In late 1952, Northrop started a design study for a simple, lightweight, supersonic fighter aircraft, the N-102 Fang. The project was an attempt to tackle the growing weight, complexity and cost of fighter aircraft. USAF did in the end chose the Lockheed F-104 as a replacement for the F-100. But Northrop stuck to the idea of a lightweight fighter aircraft and in the following years it developed into the F-5 series.
FANG 00.jpg
FANG 01.jpg
FANG 02.jpg
But what-if the Fang had been the choice of USAF. Then Fang would have been produced in the thousands and have seen service with myriads of air forces.
My build will be a re-engine from four engines to one engine, as the build will be based on the wing (and maybe some other pieces) of a 1/144 Academy B-58A Hustler. This will be supplemented with whatever I can find on my scrapyard.
Fang 03.jpg
<popcorn>
Quote from: zenrat on July 25, 2023, 04:04:33 AM<popcorn>
Me too, that Fang's an interesting and elegant shape. :thumbsup:
This im gonna like right room then get go 😁🤙
Fantastic! A very sexy looking aircraft!
You could do one as a developed version with a larger nose for a radar and other bits like what happened to the F-16 and F-18.
I have a small scale Hustler too and this is a great project for it. Another for the to do list.
This is a lot more than a re-engining project. l look forward to seeing it cone together. :thumbsup:
Oh, that's a sexy looking aircraft. I' m following to see how you're going to tackle the fuselage. Obvious choice to use a b-58 wing as it's a good start.
David aka 63CPE
Quote from: PR19_Kit on July 25, 2023, 04:50:29 AMQuote from: zenrat on July 25, 2023, 04:04:33 AM<popcorn>
Me too, that Fang's an interesting and elegant shape. :thumbsup:
Ditto - cute li'l thing...
What engine did it have? J79?
Quote from: kerick on July 25, 2023, 11:00:40 PMWhat engine did it have? J79?
You are spot on - A General Electric J79-GE-1 with 9.300 lbs thrust dry - 14.400 lbs thrust with afterburner.
Fuselage? Ye olde KP Su-25 Frog foot. Looks to have the same slab sided fuselage and the KP kit has separate engines. Plastic is quite thick IIRC, so that may help.
First step in the build is the conversion of the wing. The trailing edge of the N-102 wing formed a straight line.
Fang 04.JPG
Can I suggest something along those lines?
Quote from: Zero-Sen on February 11, 2018, 11:16:01 AMSome scale-o-rama with two J79 in a single engine pod, inspired by the B-58 used as a flying testbed for the GE J-93 ...
(https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/xq90/924/UoUQhN.png)
I wasn't aware of this project, it's a very elegant design :thumbsup:
The wing of the 1/144 B-58 is now turned into the shape of the 1/72 Northrop FANG. The fin of the B-58 is already nearly in the shape of the FANG and only needs a few adjustments.
Fang 05.JPG
Very sort of similar to what I did with my build on a beast like this Mat.
I used the entire B-58 wing with fuselage minus the cockpits for a build I called the Python.
This is different to mine tho and I'm liking where it's going ;D
Quote from: Wardukw on August 20, 2023, 10:55:33 AMVery sort of similar to what I did with my build on a beast like this Mat.
I used the entire B-58 wing with fuselage minus the cockpits for a build I called the Python.
This is different to mine tho and I'm liking where it's going ;D
Did you keep all four engines?
Quote from: mat on August 20, 2023, 12:16:19 PMQuote from: Wardukw on August 20, 2023, 10:55:33 AMVery sort of similar to what I did with my build on a beast like this Mat.
I used the entire B-58 wing with fuselage minus the cockpits for a build I called the Python.
This is different to mine tho and I'm liking where it's going ;D
Did you keep all four engines?
Nope 😄..I cut the wings in half and built the new engines into the wings then blended them together.
Since it's a pain to post a link with a phone is ya scroll thru the Aircraft pages you'll find the build :thumbsup:
The first step in creating the lower fuselage. It's based on a 16 mm plastic tube used in electrical installations. It can only be bought in lengths of two meters. So now I have enough for a lifetime of conversions.
Fang 06.JPG
Same as the engines on mine Mat.. electrical tubing from our pile here at the camp .
Luckily I can buy it by the metre here if I need to.
In my immense scrapyard I have found some pieces to be incorporated in the fuselage. The pieces come from a old, crashed Airfix F-5E.
Fang 07.JPG
Quote from: mat on August 26, 2023, 04:51:37 AMIn my immense scrapyard I have found some pieces to be incorporated in the fuselage. The pieces come from a old, crashed Airfix F-5E.
Fang 07.JPG
Score!!! ;D ;D
That's what we say here in NZ when we find something we knew we had but couldn't find...or...when we get something super useful for bugger all coins 😉
Yep... this is coming along very nicely
Are you going to area rule the fuselage? It was discovered in April 1952 so possibly. The lack of it nearly killed the F-102 as it just would not go supersonic. The Fang looks supersonic just sitting there.
Northrops mock-up from 1953 don't show any area rule of the fuselage. I guess that Northrops engineers just hadn't heard the news at that time. As they further developed the light weight fighter concept area rule came into the picture and the end result of the development line (the T-38 and F-5) got a lot of area rule. As I stick to the original proposal, there will be no area rule on my N-102 FANG.
FANG 02.jpg
The engine/fuselage have now been glued to the wings. More PSR ahead.
Fang 08.JPG
Fang 09.JPG
You don't mind making a whole lot of work for yourself, do you! :o :o
Quote from: mat on September 17, 2023, 10:30:09 AMThe engine/fuselage have now been glued to the wings. More PSR ahead.
Fang 08.JPG
Fang 09.JPG
Mat we would call that a massive understatement ;D ;D
Quote from: Old Wombat on September 17, 2023, 04:50:11 PMYou don't mind making a whole lot of work for yourself, do you! :o :o
I'm used to make a lot of work for myselff. Put my first aircraft kit together about 60 years ago - An Airfix P-38 - Lots og glue and fingerprints all over the plane. And to make that mess into a decent model took a lot of work.
The FANG now got a front fuselage made up of pieces from a long deceased Airfix F-5E.
Fang 10.JPG
The rest of the fuselage have now been added, and it's made up of more stuff from the Academy 1/144 B-58.
Fang 11.JPG
Fang 12.JPG
Quote from: mat on August 27, 2023, 01:56:24 AMNorthrops mock-up from 1953 don't show any area rule of the fuselage. I guess that Northrops engineers just hadn't heard the news at that time. As they further developed the light weight fighter concept area rule came into the picture and the end result of the development line (the T-38 and F-5) got a lot of area rule. As I stick to the original proposal, there will be no area rule on my N-102 FANG.
FANG 02.jpg
I keep looking at this pic trying to figure out what is the large object beneath the left wing of the FANG. It looks to be the size of the truck but streamlined like part of a fuselage. Plus how many different machine tools are along the walls. Two drill presses, a table saw, a floor mounted joiner, a shaper or giant router table and a big band saw. No safety devices on any of them.
Quote from: kerick on September 18, 2023, 08:13:24 AMQuote from: mat on August 27, 2023, 01:56:24 AMNorthrops mock-up from 1953 don't show any area rule of the fuselage. I guess that Northrops engineers just hadn't heard the news at that time. As they further developed the light weight fighter concept area rule came into the picture and the end result of the development line (the T-38 and F-5) got a lot of area rule. As I stick to the original proposal, there will be no area rule on my N-102 FANG.
FANG 02.jpg
Plus how many different machine tools are along the walls. Two drill presses, a table saw, a floor mounted joiner, a shaper or giant router table and a big band saw. No safety devices on any of them.
NO SAFETY DEVICES. That were the good old days. We rode MCs without helmet, there were no safety belts in the cars and everyone were fixing the electricity in the house without any training. <_<
The thing under the wing looks to have windows. Could it be a mockup of a proposed interior layout of something larger?
Yes ! She's really coming along now ! Great job. Sush a neat little subject :wub:
Looking really good :thumbsup:
Quote from: mat on September 18, 2023, 08:47:34 AMQuote from: kerick on September 18, 2023, 08:13:24 AMQuote from: mat on August 27, 2023, 01:56:24 AMNorthrops mock-up from 1953 don't show any area rule of the fuselage. I guess that Northrops engineers just hadn't heard the news at that time. As they further developed the light weight fighter concept area rule came into the picture and the end result of the development line (the T-38 and F-5) got a lot of area rule. As I stick to the original proposal, there will be no area rule on my N-102 FANG.
FANG 02.jpg
Plus how many different machine tools are along the walls. Two drill presses, a table saw, a floor mounted joiner, a shaper or giant router table and a big band saw. No safety devices on any of them.
NO SAFETY DEVICES. That were the good old days. We rode MCs without helmet, there were no safety belts in the cars and everyone were fixing the electricity in the house without any training. <_<
Quote from: zenrat on September 19, 2023, 04:19:44 AMThe thing under the wing looks to have windows. Could it be a mockup of a proposed interior layout of something larger?
I have found another picture of the FANG mockup. In the right corner you see "The Thing"
N-102.jpg
Looks like several other parts to the Thing along the wall. And the Thing appears to have an inlet underneath.
And now back to the FANG. She is looking more cool with each pic. Loving this! Paint scheme thoughts yet? Interesting how it appears the builders used wire to simulate the canopy.
Quote from: kerick on September 19, 2023, 09:21:27 AMLooks like several other parts to the Thing along the wall. And the Thing appears to have an inlet underneath.
And now back to the FANG. She is looking more cool with each pic. Loving this! Paint scheme thoughts yet? Interesting how it appears the builders used wire to simulate the canopy.
I have some paint in mind. The FANG were designed for a USAF requirement. It lost out to the Lockheed Model 083, which were put in production as F-104. But what-if the FANG had been chosen. The F-104 served in 15 air forces, and the further development of the FANG - the F-5 - served in 35 air forces.
At the moment I sway between som Top Gun scheme or one of the more exotic F-5/F-104 users. In the late 1960s my local air force - Flyvevåbnet (RDAF) - painted their F-104Gs in an overall camo of SM67. That wonderfull green colour, which efter a few months started to turn into any colour you can image between green and light purple grey. So maybe my FANG will end up the the colours of the squadron I served in i the 1970s - ESK 730.
Quote from: kerick on September 19, 2023, 09:21:27 AMLooks like several other parts to the Thing along the wall. And the Thing appears to have an inlet underneath.
There a some other pieces at the wall to the left of The Thing. Just a thought: Could it be some pieces of a mock-up for SM-62 Snark?
Quote from: mat on September 19, 2023, 02:22:09 PMQuote from: kerick on September 19, 2023, 09:21:27 AMLooks like several other parts to the Thing along the wall. And the Thing appears to have an inlet underneath.
There a some other pieces at the wall to the left of The Thing. Just a thought: Could it be some pieces of a mock-up for SM-62 Snark?
No idea.....
Interested to see this green paint! Will it be weathered to the purple grey?
Here are some examples of what the SM67 paint would turn into being exposed to the sun and the scandinavian weather.
R-703.jpg
R-755.jpg
G-799.jpg
The Danes could always be guaranteed to come up with almost impossible schemes to, model! :o
Quote from: PR19_Kit on September 20, 2023, 04:26:03 AMThe Danes could always be guaranteed to come up with almost impossible schemes to, model! :o
Not on purpose. Just by negligence. Or, as they would put it: "why do this when there's a beer waiting in the fridge.. " ;D
Quote from: Pellson on September 20, 2023, 05:29:31 AMQuote from: PR19_Kit on September 20, 2023, 04:26:03 AMThe Danes could always be guaranteed to come up with almost impossible schemes to, model! :o
Not on purpose. Just by negligence. Or, as they would put it: "why do this when there's a beer waiting in the fridge.. " ;D
Now't wrong with that :cheers:
Quote from: NARSES2 on September 20, 2023, 06:28:53 AMQuote from: Pellson on September 20, 2023, 05:29:31 AMQuote from: PR19_Kit on September 20, 2023, 04:26:03 AMThe Danes could always be guaranteed to come up with almost impossible schemes to, model! :o
Not on purpose. Just by negligence. Or, as they would put it: "why do this when there's a beer waiting in the fridge.. " ;D
Now't wrong with that :cheers:
..which is why I'm quite fond of Mrs P's Danish relatives.. ;D
Recreating that weathering would be quite a challenge. Some of it looks like the overall paint faded then someone came along with a spray gun and touched up the panel lines with original color paint. Lots of Army helicopters look like that and some Navy aircraft after a long time at sea. The underside must stay more original as the landing gear door looks new. Better be a large scale model!
I thought they must have pre-shaded them all........................ ;)
I love the look of that 104 ..I have a Hasegawa F-104 :wacko:
Man I would need a heap of pics of that :o
Quote from: PR19_Kit on September 20, 2023, 02:20:07 PMI thought they must have pre-shaded them all........................ ;)
And then got bored and went for a pint ;)
Quote from: Wardukw on September 20, 2023, 09:50:13 PMI love the look of that 104 ..I have a Hasegawa F-104 :wacko:
Man I would need a heap of pics of that :o
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fb/Lockheed_%28Canadair%29_F-104G_Starfighter_%28CL-90%29%2C_Denmark_-_Air_Force_AN0992810.jpg)
I found more pics but they wouldn't copy over. This would be quite a challenge!
I always thought this paint weathering looked like it had just rained and was not quite dried up.
Now for this one you could paint the purple grey and then touch up the panel lines with a tiny bit of green. Even the formerly black code on the side has faded to grey.
(https://media.abpic.co.uk/pictures/full_size_0341/1511080-large.jpg)
Here's a site with bunches of pics, even one in the rain. That's all, I promise.
https://abpic.co.uk/pictures/search?type=Lockheed+F-104&operator=Royal+Danish+Air+Force&country=Denmark&date_taken=&information=&tag_fields=%5B%22type%22%5D
Ken mate I'm pretty sure they did use waster based paint...it's like they just been abandoned and been sitting for decades..not in active service :o
Quote from: Wardukw on September 21, 2023, 12:20:04 PMKen mate I'm pretty sure they did use waster based paint...it's like they just been abandoned and been sitting for decades..not in active service :o
Well, in fact, while not water based, the paint used was bad quality, and it didn't get any better as the Danes kept (and still keep) all fighters outside all year round, i.e no hangars. However, later on, they replaced the fading matt paint with a gloss version that aged much better - and that is very well matched with Humbrol 116 plus a layer of Klear.. ;)
IMG_4459.jpeg
Oh, that's VERY smart! :thumbsup:
Quote from: PR19_Kit on September 21, 2023, 04:12:06 PMOh, that's VERY smart! :thumbsup:
Damn near took the words out of my mouth Kit..man that is very very nice 🙂
The complete opposite to how I like my aircraft :wacko: ;D
That's air show pretty!
That's worth searching for some decals......... :thumbsup:
Quote from: Pellson on September 20, 2023, 05:29:31 AMQuote from: PR19_Kit on September 20, 2023, 04:26:03 AMThe Danes could always be guaranteed to come up with almost impossible schemes to, model! :o
Not on purpose. Just by negligence. Or, as they would put it: "why do this when there's a beer waiting in the fridge.. " ;D
That... sounds very Antipodean to my ears... ;)
Quote from: Rick Lowe on September 21, 2023, 10:01:41 PMQuote from: Pellson on September 20, 2023, 05:29:31 AMQuote from: PR19_Kit on September 20, 2023, 04:26:03 AMThe Danes could always be guaranteed to come up with almost impossible schemes to, model! :o
Not on purpose. Just by negligence. Or, as they would put it: "why do this when there's a beer waiting in the fridge.. " ;D
That... sounds very Antipodean to my ears... ;)
Great minds think alike, and all that.. ;)
Quote from: kerick on September 20, 2023, 02:16:51 PMRecreating that weathering would be quite a challenge.
I tried my luck on a SAAB RF-35 Draken and a Hunter F. 51 some years ago. The Hunters faded more evenly than the Drakens. The Hunters were in service at ESK 724 until march 1974. At that time they were rather outdated but still great for low-level-dogfighting. ESK 724 were based at Skrydstrup AB, where ESK 730 (my squadron) were the neighbours. 730 flew F-100s, which were big, heavy and needed almost the whole runway to get airborne. The Hunter-boys liked to show off, so they got airborne using less than a third of the runway. Then they would quicly retract the undercarriage and make a sharp low-level turn, so they would pass over the squadron area of 730. Just to show, that they were the real fighter pilots.
Fang 13.JPG
The FANG have made some progress. But still a lot of PSR to be done.
Fang 14.JPG
Fang 15.JPG
It's looking very good so far. :thumbsup:
Damn that Draken turned out good 👍
That's alot of work there ..so tempted on my 104 now 🤔
The Fang is looking better every time I see it ;D
Quote from: mat on September 25, 2023, 06:59:25 AMQuote from: kerick on September 20, 2023, 02:16:51 PMRecreating that weathering would be quite a challenge.
I tried my luck on a SAAB RF-35 Draken and a Hunter F. 51 some years ago. The Hunters faded more evenly than the Drakens. The Hunters were in service at ESK 724 until march 1974. At that time they were rather outdated but still great for low-level-dogfighting. ESK 724 were based at Skrydstrup AB, were ESK 730 (my squadron) were the neighbours. 730 flew F-100s, which were big, heavy and needed almost the whole runway to get airborne. The Hunter-boys liked to show off, so they got airborne using less than a third of the runway. Then they would quicly retract the undercarriage and make a sharp low-level turn, so they would pass over the squadron area of 730. Just to show, that they were the real fighter pilots.
Fang 13.JPG
The Fang is turning out great, but your two "dirty Danes" are impressively painted, :wub:
Quote from: Pellson on September 25, 2023, 12:19:45 PMQuote from: mat on September 25, 2023, 06:59:25 AMQuote from: kerick on September 20, 2023, 02:16:51 PMRecreating that weathering would be quite a challenge.
I tried my luck on a SAAB RF-35 Draken and a Hunter F. 51 some years ago. The Hunters faded more evenly than the Drakens. The Hunters were in service at ESK 724 until march 1974. At that time they were rather outdated but still great for low-level-dogfighting. ESK 724 were based at Skrydstrup AB, were ESK 730 (my squadron) were the neighbours. 730 flew F-100s, which were big, heavy and needed almost the whole runway to get airborne. The Hunter-boys liked to show off, so they got airborne using less than a third of the runway. Then they would quicly retract the undercarriage and make a sharp low-level turn, so they would pass over the squadron area of 730. Just to show, that they were the real fighter pilots.
Fang 13.JPG
The Fang is turning out great, but your two "dirty Danes" are impressively painted, :wub:
The Fang is looking awesome. It's really coming together.
One question. Did that paint on those aircraft that faded so badly on the upper surfaces stay the original color on the undersides? I like the faded aircraft with brand new looking fuel tanks.
Quote from: kerick on September 25, 2023, 03:24:29 PMQuote from: Pellson on September 25, 2023, 12:19:45 PMQuote from: mat on September 25, 2023, 06:59:25 AMQuote from: kerick on September 20, 2023, 02:16:51 PMRecreating that weathering would be quite a challenge.
I tried my luck on a SAAB RF-35 Draken and a Hunter F. 51 some years ago. The Hunters faded more evenly than the Drakens. The Hunters were in service at ESK 724 until march 1974. At that time they were rather outdated but still great for low-level-dogfighting. ESK 724 were based at Skrydstrup AB, were ESK 730 (my squadron) were the neighbours. 730 flew F-100s, which were big, heavy and needed almost the whole runway to get airborne. The Hunter-boys liked to show off, so they got airborne using less than a third of the runway. Then they would quicly retract the undercarriage and make a sharp low-level turn, so they would pass over the squadron area of 730. Just to show, that they were the real fighter pilots.
Fang 13.JPG
The Fang is turning out great, but your two "dirty Danes" are impressively painted, :wub:
The Fang is looking awesome. It's really coming together.
One question. Did that paint on those aircraft that faded so badly on the upper surfaces stay the original color on the undersides? I like the faded aircraft with brand new looking fuel tanks.
The parts of the planes, that were not exposed to direct sunlight kept the original colour - almost. All ground equipment were painted with the same SM67 paint. And of course they faded in the sun!
Trucks.jpg
On the picture of F-100 you might be able to see the original green on the underside and the droptanks. But you can also se, that the paint were not resistant to the heat from the afterburner.
G-262.jpg
That seems to be a common look on Huns. Fun to replicate.
Quote from: mat on September 26, 2023, 01:55:29 AMQuote from: kerick on September 25, 2023, 03:24:29 PMQuote from: Pellson on September 25, 2023, 12:19:45 PMQuote from: mat on September 25, 2023, 06:59:25 AMQuote from: kerick on September 20, 2023, 02:16:51 PMRecreating that weathering would be quite a challenge.
I tried my luck on a SAAB RF-35 Draken and a Hunter F. 51 some years ago. The Hunters faded more evenly than the Drakens. The Hunters were in service at ESK 724 until march 1974. At that time they were rather outdated but still great for low-level-dogfighting. ESK 724 were based at Skrydstrup AB, were ESK 730 (my squadron) were the neighbours. 730 flew F-100s, which were big, heavy and needed almost the whole runway to get airborne. The Hunter-boys liked to show off, so they got airborne using less than a third of the runway. Then they would quicly retract the undercarriage and make a sharp low-level turn, so they would pass over the squadron area of 730. Just to show, that they were the real fighter pilots.
Fang 13.JPG
The Fang is turning out great, but your two "dirty Danes" are impressively painted, :wub:
The Fang is looking awesome. It's really coming together.
One question. Did that paint on those aircraft that faded so badly on the upper surfaces stay the original color on the undersides? I like the faded aircraft with brand new looking fuel tanks.
The parts of the planes, that were not exposed to direct sunlight kept the original colour - almost. All ground equipment were painted with the same SM67 paint. And of course they faded in the sun!
Trucks.jpg
On the picture of F-100 you might be able to see the original green on the underside and the droptanks. But you can also se, that the paint were not resistant to the heat from the afterburner.
G-262.jpg
Either the paint burned off or it was not painted at all on all the Huns. It's a challenge to paint the burnt titanium look.
Something to add to the FANG?
Quote from: Pellson on September 25, 2023, 12:19:45 PMThe Fang is turning out great, but your two "dirty Danes" are impressively painted, :wub:
They really are :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
That burnt-burner area is so archetypal 'Danish Hun'. :thumbsup:
Quote from: kerick on September 26, 2023, 06:07:55 AMQuote from: mat on September 26, 2023, 01:55:29 AMQuote from: kerick on September 25, 2023, 03:24:29 PMQuote from: Pellson on September 25, 2023, 12:19:45 PMQuote from: mat on September 25, 2023, 06:59:25 AMQuote from: kerick on September 20, 2023, 02:16:51 PMRecreating that weathering would be quite a challenge.
I tried my luck on a SAAB RF-35 Draken and a Hunter F. 51 some years ago. The Hunters faded more evenly than the Drakens. The Hunters were in service at ESK 724 until march 1974. At that time they were rather outdated but still great for low-level-dogfighting. ESK 724 were based at Skrydstrup AB, were ESK 730 (my squadron) were the neighbours. 730 flew F-100s, which were big, heavy and needed almost the whole runway to get airborne. The Hunter-boys liked to show off, so they got airborne using less than a third of the runway. Then they would quicly retract the undercarriage and make a sharp low-level turn, so they would pass over the squadron area of 730. Just to show, that they were the real fighter pilots.
Fang 13.JPG
The Fang is turning out great, but your two "dirty Danes" are impressively painted, :wub:
The Fang is looking awesome. It's really coming together.
One question. Did that paint on those aircraft that faded so badly on the upper surfaces stay the original color on the undersides? I like the faded aircraft with brand new looking fuel tanks.
The parts of the planes, that were not exposed to direct sunlight kept the original colour - almost. All ground equipment were painted with the same SM67 paint. And of course they faded in the sun!
Trucks.jpg
On the picture of F-100 you might be able to see the original green on the underside and the droptanks. But you can also se, that the paint were not resistant to the heat from the afterburner.
G-262.jpg
Either the paint burned off or it was not painted at all on all the Huns. It's a challenge to paint the burnt titanium look.
Something to add to the FANG?
The part were painted but burned off by the heat from the afterburner
Taking shape really nicely
Quote from: PR19_Kit on September 26, 2023, 08:48:59 AMThat burnt-burner area is so archetypal 'Danish Hun'. :thumbsup:
Every Hun was like that ..a very cool but hard to duplicate detail on a model ..seen some ture masterful work done on those..so jealous <_<
How's the FANG coming along?
Quote from: kerick on October 02, 2023, 08:31:34 PMHow's the FANG coming along?
The FANG are moving ahead - slowly. I've just been in Copenhagen to visit my daugthers and some of my grandchildren. Which means a lot of physical exercise on different playgrounds. The FANG have now got the tailplanes, canopy and the start of the paintjob. Still some way to go.
Fang 16.JPG
Fang 17.JPG
Fangtastic ;D :thumbsup:
:thumbsup: :thumbsup:
I thought it looked good without the tailplane - but I suppose it belongs there.
Quote from: perttime on October 03, 2023, 09:36:08 PMI thought it looked good without the tailplane - but I suppose it belongs there.
My thought exactly. :thumbsup:
Quote from: Pellson on October 04, 2023, 12:35:29 AMQuote from: perttime on October 03, 2023, 09:36:08 PMI thought it looked good without the tailplane - but I suppose it belongs there.
My thought exactly. :thumbsup:
It belongs there!
FANG 02.jpg
It belongs for sure. But is it big enough to haul that big wing around? On the Fang mock-up the point where the leading edge meets the fuselage looks to be almost directly under the trailing edge of the wing.
Quote from: mat on October 04, 2023, 01:26:25 PMQuote from: Pellson on October 04, 2023, 12:35:29 AMMy thought exactly. :thumbsup:
It belongs there!
I think all we meant was that the model LOOKS good enough without.
Looking at your pic, though, the stabilator is placed in line with or even slightly below the trailing edge of the wing, and that makes sense as it, during positive load at least, wouldn't be shadowed aerodynamically by the wing. On the model - not so much. And that looks somewhat weird. In my eyes, that is. It's still an amazing build
Nice! :thumbsup:
Quote from: CammNut on October 04, 2023, 04:00:31 PMIt belongs for sure. But is it big enough to haul that big wing around? On the Fang mock-up the point where the leading edge meets the fuselage looks to be almost directly under the trailing edge of the wing.
It is an all moving tailplane. The delta wing extends pretty far towards the tail, so I was guesstimating that surfaces on the wing would do it.
I wonder if the wing surfaces were supposed to be working together with the all moving tailplane.
Chord looked a bit narrow to me. But it's deceptive. Fang did have a pretty narrow-chord stabilator.
I think it's just because most of us are not used to seeing swept tail planes on a delta like that. Mirage, F-102, F-106 and even the B-58. Then there is the MiG-21 and F-16 that have a longer fuselage after the wing. It's just a matter of what a person is used to seeing.
:wub:
Quote from: Pellson on October 04, 2023, 10:48:31 PMQuote from: mat on October 04, 2023, 01:26:25 PMQuote from: Pellson on October 04, 2023, 12:35:29 AMMy thought exactly. :thumbsup:
It belongs there!
I think all we meant was that the model LOOKS good enough without.
Looking at your pic, though, the stabilator is placed in line with or even slightly below the trailing edge of the wing, and that makes sense as it, during positive load at least, wouldn't be shadowed aerodynamically by the wing. On the model - not so much. And that looks somewhat weird. In my eyes, that is. It's still an amazing build
monty-python-431.jpg
I CONFESS !!!
The tailplanes should have been placed lower down. But scrapbuilding sometimes means you have to adapt to reality. In this case the fuselage end (Made of the front of the 1/144 B-58) simply wasn't deep enough.
So in my what-if world test flights pointed to this unorthodox position :rolleyes:
Paint job done - more or less. At last a paint scheme, where you can paint the lines freehand.
Fang 18.JPG
Fang 19.JPG
Fang 20.JPG
:thumbsup: :thumbsup: ..looking great 👍 👌
AT LAST - DONE
Painting finalised and all pieces put together. All thats left now, is to take some decent pictures and write some back story
Fang 21.JPG
Fang 22.JPG
I really like that :bow: :bow:
That looks great! Nice use of parts. The result is far greater than the sum of the parts!
That looks pretty cool!
The cockpit came from an F-5, as I recall. Somehow, my eyes see similarities with Hawker Hunter now ???
That did turn out great indeed 👍
Very nice work matey ;D ;D
Cool! :thumbsup:
I like the burnt effect under the tail.
Really great painting! :thumbsup:
Nice one.. :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
Sweet !
:thumbsup: