In the Navy Chat

[Marlin]

Hi, 

I'd like to play too. 

Got an Classic Airframes Gannet I'd like to build as a Deutsche Marine version.

/Bosse 

[rob85]

8 hours ago, trickyrich said:

gosh I haven't even planned for this one, can't remember if I'd signed up or not. 

 

Won't be upset if this one goes through have some great candidates for it, maybe even start my VF-31 SIG builds!!

Ha, yeah your 9th on the list, but that’s ok you support a lot of GB’s so I will let you off not remembering 😃. And your welcome to start your VF-31 builds here!

 

rob

[rob85]

1 hour ago, Marlin said:

Hi, 

I'd like to play too. 

Got an Classic Airframes Gannet I'd like to build as a Deutsche Marine version.

/Bosse 

Hey Bosse, welcome along. A Deutsche Marine Gannet sounds great! More than happy for you to join in with that!

 

so far so good, ‘in the navy’ is leading the poll 😮 so really happy, hopefully it will stay up there so it doesn’t get too caught up in the switching of votes etc 😬

 

Rob

[JOCKNEY]

Hi @rob85

Can i ask would the fieseler fi 167 be eligible  ? It was designed for the aircraft carrier Graf Zeppelin i believe.

Ive been looking for an excuse to build it.

Cheers Pat 

[rob85]

54 minutes ago, JOCKNEY said:

Hi @rob85

Can i ask would the fieseler fi 167 be eligible  ? It was designed for the aircraft carrier Graf Zeppelin i believe.

Ive been looking for an excuse to build it.

Cheers Pat 

Well.... this could be a tough one! From what I can see it was as you said designed for use on ships, and in conjunction with the Kriegsmarine, however (and you can blame Goring for this) all aircraft (to my knowledge) came under the command of the Luftwaffe. Which makes it part of an airforce.... but with that said German boat planes, FW condors, torpedo bombers etc would all be excluded?! 
 

so do I relax the rules to include these nautical base aircraft that were never under the command of the navy?! 
 

the aircraft was used as costal trials as a torpedo bomber but was then sold to the Croatians (but not their navy either).

 

what do people think?

 

Rob

[Col.]

4 hours ago, rob85 said:

...what do people think?

To me it's a step over the border of this GB. The title is, after all, In The Navy and moving away from that could open flood-gates to all sorts of dilution. So unless the equipment concerned was operated by a navy or at least off of a naval vessel it shouldn't be in this GB.

[Cookenbacher]

Sign me up Rob.

[rob85]

9 hours ago, Cookenbacher said:

Sign me up Rob.

I shall! Hope the journey went well? Looking forward to catching up on Saturday 

 

Rob

[rob85]

@Cookenbacher 😂 I just realised that’s a link, I’m dying I completely forgot the navy episode of Simpson's. Stunning work 

[rob85]

9 hours ago, Col. said:

To me it's a step over the border of this GB. The title is, after all, In The Navy and moving away from that could open flood-gates to all sorts of dilution. So unless the equipment concerned was operated by a navy or at least off of a naval vessel it shouldn't be in this GB.

This is true, if it’s opened to airforce subject that flew in support of the navy but as part of the navy I could be on sticky ground! 
 

@JOCKNEY sorry I’m going to say no, which is gutting as had there been evidence of it being launched from a ship then I would say yes. I work on rules clarity as they probably need it and do an updated post. Sorry as I would like to see it built

[JOCKNEY]

Hi Rob

No problem good luck getting this one on the 2020 build list.

 Cheers Pat

[rob85]

So clarity on the rules....

 

the group build is for any subject that has been used or falls under the command of a real life navy (no fictional navy sorry). It can be anything, people, plane, ships, boats, bicycle (I don’t know, they probably had them) tanks (I’ve found out!) helicopters, landing craft, subs etc as long as you can prove it actually existed and was used by or under the direct command of a real navy anywhere in time! The exception will be if the subject is not part of the navy but can be proved to have existed and worked for or on navy vessels e.g. ship launch aircraft. In these cases please discuss the ideas so we know it qualifies. 
 

hope this makes sense and everyone is happy with the outline. Please let me know your thoughts.

 

Rob

[helios16v]

For those that are not aware, USMC is actually under the Department of the US Navy.  

[VMA131Marine]

24 minutes ago, helios16v said:

For those that are not aware, USMC is actually under the Department of the US Navy.  

Well somebody has to give us Marines a ride!

[modelling minion]

On 11/5/2019 at 5:21 PM, rob85 said:

So clarity on the rules....

 

the group build is for any subject that has been used or falls under the command of a real life navy (no fictional navy sorry). It can be anything, people, plane, ships, boats, bicycle (I don’t know, they probably had them) tanks (I’ve found out!) helicopters, landing craft, subs etc as long as you can prove it actually existed and was used by or under the direct command of a real navy anywhere in time! The exception will be if the subject is not part of the navy but can be proved to have existed and worked for or on navy vessels e.g. ship launch aircraft. In these cases please discuss the ideas so we know it qualifies. 
 

hope this makes sense and everyone is happy with the outline. Please let me know your thoughts.

 

Rob

Makes perfect sense to me Rob.

2 hours ago, helios16v said:

For those that are not aware, USMC is actually under the Department of the US Navy.  

I suppose that means that someone could build an imerialist USMC tank to attempt to combat the superior armour of the glorious Soviet naval Infantry.

[Col.]

1 hour ago, modelling minion said:

I suppose that means that someone could build an imerialist USMC tank to attempt to combat the superior armour of the glorious Soviet naval Infantry.

We Commie Scum must always endevour to meet the Capitalist Pigs threat head on!

[trickyrich]

...arrrr people I think it's time for your medication!! (he says not looking at @Col. & @modelling minion)

 

I had initially struggled to think what to build for this but now my purpose is clear (besides annoying hosts and everyone else ), I can make a start on my VF-31 builds!

 

I currently have these with correct decals;

Academy F-4J

Tamiya F-14A  (I may have to get a few more of these!!!)

Hasegawa F/A-18E

 

still need (for now)

Hobby Boss F3H-2N Demon ( about to order)

Academy F-4B and decals for it

 

I'll eventually start acquiring earlier aircraft but decals then start to become an issue.

[DaveJL]

Missed this...count me in with an F-14 no doubt....

[Col.]

Some of Felix' machines get my vote @trickyrich as the second coolest artwork I can think of on the F-4 and F-14   Didn't realise he makes an apperance on the F/A-18E as well though.

[trickyrich]

yeah you're right there, that's why I'm going to do that set.

 

here is a really good site for info on VF-31 and now VFA-31 (all the remaining VF squadrons changed their designations to FVA or VFC);

 

http://www.seaforces.org/usnair/VF/Fighter-Squadron-31.htm

 

My F-14A will be a red tail bird from their first carrier deployment on the USS John F Kennedy

 

http://www.seaforces.org/usnair/VFA/Strike-Fighter-Squadron-31.htm

 

My Super Bug will be the red tail CAG bird

[helios16v]

2 hours ago, trickyrich said:

...arrrr people I think it's time for your medication!! (he says not looking at @Col. & @modelling minion)

 

I had initially struggled to think what to build for this but now my purpose is clear (besides annoying hosts and everyone else ), I can make a start on my VF-31 builds!

 

I currently have these with correct decals;

Academy F-4J

Tamiya F-14A  (I may have to get a few more of these!!!)

Hasegawa F/A-18E

 

still need (for now)

Hobby Boss F3H-2N Demon ( about to order)

Academy F-4B and decals for it

 

I'll eventually start acquiring earlier aircraft but decals then start to become an issue.

Damn...I guess I need to see if I can track down some decals.  I've got the old Grand Phoenix kit.  Cool plane...probably could've been a lot more successful if the retrofitted motors (J71s from the B-66) weren't complete turds (the engine the airframe was designed for never reached production).  

[helios16v]

And @trickyrich, it's VFA, not FVA.  

[trickyrich]

30 minutes ago, helios16v said:

And @trickyrich, it's VFA, not FVA.  

I thought something didn't look right when I typed it???

 

Mmm the Demons were pretty horrid, it is nice that HB has that scheme as no one else does AM decals for them...or the F-4B, though I think it was a scheme for the old Airfix Phantom. As it is the only F-4J decals I could find are done in China.....they could be interesting.

 

Speaking of which one of the BuNos in one of the decal sets for the F-14A is actually for an A-4M Skyhawk, plus two other numbers don't appear to have every been issued! 

[Col.]

5 hours ago, trickyrich said:

Speaking of which one of the BuNos in one of the decal sets for the F-14A is actually for an A-4M Skyhawk, plus two other numbers don't appear to have every been issued! 

Reads like someones dyscalculia was kicking in while they were creating that decal sheet.

[Enzo the Magnificent]

Well, I seem to have lost control.   My original plan for 2020 was to minimise my number of builds so I could do one in each GB.  But now I've seen the CtA Decals sheets for the Jolly Rogers timeline.

 

Plans for this GB are an FJ-3 Fury, an F9F-8 Cougar and an F3H-3M Demon all from VF-61 Jolly Rogers in yellow and black trim.