Jump to content
ARC Discussion Forums
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt

bdt13

Members
  • Content Count

    810
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About bdt13

  • Rank
    Step away from the computer!
  • Birthday March 1

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Oakmont PA
  • Interests
    1/72 jets

Recent Profile Visitors

9,241 profile views
  1. See the excellent Desert Storm site for information on where the CALCMs were loaded. Good luck with your build.
  2. Thanks, all. When/if I ever get to building a YA-10 I'll be sure to use the Republic seat.
  3. The original picture is here. Google and other search engines can be fickle. A keystroke or two different and I find results move around or disappear entirely. Given that the pic was on a small blog, I'm not surprised it took some effort to find.
  4. Yes, this was of the FSD (full-scale development) aircraft, 73-1669, which crashed in June 1978 due to a double-engine flameout during gun testing. Photos of the ejection are on p. 29 of Dana Bell's Detail & Scale book on the A-10. FWIW, the eventual fix to the issue was continuous engine ignition during gun operation. An ESCAPAC was fitted and used in this incident. I'm pretty well convinced that all the FSD aircraft used ESCAPAC from manufacture (some may have gotten ACES II later), and any third type of seat was only on the YA-10s.
  5. Hmm... OK, please help me out then. ESCAPAC has flared shoulders that slope down and back from the headrest. I am not seeing this feature in the photos of the mystery seat. Also, ESCAPAC has two very prominent or deep headrest cushions. The mystery seat has two as well, but more shallow to my eye. The back rest or chute pack is definitely missing in the mystery seat. Is this easily removable in ESCAPAC? Quixote74, thank you for the link, I had not seen that picture before. Additional evidence (to me at least) is the red color seen in your pic and in this one here and here of the second prototype. To me the headrests look rounded, not square. They also seem too short to be an ESCAPAC with the handle over the headrest. I am not interested in starting a flame war. The photos we are all using are a bit on the small side and/or the canopy is closed and obscures or distorts detail. If clearer photos can be found I am very interested to see them. Seeing an ESCAPAC with a red headrest or removed back cushion might help. Ideally someone with first hand knowledge could clear this up - any test program folks or Fairchild-Republic people out there? Second edit: Link here to a page with much clearer pic of seat with canopy open. What seat do we think this is?
  6. I have been looking at a lot of photos of early Warthogs and I have noticed the ejection seat is not the Escapac or ACES II model typically referenced. See the first pic in this link for an example. As this is a Republic product, I'm guessing this may be an F-105 seat. I have noted in color photos that the headrest is red; unfortunately I cannot find one on the web I can link to. Can anyone shed some light on the true identity of these seats? I am interested in modeling early A-10s and want to be as accurate as I can be.
  7. All- Thanks for the information in your responses. I now understand that there was a Project Compass Ghost (PCG), and that they were using lights to hide an F-4 in a similar way that Project Yahudi did in the 1940's. I'm still curious to know where things went when the lighting approach was discontinued. Were the gray colors a product of PCG, or were they developed separately and then given the name? If so, was the name meant as disinformation or was it simply as misunderstanding? What colors were tested in the project to arrive at the finished product? What, if any, aircraft were they tested on first? Are there any photos? Perhaps the lack of information hints that parts of this effort are still classified in some manner. Perhaps those involved did not feel their efforts were of sufficient interest to document them. Perhaps in time we will know the story.
  8. There is much written on this site about the usage and matching of FS 36375 and 36320. However, I have yet to see anything on the history of the colors or their name. Who first determined that none of the available gray colors were what was needed for fighters anymore? What was the process for finding new colors that would do the job? What other colors were tried, and what type of experiments were done to ensure their effectiveness (I'm sure there were some test planes painted in one-off schemes - pics please!!)? What were the first aircraft with an official technical order mandating their use? How did they get the name "compass ghost", even unofficially? Any real data at all is better than speculation. I'm thinking that if anyone at all knows, it will be someone with connection to this site. Thanks!
  9. Mr. Vark- Thank you for once again sharing your valuable experience with us and analyzing these videos. This is the kind of content that keeps me coming back to ARC.
  10. I was afraid this would happen. Chile's C/D models had the coolest paint, and now look completely vanilla. I was hoping they would have painted the AM/BM models in the C/D scheme instead. But, as usual, no one asked me.
  11. +1 on that! I picked up a copy of the old Hasegawa kit and the decals are yellowed beyond belief (and I don't mean the ivory the whites started out as). Some older Luftwaffe and Marineflieger markings would be appreciated as well.
  12. Welcome to the forums! To deal with this issue myself I have photocopied instruction sheets or other images of the aircraft I want to build. You may need to scale the copier to get the right size for your model.
  13. Excellent as usual! A lot of types we in the US aren't used to seeing. Thank you.
×
×
  • Create New...