Niels
-
Content Count
2,480 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Calendar
Posts posted by Niels
-
-
FS36375 should be quite close in my opinion
-
Nice!
-
6 hours ago, Thadeus said:
They even have the second nicest scheme for the Viper, second only to the Polish AF 😉
Agreed 😆
The Chilean Vipers are ex-RNLAF, so naturally they are similar as they came with the chute when delivered.The design of the RoCAF and RNLAF/RNOAF parachute housing are the same - there is no size difference. They both have the A/B tail, so hence the same.
The chute inside might be different in design, but again - the housing is not for the A/B tailbases nor the C/D tailbases. -
The attachment point of the chute is what will matter, not the housing itself. That is but a shell/enclosure. Not 100% sure, but believe the attachment point of the chute is in the tailbase structure, not the housing itself.
-
Very cool! 😄
-
@Thadeus, you can't compare dragchute housing on the F-16C/D with the F-16A/B - they have totally different design due to different tailbases and thus little in common.
Over on F-16.net there is lots of information to clarify, but in short, on the F-16A/B the RNoAF required parachutes to break landing on icy runways. The Belgians adopted this, but instead of drag chute used this for ECM. The RNLAF copied the Norwegian solution, so also did Indonesia on their F-16A/B fleet. Later, these got reinforcements around the rear with a "zig-zag" pattern. The RoCAF (Taiwan) and Venezuelan is modeled on the same - but the Norwegians did it first 🙂. Lastly there are some differences on where the RWR is placed on the tail of the A/B fleet depending on user, but this doesn't change the base design of the housing.The Greeks were the first to adopt the parachute housing on their F-16C/D Block 30 and later 50/52's, and at the rear it is quite similar to the Norwegian, while the "front" is fused into the more squarish tailbase of the F-16C/D. The F-16D block 52's also got the the "humpback" similar to the Polish ones, but otherwise similar to the C.
The broadened tailbase of the C/D was originally intended for ALQ-162(?) ECM gear, however the USAF/ANG/AFRC never adopted this as originally intended, but the broad tailbase became the standard for the C/D fleet. Most users outside the US have however adopted the parachute housing, mostly for parachutes while the Israeli use it for ECM gear instead. Türkiye has a mix of jets with and without, still used for parachute when fitted. Again, there are differences between users on placement of the RWR, but the base design is the same.Both Reid Air Publishing and Daco has good detail books on the F-16 highlighting what I have described above.
-
-
Oooh, looking forward to June release and Dark Viper 5 🤩
-
Very nice! These will be available in 1/48 aswell, right?
-
Gents, take the discussion elsewhere, it doesn't belong in this topic.
-
Here's a selection of alternatives for you;
reskit mig-29* 1:48 - Scale Modeling Search (scalemates.com) -
Being manufactured in Turkey doesn't mean that the base design is any different. It is common that same design manufactured at different locations receive different "part numbers" to distinguish where it is produced. After all, there is only so many differences you can make to an F-16C/D tail. Interestingly enough, even if the Turkish are manufactured locally, not all Turkish F-16 have these intstalled?
-
Thanks for confirming @Cliff C
-
Very nice!
Is the cockpit from Ultra fixing the shape issues of the HB kit?
-
I have the Kittyhawk F-35C and would welcome a proper decal sheet. The USN is slow in onboarding the F-35C compared to the USMC and USAF btw.
-
Thanks @Laurent, learn something new every day 🙂
-
It can essentially carry everything the E could, except that which required radar guiding as the RD never had this. However the mission of the RD is reccon, hence likely hardly ever carried much other than fuel tanks and Sidewinder/Mica missiles.
-
Yes.
-
46 minutes ago, Stefan buysse said:
I would not know where to find a decent FSD or prototype F-16 kit, but that sheet did rather well.
Tamiya's original F-16 is the one that comes the closest. If I remember correctly, it even had the split front wheelbay doors?
-
Don't get me wrong, I like the markings so will look forward to this. Throw in some F-4D's in SEA and you have a ball 🙂
-
1 hour ago, Corey said:
I would like to take this time to suggest NJ ANG F-4E’s from the 141st TFS, 108th TFW with the fantastic tiger art on the nose.
Already done by SpeedHunter Graphics, although OOP
-
Wow! Very nice!
-
-
Provided it's all dark marknigs on the Have Glas subjects, you could call it "Double Dark Vipers" 😜
Legion Pod: Are there Foreign Users?
in Jet Modeling
Posted
Answer is no. Honestly I don't see it in widespread US use either? I pressume that some of the functionality can also be covered by regular targeting pods, hence not the same need as if it would have been had you not had a targeting pod. Mainly seen on test jets and/or aggressors, but might have missed some users?