Jump to content

pigsty

Gold Member
  • Posts

    4,273
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

pigsty last won the day on April 3 2015

pigsty had the most liked content!

About pigsty

  • Birthday 19/01/1967

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    the patio of England

Recent Profile Visitors

11,912 profile views

pigsty's Achievements

Very Obsessed Member

Very Obsessed Member (5/9)

3.3k

Reputation

  1. A blonde driver is pulled over by a blonde traffic copper. "May I see your licence, please?" the copper asks. "It's in here somewhere ... oh, where did I put it - ah," and she pulls a mirror out of her handbag and looks into it. "Here it is, officer." The copper takes the mirror, looks at it, and hands it back. "Sorry to have bothered you," she says, "I didn't know you were a copper too."
  2. As I get older and portlier, a beard becomes a more attractive thought. It'll hide a multitude of chins.
  3. That might be why there are combustion chambers missing, and the "nacelle" certainly makes it a bit neater and keeps the dust off. Plus there are labels on some parts - so I'd buy this. On the Fiat G.80 - it had side intakes, which would fit an engine like the Goblin with its own split intake. If the Ghost could be fitted with a single intake, so could the Goblin in principle; and many aircraft with intakes on the sides have conventional engines with a single intake. However, I've found a cutaway of the G.82, and its engine does look to have a split intake. So that takes us back to this mystery thing being a Ghost. I don't think it's an Orpheus. That had axial flow, whereas this thing clearly has a centrifugal compressor, a feature only of the earliest engines. One possibility we shouldn't discount: it's not a real engine. It might be a lash-up of parts from various types, put together as a training aid for general principles of jet engines, rather than How To Fix This Engine.
  4. I think he was saying it's a Ghost. The Goblin had a split intake - so did the Ghost when fitted in a Venom, but it had a single intake when fitted to, say, the prototype Comet. However ... what would a Ghost be doing in a nacelle like that? The most likely application is actually the Volvo RM2 version from the SAAB J29, but that's not a J29 fuselage. Are the petrol pumps in the background any help? They're labelled Benzine, so it's not likely to be in the UK.
  5. Just like every other part ... and this man keeps asking me why I don't cross to the dark side and try a vacform!
  6. Kids these days have no idea how to punctuate (especially not this sort of thing). I blame the parentheses.
  7. It would have had higher recoil forces, though, if it had up to 70 calibres of barrel - maybe more than 1.5x as much. So then you have to upgrade the recoil system, reinforce the carriage, even possibly redesign the trail legs to stop the whole thing rocking backwards or buckling them. Ten tons could be a record that no other gun would have beaten; but it wouldn't have been handy, for all that.
  8. It's also worth noting that if Invincible had carried any extra guns, they couldn't have been up on the flight deck like that. The mountings might have been mobile but, to be used on a ship at sea, they'd have needed bolting down; and placing them there would have made a good chunk of the deck unusable, even though it was all Harriers. Then there's the problem of supplying the ammunition. I don't know if she got any extra close-in armament - I suspect not, but she had two Phalanx fitted afterwards, so someone must have thought it a problem - but the more likely locations would be the foredeck and the island.
  9. And, surely, the heaviest? The PaK 44 came in around ten tons - absolutely unuseable, and that's before you factor in the sheer length of the thing.
  10. Oh yes. I remember footage on Spotlight of one pair being test-fired against the Great Mew Stone.
  11. If that's on the way home, and looking at the colour, they're more than likely captured Argentine weapons. Something German and 20mm, perhaps?
  12. That's the one. Though it wasn't called that the second time around. Someone must really have hated that aircraft.
  13. That's not it. I'm not after a type of aircraft - it's a specific airframe.
  14. Normally I don't dip into these threads, because the same things always come up - £80 for a kit compared with £8000 for a rail layout or £800 for a show and a night on the town, hourly rate, at least it's not cocaine. But one thing that's always been expensive is paint. I just paid £2.95 for a tin of Humbrol enamel. The guy in the shop (Sussex Model Centre, excellent place, no quarrel with them) told me I was lucky because it's €3.95 over the water. The UK price scales up over £210 a litre for very ordinary paint, in the chemical sense. A litre of Farrow & Ball emulsion is £23.60, and even Little Greene, who fancy themselves a bit, don't want more than £33 a litre. I get the differences - bigger range, broken down into much smaller batches, doubtless more. But that doesn't stop it being expensive. And yet we hardly ever mention it ... because we don't mind all that much?
  15. Nick Hooper used enamels, alas, not acrylics, but here's what he says: To obtain the finish I wanted, I used gloss enamels, specifically Revell 32131 Fiery Red, Humbrol 22 White and Humbrol 14 French Blue – in an approximate ratio of 8 parts Red, 6 parts White and 1 part Blue. So I suppose if you can find equivalents in an acrylic range you're away. And I can warrant, that's a very good match. Interesting mention of Docker colours. Given the rather yuck shade of lilac, mauve, what have you, and the way the Docker Daimlers looked ... was there any connection?
×
×
  • Create New...