Geoff_B Posted November 15, 2019 Share Posted November 15, 2019 On 11/12/2019 at 11:09 PM, cmatthewbacon said: Interesting to hear them bigging up the “rolling landing” on QE in the most recent episode as something extraordinarily difficult that’s “never been done before”... First, I find it hard to believe that 40 knots forward airspeed really makes that big a difference to how much ordnance you can land back on. But mostly, I bet all those Phantom and Buccaneer pilots banging their flying bricks back onto the stern of the Ark Royal pitching up and down 40 feet in a heavy sea, not to mention the FAA Corsair drivers or Winkle Brown during his first jet carrier landings might debate _exactly_ how difficult driving down a corridor in the sky on the helmet display towards a deck you could land on sideways in a millpond sea actually is. And I’m sure I’ve seen plenty of Harriers doing short rolling landings at air shows this last couple of decades or more, so the principle seems pretty well established... </end off topic rant> best, M. It is with the F-35B because its not a Harrier, yes Harriers could do Rolling landings by the skill of the pilot and they throttle/nozzle control on land. The F-35B is done with computers they have managed to automate the process and to do so from a ship on a design that was intended to do either CTOL or STOVL. Of course it makes a difference, the Aircraft has to slow to a Hover then drift sideways before dropping onto the land spot which requires a fair amount of thrust to do so, with the short rolling landing, they don't go into the full hover and get the benefits of not having to do so. This not only increases the bring back capacity but also reduces the wear & tear on both the airframe and the engine. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davecov Posted November 15, 2019 Share Posted November 15, 2019 1 hour ago, 593jones said: In that scale is the difference detectable? When I used Orange Hobby F-35Cs on my 1/350 build of HMS Queen Elizabeth five years ago (due to lack of any other variants then), I never heard the last of it from the Internet! This year when I built HMS Prince of Wales, I used Shapeways F-35Bs. Dave 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robertone139 Posted November 15, 2019 Share Posted November 15, 2019 11 hours ago, 593jones said: In that scale is the difference detectable? Yes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
593jones Posted November 16, 2019 Share Posted November 16, 2019 22 hours ago, davecov said: When I used Orange Hobby F-35Cs on my 1/350 build of HMS Queen Elizabeth five years ago (due to lack of any other variants then), I never heard the last of it from the Internet! This year when I built HMS Prince of Wales, I used Shapeways F-35Bs. Dave Sometimes I thank the lord for poor eyesight! If I can't see it, it's fine 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichG Posted November 16, 2019 Share Posted November 16, 2019 (edited) On 11/15/2019 at 11:43 AM, 4scourge7 said: If Airfix doesn`t do it, someone other company will, and it will be only half as good as if Airfix had done it first. I think Airfix had better get their skates on if they're serious. I would not be at all surprised if Trumpeter were not eyeing up a Queen Elizabeth CV in 1/350. They have a pretty comprehensive catalogue of 1/350 ships including a proven appetite for big ship kits like Kitty Hawk & Nimitz class carriers, Admiral Kuznetsov/PLA Navy carrier, LPHs and also other modern subjects. And they've also shown interest in current RN subjects in kit form with the Type 23 and Type 45. So a kit of HMS Queen Elizabeth / HMS Prince of Wales would seem to be a pretty good fit for their range. Not sure these could really be called half as good either... I have the Type 26* & 45 kits and they seem to me to be very well moulded, go together well and are accurate to my untrained eye... certainly reviews of Trumpeter ships that I have read have been quite positive. Rich * oops meant Type 23 Edited November 19, 2019 by RichG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RussellE Posted November 18, 2019 Share Posted November 18, 2019 (edited) On 11/13/2019 at 9:56 AM, Paul Bradley said: I've no doubt they did their homework with the design - doesn't make her look any better though! 😉 An interesting tidbit in the TV prog was the part about the part the wind direction plays in flight ops, specifically the blanking and funneling effect of the islands and the turbulence this sets up across the very spots the F-35s land on. Indeed the air flow over aircraft carriers is very important. Did you know for instance, that it was the direction that the props turned (obviously the early prop driven planes) that determined that the islands were placed upon the starboard side of the deck? Edited November 18, 2019 by RussellE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RussellE Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 On 11/17/2019 at 3:27 AM, RichG said: I think Airfix had better get their skates on if they're serious. I would not be at all surprised if Trumpeter were not eyeing up a Queen Elizabeth CV in 1/350. They have a pretty comprehensive catalogue of 1/350 ships including a proven appetite for big ship kits like Kitty Hawk & Nimitz class carriers, Admiral Kuznetsov/PLA Navy carrier, LPHs and also other modern subjects. And they've also shown interest in current RN subjects in kit form with the Type 23 and Type 45. So a kit of HMS Queen Elizabeth / HMS Prince of Wales would seem to be a pretty good fit for their range. Not sure these could really be called half as good either... I have the Type 26 & 45 kits and they seem to me to be very well moulded, go together well and are accurate to my untrained eye... certainly reviews of Trumpeter ships that I have read have been quite positive. Rich Yes, Airfix need to get a wriggle on to beat the competition. Trumpeter certainly have beaten everyone to the mark if they have the Type 26 frigate already kitted, given they've only just begun construction on the real thing... Or do you mean the type 23? The QE/POW would fit nicely with Airfix, especially given their association with the RN. If Airfix can, they should definitely give the Type 26 a go as well in 1/350 and 1/700 given the fact that both Canada and Australia will have their own variants of the class, and a smart move by Airfix would be to kit all three types. Having more new tool naval subjects will also help to broaden the brand appeal for Airfix. As for Trumpeter's ships, well, the reviews may be good, but after building Prinz Eugen in 1/350, let's just say, I won't be re-entering that arena anytime soon... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corsairfoxfouruncle Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 2 hours ago, RussellE said: As for Trumpeter's ships, well, the reviews may be good, but after building Prinz Eugen in 1/350, let's just say, I won't be re-entering that arena anytime soon... ☹️ Thats one of the few ships i was hoping to build. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RussellE Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 26 minutes ago, Corsairfoxfouruncle said: ☹️ Thats one of the few ships i was hoping to build. don't get me wrong, Trumpeter got the shapes correct and it was highly detailed, but it was let down by sloppy tool making, which led to every part (and there's a lot of them) requiring hand working to fit the next correctly. Example: the walls that make up the superstructure were all of varying heights, and the part edges were usually bruised. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike romeo Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 On 11/12/2019 at 11:09 PM, cmatthewbacon said: Interesting to hear them bigging up the “rolling landing” on QE in the most recent episode as something extraordinarily difficult that’s “never been done before”... Never been done before on a ship (outside of a very hairy emergency with a SHAR and a very early sea trial of a Harrier GR1 that tried and ended up in the scuppers of the aircraft carrier concerned) and not by F-35 on QEC. There is risk on trialling any 'novel' flight evolution. Nevertheless, I suspect there was some skilful editing for added drama. You are right that it should be less stressful than doing a conventional arrested recovery. Quote First, I find it hard to believe that 40 knots forward airspeed really makes that big a difference to how much ordnance you can land back on. You can believe whatever you want, Matt; if however you want some facts, PM me. Regards Martin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TIGER HOBBIESLIMITED Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 (edited) With a model of the QE/POW Carrier is not about how good they are, it will be who is first to the market. We get regular phone calls asking for models of HMS QE, only to disappoint, the caller saying none exist other than 1/1250 Resin models. or mad money models The one in the link 1/1250 £183.00 https://anticsonline.uk/N2533_Current-Royal-Navy/107593369_Albatros-Alk318-HMS-Queen-Elizabeth-Carrier-Ro8.html One below not sure of scale may be 1/700 https://www.ebay.co.uk/c/901801589 Yours for £447.00 Edited November 19, 2019 by TIGER HOBBIESLIMITED Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff_B Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 4 hours ago, TIGER HOBBIESLIMITED said: One below not sure of scale may be 1/700 https://www.ebay.co.uk/c/901801589 Yours for £447.00 That's crap as well, poorly done with little reference to the real ship 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin W Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 13 hours ago, RussellE said: Indeed the air flow over aircraft carriers is very important. Did you know for instance, that it was the direction that the props turned (obviously the early prop driven planes) that determined that the islands were placed upon the starboard side of the deck? Edited 13 hours ago by RussellE Are you sure? 1) most airfields use a left hand circuit so the carriers just followed suit. 2) flyco on a carrier overlooking the deck can also see the landing pattern if it's opposite the island. 3) the Japanese built carriers in pairs one with a port island and one starboard so the ships could be closer together and not interfere with each others landing patterns. This even though they operated identical aircraft. I don't think the direction of rotation of the propeller had the final say. Colin 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Boak Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 The propeller doesn't go the same way round on all aircraft. The Merlin was certainly one exception to what had become a normal rule but just how standardised this rule was in the days of the early carriers from different nations is a question you'll need a WW1 enthusiast to comment on fully. However wasn't the Camel well known for pulling badly to the left, which would imply it did go back that far/ It should be added in defence of the argument that the Japanese actually only built one carrier (Soryu?) with the island on the left, and I gather it wasn't considered successful. I've just read Eric Brown on the Seafire, where he had an arrester hook pull out so used the torque to run into the island (at fairly low speed) rather than go over the side. OK with a Merlin... I wouldn't however extend that to a generally useful technique (and neither did he!). 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul H Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 Just seen that the Pompey local paper has this document about HMS Prince of Wales on their website, & thought it might be of interest: https://epages.jpimedia.co.uk/full_page_image/page-1-123/content.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichG Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 23 hours ago, RussellE said: Trumpeter certainly have beaten everyone to the mark if they have the Type 26 frigate Ha! Yes, sorry meant Type 23 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smokeyr67 Posted November 20, 2019 Share Posted November 20, 2019 The more I read this topic, the more excited a get about a model of the QE that may or may not eventuate, so I’m thinking of taking matters into my own hands and build a 1/144 scale model of her (r/c). That’d be a great size (just shy of 2m) and with a little bit of luck I’ll be able to find some F35b’s and Merlins in that scale. Now I just need some plans, some motivation and above all lots of cash 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RussellE Posted November 20, 2019 Share Posted November 20, 2019 14 hours ago, Smokeyr67 said: The more I read this topic, the more excited a get about a model of the QE that may or may not eventuate, so I’m thinking of taking matters into my own hands and build a 1/144 scale model of her (r/c). That’d be a great size (just shy of 2m) and with a little bit of luck I’ll be able to find some F35b’s and Merlins in that scale. Now I just need some plans, some motivation and above all lots of cash Why not go all out and build her in 1/72? 😉 there'd be no problems sourcing F-35's and Merlins at that scale, and boy, what a whopper she'd be! 🤣 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smokeyr67 Posted November 21, 2019 Share Posted November 21, 2019 At 1/72 it would be bigger than my first real boat... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Botan Posted November 23, 2019 Share Posted November 23, 2019 The newest workbench have some bits about 350 scale ships. Quote Testing the water Visitors to the Airfix stand at SMW 2019 would have been intrigued to see a spectacular hand built model sharing display space with our new Vulcan, one which has a particularly interesting story behind it. Occupying a prominent position initially near our make and paint tables and on Sunday, on the display stand itself, this magnificent 1/350th scale model of the Royal Navy’s new aircraft carrier HMS Prince of Wales was painstakingly built by talented modeller Dave Coventry, who was on hand to make sure nobody took too much of a shine to his latest creation and got a little too close. Attracting plenty of interest over the show weekend, this beautiful model was intended to stimulate discussions on two specific points – should Airfix be looking to re-enter the 1/350th scale ship market and if so, which particular vessels would be most popular with modellers? Attracting plenty of interest over the weekend of the SMW show, this magnificent scratch built 1/350th scale HMS Prince of Wales raises the question, should Airfix return to this scale of ship models? With many people assuming that sight of this model signified a clear intention that Airfix were planning to introduce a new kit of a Queen Elizabeth class carrier in the near future, it became abundantly clear over the weekend that there was plenty of modelling appetite for such a development and it proved quite a challenge to temper expectations. Serving as probably the most effective scale canvassing prop we have ever displayed in a public forum, Dave’s beautiful model started discussions we are desperately keen to hear your views on and we would be grateful if you would let us have your thoughts by dropping us a quick e-mail at our usual [email protected] address. Would you welcome the return of Airfix to the1/350th scale ship model arena and if so, which vessels would you like to see produced. On a slightly more specific note, would you welcome the addition of a Queen Elizabeth class carrier in this scale? With regard to Dave’s latest masterpiece, this is the second Queen Elizabeth Class carrier model he has produced for us in the past five years, with the previous model having been presented to the Royal Navy and on permanent display aboard HMS Queen Elizabeth itself. This latest model was scratch built by Dave, using all the experience he gained whilst building the previous model and incorporating many parts taken from various Airfix kits – we think you will agree, it looks truly magnificent. After its starring role at Scale Modelworld 2019, the model will be placed on display in the Hornby Visitors Centre in Margate, just one of the many attractions awaiting people looking for an interesting day out. It remains to be seen whether Dave’s efforts will result in an Airfix kit version of his impressive carrier, but we certainly look forward to watching developments with interest. We will certainly bring readers details of how our request for opinions on the subject progresses. Highlights made by me. Personally I would love somebody to finally make injected WWII British U-class, V-class or T-class submarine in 1/350 scale. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IanHx Posted November 23, 2019 Share Posted November 23, 2019 On 11/21/2019 at 12:30 AM, Smokeyr67 said: At 1/72 it would be bigger than my first real boat... To misquote Jaws, "we're gonna need a bigger shed" 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
st george Posted November 24, 2019 Author Share Posted November 24, 2019 After Making a 1/350 HMS Queen Elizabeth. I would love to see a 1/350 HMS Ark Royal (R09). Come on Airfix, you know you want to. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin W Posted March 11, 2020 Share Posted March 11, 2020 Bootneck is currently building a 1/350 Ark Royal R09 in the Navy group build. Maybe Airfix will take the hint! Colin 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
k5054nz Posted March 12, 2020 Share Posted March 12, 2020 (edited) I’ve just finished watching both series of Britain’s Biggest Warship and now have urges to build QNLZ in 1/700, and a Merlin HC.4 and 617Sqn F-35B in 1/72! Have tweeted my requests to Airfix. Edited March 12, 2020 by k5054nz 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scooby Posted March 15, 2020 Share Posted March 15, 2020 On 11/19/2019 at 6:56 AM, Colin W said: Are you sure? 1) most airfields use a left hand circuit so the carriers just followed suit. 2) flyco on a carrier overlooking the deck can also see the landing pattern if it's opposite the island. 3) the Japanese built carriers in pairs one with a port island and one starboard so the ships could be closer together and not interfere with each others landing patterns. This even though they operated identical aircraft. I don't think the direction of rotation of the propeller had the final say. Colin When able, the LH circuit is preferred as it keeps the Captain in a fixed wing aircraft on the inside of the turn. 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