TaiidanTomcat
-
Content Count
9,048 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Calendar
Posts posted by TaiidanTomcat
-
-
17 hours ago, Slartibartfast said:
Somehow, I picture the front falling off..well that doesn't usually happen, I can assure you of that!
-
I really prefer to keep these in CONUS. Paypal preferred (friends and family works best, and if you have money in the paypal or an attached bank account there is no fee for either of us) but USPS MO works too. PM if interested. I really want to avoid EBAY and I'm trying to price these to move, but Ive also been out of the model buying game for sometime (SWMBO, KIDS, life etc)
Ebay is getting insane, I prefer to sell them here. I have much much better experiences here on ARC anyway, and its a true blessing. lastly like everything the price of shipping has gone up. I am as unhappy about this as anyone, but keep it in mind. I sent a small package to Pennsylvania and almost passed out at the shipping charge.
1/32 THREE Revell F-14 Tomcats. there are THREE of them all jumbled together. I can't separate them Parts were removed from sprues, and have been bagged. there should be enough to make 3 Tomcats including the 3 sets of decals and 3 sets of instructions. I will throw additional Revell parts in as well just in case I missed something:
---------I am asking $125 to the door. -------------
please PM me with questions or offers. I am trying to free up space and get some cash for holiday gift giving
best wishes!
-
On 9/16/2021 at 4:18 PM, juanchopancho said:
France is pissed 😆
That is an understatement. I was worried some of the French Defense forums would actually die of dispair
-
I see them about twice a week, USAF brand. They are cool and still futuristic looking in my book
-
I was not exactly keeping up with this, but I am pretty surprised personally to wake up to this news this morning. I think it makes sense as the Australians are "leveling up" now in terms of capability rather than sticking with the less capable diesels
-
11 hours ago, Alternative 4 said:
Have to agree, the world needs another 109 like it needs another Spitfire
Another Spitfire you say?! 😃
-
20 hours ago, dai phan said:
I really wanted to go back to my innocent days that I enjoyed so much with each kit. Even Lindberg kits brought BIG smiles to my face... Is there any hope left ? Dai
You can, nothing is stopping you except yourself.
There's no pressure here. If you built a kit and never posted it on the internet would anyone ever know? We won't. you can make it your dirty little secret. That time you built a model and enjoyed it.
-
On 8/18/2021 at 8:53 AM, niart17 said:
I think this is a very common occurrence. One thing I did that helped with this is finding some reason to force myself to just build a kit for fun, the old way. What helped for me for instance was our club had a interclub challenge that only allowed tube glue, paint brushes, and kit out of the box. Because it was a club challenge, you could tell yourself "I know this isn't what my mind tells me to do, BUT I HAVE TO in order to complete the challenge. I think that tricks the part of the brain that normally says "That's not right!" into focusing on the task of completing the challenge. That frees up the fun side of your brain to enjoy just building again. It worked for me but YMMV.
Bill
Yup. A lot of this stuff is psychological. You make your own arbitrary rules and then refuse to break them, even at the cost of enjoyment. This is a good thing, like with work or achieving a hard goal, but not for a something that is supposed to be enjoyable. in your case, you had to find a kind of "excuse" to free yourself. (and good for you BTW)
OP, not every build should be a marathon. Some people really love marathons, but the most fun I ever have running is the 4 mile course I run near my parents that i've run since I was in high school-- and yes I've done marathons. They don't give me warm fuzzies. they are grueling.
The peak for me was when I realized there were large portions of my stash that I would rather sell than build because I didn't think I could do them justice. Think about that, I would rather lose them than potentially have them but imperfectly? Thats nuts. thats stupid. That not the point of this. especially because I look at the stuff I love on my shelves and lots of them are terrible LOL I mean bad, but some of my favorite models are also some of my worst. So what gives?
lastly a part of it may be money. Theres a sunk cost. Its not unheard of to have about 400 bucks in a 1/32 scale modern fighter, with all the fixings. might be getting pressure on that end.
-
On 8/1/2021 at 9:43 AM, Berkut said:
Yeah, i didnt even make it 5 min in. I really tried. Really bad takes all around.
You don't think the fanbois will be demanding it be in the latest Ace Combat? 🤪
-
On 7/24/2021 at 12:31 PM, Berkut said:
Not trying to hang you out to dry but in past you have said multiple times that the sidebays of T-50 cannot possibly be bays. This is multiple times over multiple occasions btw, despite of the presented evidence. IIRC you said it is more likely they house hydraulics for LEVCON's. We have known literally since day 1 of T-50 first taking to the sky (29 January 2010) that they are indeed sidebays. Since then there has been mountain of evidence, including a video of them in action.
are you sure that was me? I've made lots of complaints about PAKFA, but I don't think I ever complained or really cared about the bays. Again, I could be wrong, I sure as hell don't remember that. And its not the first time I've been confused with other posters, I'm not the only brash, silly, person on a lot of forums
-
8 hours ago, Berkut said:
Nice joke. They most certainly are not. I have called out two of said idiots and their response didnt convey any shame whatsoever. Or you know, when you have claimed multiple times in not-so-distant-past that T-50 doesnt have sidebays and that they must be something else. But hey, water under the bridge? 😉
do you mean me personally on the side bays? or the general "you" because I honestly don't remember that, and have like 6 years of sleep deprivation going, so I seriously don't remember, also I drink. sidebays seem to be the least of the Su-57 concerns now, so I guess water under the bridge.
did I say something about side bays? honest question.
I've been shameless on a lot of things, so I don't mind-- but my mind boggles on that one.
8 hours ago, Berkut said:Now, I am still not any more enlightened as to what responses you are referring to. I am just genuinely curious.
just the same trash we see with everything new anyone rolls out. the last 20 fighter programs that went over budget are no indication this one will, its going to X amount of dollars, and do all these things. A lot of Russians have already crowned this king kong at gripen prices. people basically taking the earliest suggestions as verifiable proof. etc. people saying it won't be like that sill JSF, and then celebrating all the different versions that will be included as soon as the learn of them. that kind of stuff.
there is a guy who has been like a kind of "reverse nostrodomos" nearly every prediction he has made the last 8 weeks has gone the opposite way. So thats been very funny, but also disappointing because I actually thought he had some information, but its turned out he actually knew very little. after haavalra got himself banned, we are down to just a one or two russian blowhards who have no idea what they are talking about. sad. keypubs seems dead, and I honestly can't be bothered with forums I even like as much anymore, let alone those that I didn't enjoy much.
I don't see anything solid on checkmate at all, sukhoi clearly shopping around ideas and trying to see what sells before they decide to pursue it. Which is good because theyre proposing an awful lot... don't try and do it all at once now.
but the lack of information, the lack of what it will be in the future even by those actually running the program says that its simply too early to be sure of anything.
since we are bringing up pakfa and its sidebays, and that its hard to make predictions, especially about the future, how did everyone's pakfa predictions go? we were all stunningly accurate I assume. if I was the sidebays guy, I was probably the only guy who got anything wrong on the predictions of the program. embarrassing.
-
17 hours ago, spejic said:
There are only so many ways to design a modern stealthy fighter. It's going to have two canted tails. It's going to have features like the chine along the sides. It's going to have a wing in roughly that form. It's probably going to have a diverterless inlet. Just look at all the other stealth fighters being developed, like the Korean KF-X or the Indian AMCA or the French-German one. The only choices are to have horizontal stabilizers or not, and to have two intakes on the sides or one on the bottom F-16 style, and if they did it on the sides everyone would be saying they were copying the F-35.
indeed, which is funny because we heard so much about what a dog the F-35 was, and now all of the sudden its "well theres really only one way to do it..."
never forget rule #1, its a bad idea until I copy it. And when I do, I came up with it first. 🙂
-
2 hours ago, Berkut said:
To what exactly?
And it can't possibly be as comical as the idiots claiming it looked exactly like F-35 based on bad pictures of airframe being wrapped in tarp and being moved. They had amazing Mk3 eyesight to be able to look through the tarp, but not amazing enough to analyze that the tail configuration is completely different. Those who claimed that it looked like F-35 are nowhere to be seen now that it is unveiled... How strange.
maybe it means they're capable of shame, the group I mentioned certainly is not. besides, it will take some time for the group I mentioned to fall back to earth.
there can be more than one set of idiots. I've learned that many times
-
Painting definitely... once I realized that paying in sweat and time with masking meant big smiles later with great paint, I started to like masking...
(I'm in therapy, and under great supervision, so you need not worry about me.)
One of the big things I learned in life is if you learn to enjoy the process, rather than the payoff, you get more payoffs.
-
The Russian/east bloc responses I've seen on the internet have been pretty comical
-
5 hours ago, habu2 said:
B-52 crews everywhere are lol at these comparisons....
If they're laughing its comfortably after the more modern bombers have created a permissive environment for them to operate over.
2 hours ago, GreyGhost said:So, the F-35 has a shelf life of 25* more years then ...
-Gregg
*If going by production first flight, prototype first flight, its 20 years.
its a fine guess but the timeline is well beyond 25 years in all the plans. Plans change of course, but as of now its the 2070s. Remember that in order to christen the airplane a "trillion dollar fighter" they had to take the timeline out to the 2070s...
F-35 Will Fly Until 2070 — Six Years Longer Than Planned
/arc-anglerfish-arc2-prod-mco.s3.amazonaws.com/public/PW5RH4IJEFBUFFJKWJMSN3OIBE.jpg)
An F-35A takes off from Hill Air Force Base, Utah, March 14, 2014. After getting upgrades, the F-35A is on its way back to Nellis AFB, Nev. (U.S. Air Force photo by Airman 1st Class Joshua D. King/ RELEASED)
WASHINGTON — The F-35 joint strike fighter will fly until 2070, reflecting a decision by the US armed services to extend the operational life of the fleet by six years.
All three services that operate the F-35 — the US Air Force, US Navy and US Marine Corps — increased the total flight hours for the fleet by 1.6 million, F-35 Joint Program Office Chief Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan told reporters March 24 at the Pentagon. Of the total, the Air Force added 1.3 million flight hours, while the Navy added 300,000 flight hours, according to the JPO.
The Air Force extended the life of each F-35A jet by two years, adding six years in total to the program, according to the JPO. This effectively means the JSF will fly until 2070, instead of 2064 as planned.
This extension translated into an addition of $45 billion in operating and support (O&S) costs to the 2015 estimate, masking a 2 to 4 percent drop in real O&S costs, Bogdan stressed. Without this extension, F-35 life cycle O&S costs would have decreased by about $22 billion from the 2014 estimate, he said.
From 2014 to 2015, the Pentagon's latest Selected Acquisition Report shows the total cost to operate and support the F-35's over its service life has increased by $107.3 billion in then-year dollars, or adjusted for inflation. The 2014 estimate for the 55 years of expected F-35 service to 2064 was $1016.5 billion, or just over $1 trillion; the now 60-year estimate to keep F-35s flying until 2070 is $1123.8 billion.
-
We like to give leadership a hard time a lot, but this will definitely fix morale. no need to make tangible, important decisions about that anymore
.
-
On 4/13/2021 at 8:49 PM, dylan said:
Can't afford and won't spend the money are 2 very different things. Canada has a lot of money for "other stuff"
and IMO we don't need much in the way of 5th gen stuff ....yet. we need an interceptor for NORAD commitment and a bomb truck to drop ordy on people 2 days after the U.S. starts a fight.
5th generation is entry standard now. This would be like saying they don't need a missile equipped CF-18.. since missiles are the 4th gen stuff they don't need. just guns and some clouds like dad needed. If you're doing NORAD, you're doing 5th gen because thats what's carrying the weight now and in the future.
I know Canada puts off the future as long as possible, but its here unfortunately
-
On 5/10/2021 at 10:17 AM, GreyGhost said:
Don't forget the AV-8B Harrier II.
Like I said, its not without precedent ...
-Gregg
On 5/10/2021 at 1:01 PM, wxltcol said:And Lightning II, the F-35..
and both of those are examples of names tainted with STOVL. how gauche
On 5/9/2021 at 1:20 PM, Thadeus said:Oh, ok. So it means my local flyboys could still fly that F-15's I thought of as a kid? Nice.
1941
1981
.png?itok=CHDWyj-c)
2021
Please note all images separated by 40 years.
-
Quote
Can't afford and won't spend the money are 2 very different things. Canada has a lot of money for "other stuff"
and IMO we don't need much in the way of 5th gen stuff ....yet. we need an interceptor for NORAD commitment and a bomb truck to drop ordy on people 2 days after the U.S. starts a fight.
Indeed, they've managed to conjure up over a billion dollars in hornets and hornet upgrades the last few years, and now the CF-18 contract is 14 billion as opposed to the 9 billion it was for 65 F-35s. This is fascinating when one considers that 9 billion was "too much"
if you want to stay compatible then its basically 5th generation or bust, and theres no interceptor on offer anyway. You should really read the above. NORAD commitment is basically 5th Gen commitment. No amount of ramming new avionics into a Hornet or god help you a Gripen is going to get to that.
I think a lot of people think its all about "stealth", its not. Its all about the electronics--partnership, compatibility, and future upgrades of electronics with the US.
In other news F-35s for the UAE appears to be a go.
Chalk another one up
-
53 minutes ago, Raceaddict said:
And yet Boeing never put them on offer...
They know Canada can't afford them and of course their entire sales pitch is that the Super Hornet is a natural growth of the Hornet, so a natural fit. Canadians can't be trusted with new technology, Its too scary and Boeing understands this. They think Canadians are children
5th Generation is for big boys!
1 hour ago, dylan said:this looks like a great replacement aircraft for our fleet of slightly used CF-18's.
its a great excuse to reset the CF-18 replacement process yet again. They'll end up rejecting the F-15 just like the good old days, but can stretch the CF-18 replacement another 5 years at least. How would you like to have them finally starting to be phased out by 2032 or so?
3 hours ago, Mr Matt Foley said:You nailed it with that comment. We should have 3 x as many and far fewer F-35's . It is a damn shame.
3 X times of what? I have to know what we are talking about before I naturally disagree
-
On 4/10/2021 at 8:20 AM, 11bee said:
Nice looking decals. Question - are these new jets replacing C-models or will they be used to replace or augment Strike Eagle squadrons. Do these jets even have A2G capabilities?
I think the current plan is C's possibly Es in the future. They should probably replace any A-10s the F-35 doesn't replace first.
Oh yeah, I went there
-
On 4/10/2021 at 9:25 AM, parche said:
Thanks. The new CO makes me look super short. He's 6-6.
It was an honor to have the reins of the Bad fool Battle Bass for a while.
Dave
6' 6" and hes in submarines? Oh lawd
Congrats on a successful command, but I also understand that bittersweet feeling
-
On 4/11/2021 at 4:52 PM, hemspilot said:
No internal weapons carriage and smaller than the F-22 judging by the chosen powerplants.
A glorified Eurofighter, but its fairly rapid development shows the South Korean Aviation industry impressive capabilities.
By comparison Japan has yet to finalize their F-2 replacement fighter.
That's not bad at all if so.
Revell 1/32 Tomcats, big lot, jigsaw puzzle style.
in Buy and sell - add scale to your title
Posted
Bump