- The Airfix Tribute Forum -

Richard M

walrus' build will be reported here.
_________________
Best
Rich
---------------------------

"I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate. All those moments will be lost in time... like tears in rain... Time to die."

Visit my PORTFOLIO

walrus · Posted: Fri 21 Nov 2008 02:19 am Post subject:

The proposed project would depend on the ability for the QE to be refitted with conventional launch and recovery of aircraft. i though this could be a potential problem, but:

DH764 · Posted: Fri 21 Nov 2008 15:40 pm Post subject:

This should be good !!
Navalised Tiffies....why didnt me thinks of that !!

Andy
_________________
You aint seen nothing like the Mighty Fin !!

Airfix Club Member 501279
IPMS Cleveland and UK Member

jhl1908 · Posted: Fri 21 Nov 2008 16:04 pm Post subject:

Interesting idea with great potentials.
Do you have a general outline drawing you want to share with us?

Please?

All the best from Jesper.

walrus · Posted: Fri 21 Nov 2008 16:43 pm Post subject:

Have been trawling the net and have some basic drawings. will try and concoct something when time allows.

was also thinking of a special squadron markings to celebrate the reformation of the FAA. so will try and do some artwork as well if poss

the build itself will have to be more about fun than anything else. I have realised with the Carrier and Harrier builds in GB's that doing a project that i want to get as right as possible doesn't go with getting the job done within the time frame- for me that is, as i always seem to work too slowly.

having said that- any technical suggestions would be welcome as i have very little knowledge of things like aerodynamics and avionics.

Someone (apologies for not remebering who) suggested moving the canards- and i can see why. but would that affect airflow? if i move the cockpit forward how will that affect COG. i might try to do these regardless- as an exercise in kit bashing. any thoughts are more than welcome please

XN923 · Bronze Star Joined: 16 May 2008 Posts: 1176

walrus · Posted: Fri 21 Nov 2008 18:47 pm Post subject:

XN923 · Bronze Star Joined: 16 May 2008 Posts: 1176

walrus · Posted: Fri 21 Nov 2008 23:40 pm Post subject:

XN923 · Bronze Star Joined: 16 May 2008 Posts: 1176

walrus · Posted: Sat 22 Nov 2008 17:25 pm Post subject:

Hi XN

XN923 · Bronze Star Joined: 16 May 2008 Posts: 1176

walrus · Posted: Mon 24 Nov 2008 03:20 am Post subject:

bashed up a quick concept of what changes might take place

comments suggestions welcome

thank you for your support thus far and in anticipation of its continuance

jhl1908 · Posted: Mon 08 Dec 2008 22:24 pm Post subject:

Any progress, Walrus?
Or are you: Juggling

Jesper.

walrus · Posted: Mon 08 Dec 2008 22:32 pm Post subject:

Have made some in-roads but progress has been sporadic. not taken any pics though as when do get to work i just want to crack on with it

will try and post some pics later this week.

the upper cockpit has been chopped. wings sliced for folds. cockpit painted. panel lines removed and recribed
considering where to stick the arrestor hook- (now, now-steady. i know what you are all thinking) want to try and get the cockpit stuck onto the fuselage, but the airbrake could be tricky so having a think about it.

walrus · Posted: Fri 12 Dec 2008 12:57 pm Post subject:

have made a bit of progress

Quick word on the kit. it seems to be the evaluation aircraft. detail is sparse both externally and internally. the cannon and refuel probe need to be scratch built. not all panel lines are present but might let that pass as some are in tricky places. yet to improve the seat as might use pilot- which seems well done compared to earlier figures and has a near enough representation of the helmet.

the sensor on the starboard side by the cockpit is a PIRATE which helps the landing amongst other things. this renders all my mods as superfluous - but i would argue that clear forward vision without electronic aids is still critical for carrier based oprations in case of system failure or battle damage to the PIRATE

but not sure if the cockpit should have been raised a tad more, but i wanted the radome to fit smoothly without having to radically alter the profile or the length. got away with an overhang of 6" that needed to be filled.

also might reconsider the position of the canards.

edit:please feel free to contribute thoughts- would be much appreciated

thomasweir · Posted: Fri 12 Dec 2008 14:11 pm Post subject:

Looking forward to seeing this built Walrus.

I remember reading a few years ago a Parlimentry Report where they debated on - what were the armed forces going to do if the JSF was cancelled, did not perform to spec, or if software access was not released for the computers on board thus giving the aircraft limited capabilities. This was also at the time the Sea Lords were determining the design of the Queen Elizabeth class - CTOL or STOVL.

BAe proposed a sea borne variant of the Typhoon but it was politely turned down as the re design costs and limited production run of around 60 would not be cost effective and could not be afforded. The back up aircraft was decided to be the Rafale or the F-18E/F. Single or twin were not determined at that time.

The French were hoping to use the wining ship design (If CTOL) for their second carrier build as they could not afford another nuclear Charles D Gaulle which is why the Rafale was selected. It would also save on carrier quals etc if both countries had the same basic carrier.

I think the Rafale is still the back up if the F-35B ends up been a flying brick.
The RAF would get Tranche 3 Typhoons as replacementfor their F-35Bs.

walrus · Posted: Fri 12 Dec 2008 14:26 pm Post subject:

Thanks for that Thomas

in discussions with my brother on this issue, the naval version of the Rafale was mentioned. it would make more sense as the type is proven so development costs would be a much smaller amount to convert to FAA standards if that was necessary.
i think that should have been the course of action to take as the technical problems of the vtol jsf are yet to be resolved. also there is the question of software. the US companies to my knowledge are reluctant to see the fruits of their labour go abroad. i stand to be corrected on these issues. but a tie in with the French would make more sense in my opinion.

XN923 · Bronze Star Joined: 16 May 2008 Posts: 1176

Interesting project Walrus, and some superb work so far.

Still would not surprise me if, budget issues notwithstanding, Sea Typhoons were on the agenda somewhere. Politically, going with Rafale might prove a bridge too far - both in terms of our perceived relationship with the US, and bearing in mind that BAE was going to get quite a lot of work out of it. If Rafale/Hornet was the option I can see BAE getting some fairly sizeable modification/refurb contracts by way of consolation. Could be the Phantoms all over again!

Another way to make the 'what-if' more realistic might be if the aircraft was a demonstrator for BAE pitching for export sales in competition with Rafale and Super Hornet. Bit late now, but hey.

daniel7891 · Posted: Fri 12 Dec 2008 16:48 pm Post subject:

An interesting project. looking forward to seeing your progress
_________________
Cheers

Daniel