Beyond The Sprues
Modelling => Ideas & Inspiration => Aero-space => Topic started by: taiidantomcat on October 12, 2012, 06:37:48 AM
-
(http://www.192fw.ang.af.mil/shared/media/photodb/photos/041710-F-3621S-002.jpg)
Believe it or not it isn't photoshopped! ...But it is still a tad deceptive. The F-22 was masked, the masks painted, and then decals added. Pics taken and then the masks were removed so it lasted less than 72 hours, and I don't believe it was ever flown.
It does make me happy to be a What If modeler though. I can't imagine that something so simple and temporary being the highlight of an F-22 model ;D
OTOH, Its amazing how some color improves the F-22s looks. If these things wore some color more often they would be downright lovable :-*
-
DANG..... Soooooo..... Nice it is.
Build more probably gunna need um....
-
(http://www.aerotechnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/AF-F22b.jpg)
More fun with colors, gunship gray look
-
Nice find. What is written on the nose of the blue nosed one?
-
Can't make it out, but "CRIPES A'MIGHTY" is my guess.
(http://www.deviantart.com/download/130009004/P_51___Cripes_A__Mighty___by_benjaminrogers.jpg)
Cheers,
Logan
-
Spot on Logan :)
http://www.hobbymastercollector.com/HA2803.html (http://www.hobbymastercollector.com/HA2803.html)
-
Thanks guys.
-
Thought this might interest some here:
(http://i.imgur.com/kl5vD.jpg)
-
^ Whoa! After seeing this pic I think I won't bother filling the wing/fuselage join on any Raptor I might build. :icon_surprised:
-
I'm surprised. No one has mentioned the drop tanks. Rarely seen apparently mainly used in Alaska.
-
One of the more interesting F-22 variations would be the X-44 without vertical surfaces and with fully three-dimensional vectoring nozzles.
-
For those learned on AVPRO Concepts, I sourced this from a corresponding thread in secretprojects.
I wonder, is this a concept for a supermaneuverable exhaust-assited airplane, or a VTOL one?
-
I have the Avpro CDs somewhere. Give me a chance to dig them out and I will give you the details.
-
(http://images3.alphacoders.com/198/198825.jpg)
(http://www.igorstshirts.com/blog/conceptships/2009/ben_procter_09.jpg)
(http://www.gamestop.com/gs/images/bonus/HAWX_bonusLG.jpg)
(http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/acecombat/images/3/3d/Fb22sv1.jpg)
-
Hmmm...that last one could be doable.
-
I have the Avpro CDs somewhere. Give me a chance to dig them out and I will give you the details.
Doh!!! I forgot about this. Remind me at the end of the week and I will get on to it...when I am back home.
-
I have the Avpro CDs somewhere. Give me a chance to dig them out and I will give you the details.
Doh!!! I forgot about this. Remind me at the end of the week and I will get on to it...when I am back home.
Double-Doh and face palm!!! I also forgot entirely about it, Greg!!. Must be I've had a severe prolonged senior moment.... ;D
-
(http://www.af.mil/shared/media/photodb/photos/070917-F-7049H-217.jpg)
-
For those learned on AVPRO Concepts, I sourced this from a corresponding thread in secretprojects.
I wonder, is this a concept for a supermaneuverable exhaust-assited airplane, or a VTOL one?
Just looked up the AVPRO CDs and there is nothing. My guess upon looking at the image is that it was supposed to be a super-maneuverable exhaust-assisted aircraft. Basically by using directed thrust from these remote 'ports' you could have all sorts of wild capability. In fact you could probably do away with conventional control surfaces...at the cost of massive internal piping/ducting + over capacity engine (probably) and all sorts of other effects. Either way, if you were going to use this concept you wouldn't do so on a conventional airframe such as the F-22 (of if you did, you would at least do away with the tail empennage. One must remember that most of the AVPRO pictures were just that: pretty pictures with little if any actual engineering behind them.
-
Great photos by NormanL (from AMI Forum) from Avalon 2013:
(http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8106/8518566725_0c26d9fb94_b.jpg)
(http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8518/8514057930_ab9936c376_b.jpg)
-
so... is that the pilots oxygen leaking in the first photo! ;D ;D
-
;D
-
Just looked up the AVPRO CDs and there is nothing. My guess upon looking at the image is that it was supposed to be a super-maneuverable exhaust-assisted aircraft. Basically by using directed thrust from these remote 'ports' you could have all sorts of wild capability. In fact you could probably do away with conventional control surfaces...at the cost of massive internal piping/ducting + over capacity engine (probably) and all sorts of other effects. Either way, if you were going to use this concept you wouldn't do so on a conventional airframe such as the F-22 (of if you did, you would at least do away with the tail empennage. One must remember that most of the AVPRO pictures were just that: pretty pictures with little if any actual engineering behind them.
Thanks, Greg! That's pretty much what I was thinking. But would be nice IF it was feasible to have a reaction control like that on the nose of one X-29 VFC (Vortex Flow Control) I think it was named, which provided a means of controlability through nose-mounted jet nozzles IIRC at high AoA and when control surfaces were out of their authority envelope. Short form: I'm entertaining the idea of a naval F-22 with reaction controls to help assist on arrested landings.
so... is that the pilots oxygen leaking in the first photo! ;D ;D
LOL....
-
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/military-plane-F-22-Raptor-military-art_zps5575d88f.jpg)
(http://www.wallsoc.com/images/1920x1080/2012/10/13/aircraft-military-f-22-raptor-fighter-jet-822633.jpg)
Edit: Corrected hot linking issue.
-
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=41b_1362682863 (http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=41b_1362682863)
-
(http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8509/8573204530_52d7935d95_c.jpg)
-
:-\
-
(http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4070/5165048268_9983c3764c_b.jpg)
-
Sweet!
-
Just a thought, a F-22B with diverter-less intakes and vectoring versions of the F-35's axi-symmetric nozzle as well as systems upgrades from the F-35.
-
Just a thought, a F-22B with diverter-less intakes and vectoring versions of the F-35's axi-symmetric nozzle as well as systems upgrades from the F-35.
Me likes! :)
-
My first thoughts are that you'd require at least two F-35 kits and one F-22A kit. I'm not sure about the engine mass flow requirements, F120 vs F135, but some playing with the F-35 inlets will likely be necessary to get them to properly work for two F120 engines. A host of US and export markings to put it in (export to Israel, Japan, Australia, S. Korea, et al. - perhaps even RAF).
-
Evan, I just got hold of an X-32 and did some 'dry' fitting of the parts, I couldn't help but notice that inside the intake it has a similar shape to the F-35's only it's bigger -- (only one intake as opposed to two which feed the same single engine). Isn't that more like what you're after ?
-
Evan, I just got hold of an X-32 and did some 'dry' fitting of the parts, I couldn't help but notice that inside the intake it has a similar shape to the F-35's only it's bigger -- (only one intake as opposed to two which feed the same single engine). Isn't that more like what you're after ?
Yeah, two X-32's would do as side inlets on a F-22B; I'd have to get all teh bits and pieces together to see how they meshed and I can't remember if the X-32 had the lo nozzles of the production F-35.
-
I can't remember if the X-32 had the lo nozzles of the production F-35.
Is the lo nozzle the same as what the F-22 has Evan, the X-32 kit has something very similar. The Italeri kit is of what could be called the USAF 'A' model, it doesn't have any lift fan equipment for it.
-
I can't remember if the X-32 had the lo nozzles of the production F-35.
Is the lo nozzle the same as what the F-22 has Evan, the X-32 kit has something very similar. The Italeri kit is of what could be called the USAF 'A' model, it doesn't have any lift fan equipment for it.
In that case, you're wanting two X-35 or F-35 A/C (the F-35B has a different nozzle that swivels one way only) nozzles to do this one as I was envisioning it. The X-32 nozzle is as it is to allow the thrust diversion in the v/stol version (not that it was that successful, they had to remove pieces as I remember, to do the vtol demonstration.
-
One day maybe...
(http://static.rcgroups.net/forums/attachments/3/8/4/4/8/7/a5556673-96-f22-Red%20Bull.jpg?d=1361502139)
-
So maybe this is a thing or just a nasty bit of gossip, nonetheless, it is in the news: Defense News.com > F-22 Restart for US Air Force Not 'A Wild Idea' (http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/air-space/2016/05/26/f-22-restart-not-wild-idea-says-welsh/84971806/)
-
So maybe this is a thing or just a nasty bit of gossip, nonetheless, it is in the news: Defense News.com > F-22 Restart for US Air Force Not 'A Wild Idea' ([url]http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/air-space/2016/05/26/f-22-restart-not-wild-idea-says-welsh/84971806/[/url])
Don't think anything will come of it... but man is it fun for some whiifery! :)
-
New NATF image:
(http://www.operatorchan.org/v/src/145503422445.jpg)
-
I would love an F-22N/NATF kit! Such a good-looking machine.
Speaking of looks, even though it's not stealthy I love how cool the F-22 looks with tanks on.
Has anyone done a Euro-1 Raptor?
-
Stealth Phantom. Top drawing is 'presumably' scaleoramed from 1/100 to 1/72
(http://i1080.photobucket.com/albums/j340/ysi_maniac/Drawing/StealthPhantom1.jpg) (http://s1080.photobucket.com/user/ysi_maniac/media/Drawing/StealthPhantom1.jpg.html)
-
A few possible exports:
RAF - armed with Meteors and ASRAAMs instead of AIM-120s and AIM-9Xs
Norway - armed with Meteors nad IRIS-Ts instead of AIM-120s and AIM-9Xs
Japan - armed with AAM-4s and AAM-5s instead of AIM-120s and AIM-9Xs
Beyond those, there are also long-range patrol versions with four 600 gal. drop tanks (the wings are set up for that). If you don't need the stealth, each wing pylon could have, F-15-style dual launchers for AIM-9Xs, ASRAAMs, IRIS-Ts, or AAM-5s
-
(https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1080x622/ddd_418b516a27a5f04c40cb20ac2ffc19a342fa6af7.jpg)
(not my snark)
-
It should have been a gun kill considering the call signs used by the two aircraft performing the mission (Frank01 and Frank02) which is a direct reference to WW1 ace Frank Luke.
***According to a current discussion at another forum the F-22 is unable to utilize the gun option above a certain altitude which is why Fox-2 was the weapon of choice.