sunbeam Tiger.
hmmm...
Would the Ukrainian pilots want a full bubble canopy?
Following another suggestion from Sport25ing ...
Shtormova tin' - The Ukrainian Storm Shadow in Action
An ex-RAF Panavia Tornado GR.4 in Ukrainian markings. This Tornado carries the individual aircraft number 'Bilyy 57', Ukrainian gold/blue roundel on its wings, and the Trizub on its tail. Ukrainian colours also surmount the tailplane. On those colour bands is marked VYSOKOPILLYA - a name commemorating a small Ukrainian village in the Kherson region destroyed by Russian occupiers. [1]
The ex-RAF Tornados had been brought out of retirement storage specifically to carry the Storm Shadow cruise missiles donated to Ukraine. 'Bilyy 57' was the first PSU Tornado to launch Storm Shadows 'in anger'. Near dawn on 23 July 2023, three Ukrainian Tornados each launched two 'Shtormova tin'' missiles against targets in Crimea - including Sevastopol Naval Base on the west coast and Gvardeyskoye Air Base in central Crimea. [2]
_______________________________
[1] Vysokopillya was occupied by Putin's troops on 13 March 2022. By the time that the Ukrainians liberated the village in early September, Vysokopillya lay in total ruins.
[2] Simultaneously, PSU ADM-160 MALD decoy missiles were also launched at 'targets' near Sevastopol - the Khersones tactical UAV base and Saky Air Base.
Nice! Yes, by all means, send Typhoons! Especially if there is a surplus of two-seaters :smiley:
BTW, I see that the Su-24MRs have been fitted with modified Tornado pylons (or parts thereof) to carry their Storm Shadows. So, bits of the old RAF Tornados did make it to Ukraine ;D
... Know of any good late-70's/early-80's 800+hp diesel/transmission systems that would work if the RAM's bought AMX-30 shells & filled them with their own goodies?
Would the British L7 105mm gun fit?
I think a "Recce in force" role is a decent option for a mechanized Bde recce sqn. Provides combat overwatch for a two vehicle recce det, ie when paired up with a smaller (size / gun) AFV with a dedicated surveillance suite. Reminds me a bit of the Danish upgrades to the M-41-DK that saw it soldiering through almost to the new millenium.
I had never really investigated the French AMX-30 before. A little research revealed just what un vrai chien de char the AMX-30 really was! The lightest of armour of any MBT; wholly unreliable drivetrain; non-standard main gun; ... :o
The only positives I could find were a relatively light weight - 500 kg lighter than the Leo 1 (mostly by sacrificing armour protection) - and a correspondingly low ground pressure. Can anyone think of any other pluses for this mutt of an MBT?
Having jumped the gun of processing an AMX-30 image, I was stuck trying to imagine improvements to this vehicle. Up-armour? Nope, already underpowered for the 750 hp available power (when working). Re-engining? Why waste a EuroPowerPack (or similar) on an AMX when you could refurb more plentiful Leopard 1s instead?
Guy: For a RAM AMX-30, you could follow the real-world Spanish AMX-30E modernisation programme. For the top-end mod, Santa Bárbara dumped the French HS-110/5SD-200D combo entirely in favour of a German MTU 833 Ka 501 (850 hp) driving a ZF LSG 3000.
Guy: For a RAM AMX-30, you could follow the real-world Spanish AMX-30E modernisation programme. For the top-end mod, Santa Bárbara dumped the French HS-110/5SD-200D combo entirely in favour of a German MTU 833 Ka 501 (850 hp) driving a ZF LSG 3000.
This sounds somewhat similar to the late 1980s Super AMX-30 modernization package for AMX-30B. The upgrades to the power packs were new MTU MB833 Ka501 diesel engine with 850 hp, ZF LSG-3000 automatic transmission, new engine cooling system, and increased fuel capacity up to 1,028 liters. The upgrades on mobility also included upgraded torsion bars, hydraulic shock absorbers, new slightly larger road wheels, and Diehl Type 234 tracks. The fire control systems were upgraded with MOLF-30 modular laser FCS by Krupp Atlas Elektronik, gyro-stabilized gun and gunner's day/night sight, laser rangefinder, and fully electric turret drive. Optional additional armour on the turret also available per buyer request. A single prototype was made and were publicly unveiled and tested in Saudi Arabia. The upgrade failed to find a buyer.
'There was also the AMX-32 development.
... The crew told me the Falcons were pretty much clocked out on frame hours. As such, I imagine they are only fit for museum purposes now.
... The crew told me the Falcons were pretty much clocked out on frame hours. As such, I imagine they are only fit for museum purposes now.
Doubtless that is true 'north. If some other nation wants to donate something 'younger' for ECM, that'd be great.
That said, I'd lean toward the idea that if the Falcon 20ECMs are flyable, they are usable. Not ideal perhaps but with a capability currently lacking in UA's arsenal.
I guess the big question here is: Are slow-flying ECM platforms like the Guardrail viable in contested airspace?
If not, the logical follow-on question would be: Are bizjet-based ECM platforms any more viable in contested airspace?
If one used them back behind the front lines in a careful manner then yes. If you try to do so in range of enemy air defences then definitely not. Hence why UAVs have a greater role...and even they are being shot down in large numbers.
With Slovakia added to the anti-Ukrainian cabal within NATO, & the possibility that even Poland may swing that way after their election, getting NATO to agree to anything to help Ukraine, as an organisation, or to ever permitting their entry into the alliance, is looking less-&-less likely.
No backstory on this one. It was prompted by Greg's suggestion:
-- https://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=904.msg212172#msg212172
BTW: The OD version was based on a Gaëtan Marie USAAC profile.
No backstory on this one since it is a real, unbuilt project - the German side of Panavia having set themselves the task of designing a STOL strike-fighter sometime late in the Cold War.
I'm a sucker for odd-ball mutts ... and they don't get much odder or muttier than Panavia's Schubschwenkler STOL Entwurf !
For those unaware, it had two engines:
Cheers 'dog. Here's another GTX-inspired PZL pair ...
... or am I being a cheeky bugger ?
... France supplies the engines, Supermarine slaps them on the front of modified Spitfires, & over to France they go.
This is a retouch I did for a thread on SPF. I'm calling Michael Gregor's second take on his fighter the Can-Car FDB-2It looks small!
This is a retouch I did for a thread on SPF. I'm calling Michael Gregor's second take on his fighter the Can-Car FDB-2
This is a retouch I did for a thread on SPF. I'm calling Michael Gregor's second take on his fighter the Can-Car FDB-2It looks small!
Yep. The FDB-1 was way smaller than something like Gloster Gladiator.
Looks like an early Grumman Wildcat . . .
. . . willing to sacrifice one of those bare-bones and hen's-teeth Can Vac Models vacuform kits ;)
I didn't even know such a thing existed, so I think I'll pass on that . . . ;)
Of course I want to . . . I just haven't seen one for sale anywhere . . . and probably couldn't afford it if I did . . . ;D. . . willing to sacrifice one of those bare-bones and hen's-teeth Can Vac Models vacuform kits ;)
I didn't even know such a thing existed, so I think I'll pass on that . . . ;)
Oh go on ... you know you want to! ;D
This might be of interest: https://dingeraviation.net/gregor/gregor.html
The S.L.E.I.G.H. DS might indeed cause grumbling among the Disney and Coca Cola era elves. The colours might fit the earlier tradition Finnish Joulupukki who used more earth shade clothing.
It is interesting to speculate what might have resulted if the Lynx was developed into something akin of the way the AH-1 Cobra was developed from the UH-1 Huey.
You might find this of interest if you haven't already seen it: https://www.aerosociety.com/media/15007/paper-2020-05-westland-and-the-attack-helicopters-from-lynx-to-apache.pdf (https://www.aerosociety.com/media/15007/paper-2020-05-westland-and-the-attack-helicopters-from-lynx-to-apache.pdf)
How about with Army Lynx skids, or Navy Lynx tricycle U/C . . . ?
... If you can incorporate a more powerful engine all the better.
What if you made forward fuselage more like the AMX, with a pretty straight belly line? Could that work?
Supposedly there was be two more wing pylons. I haven't shown these because I don't know what their arrangement was meant to be (although I suspect a set of missile pylons further outboard).
Something to keep in mind regarding stores pylons/bomb rack placement under the wings with aircraft designs of that era is that many of these aircraft were fitted with zero-length rocket launcher units ...
Something to keep in mind regarding stores pylons/bomb rack placement under the wings with aircraft designs of that era is that many of these aircraft were fitted with zero-length rocket launcher units ...
In lieu of any sign of wing rails, I mentioned short pylons for AIM-9Ls or similar. Considering the intended role, probably more likely that the G.291 featured further outboard pylons for additional SNEB pods.
I did do a fit-check of the AIM-9 Sidewinder launch rail/pylon on the new locations on my Monogram F-86 Sabre and there were no fit issues when placed in the new outboard stores pylon locations so it would appear to be a matter of choice in having an additional pair of Sidewinders at these new outboard locations or a pair of stores pylons for free-fall bombs or rocket pods. Granted the weight capacity would be much less than those inboard stations but it still looks good and practical/convincing to the casual observer.Lovely profiles!!Something to keep in mind regarding stores pylons/bomb rack placement under the wings with aircraft designs of that era is that many of these aircraft were fitted with zero-length rocket launcher units ...In lieu of any sign of wing rails, I mentioned short pylons for AIM-9Ls or similar. Considering the intended role, probably more likely that the G.291 featured further outboard pylons for additional SNEB pods.
Yes, if anything, I would think that one Aim-9 Sidewinder for self-defence would be a good balance and not detracting from it's intended role apophenia.
MAD
I did do a fit-check of the AIM-9 Sidewinder launch rail/pylon on the new locations on my Monogram F-86 Sabre and there were no fit issues when placed in the new outboard stores pylon locations so it would appear to be a matter of choice in having an additional pair of Sidewinders at these new outboard locations or a pair of stores pylons for free-fall bombs or rocket pods. Granted the weight capacity would be much less than those inboard stations but it still looks good and practical/convincing to the casual observer.
If I had the kits to resource I would love to have that "Y-Shaped" twin Sidewinder launcher pylon from the F-100 Super Sabre. Mounting that on the inboard stores station to replace the single Sidewinder pylon would give the F-86 Sabre a much needed upgrade in capability. So far the only source for the twin Sidewinder launcher in 1/48th scale if from the rather expensive Trumpeter F-100 Super Sabre kits. :icon_nif:
Lovely profiles!!
Yes, if anything, I would think that one Aim-9 Sidewinder for self-defence would be a good balance and not detracting from it's intended role apophenia.
MAD
On your Y-shaped pylon conundrum, here's an off-the-wall possibility. Wrong period/continent but, I note, that the Tamiya Tornado F3 comes with those mid-'90s drop-tank/rails combo pylon. Could that set be pruned of its drop-tank attachment to leave just the Y-shaped mounts for the LAU-7s?
Tamiya Tornado F.3? I require bits and pieces in 1/48th scale...
It's all good. I wonder if the HobbyBoss, Revell or Italeri Tornado kits might have these bits. Will have to do some research at ScaleMates to see what the kits contain. a sTamiya Tornado F.3? I require bits and pieces in 1/48th scale...Yep. Sorry Jeff ... got my scale wires crossed :-[
... not be suitable for conversion to the desired inverted "Y-Shape" of the F-100 Super Sabre Sidewinder twin launcher pylon...
I could use a sprue of just Sidewinder and Maverick launchers.Scale?
More than likely it is the same launcher adapter unit/pylon for the RDAF F-100. The real Sidewinder launcher/pylon is a very shallow "Y-Shape," very hard to discern from a "T-Shape" at a distance because it is so shallow. It is designed to align the Sidewinders so the control surfaces are vertical and horizontal (+ shape) to the line of flight instead of the usual "X" shape that most other aircraft utilize for carriage of the Sidewinder. Mirage III being another example of the offset to carry the Sidewinder in the "+" arrangement.... not be suitable for conversion to the desired inverted "Y-Shape" of the F-100 Super Sabre Sidewinder twin launcher pylon...I notice a twin-rail launcher on Danish F-100s but, at a glance, they seem to be flat-bottomed - ie: an inverted 'T' rather than a 'Y'. I'm assuming that those are a different (later?) type from your desired inverted 'Y'.
The B-10 always looks like a failed amphibian*, to me...
The B-10 always looks like a failed amphibian*, to me.
The B-10 always looks like a failed amphibian*, to me.
You were saying…
([url]http://aviadejavu.ru/Images6/HI/HI-1/46-2.jpg[/url])
You were saying…
Maybe someone took the idea and your profile and then jumped in a time machine/sent the image back in the past to create it for real...just to mess with you. ;)
... is messing with my mind...
... I think I have enough parts to build it (using a 7TP/T-26 Mirage kit)
Are you sure it's not "leaf-spring" suspension? ???
This one fought me all the way ... so I'm calling it done :P
... You should (without the need to do any research) know that the EE slim fuselage Lightning project was the P.6 . . . ;)
... how about Lightning flying surfaces on a Vought Crusader fuselage . . . ? ...
It reminds me of the Lockheed CL-1200 Lancer proposal to replace the F-104 Starfighter (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_CL-1200_Lancer) in some ways, the larger tail not so much but the high-mounted wing definitely.
It reminds me of the Lockheed CL-1200 Lancer proposal to replace the F-104 Starfighter (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_CL-1200_Lancer) in some ways, the larger tail not so much but the high-mounted wing definitely.
A propos of nothing (except, maybe, Carlos' car musings?), I present the 1965 Bonneville Short Wagon - a car that Pontiac was wise enough not to build ;)