Jennings Heilig Posted March 10, 2008 Share Posted March 10, 2008 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bexwh773 Posted March 10, 2008 Share Posted March 10, 2008 (edited) an RF Phantom nose mated with the fuselage of a Spey Engined FG® Phantom. Have you been talking to Hatchet by any chance Jennings? Bexy Edited March 10, 2008 by bexwh773 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mentalguru Posted March 10, 2008 Share Posted March 10, 2008 The serial number? The undercarriage is up and there aren't any pilots in it? Fozzy bear is the crew chief? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary C Posted March 10, 2008 Share Posted March 10, 2008 The little known RF-4FGR.2? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan P Posted March 10, 2008 Share Posted March 10, 2008 The panel lines are wrong, the nose is completely the wrong shape, and the MGA252 antenna doohickey crank whistle isn't even represented! It isn't from Trumpeter by any chance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek Bradshaw Posted March 10, 2008 Share Posted March 10, 2008 (edited) ...If it's a 'whiff', then nothing!... Derek Edited March 10, 2008 by Derek Bradshaw Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chek Posted March 10, 2008 Share Posted March 10, 2008 I hate being picky about other people's fun - so this isn't being picky! But I have to comment that the vertical camo stripe sorta destroys the line of the RF nose to the detriment of the idea behind it. Now if it was one of those big F-4E(S) recce noses carrying a H1AC camera worthy of two Speys I'd wager the proportions would look a lot better, imho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary West Posted March 10, 2008 Share Posted March 10, 2008 XV527 carried the tail code 666 and not C Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian @ KitsforCash Posted March 10, 2008 Share Posted March 10, 2008 (edited) the engines should be one on top of one another to make a real fighter! the engines should be one on top of one another to make a real fighter! Edited March 10, 2008 by iant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hatchet Posted March 10, 2008 Share Posted March 10, 2008 It's not II or XIII sqn markings? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bentwaters81tfw Posted March 10, 2008 Share Posted March 10, 2008 It's got a hard wing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Fleming Posted March 10, 2008 Share Posted March 10, 2008 No IR linescan or SLAR? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bexwh773 Posted March 10, 2008 Share Posted March 10, 2008 Something Ive been pondering all day, as this is a RF4 it would have been allocated within one the RAF's PR Squadrons, so you would need the markings of the following: 13, 17, 31,39, 58, 69,80, 81,82, 214,527, 540, 542. Just a thought, but as its a Phantom Im normally wrong Bex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Fleming Posted March 10, 2008 Share Posted March 10, 2008 Phantom FR Squadrons were 2, 41 and IIRC 54 at times as well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aeroplanedriver Posted March 11, 2008 Share Posted March 11, 2008 That pointy nose really accentuates the brutish Spey rear end. Very nice J! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PHREAK Posted March 11, 2008 Share Posted March 11, 2008 It's logically a GR4 surely? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Posted March 11, 2008 Share Posted March 11, 2008 (edited) Got it!!! Yep, just worked it out. The number of holes in the intake splitter plate is totally wrong! Come on, it's so obvious, everyone here should have noticed that! Edited March 11, 2008 by busdriver Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thx6667 Posted March 11, 2008 Share Posted March 11, 2008 Is it a Lightning F.3 with F.6 wings? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miduppergunner Posted March 11, 2008 Share Posted March 11, 2008 I have no idea - and don't give a monkey's!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnonymousDFB1 Posted March 11, 2008 Share Posted March 11, 2008 I have no idea - and don't give a monkey's!! Or is it a case of "The propeller is missing" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howard of Effingham Posted March 11, 2008 Share Posted March 11, 2008 i remember when jennings unveiled his FC-135 profile on the what-if site..... neat work and it would look good in 543 sqn markings too. trevor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 To go back to the original question....... Absolutely nothing ! Ian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skybert Posted March 13, 2008 Share Posted March 13, 2008 (edited) You've been sniffing glue again haven't you? :-) Edited March 13, 2008 by Skybert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Laidlaw Posted March 13, 2008 Share Posted March 13, 2008 Yup, it's tail heavy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chek Posted March 13, 2008 Share Posted March 13, 2008 Yup, it's tail heavy. That's sorta what I was getting at in suggesting the F-4E(S) big camera nose. Which might look a bit like that below.... Apologies Jennings - not trying to steal any of your joy! Honest! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now