Jump to content

Agent K

Members
  • Posts

    410
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Agent K

  1. Looks absolutely fantastic, can't fault it, nicely done. Well the only thing I can fault is the spelling of hangar........ 😉
  2. All good and interesting points raised here, I took it for what it was, and understand the compromise made to get it made in the first place and to be able to market it. Would we see anything else as good, or anything that covered the subject elsewhere? I doubt it, hence for that reason itself it's very good. CGI has, ultimately it's limitations, albeit it is very good and convincing these days. To add to the overall quality and accuracy it's worth listening to the "We have ways" podcast where they speak with one of the shows creators and episode writers, John Orloff. He goes into good detail on how all the correct aircraft are tracked in the correct position in CGI so they are accurate to the actual mission, and also thus method of attack, destruction etc. It's a very interesting listen.
  3. Flown on these a good number of times. what a fantastic model and end result.
  4. Being December 1, I can't see any evidence of an advent calendar this year? or am i missing something?
  5. Buenos dias y bienvenido Some great models there. I spend quite a bit of time in Madrid with work and my office is between MAD airport and Torrejon so see a number of Spanish Air Force types as well as all the airliners.
  6. Agreed, and with of course the same cockpit section on both types.
  7. Amazing, great result and the very first aircraft I ever flew in, an Air France Caravelle at 6 years old and the first of over 50 distinct types I have subsequently flown in.
  8. Flew on this a good number of times, what a fantastic build!
  9. I've seen a lot of F22's flying in my time and in very different weather and lighting. This really is the best I've seen that captures the colours and weathering and lighting. Awesome!
  10. Thank you both for such a quick response and advice, appreciated.
  11. I've recently acquired some of this paint and am pleased with it. However I think I used the wrong varnish on one occasion which went patchy and took ages to dry (is it a case of a water based paint with a non-water based varnish?) and am wondering of any of you have recommendations for a good gloss, satin and matt varnish I can use with these paints. Thank you for any suggestions.
  12. It was the only weekend in that July period that Church Fenton (CF) could provide, as the weekend before (or after - I forget) was already booked. I'm led to believe they will move it next year to avoid conflict. One mustn't forget it's not just about CF availability but also TFC aircraft and all the other visiting warbirds that make up the show.
  13. They did, in 1:72, a few years back.
  14. I think you'll find that BAE didn't pop down to Homebase Dunsfold to get thousands of cans of Dulux to paint the aircraft........... imagine painting a non aerospace tested and approved paint on a multi-£10's of millions aircraft and invalidate any military certification or release to service. I'm not sure any Engineer would have approved that! I recall seeing 4 Squadron on exercise at RAF Leeming in 1984 with a GR3 in the 2-tone grey camouflage scheme.
  15. Are the Spitfire and 109 really that different though? single-engined, monocoque (i.e. stress loaded), low wing design? The The Hurricane, bear in mind was half a generation earlier and a lower risk design that took the space frame as opposed to monocoque fuselage from the previous Hawker biplanes and brought up to a more modern, relatively speaking, monoplane design. I'm sure it's understood, but there isn't an "aeroplane design" app, where numbers are stuffed into and it spits out a design. What the technology gives you is the ability design, to process data, to carry out stress analysis, CFD analysis etc etc in a far quicker and far more powerful way that pure wind tunnel, or dynamic testing. whilst consulting a slide rule. Human beings still lead and manage the process, it's that powerful tools, exists to help them optimise things.
  16. I think Giorgio N and others have answered pretty fulsomely so I won't repeat what they say..... much........ but don't underestimate or misunderstand the size and quality of teams on aircraft and system design. I can reassure you they are not a few blokes with woolly jumpers and patches but some of the cleverest and highly qualified people you will meet and they are across all ages. Having done 5 years to achieve a degree in Aeronautical Engineering myself a good few years back and worked for (and still working in) several decades in the industry and with some of the finest Airbus and BAES and Boeing have to offer, and I have never owned or rarely seen a wooly jumper or elbow patches........ The overriding factor in design is the requirement which sets the specification i.e. it's range, load, performance, equipment needs, weight, etc etc etc There is so so much more than how it looks, which isn't a factor, think engines, avionics, systems, and so so much more. It really can't be designed by a few people in a lunch hour! As for your examples, they exist, F35, F22, Typhoon are the 21st century TSR2's and Buccaneers, I'm sure also the B21 Raider would more then be a 21st Century Vulcan!
  17. A wonderful county! Welcome aboard
  18. What a fantastic result for an interesting aircraft too, nicely done and thanks for sharing.
  19. Is it though? and who is "the Army"? the Chiefs of staff, the troops? all? and what about the RAF that will operate and fly it? and it depends of course on your measures to deem what is the best?, it's all subjective........ I guess if you get the RFP right, and be detailed and specific on the requirement for performance, cost, training, operational costs, build offset, maintenance, etc etc etc then the best is what wins that competition, and if it's the Blackhawk then good, if not then good too.
  20. Nice to see a Nellis based scheme too, having seen a number of these during a number of trips out to Red Flag over the past several years.
  21. Agree with a lot of the statements above, I have bought it from day 1 and of late it seems to be more akin to a comic than a serious historic aviation journal. The quizzes, the frankenplane thing, poor and unprofessional editing and writing. Why change something just for the sake of it, no news stories at the front of the magazine any more, lots of white space, I suspect Ken Ellis will be aghast at what has happened.
  22. Very nice! just loved the Europe 1 cammo scheme and it's such a unique and great looking aircraft. Was lucky to see some a few weeks back as I headed to Vegas and Nellis to catch a week of Red Flag action.
  23. You know the old drill, it was on back-order, already paid for etc etc.....
×
×
  • Create New...