Jump to content
This site uses cookies! Learn More

This site uses cookies!

You can find a list of those cookies here: mysite.com/cookies

By continuing to use this site, you agree to allow us to store cookies on your computer. :)

GMK

Poseidon MRA Mk.1

Recommended Posts

What's wrong with calling it the Poseidon?  It's not been used before (frankly I think "Thunderbolt II" and all that show a woeful lack of imagination), it's maritime, and it's the original god that the Romans copied with Neptune.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Slater said:

On the topic of confusing designations, the USAF's version of the V-22 Osprey is called "CV-22", which should indicate a primary role of cargo transport. Even though it's really a Special Ops aircraft. The US Marines' version is called "MV-22" which would indicate a special missions aircraft, even though it replaced the old CH-46 helicopter and does "CH" stuff normally. Why? Supposedly it's because the USMC is the lead service on the Osprey and they got to select the designation.

I think that the USAF CV-22 should be HC-22, similar to the HH-60 designation. ‘M’ designates multi-mission, not special operations (MQ-4 would be an example of this). Would the HMX-1 VIP support birds be more accurately VV-22?

 

The MV-22 designation for the USMC version does apparently cause a level of consternation within US SOCOM. Who knew?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I vaguely remember that the 'V' denotes fixed wing vertical take off - like the AV-8... As opposed to rotary wing vertical take off helicopters. 

 

Poseidon I don't mind (not that's it's got anything to do with me)! But Wedgetail has to be called something new. Wasn't/ isn't the A400 called Grizzly somewhere in the world? Atlas seems more apt. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the "V" designation can refer to both short- and vertical takeoff aircraft (OV-10 Bronco, for example).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Slater said:

I think the "V" designation can refer to both short- and vertical takeoff aircraft (OV-10 Bronco, for example).

It should really be FV-35B, then ...? 🤔

 

Nils

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Slater said:

I think the "V" designation can refer to both short- and vertical takeoff aircraft (OV-10 Bronco, for example).

Depends where in the designation it appears. The VIP Sea Kings & Blackhawks used by HMX-1 to fly the US president around are the VH-3 and VH-60, respectively. The V in this case denoting a VIP-configured aircraft. Hence mh comment about VV-22, being a VIP-configured (V), STOVL (V), model 22. 

 

V in squadron designations is a fixed-wing designator, preciously denoting heavier than air. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 22/08/2018 at 18:02, Britman said:

I do not think much these days of aircraft finishes. We seem to lack some basic rules and execution for some of the most basic of things. The Phenom has a fin flash borrowed from something twice its size , not to mention the Hawk T2,s wee weed fin flash. Voyager has a cheat line that should go through the cabin windows and should go straight through at the rear instead of pulling up, and the roundel should not be floating around looking for a home. Beer required pronto.

 

Keith.

I have been thinking the same thing for a while. Maybe it's just me, but it seems all sense of aesthetics has fizzled out when it comes to recent UK military types. Thinking back to the likes of the TriStar, VC 10 and others, the roundels, fin flashes and even serial and title font styles all seemed to 'work' somehow. Even camouflaged types had a certain balance regards markings. The current scheme carried by the new Lightning makes my heart sink as a modeller. I'm sure there are valid reasons though for the lack of colour. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to agree. It's not just the RAF either. The positioning of the Royal Navy wording on 750's King Airs is ridiculous. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Why have the RAF F35's adopted the US Navy style of jet intake warnings?

Edited by st george

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Particularly strange looking are those types that carry the RAF 'brand logo' (correct description?), such as the Puma. The result is an aircraft that ends up with two roundels on its side!

 

It would be fascinating to know the formal current procedure for designing UK military colour schemes and markings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/28/2019 at 5:48 PM, Vingtor said:

It should really be FV-35B, then ...? 🤔

 

Nils

 

Probably VF-35 as it's a variant of an existing F series

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎7‎/‎6‎/‎2019 at 6:34 AM, st george said:

Why have the RAF F35's adopted the US Navy style of jet intake warnings?

I'd suspect that it's a shed load cheaper to maintain that consistency rather than having to have your own drawings and stencils and paint shop plans and RAM concerns! etc. etc. etc…...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/6/2019 at 9:38 AM, Timbo88 said:

 

It would be fascinating to know the formal current procedure for designing UK military colour schemes and markings.

It's probably been contracted out to Carillion or Serco.

 

Here's another one: Army Air Corps Wildcats painted two-tone grey. Very useful down among the trees.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bizarre isn't it. I read in 'Tornado Boys' that when the Buccaneer was replaced at Lossiemouth by the Tornado GR.1B the new type was painted overall grey, which apparently made them stand out more over water than the DG/DSG wrap round of the Buccaneer.

Maybe a mix of fashion and economy perhaps.

If anyone does have access to public domain documentation that explains why current types are coloured/marked as they are I would love to see it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/6/2019 at 6:34 AM, st george said:

Why have the RAF F35's adopted the US Navy style of jet intake warnings?

Safety. An angular aeroplane where to an untrained observer (or careless personnel) the intake may not immediately stand out approached from certain angles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Vickers McFunbus said:

Safety. An angular aeroplane where to an untrained observer (or careless personnel) the intake may not immediately stand out approached from certain angles.

But surely sticking to historically-consistent - rather than functionally relevant & safe - markings is more important?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An interesting discussion here, I too find it surprising/interesting on some of the schemes and designs and colours.

 

The Wildcat mentioned earlier (in Army guise) yes I understand the consistency with the whole Army and Navy fleet, but aesthetically let alone operationally, the previous grey and green scheme is better?

 

(At least part of) the role of camouflage is to break up the shape of the object, and you see that in the F15 (C/D), F16 and F22 with soft blended lines and different shades. It was always strange to see a hard straight line between the upper grey and the underside on the likes of the Tornado F3 which although I guess it blended from a distance I'd have thought a feathered line and greys would have been better.

 

Also it always surprises me that the same aircraft built to do the same role, interpret and have different flavours of camouflage dependent on the operator, for example the Typhoon, where the British, Germans and Saudis all have different schemes and shades of grey, with only the Saudi examples having a scheme and pattern that breaks up the shape of the aircraft to a degree.

 

A fascinating topic!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, GMK said:

But surely sticking to historically-consistent - rather than functionally relevant & safe - markings is more important?

Obviously. I believe the stealthy coating will soon be replaced with a WW2 vintage stone/sea green as seen on FAA aircraft of the period.

 

Poseidon will be predominantly white with camouflaged uppers!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Truro Model Builder said:

 

Here's another one: Army Air Corps Wildcats painted two-tone grey. Very useful down among the trees.

 

probably down to £££££

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a long term employee of Yeovil's finest Helicopter Manufacturer- and someone who takes a keen interest in Colour schemes of all of our products for Modelling references- I can assure you that the Aircraft we produce are painted in exactly the colours/materials that the customer requests- with some caveats.

 

In the case of products built under licence- i.e. The WAH64D/ AHMk1 Apache- these were painted to the US Army standard at Yeovil, using Fed Standard paints shipped in from the US. Any change to the paint schemes, or materials employed would require Design Authority approval (i.e. US DOD or Boeing) and would require a change to the drawing suite- neither of which would be without cost. Westland had to produce the Apache to Boeing's standards or would have been hammered for breach of contract.

 

With the [UK's 🙂 ] F35 being wholly produced in the US of A the above will stand, any changes to the painting and markings will incur design work and cost which may be undesirable to the UK MOD in the long term, coupled with the special properties of any materials used in terms of IR or Radar observability that may pose problems

 

As for the Mk4 "Junglie" Merlins being painted in distinctly un-foliage grey-ask the RN or the Integrated Project Team- We will paint them any colour you like, hence the Metallic Green Danish EH101's, the sexy Black CSAR HH-101 and the superb Norwegian SAR Aircraft looking like James Hunt's formula 1 car 🙂

 

Edited for numptyness. Thanks Rick!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Troffa said:

With the F35 being wholly produced in the US of A

There are assembly lines in Italy and Japan too but your point is no less valid. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Troffa said:

 

With the [UK's 🙂 ] F35 being wholly produced in the US of A the above will stand, any changes to the painting and markings will incur design work and cost which may be undesirable to the UK MOD in the long term, coupled with the special properties of any materials used in terms of IR or Radar observability that may pose problems.

 

Operative words being “changes to”. There’s no additional cost to getting it right the first time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

First flight also completed. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
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...