ALF18

Pigsty I just looked it up on Wikipedia... I will take your advice. CBC here in Canada plays a BBC series on Sunday mornings when people should be sleeping or doing something productive; Coronation Street. Somehow it doesn't float my boat. If Summer Wine is similar, I will give it a miss. ALF

A great variety of inputs so far, and some insightful comments. I have to admit, though, that I have no idea what the cultural reference was to "Last of the Summer Wine"... although it sounds intriguing. I admit to being surprised about the sensitivity to the s or z sound; that to me was not very significant, but I find it illuminating to see the emphasis on this point. Speaking of emphasis, I use a very subtle one on the first syllable. Here in French-speaking Canada, it is very common to hear words mispronounced by francophones speaking English. The usual culprit is emphasis in the wrong place (my father used to say "He put the em-PHASS-is on the wrong syl-AB-el" as an example). For example, engine will often be pronounced "en-GINE" with the long I sound, making the word hard to recognise. My wife didn't understand why I laughed so hard when she called me to announce the "check en-GINE" light was on in the car. There she was worrying the engine would blow up, and I was ROTFL. So far, I am feeling validation that my aversion to the American-sounding "com-PAWZ-it" is justified. Thanks to those whom have taken the time to respond so thoughtfully. ALF

Two more options added - if you like, you may go back and vote for one. Thanks for your input. ALF

I live in Canada; more specifically I live in a portion of Canada where 99% of the populace speaks French, my second language. For that reason I sometimes don't hear some words pronounced by native English-speakers, especially more modern words. This is the case with the word "composite" for me. I consider myself an anglophone (Canadian code for native English-speaker), and I pronounce things the Canadian way. I was wondering how people pronounce this? In an Aviation English class I teach, we talk about composite aircraft skins and other components. Some of my students say it "com-PAWS-it" (emphasis on the capitalised syllable) in English. None say it "COMP-oz-it", which is kind of the way I thought it should be pronounced. Please vote in the poll. I am not looking for an absolute right or wrong; I just want to know if I am totally out to lunch saying COMP-oz-it. Could there be regional differences? In other words, do Americans say it one way, while Commonwealth countries say it another way? Any anecdotal insight you might want to add in the thread would be interesting as well. ALF

I enjoyed this GB. Good builds, folks! Question: does anyone know if the Dragon kit in 1/144 (CF-188A Hornet 410 Cougar Squadron) is available still? If so, where? I don't build in that scale, but a friend asked me yesterday if the kit was still available. ALF

Pete All our aircraft had these AOA light boxes on the nose strut. I can't recall ever flying one that didn't have the box installed. If they ever flew without, there must have been a maintenance reason for it (broken, no spare), and an entry in the aircraft log to that effect, because it was a normal part of the Canadian aircraft equipment set. We never used the lights for anything practical, though - nobody ever checked to see if our AOA was on-speed for landings from the ground. There was also an AOA indexer next to the HUD, which most guys left off (intensity turned down to zero on the rheostat), because we used the HUD cue for AOA on approach (what we called the E-bracket). I'm a little mystified as to why there would be pics with this box missing. ALF

I'm in as well. Neu has done his usual arm-twisting job on me, and I didn't put up much of a fight... I have a 1/48 Sabre in Korean war colours. I have always loved the yellow fuselage band on natural metal. I will take the opportunity to research a Canadian ace who flew Sabres in this scheme during the Korean war: Omer Levesque. ALF

Shaun For an American Hornet, there may be some differences in procedure when it comes to which flags and pins are installed at various stages of "putting the aircraft to bed" or when parked on the flight line. What is the same, however, would be the locations and types of protective equipment. When ours were parked ready for the pilot's walkaround, we left 4 pins installed on the airframe (tail hook, and one per gear), plus the two pins in the cockpit (canopy jettison and ejection handle). I have been told by USN pilots that they typically do not insert the seat pin, because this series of seats have a safe/arm handle on the right armrest that prevents inadvertent ejection. The tail hook pin is around the attachment point mid-way along the hook itself. In this pic of my 1/32 Hornet build from a few years ago, you can see what it looks like (but the location is not precise - this one is too far forward). http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/mm175/danmcw/P1010300.jpg The wheel strut pins (I hadn't finished twisting the copper wire yet): http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/mm175/danmcw/P1010303.jpg The nosewheel pin is installed at the point where the "drag brace" (the part that goes up and aft from the wheels) meets the vertical strut. http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/mm175/danmcw/P1010380.jpg In the cockpit, there is a pin that goes into the base of the ejection handle, and has a long remove before flight (RBF) flag that ends in an elastic "noose" that drapes over the top of the control stick to help remind the pilot the pin is installed. The pin for the canopy jettison goes at the base of the yellow and black handle (handle shown here, but no pin installed). http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/mm175/danmcw/P1010285.jpg For other protection, there are of course intake and exhaust covers, and pitot boom covers that are very typical (L-shaped red cloth). Often, the two pitot covers are linked together by a cream-coloured bungie cord that stretches between the two pitot booms and holds the two covers in place by tension. If the wings are folded, there can be pins installed under the wing, near the fold itself, with RBF flags. Missiles will have hard plastic magnetic covers (AIM-9 series only, not AMRAAM or AIM-7) on the seeker heads and a red sheath around the target detector section near the front fins (red, with RBF flag). Other weapons may have other pins and flags, but fuel tanks don't have pins. Finally, an F/A-18A will have this "beer can" (little orange tit that pops out when twisted, just forward of the electrical panel and aft of the ID light) that electrically safes the gun. On F/A-18Cs, this is also present, but there is also a second beer can for the chaff/flare dispenser electrical safety in the same area. http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/mm175/danmcw/P1010291.jpg Hope this helps. ALF

That is simply an amazing manifestation of perseverance and hard work. Looking great! ALF

I don't have a non-copyrighted pic for you, but I can describe the attachment, or if my attempts at being understood are too muddled, send me your e-mail address and I'll send you a good pic showing how it looks. The middle of the cover is held in place by a pin that pops into a retractable hole on the outside of the intake. That hole is at the back of the vee shape that the cover makes at the centre back; inside the intake danger decal, and a bit above centre (i.e. in the vee of the decal's lines, but above centre and forward of the apex of the vee). From there, the covers stretch around the front of the intakes, and the top and bottom inside corners are held in place by bungee cords that are hooked into small holes in the airframe (one under the LEX about 2 feet aft of the intake, and the other under the intake forward of the wheel well, roughly halfway toward the wheel well from the intake). Confused? ALF

The Sniper fits onto Station 4 (only that station, because it is the only one that has ECS air to cool the pod), with the same kind of "skirt" part that the Nighthawk B pod used. Most, if not all, kits should have that attachment skirt to go with a FLIR pod from the kit. If you want pics, let me know and I can beam you some by e-mail (not mine to post). ALF

Yellow means live explosive in a weapon (warhead), in this case a bomb. I believe (not 100% certain) that the two yellow rings on USN and USMC bombs signify thermal protection applied to the bomb, to prevent them 'cooking off' in an on-board fire. ALF

Definitely plausible that the canopy could be up with any flap setting. Unlike some aircraft (Tutor from 2 CFFTS, not Snowbirds, for example), there is no restriction on the canopy being open with engines running on the Hornet. So the canopy could be full open or full closed, with any flap setting, engines running or engines shut down. ALF

Neu I decided not be shy, given that your ulterior motive for getting me to participate in this GB (lurking or building, machts nichts) was to garner information. Admittedly, in some lighting, the forward fins can look a bit lighter, like in this pic (Canadian Forces Combat Camera photos in this post): This one, further back, shows that the front fins are significantly darker than the rear ones. The rear fins are very close to FS 36375 (the light grey lower colour of the CF-18). In fact the missiles tend to be a lot cleaner than the aircraft skin, because live ones are rarely flown - except in this Libyan operation of course. I quite understand your wish to "get it done" - been there, felt that way. Great job, and good luck getting the others done in time. ALF

Great detail job in this tiny scale - it's clear you're way younger than I am! FYI, here is some explanation of the types of wingtip store you might see on a CF-18: AIM-9M (live) - these are the grey ones with yellow and burnt orange bands identifying the explosives in the warhead and rocket motor sections CATM-9M - Captive Air Training Missile (AIM-9M). This is a blue tube with a real seeker head installed at the front. Blue for inert rear section. Canada always used blue tubes for these; USAF and other air forces might use a grey tube with blue bands showing that it is inert. Canadian AIM-9 CATMs were like yours in this build at first; grey tail fins, and dark-coloured forward (guidance) fins. In later years, we took to flying with the tail fins removed, and eventually the guidance fins were removed as well, resulting in a blue tube with a dark seeker head on the front, and no fins. So one tiny critique on the CATM-9s you have installed: the forward fins should be a gunmetal colour, not a light grey. DATM-9M - Dummy Air Training Missile (AIM-9M). This is a blue tube with a blue warhead, and fins may be installed as per the CATM. The seeker head is not active (this is the Dummy part). Why carry it? Usually only on a 2-seat CF-18, and especially when it is configured with a centreline tank only for underwing/fuselage stores. The dual (but not the single) CF-18 has some Angle of Attack (AOA) restrictions when loaded with asymmetric wingtip stores, because the bigger canopy reduces longitudinal stability and renders it more vulnerable to departure from controlled flight at high AOA. So when you fly a dual with a CATM, you would likely have a DATM installed on the opposite wingtip to remove those AOA restrictions when air fighting. ACMI or ACMR/I pod - (Air Combat Manouevring Instrumentation or Range Instrumentation). The older versions were grey tubes with a pitot tube at the front (long, skinny and metal coloured), and no fins. Older versions were dependent on ground receiver and recording stations to gather the flight data for debrief; Canada only had one instrumented range and it was in Cold Lake. We would sometimes deploy to Florida or elsewhere where the USAF had a range, and we would borrow USAF pods for use down there. Nowadays, we have "untethered" pods that use GPS data for positioning and have on-board recording ability, which is then synchronised with the precise GPS-based timing on the recordings, and replayed at a portable ground debrief station. These pods are different in that they have large metal antennae (loops) near the front, but still have the pointing pitot tube out front. BLOS comms - Beyond Line Of Sight communications pod. This is brand new, looks a lot like an ACMI pod, but incorporates a satellite communications receiver that retransmits on a radio-frequency band so that the pilot can talk via his on-board radios and a satellite link with controllers many miles away. I saw one of these in a kiosk at the airshow in Bagotville this summer, and was fooled into thinking it was ACMI at first glance. I don't know the official name; BLOS comms was the name of the project to acquire this capability eons ago when I flew the aircraft. I love the weathering job. For the era, at 410, the aircraft were never this dirty, but the effect is very typical of a modern CF-18's appearance. ALF