Author Topic: Fiat G-91, G-95, aso ... (Read 10258 times)

Daryl J. · « **Reply #1 on:** April 13, 2013, 02:41:15 PM »

Multiple US Army variants.

GTX_Admin · « **Reply #2 on:** April 13, 2013, 03:19:05 PM »

What if the original plan had gone ahead and the G.91 had become the standard NATO light tactical support aircraft. Operators including all of NATO.

Weaver · « **Reply #3 on:** April 13, 2013, 05:12:32 PM »

I built a Red Arrows G.91 (but mucked up the paint) based on the idea that the RAF bought into the standard NATO attack aircraft idea.

The idea was that most of NATO bought into the G.91, but that the unity fell apart in the next generation, with the RAF and Luftwaffe going with the Harrier, the Italians the G.91Y (rejected by the rest because of it's American engines), and most of the export customers swapping to the F-5E. That left the next generation trainer requirement to sort out: Shorts and Breguet came up with an Adour-engined G.91T rebuild, and that took the place occupied in the real world by the Hawk and the Alpha Jet.

Daryl J. · « **Reply #4 on:** November 17, 2013, 04:05:54 AM »

I'm both surprised and tickled there is a mainstream injection moulded kit in 1:48 coming.
Lots of US Army and OR Army National Guard based ideas.

Daryl J. · « **Reply #5 on:** December 01, 2013, 03:51:16 AM »

Could someone please refer me to a place or five where US underwing munitions that could have been carried by the Gina are listed? I'm too ignorant on that subject for Google to be my friend.

Thanks.

GTX_Admin · « **Reply #6 on:** December 01, 2013, 04:09:17 AM »

Quote from: Daryl J. on December 01, 2013, 03:51:16 AM

Could someone please refer me to a place or five where US underwing munitions that could have been carried by the Gina are listed? I'm too ignorant on that subject for Google to be my friend.

Thanks.

Given the US Army were considering the G.91 in the early '60s, I would assume just about anything you see on platforms such as the F-4, A-7, F-5, A-37 etc would be suitable (within reason).

Daryl J. · « **Reply #7 on:** December 01, 2013, 07:49:37 AM »

Thanks all. :)
It's appreciated.

Weaver · « **Reply #8 on:** December 01, 2013, 09:24:48 PM »

Quote from: Daryl J. on December 01, 2013, 03:51:16 AM

Could someone please refer me to a place or five where US underwing munitions that could have been carried by the Gina are listed? I'm too ignorant on that subject for Google to be my friend.

Thanks.

Max payload for the single-engined Ginas was 1500lb on four pylons. I think the individual pylon rating were 500lb each but I'm not sure. That would imply Mk.81 or Mk.82 low drag bombs or any variant thereof, Rockeye cluster bombs, and just about any standard 2.75" rocket pod.

Of course, if the US Army got it's own CAS force, it might not neccessarily adopt exising Air Force/Navy weapons, preferring to buy/develop it's own. For instance, they might decide they like the Gina's standard SNEB rockets better than the FFARs, or that they prefer a twin 20mm/30mm cannon fit to the quad .50" MGs.

ysi_maniac · « **Reply #9 on:** March 13, 2022, 07:33:59 AM »

Fiat G.104

Two options for chin intake: semicone and F-16 style

ysi_maniac · « **Reply #10 on:** March 14, 2022, 04:32:51 AM »

Gina with downscaled and shortened wings and tailplane from F-4.

raafif · « **Reply #11 on:** March 14, 2022, 06:40:16 AM »

Had fun (not) doing these real schemes

ysi_maniac · « **Reply #12 on:** March 15, 2022, 02:43:56 PM »

^^^^^
Is there something wrong with back seat canopy in Portuguese or Irish trainers?

ysi_maniac · « **Reply #13 on:** March 15, 2022, 02:44:17 PM »

Did you know that G.91Y was 137 cm langer and 2360 Kg (gross weight) heavier than G.91R?

I decided to reengine them. I have to accept that F404 for G.91Y is a bit extreme, but they did it with F-5, ... why not Gina?

GTX_Admin · « **Reply #14 on:** March 16, 2022, 01:17:43 AM »

Oh...interesting. Doing the comparison between F404 and Twin J85s:

	2 × General Electric J85-GE-13A	1 × General Electric F404-GE-100
Total Engine Weight (excluding structure)	1,368 lb(620 kg)	2,282 lb (1,035 kg)
Engine Width	41.6 in (106 cm)	35 in (89 cm)
Engine Length	112.5 in (286 cm)	154 in (390 cm)
Thrust Dry	5,450 lbf (24.24 kN)	11,000 lbf (49 kN)
Thrust Afterburner	8,160 lbf (36.3 kN)	17,700 lbf (79 kN)
Thrust:Weight (afterburner)	5.96:1	7.76:1

Would be doable I believe but might need to balance the extra tail weight to counter it being a tail sitter. Would be damn spritely though.

upnorth · « **Reply #15 on:** March 16, 2022, 01:48:12 PM »

Real world nations that were in line to have them, but ultimately didn't were: Greece, Israel, South Africa and turkey.

Greece and Turkey changed their minds (or maybe had their minds changed for them) and the aircraft build for them were given to the Luftwaffe.

The Italian government vetoed the sale of G.91s to Israel and South Africa on political grounds.