Welcome to Britmodeller.com

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.

This site uses cookies! Learn More

This site uses cookies!

You can find a list of those cookies here: mysite.com/cookies

By continuing to use this site, you agree to allow us to store cookies on your computer. :)

  • Announcements

    • Mike

      PhotoBucket are no longer permitting 3rd party hosting   01/07/17

      As most of you are now painfully aware, Photobucket (PB) are stopping/have stopped allowing their members to link their accumulated years of photos into forums and the like, which they call 3rd party linking.  You can give them a non-refundable $399 a year to allow links, but I doubt that many will be rushing to take them up on that offer.  If you've previously paid them for the Pro account, it looks like you've got until your renewal to find another place to host your files, but you too will be subject to this ban unless you fork over a lot of cash.   PB seem to be making a concerted move to another type of customer, having been the butt of much displeasure over the years of a constantly worsening user interface, sloth and advertising pop-ups, with the result that they clearly don't give a hoot about the free members anymore.  If you don't have web space included in your internet package, you need to start looking for another photo host, but choose carefully, as some may follow suit and ditch their "free" members at some point.  The lesson there is keep local backups on your hard drive of everything you upload, so you can walk away if the same thing happens.   There's a thread on the subject here, so please use that to curse them, look for solutions or generall grouse about their mental capacity.   Not a nice situation for the forum users that hosted all their photos there, and there will now be a host of useless threads that relied heavily on photos from PB, but as there's not much we can do other than petition for a more equitable solution, I suggest we make the best of what we have and move on.  One thing is for certain.  It won't win them any friends, but they may not care at this point.    Mike.

T7 Models

Members
  • Content count

    2,624
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

4,733 Excellent

About T7 Models

  • Rank
    Very Obsessed Member
  • Birthday 19/03/71

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://www.t7models.com
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Cornwall
  • Interests
    Modelling, aviation, photography, singing

Recent Profile Visitors

3,863 profile views
  1. In which case Britmodeller will be very much quieter.
  2. "The following programme contains violence, scenes of a sexual nature and scenes some viewers may find distressing." Just another day in Westeros then.
  3. But not when it takes four weeks to resurface a roundabout...
  4. I recognise who it is from the little bit of printing on the label. I am surprised.
  5. I don't know, I'm not a civil engineer. All I know is that it SHOULD.
  6. Yes, but the equipment to actually do the physical work is rather more efficient and quicker these days, so it should more than even out.
  7. Might look good marked up as a station hack.
  8. Another way to know you're getting old: when wet dreams and dry farts swap around.
  9. According to the news, 15% of women are on medication for mental illness. Which means the other 85% are walking around untreated.
  10. "Waiter, there's a whisker on my plate."
  11. It was never on the cards, though it could be argued that basing all of the RN's ASW helicopter force at the other end of the country from the SSBN home base is a crazy idea. By the way, here is a very interesting article on the pros and cons of procuring the P-8 for the RAF in the latest Air Forces Monthly.
  12. You only get the ten-headed mackerel if you go fishing in the sea around Portreath, near where the former Chemical Defence Establishment at Nancekuke used to be. Everywhere else it's just the usual three-headed variety.
  13. Very interesting post, XV107. I certainly agree with you over the impracticalities of buying the F-15 and the RAF's preference for two-seat combat aircraft. At the time it would have been the only viable alternative to the ADV; I think the F-14 -albeit with two seats and a probe-and-drogue system- would have been well out of the MoD's price range. I admit I had committed the crime of not taking politics into account, though there may have been compelling reasons for maintaining the Phantom buy in the 1960s to partially replace the Lightning in No.11 Group. I am currently reading Dominic Sandbrook's White Heat, about the UK during the latter half of the 1960s. The Americans were very unhappy with the Wilson Government over (a) cancelling the F-111K, (b) withdrawing from east of Suez, and (c) not supporting the war in Vietnam, the first two of which Denis Healey as SoS for Defence was also unhappy about. A decision then to keep the full RAF order for Phantoms, which was 152, along with the 20 FG.1s diverted from the RN and converting the FAA's option for a further seven would have seen the RAF receiving just over 180 aircraft. Knowing that the RAF would receive the balance of the RN's aircraft in the 1970s, this would have been just sufficient to have allowed the conversion of the two Wattisham Squadrons (Nos. 29 and 111) and possibly No.23 Squadron at Leuchars. Replacing the existing Phantom ground attack squadrons at Coningsby (Nos.6 and 54) with a further Harrier buy would then have allowed replacement of the Lightning squadrons in Germany. You would have ended up with the following fast jet wings in the RAF by the mid-1970s: Binbrook: 2x Lightning (5, 11) and OCU if Coltishall was closed Coningsby: 2x Harrier (6, 54), 1x Phantom R (41) Honington: 2x Buccaneer (12, 208) and OCU Leuchars: 2x Phantom AD (23, 43) OR 1x Phantom AD (43) and 1x Lightning (23) pending delivery of ex-RN Phantoms Wattisham: 2x Phantom AD (29, 111) Wittering: 1x Harrier (1) and OCU, 2x Hunter (45, 58) Bruggen: 3x Phantom FG (14, 17, 31) Gutersloh: 3x Harrier (3, 4, 20) Laarbruch: 2x Buccaneer (15, 16), 1x Phantom R (2) Wildenrath: 2x Phantom AD (19, 92) This would have provided an effective combat force into the 1980s, and the Tornado GR.1 would then have entered service in much the same way as it did in reality, though possibly re-equipping No.41 Sqdn at Coningsby instead of a reformed No.2 Sqdn. There would also have had to have been an increased buy of Harrier GR.5/7s to re-equip the Coningsby squadrons, while the Binbrook wing could have re-equipped in the early 1980s with Phantoms and there would not have been a need to buy ex-USN F-4Js. The Tornado F.3 would have entered service as it did in reality. So where might this have left the Jaguar? If, as XV107 suggests, it would have been politically advantageous to work with the French on the project and commit to 200 aircraft, where could we have put them? The Jaguar's original requirement was as an advanced trainer, though this was abandoned by both partners in favour of a pure combat aircraft. We could have operated it in that role, replacing the Gnat and Hunter at Valley and also using it for tactical weapons (and thereby negating the need for the Hawk) as well as using some to re-equip the two Phantom reconnaissance squadrons. With the ex-RN Phantoms, this could have allowed the re-equipping of the two Binbrook Lightning squadrons in the late 1970s, phasing the type out completely. Alternatively a reduced commitment could have been negotiated, perhaps leaving the pure training role to the Gnat, had the UK then agreed to work with the French and the Germans on what became the Alpha Jet. And I have to say, I've always liked the Jaguar. I'm just putting forward a little whiffery hopefully based on logic.
  14. I'm Cornish, and even I think that Star Gazy Pie was the result of a trip too far.
  15. Nah. That will be the Short Belfast.