Jennings Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 This gets my attention! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
john53 Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 (edited) 51 FIS Roswell 1947.---John Edited July 30, 2015 by john53 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
skyhawk174 Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 I would have lost that bet of seeing this in 1/48 in plastic. I seem to recall that there are several in 1/72nd in injection plastic as well as resin. Sure was an interesting beast. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Cubs2jets Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 This gets my attention! LOL !! This from the one who thought the F-16XL and F-20 kits of "unsuccessful" airplanes were foolish! All in good fun, Jennings. :D C2j Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jennings Posted July 30, 2015 Author Share Posted July 30, 2015 I didn't say foolish. I'd put this one in the same category though - there are LOTS of other more worthy subjects out there. But I'm not looking a gift pancake in the syrup though. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
K5054NZ Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 Cool. Cool cool cool. I might have to get one. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
dnl42 Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 So, there is a 1/48 kit of the V-173 from Special Hobby. Sprue has it, so does the LHS. At least this one actually flew! <rant> And yet, no 1/48 F11F other than the FM kit or Lindbergh's F9F-9!? :explode:/> </rant> Quote Link to post Share on other sites
sharkmouth Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 Best of all, not one has mentioned the blade orientation on this test build. Regards, Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Laurent Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 Best of all, not one has mentioned the blade orientation on this test build. Perhaps people realize nowadays that test-builds are just to ensure that the fit is good enough ? Blade orientation is 75% ok. It was 100% ok in the CAD snapshots. Just a build error I believe. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
dragonlance Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 I want this one. And it will probably be cheaper then Planet Models resin. Vedran The milimeter brigade Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ReccePhreak Posted August 1, 2015 Share Posted August 1, 2015 (edited) . Edited June 19, 2016 by ReccePhreak Quote Link to post Share on other sites
chriss7606 Posted August 2, 2015 Share Posted August 2, 2015 I just read that this thing never really flew. It was the earlier version that was flight tested. So an aircraft that never flew, never entered service, and only one was actually completed is a better investment than a F11F Tiger? Ok. I really don't understand the kit making industry. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
dragonlance Posted August 2, 2015 Share Posted August 2, 2015 I'm not American and English is not my first language, but I would buy this waaay before the F11F. The world is not only the USofA. Vedran The milimeter brigade Quote Link to post Share on other sites
James Posted August 2, 2015 Share Posted August 2, 2015 (edited) I'm not American and English is not my first language, but I would buy this waaay before the F11F. The world is not only the USofA. Vedran The milimeter brigade Exactly. Too much "wahhhh they didn't make the plane I want." The rate these kits are popping out we are probably going to see every aircraft ever built, flown or conceived reproduced in plastic form. Edited August 2, 2015 by James Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jennings Posted August 2, 2015 Author Share Posted August 2, 2015 How is a 1/48 XF5U-1 analogous to a 1/32 F11F? Totally different potential markets. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Flying Pancake Posted August 2, 2015 Share Posted August 2, 2015 My username probably gives away my interest but I'm in for at least 4 of these kits. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Dmanton300 Posted August 2, 2015 Share Posted August 2, 2015 (edited) It's that heath-robinson arrestor hook set up that blows me away! Edited August 2, 2015 by Dmanton300 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jennings Posted August 2, 2015 Author Share Posted August 2, 2015 The whole idea of this thing blows me away! I'm trying to picture the meeting where the guy originally pitched the idea. :) Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Spruemeister Posted August 3, 2015 Share Posted August 3, 2015 It's just one of those planes that you have to really, really, really wish would have flown and been evaluated. It wasn't going to out perform the jets coming down the pipe, but it seems like a waste to just bust it up with a wrecking ball. The aviation enthusiast in me wishes it so. Rick L. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Flankerman Posted August 3, 2015 Share Posted August 3, 2015 I love the access ladder - more a stairway - leading to the cockpit... https://c1.staticflickr.com/7/6074/6056443490_d84b5e077b_z.jpg I can remember scratch- building one in 1/72 scale millions of years ago - IIRC I used the engine nacelles from a Meteor as a starting point. My mate John scratched the V-173 to go with it - all this before any kits were available. Ken Quote Link to post Share on other sites
CorsairMan Posted August 3, 2015 Share Posted August 3, 2015 What a wonderfully weird airplane. Strictly from the modelling perspective I think it's much more interesting than the f11. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Otto Posted August 3, 2015 Share Posted August 3, 2015 (edited) Perhaps people realize nowadays that test-builds are just to ensure that the fit is good enough ? Blade orientation is 75% ok. It was 100% ok in the CAD snapshots. Just a build error I believe. I am presuming by "orientation" it is meant that the model is showing two starboard props. Unless (which I doubt) the prop blade airfoil sections were 100% symmetrical. This aircraft had the same prop rotation configuration as the P-38 in order to attempt and nullify wing tip vortices'. This is a lot of "hoopla" for an aircraft which NEVER got off the ground. I would much rather see a model of a Moonbat or a Grizzly which were both phenomenal aircraft and both flew. The grizzly would have been lust awesome if it would have come into full production. I am not aware of any other aircraft which had two R-3350s. Moonbat Edited August 3, 2015 by Otto Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mawz Posted August 3, 2015 Share Posted August 3, 2015 I am not aware of any other aircraft which had two R-3350s. 2xR-3350 aircraft other than the Grizzly: Boeing XPBB Sea Ranger Fairchild C-119 Lockheed P2V Neptune Martin P5M Marlin Stroukoff YC-134 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Otto Posted August 3, 2015 Share Posted August 3, 2015 (edited) I did forget about the c-119, mostly because many of them also had R-4360s. But none of these could even come close to approaching 400mph like the Grizzly could.so please let me rephrase the statement to "combat aircraft" Edited August 3, 2015 by Otto Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Spruemeister Posted August 3, 2015 Share Posted August 3, 2015 A Moonbat in 1/48 injection. I would go all giddy inside. Rick L. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.