Antoine
-
Posts
5,652 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Events
Profiles
Forums
Media Demo
Posts posted by Antoine
-
-
On 12/24/2018 at 3:23 PM, Wez said:
Are we still interested in this one for 2020? I know I am!
What's obvious is your interest in digging!
Well, what does Giorgio think about this?
-
For a while?
The MiG-21 was only released during last summer.
What do you expect?
-
On 9/27/2018 at 3:13 PM, Uncle Uncool said:
Yeh, but it's got to be a helluva lot more Metal, not some mellowy, romantic wail.
Like this, for instance:
Yeh, me likes!
Cheers,
Unc2
I'm pretty sure that you'll prefer this not so new version...
-
I'd just edited my post above for some adds/corrections, I just hope it's at least understandable.
Sorry for the hijack.
-
1
-
-
17 hours ago, SleeperService said:
If the track has worn so the the pin bushings are oversized the extra will show up as extra slack. This may be corrected by removing links or, if very bad left as is to avoid the weakened links to fail, The latter is OK as an emergency item but severely restricts top speed and manoeuvrability.
Well, oversized bushing could happen, yes (I even remember a pin "shaped" like a crankshaft!), but the main reason that make a track show slack is heat.
As a tank start to roll, the motion make the track links heat up very quickly due to friction, and when they're made of metal, they widen imperceptibly. It can't be noticed with eyes for one link, but put one hundred links together, and you get some slack.
When the tank stop, the links shrink back as the temperature drop, but not completely to its original size.
So, day of use after day of use, slack will appear and stay.
Usually, each tank have a built-in tension gear that you'll use as long as the slack is inside a given margin.
But once it get outside, there's no other choice than to remove a link, and then start the process all over again, till its time to remove another link.
When you remove a link on one side, you got to do the same on the other side, even if you're still inside the margin there. While it's strictly forbidden to do so, I've to confess that one time I've used my tank for a couple of days with 82 links left and 81 right, as I couldn't link up the left track with 81 despite a whole hour effort by the crew. Two days later, the same operation went very well in just five minutes.
Yet you can't remove all the links you wish to, as a track will come new with n number of link, and will be declared worn out, say, at n-3.
On AMX-30, a new track was made of 83 links and considered worn out as you were about to remove the 81rst link.
Usually, the slack build up more on a specific part of the running gear. and it's there that you'll gauge it.
On the -30, it's at the front end between the idler wheel and the first return roller.
One last word, slack could be dangerous and useful at the same time. Do not let it build up when you know terrain is hard (no mud) or if you'll stay on the road, as if there's too much, the track will pop out of drive sprocket. On the other side, add some more when you plan to drive on heavy fresh snow, or mud, as those elements will tend to block a running gear set too tight.
-
6
-
1
-
-
Guys....
I'm afraid I'm going to bail out of this GB while it's still time.
I've got a long list of (bad) reasons, but the truth is that appart from a couple of specific subjects, I'm no more interested in WW2 German armour.
I'm really sorry, but I'll keep an eye on your work, and I hope to join you latter on another armour STGB
-
4
-
-
Thanks, Julien!
Ugly, but still there's a little something that'll make me buy one.
-
AFAIC, also confirmed.
And thanks for the new thread, Col.
-
1
-
-
Hi Dave,
Thanks, that's indeed nice from Revell, as this rebox is also cheaper than the original (I believe due to the packaging and the decal sheet).
You should check your references about Belgian IIIE.
Any profile for the Aussie markings?
-
1
-
-
Hi there,
Trying for something a little bit different, I think my choice will be the following.
-
2
-
-
I must have signed up for this GB somewhere along the road, as I've received the PM reminder.
Thinking about it, I've got load of (good?) excuses for not participating in this GB (most of my Pz.IV stash sold, workshop far from being ready, no time for modelling, awful record at crossing any GB finish line, you name it....), but....
Well, let's have a try.
After all, I still have a few boxes to choose from, and might even have some days off around Christmas, so you never know.
Let me just check my references, I'll then decide about my victim.
-
2
-
-
Hi Dave, I was wondering if there was a review of yours from the Hornet F.1/3?
Can't find anything else so far....
-
X-Wing fighter, I bet!
-
Whatever, Murphy/Fegan's "kill" has been credited to them at air wing level straight out of the debrief, and then at 7th Fleet, but political considerations then took over at higher level, and it was never made official.
Therefore, BuNo 150646 is the first official USN MiG killer of the Vietnam war.
-
4 hours ago, Brian J said:
I'm afraid I don't quite understand your last comment , "And then, what would have been the Modex of Watkins/Mueller's phanatom, who were flying 102?" According to the above mentioned text, "VF-96's reports show that 'showtime 603' (Fraser) and '610' (Don Watkins) were on station at 40,000 and 35,000 ft respectively."
Sorry, l wanted to write 602, not 102.
I'm not talking about Don Watkins, but about Howie Watkins, who with Mueller was manning the spare F-4.
They launched after Greer's crash.
-
On 3 novembre 2018 at 5:52 AM, Brian J said:
First off, I am aware of the claim made by Capt Don Kilgus, flying an USAF F-100D Super Sabre. However, my initial question was, "...has there been an official clarification as to who is given credit for the first Navy MiG kill of that war?"
Well, tell me if I'm wrong, but the topic's title is "First MiG kill in Vietnam War"
And then, just under, you write about "several aspects of early F-4 MiG kills".
A bit misleading, isn't it?
On 1 novembre 2018 at 5:12 PM, Brian J said:I'm hoping for clarification concerning several aspects of early F-4 Phantom MiG kills during the Vietnam War, specifically who is credited with the first 'official' MiG kill. Without listing all of my references I will quote just one or two that add to my quandary.
Then,
On 3 novembre 2018 at 5:52 AM, Brian J said:One final point. Several years ago I spent several days/weeks trying to dig up the correct/accurate call sign of F-4B BuNo 151403 at the time it was lost on April 9, 1965. The following quote is from an e-mail I sent to a fellow modeler who joined in on the exchange on another web-site:
"Since my last e-mail it dawned on me to check back issues of The Hook quarterly and spent several hours going through over 25 years of back issues. The Summer and Fall 1990 issues include a two part history of VF-96 by Mike Weeks. In the second part he gives a detailed description of the 9 April 1965 encounter in which BuNo 151403 was lost. This article mentions three times that the call sign was 'Showtime 602.' The photo caption on page 34 in the Fall issue states that, "On that day LTJG Terry Murphy and RIO ENS Ron Fegan in Showtime 602 (seen here as 611) failed to return to Ranger after high altitude battle..."
What I found encouraging was that in his acknowledgements on page 47 he lists at least ten or twelve former members of VF-96 who provided assistance, which leads me to believe the guys who were there should know!"
The above e-mail was seen by other modelers and never questioned. At this point in time I stand by my conclusion that at the time of the loss of BuNo 151403 it was Showtime 602.
Well, BuNo 151403 being Showtime 611 in january 1965 is a fact.
Shift of Modex could and did happen during a cruise, in general due to losses, but AFAIK, there were none for VF-96 before the Hainan engagement.
And then, what would have been the Modex of Watkins/Mueller's phantom, who were flying 602?
-
I won't go into comparison of both kits, but if you go HB, an aftermarket pit is really needed, as the kit's one isn't large enough, leaving a void on each side
-
2
-
-
On 10/31/2018 at 8:18 AM, petr@SpecialHobby said:
Antoine - interesting idea, cannot promise anything now, but let me check it. In case we would not be able to find reliable reference materials, drawings, photos, it would be nice to get some help from you and other French readers.
Thanks, that should not be a problem.
-
13 hours ago, Brian J said:
On page 11 of US Navy F-4 Phantom II MiG Killers, 1965-70 by Brad Elward and Peter Davies (Osprey Combat Aircraft-26) concerning the combat off Hainan Island on April 9, 1965, the authors state that, "The Hainan Island incident had provided both the first MiG kill of the war (although this was not officially acknowledged in order to avoid upsetting the Chinese)..." By the way, this F-4B, BuNo 151403 had the call sign 'Showtime 602' not 611 as found in several references, during this engagement.
To my knowledge, O'Connor's book provide the best account of the engagement, and in my opinion, he's right when he write that Showtime 611 never get any kill on the J-5s (The Chinese would have been too happy with that), and that it's been shot down by its own wingmen. No wonder that the USN doesn't see the need to dig further into this affair, and thinks its better to leave it in the fog.
Beside, BuNo 151403 is indeed Showtime 611, just have a look at page 8 of your own reference book.
602 was flown by H. Watkins.
Kilgus should get credit for the first MiG kill, as there's no way the MiG-17 could have recovered given his attitude and altitude when last seen by the F-100 pilot. And the Vietnamese acknowledge no less than four losses this day... for no official US claim!
-
On 10/31/2018 at 10:11 AM, lasermonkey said:
Oh dear, I think my heart just melted!
16 hours ago, azureglo said:Ditto, what a li'l cutie pie
Ok then, another one, more tiger-like, with mouth wide open.
Yet the only sound was then a weak "ma", or "mou".
-
11
-
-
Whatever, I'm in.
Ace theme is an highly classical one, but still very interesting to me.
I'll find something, for sure.
-
1
-
-
Well, it doesn't come to mind of the majority, because it was quickly forgotten,
During the Battle of Stonne, 16th may 1940, Char B1 Bis "Eure" from the 41ème BCC surprised a German armoured column in the town's main street. Pz.III mostly, with a few Pz.IV. There were thirteen of them. Ltn Pierre Billotte, TC, and its crew, destroyed them all, one after the other. Together with two PAKs found down the street on the other side of Stonne.
Some kind of double ace in a day.
Billotte was later wounded, then captured, and sent to a POW camp in Pomerania.
From there, he escaped to USSR, where he was interned till the beginning of Barbarossa.
He then became France representative in Moscow!!!
But soon he left to the UK to join De Gaulle.
He landed back in France at the head of a 2ème DB tactical group, liberating Paris.
He then became a general, and went into politics after the war.
-
5
-
-
Much more confident a few weeks later!
-
16
-
-
Enter Sacoche!
First day at home back in july, barely two month old.
Abandonned by her mother a few days after she was born, but then another female took care of her.
-
10
-
Yeh, but it's got to be a helluva lot more Metal, not some mellowy, romantic wail.
Rafale B French Airforce - Opération Harmattan 1/48 - AASMs
in Work in Progress - Aircraft
Posted
Well done there!!!
Sorry, I'm late to the party, I could have provided some hopefully useful pics.