graves_09

Comparing cost estimates of a proven platform with 15+ years operation experience vs. a platform still in DT is comparing apples to oranges. Not saying it's wrong, just far more unknowns and variables in the F-35 life cycle cost analysis than one for the SH. Based on LM'S history of overly optimistic JSF cost estimates, I'd take that ANAO study with a LARGE grain of salt.

Unless something changes drastically, the Navy is not giving up the SH anytime soon. Growler will be around even longer (Read:parts commonality with SH). The proposed FY18 SH buy is meant to replace early lot SH that prematurely reached end of life. Legacy was never meant to fly past 6000 hours but look what's being done now...full center barrel replacements. Legacy SLEP/SLAP has grown far beyond what anyone ever planned, so never say never. Let me remind you that all of this was made possible by massive delays in JSF and unplanned operations in Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria (I'm sure that w

Not exactly, they are shifting their focus to supporting SH rather than building it. There are still lots more dollars to be made from SH, so buyers will definitely not be left with an unsupported aircraft as you are suggesting. Besides the majority of profits on A/c are made AFTER the sale not the sale itself. I do think Boeing is being short cited in giving up on competing for any new fighter production. After the F-18 F15 are retired they will have nothing left and all corporate knowledge will be lost forever.

As far as who comes up with the ideas, it can be maintanence, pilots, engineering, contractors government. Either way the idea needs to be vetted before going out and doing it. Even before a test flight, tons of work is done in modeling and simulation, bench top testing, installed ground testing etc. Just getting a test plan approved takes months of writing and reviews. The days of bolting on a new part and flying a long past.

From Navy prospective, any mods done to aircraft must have an approved flight clearance. At a minimum a flight clearance requires a review by all effected technical authorities who sign off and accept the change (and risk if something goes wrong). It can grow to involve multiple dedicated test flights and take years to approve. Any mods without a flight clearance leave the user/maintainer directly responsible if something goes wrong. Not many people would be willing to step out on that ledge alone...

The biggest difference in the A vs C cockpit are the analog vs digital fuel displays, which didn't get upgraded in the A+. Much of the other changes will not be noticed by the modeler.

Proof of what exactly? That 5th gen fighters can operate next to advanced air defense networks when not actively trying to engage aircraft? By that math so can F-18s, F-16s, B-1s etc. What this all boils down to is the same decision we make when we buy ANY technology (phone, computer, car, aircraft), "do I get what is cheap and available now knowing it will be obsolete soon and have to spend more money later, or do I wait and buy something more expensive and save money/have more capability in the long term." I prefer the latter option myself, but each country has its own elected governme

And the Academy award for longest post goes to....

In this case Tamiya isn't necessary the best. It is an old kit that is not up to modern standards. The cockpit has no detail (decals only) and the kit is a mix of raised and engraved panel lines. Large parts of the fuseloge need to be rescribed. To represent a 1980s tomcat you'll want the original VF211 or 1994 boxing. You can usually find these for around $ 100 on ebay or personal sales. I'm not sure if the black knights boxing can build an early tomcat. I know it was updated for "bombcat" parts/weapons. Definitely not worth paying $150+ or whatever retail price is for this kit. Trum

First time I've heard that designation used. VMFA-115 flew A+ so maybe it's a miss print? The picture is definitely a late lot charlie. If there are C+ upgrades, most will be unnoticed by modelers.

Great! I just ordered some.

Thanks for the tips guys. Can I assume that it drys hard enough to scribe panel lines?

Gun vents, yes most had been upgraded around mid 1990s. BOL, maybe - the rails were interchangeable so usually deployed squadrons had them but RAG squadrons may not. Check references of a particular aircraft/time period to be sure.

I'm working on converting a 1/48 Hobby Boss A-6E to an A-6F. One of the largest differences is fatter "bulged" intakes to accommodate the F404 engines. Near as i can tell the thickest part needs to be about 7/16 inch bigger and tapers to flush with the current intakes. I planned to use putty to sculpt the new contours but I'm not sure this is the best approach. Will that much putty be stable? Will it crack over time or melt the underling plastic? I've got 3M acyrl green, Tamiya light putty and Mr Surfacer at my disposal. Any suggestions on what I should use? (I'm leaning toward the acry

It isn't an aircraft physical limitation, it is the effects of a sonic boom over populated areas. I think his question was would this be an except to those regulations.

No, standard JDAM, 500 lbs and 2000 lbs respectively.

Most definitely an AIM-120. The later versions have "clipped" fins to fit on platforms with internal weapons bays.

It reminds me of the small yappy ankle biter dogs, that feel the need to bark incencently at everyone because they need to show how tough they are. Whereas a bigger dog just looks at them and walks away knowing he could easily break them.

Looks to be more than an isolated incident. http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/16/politics/russian-jet-barrel-rolled-us-aircraft/index.html

Actually if you use the kit intakes the demarcation line is the seem line between the forward and aft section. If you dont mind dealing with the seem inside the intakes, you can paint the white and gray sections before mating them together, no masking. This is one reason I prefer the kit intakes over the seemless. Pick you poison.

They had to remove the dog due to copyright issues. It's currently being reworked.

Any pics you can share?

Very nice. I especially like the weather effects. The landing gear look like the real deal with the paint effects and scratch building.

I'm excited if it is a new kit. Hopefully cheaper and better than the trumpy kit.Althought, it seems strange to use a competitors kit to announce your own new product. Would Ford use a Chevy as a place holder for their new car?

It says "new tool" but the AIM9X on the wing tips look suspiciously like the ones from Trumpeter kits. Hope I'm wrong...