Jump to content

squezzer

Members
  • Content Count

    248
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by squezzer

  1. He would have try to get airborne again. In case of failure, he would have crashed. It happen sometimes. Since Newton invented gravity years ago, things tend to fall back to ground after a trip in the air...I m kidding of course but 100% safety doesn't not exist, most of the people in aircraft business are involved and well trained, the world safety record is quite good and far better the road safety record just to mention one, even in countries with a strong law enforcement system. This said, human beings can fail or can do stupid things, accidents happen after a very unlikely combination of
  2. It is a fact that modern aicraft design and assistance systems push the limits but the limits exist anyway...
  3. Sure but considering the extra weight and technical complexity, I guess that the gains of that system were not sufficient to be widely used on most of aircraft types.
  4. I don't know the specifics for the A380 but most of the time, the rudder and the front landing gear are actuated together by the pedals as soon as the front landing gear oleo is compressed. The amount of control respectively provided by each one depends on the airspeed. At high rolling speed, whithout rudder authority, the front wheels would rotate and skid and the plane would roll on its side instead of making a flat turn on its wheels.
  5. On the other hand, crosswinds or shearwinds are sometime very local phenomenon which axis is not parallel to the main wind axis the runway is supposed to be parallel to.
  6. Actually, the landing gear was designed and built by Safran Landing Systems, formerly Messier-Bugatti, one the world leaders since years in that business.
  7. Affirm...my 27th St Eloi is coming (Nenesse)
  8. It said in the comments under the video: crosswinds, nothing to see with the aircraft.😉
  9. It was designated F1-E. There is not much about it on the internet as it has been a single prototype. I ve read it was longer (50ft 11.5in) than the regular F1-C (49ft 26in), the air intakes and their shock cones were enlarged and the landing gear was strengthened. From the pictures, the nose cone / fuselage junction was slanted and the nose itself seems more ogival to me. The rest of the airframe including the wings is pretty much the same as the standard F1-C. I think that you best bet is to seek for articles and pictures of Le Bourget airshow of 1975. As Patrick l'Arpete wrote it in t
  10. I don't know what these primers are made of but it not because they are odorless that they are not harmfull. Carbon monoxyde is odorless but it kills you. Just my 2 cents
  11. I think it is a very good idea but it was intended to celebrate the centennial of the battles, there is a mistake. The take of the fort of Douaumont was a sequel of the battle of Verdun an took place in 1916. Caporetto was in 1917 an so on. No offense here, I just point out something may be wrong according to the initial intents. As I do not how to contact the site owner, I post here. ;)/>
  12. It was not a sarcasm, just an information to point that there was a major inaccuracy on this boxart. I did not link this inaccuracy to the quality of the kit itself.
  13. You are right, it seems that the missiles are 9-L. We never had this type in the french air force inventory. Moreover, the Mirage is in NMF finish, it means that the action on the boxart takes place in the 60's as the Mirage weared a NATO (kind of) camouflage circa 1970. The 9-L entered in service at the end of the 70s. Therefore, Mirage IIIE in NMF should be equipped with 9-B winders or Matra 530 on the centerline. The MAGIC I was introduced circa 1976.
  14. The question of the underside color of the Mirage F1 is a difficult one. In the french air force documents, it is referred to as metallic grey but when you look at the real thing, it looks more grey than metallic when a little weathered, so there is no definitive answer on the way to replicate this shade. The other thing which is incorrect in the posts above is the statement about the fuel tank. The big centerline fuel tank , sometime referred to as the iraqi tank (2200 liters) can be hung under the F1 CR and not only the F1 CT. This capability was added to the CR during major ovrhauls at the
  15. The color of MAGIC I was white, the MAGIC Il was light gray from the factory. It was delivered at the beginning of the 80's. You can find white front sections on grey rocket engine. They were made of guidance sections from MAGIC I and propellers from MAGIC ll. They were fired for training purpose until the beginning of the 21 st century As the Mirage F1 CR entered into service In 1983, it would carry grey MAGIC II. The early sidewinders were used by the Frenchs prior to the MAGIC.
  16. I don t think so. The Nesher is more or less a copy of thr Mirage V with an Atar engine. The Kfir is inspired by the Mirage but with a J-79 engine. The fuselage lenght and the wingspan seems to be different, then I assume there is a lot of shape differences between the two aircraft.
  17. I am pretty sure the 9x was not in use on the F-14. Someone has more info? The other important info you have to give is the scale. Regards
  18. Model Alliance sheet nº72138 has a large selection of Jag from all the users of this wonderful aircraft, including Nigeria of course. I have this sheet in my stock and I find it very nice. You can get it from Hannants for around 15 $.
  19. The kuwaiti F-18 have the search light too. What about the Academy offer? I read here and there their F-18s are quite good but I dont know about the inbox details
  20. In french, the correct spelling is: vent de la mort (with no "e" in the end)
  21. Hi guys, I am after a picture of the bulkhead located behind the rear bang seat of an f-16 d blk 30. I don t think there is a huge difference between the blocks and I guess any two seater bulkhead would meet my expectation. I just need some reference to upgrade this area in a 1/48 Hasegawa kit started some 20 years ago by one of my best friends who gave it to me circa 1993 when he stopped aircraft modelling to focus on figurines. Thx
  22. Just to win the pedantic award of the week, the KC-135F does not exist. It is either C-135F with J-57 engines or C-135FR with F108-CF100 engines, the R stands for remotorise (re-engined). Unlike the KC 135, they are full cargo capable aircraft and beside the probe and drogue system used by most of the french aircraft, there are other differences. There is one air intake at he root of each wing , the KC has only one at the root of the left wing. We also use wing tip refuelling pods since 1995-96. We used the flying boom to refuel the AWACS have since 1991. Beside the 11 C-135FR, we also use
  23. I would say Douglas Escapac, just as the single seater.
×
×
  • Create New...