What do aviation modelers think of the latest generation of jet fighters?

Low-vis ROCKS!

Reply to
Rufus
Loading thread data ...

Wish I could. I'd love to post some pictures of my work, but sadly my digicam just isn't up to the job.

Reply to
Enzo Matrix

Now I feel I went the wrong way when I built that F-104 and painted it in Light Compass Ghost Grey years ago. Hey, it was 'new' then.

Bill Banaszak, MFE Sr.

Reply to
Mad-Modeller

by the by:

Should not the Sea Harrier FA2 already be out of service? We have an upcoming air show here in Northern Germany in August (I am scheduled for the spotters day one day before the show :-) ) with the RN having accepted the invitation and announcing a Sea Harrier to participate..(great!) Ingo

*time is an enemy*
Reply to
Ingo Degenhardt

For me, both have their very own advantages for modelling: a colourful hi viz scheme as well as a low-viz one, especially when rather heavily weathered.

*time is an enemy*
Reply to
Ingo Degenhardt

Iirc the last squadron stood down recently.

Reply to
Harro de Jong

True, a low-vis aircraft can look cool. What I meant is that when you do lots of modern jets, you can end up with a whole row of planes all looking the same. The older color schemes had a bit more variety.

Reply to
Harro de Jong

I have an April issue "Aircraft Illustrated" that said they'd be down on the 31st of March. It's amazing to me that an aircraft that seems so recent is already OS but then I remind myself that they were in on the Falklands brush-up.

Bill Banaszak, MFE Sr.

Reply to
Mad-Modeller

You have to consider that the Sea Harrier was simply a navalised first-generation Harrier of the sort that had entered service in 1969. The FA2 version had some new-build aircraft. Others were converted from low-time FRS1 airframes. Most of them were in pretty good nick. However, the problem was that there were very few of them and the RAF has not used anything similar for nearly 15 years. The infrastructure and supply costs were exorbitant, which was the real reason that they have been withdrawn.

They have been replaced by Harrier GR7s flown by naval pilots. Sadly, the GR7 does not have a radar fit and so Royal Navy ships no longer have a viable air-to-air defence. We are told that with the introduction of the Type 45 destroyers, the Navy won't *need* any defensive fighters. That sounds a little like Duncan Sandys pronouncements back in the 60s that manned fighters were obsolete and that all we needed were missiles. Look where *that* got us.

Besides, the first Type 45 was only launched at the beginning of the year and won't be in service for at least another two years. What do the Navy do in the meantime?

Reply to
Enzo Matrix

ISTR that the RN wanted to upgrade the engines, but that the FA2 airframe won't allow that (no room), so they'd have to be completely rebuilt.

Reply to
Harro de Jong

That was certainly a factor, but the fact that they were obsolete and couldn't be upgraded would not cause them to be removed from service if they were still cost-effective. That situation is pretty standard in the British armed forces. The RAF used Shackletons for 25 years after they became obsolete.

Reply to
Enzo Matrix

You think you guys have problems - you should look at the mess the RAN is in regarding those Vietnam-era Sea Sprites they bought. AU$1.1 billion project and it looks like the whole lot are completely useless and will have to be scrapped - it seems that modern avionics and prehistoric airframes just can't get along...

And the Army's Tiger helos are causing some problems as well.

RobG (The Aussie One)

Reply to
RobG

That's just the sort of crap I'd expect from a some gullible person who'll accept any innaccurate media reports.

Sure, the airframes are old but they have been totally refurbished and everything that bolts to them is brand new. And this is where the problem begins.... It's not the airframes that are faulty it's the continual failing of defence that every project has to involve some unique modification. In the case of the Seasprites it's a case of taking a proven refurbishment program and modifying it to meet some "Australianised" requirement.

I don't believe the problems being reported are quite a truthful as the media portrays. If any problems exist it will come down to the integration issues of US ordnance on a European helo, which the ADF are happily paying to have developed for the benefit of future buyers (which the ADF gains zero value from).

Of course, you could try asking Brigadeer Patch why he proclaimed the unrealistic delivery date of April 2004 "no matter what"..... Even then it was an entirely optomistic schedule based on an unproven (and now proven to be flawed) ASDEFCON process.

Reply to
The Raven

if an ac can still do it's job, is it really obsolete?

Reply to
e

Sometimes it's more a matter of the age of the aircraft. they may just be old enought ot be near the end off thier strucrual fatige life, and as such can't be operated to thier full potential.

I don't know about Sea Harriers, but an AV8B has a lot of composite parts - and there's always been a raging engineering debate as to just how to estimate the fatigue life of composites. So they may be playing conservative.

As an example, Raytheon/Beechcraft re-perchased and destroyed all of their all composite airframe Beech Starships some time ago rather than expose themselves to the continuing liability...all of them but Burt Rutan's - having met him, and after learning that it was his design, I'd speculate that he simply refused to give his up.

Reply to
Rufus

No... but the AEW Shackleton wasn't actually doing the job to the standards of the day.

Even back in the early '80s, AEW E-3s could detect incoming threats, ascertain their height, speed and bearing. The software could usually ascertain the type of aircraft, assign predicted threat levels to each contact and could also assign a sphere of probability, which can help the operator make an educated guess as to what that aircraft will do next. The data could then be downloaded directly to an intercepting aircraft.

While USAF and NATO E-3s had this capability, the RAF was relying on the AEW Shackleton to ascertain height and bearing of incoming targets. Speed had to be calculated manually by noting the time between two positions with a stopwatch. The information on each target was then relayed to the crew of the interceptor by radio, leaving the interceptor crew in the dark about target capabilities and intentions.

The Shack was still doing to job as well as it had always done. It was just responding to an '80s combat scenario in a '60s manner. That's obsolete!

Reply to
Enzo Matrix

The Sea Harrier was all-metal, like the first generation Harriers (AV-8A, GR1, GR3).

Reply to
Enzo Matrix

isn't there one other guy with his own graveyard? that was an amazing ac. is it kitted?

Reply to
e

yes, that would be the case. sad, i like the old crate. the front end looks like a house builder tacked it on.

Reply to
e

I think FA2 SHars had the last one delivered in 1988 - sounds not too old to me. (my car is from' 87 :-) I am not an expert, but their Radar seems to be quite modern and the a/c can carry the AIM-120... May be it is just a matter of cost? Ingo

*time is an enemy*
Reply to
Ingo Degenhardt

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.