Jump to content

Tired of those Tricky TERs?


RMP2

Recommended Posts

Do you lie awake at night worrying about aligning multitudes of ordanance on TERs?

Do your walls have head shaped dents from every prior attempt of mounting triplets of Mk82s?

Sick of stabbing no. 4 blades in your eyes after triple Maverick troubles?

Have you crawled, weeping from your man cave jibbering on about "Matra pods should only be mounted in singles..."?

Are there puddles of dribble on and under your build bench from the 328th failed attempt to get those three cluster bombs all nice and straight?

WELL DRIBBLE AND CRY NO MORE MY FRIENDS AND FELLOW MODELLERS!! THE ANSWER IS HERE!!

With no moving parts...

100% reusable...

100% adjustable...

100% brand universal...

Guaranteed unbreakable...

May I present (drum roll)..........

THE TER JIG!!!!

P1020365%20Medium.jpg

P1020364%20Medium.jpg

P1020363%20Medium.jpg

Yours for the special offer introductory price of £49.99 (excl VAT and P&P. Rocket pods TERs and sway bars not included).

Watch out for our future releases! A sneek preview is below. ;)

P1020366%20Medium.jpg

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To say that is a timely tip is like saying that you couldn't have suggested this at a better time!

Which is, errr, like the same thing I guess. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Triple Ejector Rack.

TERrible things.

Response so far has been TERrific.

Hurry, cure your triple ordanance TERatoligical malodies now!

Ok, Ill stop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Err................ if that's for your Brit Phantom it's probably indelicate to tell you that the RAF used Carrier Bomb Triple Ejector (CBTE) on their F4's and not TER's?

Selwyn

(Running for cover, and not mentioning the Rocket pods.........)

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know... but finding some CBTEs is a little tricky. Besides, theyre based on the TER are they not? And can barely be seen behind the unmentionables and under the pylon.

Still undecided re the Phantom. Its sporting an EMI pod, but apparently thats wrong on XT898.

I cant win. Good job its just a plastic toy plane and not a real one, eh?

Edited by RMP2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know... but finding some CBTEs is a little tricky. Besides, theyre based on the TER are they not? And can barely be seen behind the unmentionables and under the pylon.

Still undecided re the Phantom. Its sporting an EMI pod, but apparently thats wrong on XT898.

I cant win. Good job its just a plastic toy plane and not a real one, eh?

Why's the EMI pod wrong? Is it because '898's a twin-sticker?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know... but finding some CBTEs is a little tricky. Besides, theyre based on the TER are they not? And can barely be seen behind the unmentionables and under the pylon.

Still undecided re the Phantom. Its sporting an EMI pod, but apparently thats wrong on XT898.

I cant win. Good job its just a plastic toy plane and not a real one, eh?

I was just being cheeky. Yet again!

Selwyn

(Sat giggling in the corner!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So Im told. But...

jag101.jpg

Thats 898 with one fitted. Press photo perhaps? :shrug:

Nice one! I've just read your for inspection thread, and never knew that the pod's seemingly couldn't be carried, by a twin-sticker, but the camera can't lie! So even if it was a press photo, you can justifiably prove that this aircraft did even if only briefly.

I wonder why the squadron didn't have a single sticker available? Maybe they'd all been transferred out as the Jaguar had been delivered?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe they'd all been transferred out as the Jaguar had been delivered?

Different squadron, but looks like they got to have a little play together. A "V".

f-4m_andJaguar.jpg

Edited by RMP2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brilliant idea. :-)

On the subject of twin stick aircraft not carrying a recce pod the only reason I can think of practically would be that the extra instrumentation required to fly the aircraft from the back seat would use up space used for the control of the pod.

Photos are often mis-leading when staged as there are plenty of 'cold-war' propaganda pics taken of aircraft carrying stores which they are not plumbed for.

"Aircraft X can do mach 2, has a range of 2500miles and can carry 2 gaziliion weapons extrenally (*but only do one of these things one at a time)."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...