Author Topic: Re: Spinners' Strike Fighters Thread - SEAC Airabonitas  (Read 1149550 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Weaver

  • I'm either dumb or evil - you decide.....
  • What-IF SIG
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 18206
  • Has a life outside What-If that is also What If
Re: Spinners' Strike Fighters Thread - Late RAF Cannucks
« Reply #2400 on: January 09, 2021, 05:21:38 pm »
IIRC the original Clunk wings were a bit on the lightly-built side, so you'd either need to go easy on the load or write something into the backstory about newm stronger wings being fitted for the air-to-ground role. Probably better to stick to the short Mk.4 wings as well. Rebuilt Clunks doing CAS/COIN in a Canada-in-Vietnam scenario is an intriguing thought.

A SEAD Clunk might use Shrike instead of MARTEL, especially if it's not British (or if it's British-in-Vietnam and we buy the US missile in a hurry).

MARTEL weighed about 1200lb.
Shrike weighed about 390lb.

A dedicated SEAD platform would need all the other gear as well: an ALQ-series ECM jamming pod and an internal emitter location system, probably replacing the radar and the gunpack. You could have large tip pods with fuel in the middle and ESM/ECM aerials in their nose and tail sections. There's also plenty of scope for aerials in the rear fuselage, given that the jetpipes aren't in the way.

The Javelin was a tank and could probably take a ton of ordnance without difficulty, indeed, there were several real-world schemes for strike-versions of it. Bear in mind that fitting a centreline pylon isn't as simple as it looks: there was a big belly hatch and an empty space right in the middle of the fuselage for maintenance access to the engines (yes, really... :rolleyes:). The wings were complicated and counter-intuitive too. It'd be a good idea for anyone thinking about Javelin mods to gaze long upon a good cutaway drawing of the thing: it really is headscratchingly odd in places.
Neophyte: Is Eris true?
Malaclypse the Younger: Everything is true.
Neo: Even false things?
MtY: Even false things are true.
Neo: How can that be?
MtY: I don't know man, I didn't do it.
Principia Discordia

Twitter: @hws5mp
www.minds.com: @HaroldWeaverSmith

Offline Pellson

  • Makes own decals
  • ***
  • Posts: 353
Re: Spinners' Strike Fighters Thread - Late RAF Cannucks
« Reply #2401 on: January 10, 2021, 02:44:36 am »
I'm wondering, that to keep an aging interceptor relevant, how hard would it have been to wire Clunks or Javelins for anti-radar role using Martel missiles (as Tornado F.3's were later used with ALARM missiles)? That wouldn't even have required low-level flying (as the idea is to get the enemy to point their radars at you) or the ability to carry scores of iron bombs.

Yes, I know, IRL reasons for not doing so would be airframe fatigue, spare parts availability, budget, and manpower limitations, but this is just to give whiffy ideas to people. :wacko:

EDIT: might have been feasible even, because in the same timeframe USN/USMC used Skyknights re-equipped as ECM birds (with their pilots using the cannons in unauthorized attacks on radar sites). :wacko:

Reworking an aircraft for new weaponry isn’t that hard. More often than not, the major problem would be to fit the associated electronics/central computing unit somewhere, but both the Javelin and the Canuck are pretty spacious. In whiff world, I don’t see a big problem. In particular if you replace the old intercept radar whose electronics were tube tech and hence quite substantial, you’ll get all the space you need for more modern tech.

And speed..  remember that USAF and USN deferred the supersonic A-7F in favour of staying with the A-7D/E for a while. You basically can’t go that fast that low when manoeuvring anyway. At the same time, I have read that the Israeli experience is that you need to stay above 600 knots/1100 km/h, but I think that’s emphasised when you’re flying over barren lands like Syria. In a European NATO perspective, you’ll probably have better ground cover?
Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition!

Offline PR19_Kit

  • Closeted Take That fan
  • What-IF SIG
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 36289
  • Whiffing since the 70s
Re: Spinners' Strike Fighters Thread - Late RAF Cannucks
« Reply #2402 on: January 10, 2021, 05:26:52 am »
Luckily this is WhiffWorld....................  ;D ;)
Any aircraft can be improved by fitting longer wings, and/or a longer fuselage

...and I'm not a closeted 'Take That' fan, I'm a REAL fan! :)

Regards
Kit

Offline SPINNERS

  • Strike Fighters WHIF Master
  • Moderator
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 2785
Re: Spinners' Strike Fighters Thread
« Reply #2403 on: January 10, 2021, 10:48:22 am »
Aermacchi Impala FGA.1 - No.20 Squadron, RAF South East Asia Command, 1975

RAF IMPALA FGA1.01 by Spinners1961, on Flickr

RAF IMPALA FGA1.02 by Spinners1961, on Flickr

RAF IMPALA FGA1.03 by Spinners1961, on Flickr

RAF IMPALA FGA1.04 by Spinners1961, on Flickr

RAF IMPALA FGA1.06 by Spinners1961, on Flickr

RAF IMPALA FGA1.05 by Spinners1961, on Flickr

A pretty simple one this that uses the Atlas Impala 2 with the red engine line removed and some pretty basic SEAC markings added. I'll get around to doing a 'desert' version with 1970's tactical markings and with a much tidier finflash that'll better match the shape of the fin/rudder. This won't be a new skin as I don't have a template for the Impala.


Offline AndrewF

  • Kitbasher
  • ***
  • Posts: 209
Re: Spinners' Strike Fighters Thread - RAF Impala FGA.1's
« Reply #2404 on: January 10, 2021, 11:41:29 am »
Fantastic work as always. Bravo.

Offline ChernayaAkula

  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 4563
  • Deutscher Meister 2011 & 2012 - BVB 09!
Re: Spinners' Strike Fighters Thread - RAF Impala FGA.1's
« Reply #2405 on: January 10, 2021, 03:34:11 pm »
An RAF Impala is a splendid idea!  :thumbsup:
Cheers,
Moritz


Must, then, my projects bend to the iron yoke of a mechanical system? Is my soaring spirit to be chained down to the snail's pace of matter?

Offline SPINNERS

  • Strike Fighters WHIF Master
  • Moderator
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 2785
Re: Spinners' Strike Fighters Thread
« Reply #2406 on: January 11, 2021, 07:44:51 am »
Gloster Javelin FAW.9 - No.19 and No.92 Squadrons, RAF Germany, 1972

RAF JAVELIN FAW9.07 by Spinners1961, on Flickr

RAF JAVELIN FAW9.08 by Spinners1961, on Flickr

RAF JAVELIN FAW9.09 by Spinners1961, on Flickr

RAF JAVELIN FAW9.10 by Spinners1961, on Flickr

RAF JAVELIN FAW9.11 by Spinners1961, on Flickr

RAF JAVELIN FAW9.12 by Spinners1961, on Flickr

RAF JAVELIN FAW9.13 by Spinners1961, on Flickr

RAF JAVELIN FAW9.14 by Spinners1961, on Flickr

A couple of unexpected (but most welcome) gifts from 'sundowner' arrived yesterday - one of which is an RAFG Javelin scheme. I decided to do both of the famous RAFG Lightning 'sister' squadrons and probably spent the most time doing a new Javelin finflash where I think I've got the proportions spot on and I also made a small batch of 12 serial numbers.

« Last Edit: January 11, 2021, 07:49:26 am by SPINNERS »

Offline PR19_Kit

  • Closeted Take That fan
  • What-IF SIG
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 36289
  • Whiffing since the 70s
Re: Spinners' Strike Fighters Thread - Javelins Over Gütersloh
« Reply #2407 on: January 11, 2021, 07:51:36 am »
Oh YES!  :thumbsup:

The Flatiron looks REALLY good in that scheme, very modellable indeed.
Any aircraft can be improved by fitting longer wings, and/or a longer fuselage

...and I'm not a closeted 'Take That' fan, I'm a REAL fan! :)

Regards
Kit

Offline Martin H

  • Im their Leader. Which way did they go?
  • Administrator
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 8464
Re: Spinners' Strike Fighters Thread - Javelins Over Gütersloh
« Reply #2408 on: January 11, 2021, 08:31:23 am »
Oh yes. That hits the spot  :thumbsup:
I always hope for the best.
Unfortunately,
experience has taught me to expect the worst.

Size (of the stash) matters.



IPMS (UK) What if? SIG Leader.
IPMS (UK) TSR-2 SIG Member.
IPMS (UK) R & D SIG Member.
IPMS (UK) DC-3/C-47 SIG Member.

Offline Gondor

  • What-IF SIG
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 7516
  • Builds Slower Than A Glacier Moves
Re: Spinners' Strike Fighters Thread - Javelins Over Gütersloh
« Reply #2409 on: January 11, 2021, 10:14:36 am »
Now if Airfix would do a nice new 1/72 version of that .....

Gondor
My Ability to Imagine is only exceeded by my Imagined Abilities

Offline chrisonord

  • DIDN'T READ THE QUESTION PROPERLY
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 5324
  • Paint it gloss??......HOW DARE YOU!!!
Re: Spinners' Strike Fighters Thread - Javelins Over Gütersloh
« Reply #2410 on: January 11, 2021, 11:26:07 am »
Yet more marvellousness :thumbsup:
Chris
The dogs philosophy on life.
If you cant eat it hump it or fight it,
Pee on it and walk away!!

Offline SPINNERS

  • Strike Fighters WHIF Master
  • Moderator
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 2785
Re: Spinners' Strike Fighters Thread
« Reply #2411 on: January 12, 2021, 08:53:49 am »
Aermacchi Impala FGA.1 - No.6 Squadron, RAF Middle East Command, 1976

RAF IMPALA FGA1.07 by Spinners1961, on Flickr

RAF IMPALA FGA1.08 by Spinners1961, on Flickr

RAF IMPALA FGA1.09 by Spinners1961, on Flickr

RAF IMPALA FGA1.10 by Spinners1961, on Flickr

RAF IMPALA FGA1.11 by Spinners1961, on Flickr

I quite like the look of the Aermacchi MB-326 family of trainers and it's sobering to consider that it's long production run was just finishing as production of the Hawker Siddeley Hawk was beginning. Anyway, this is the single-seat Atlas Impala dressed up in RAF tactical markings with alternative No.6 squadron markings (I normally like the red /white tinopener markings).

Offline Weaver

  • I'm either dumb or evil - you decide.....
  • What-IF SIG
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 18206
  • Has a life outside What-If that is also What If
Re: Spinners' Strike Fighters Thread - No.6 Sqd Impala FGA.1's
« Reply #2412 on: January 12, 2021, 09:41:28 am »
Always liked the idea of an RAF Impala. If you start modding the Strikemaster for a Britain-in-Vietnam scenario, you can't go too far before it becomes easier to just buy the Impala if what you want is a Viper-powered single-seat light strike type.
Neophyte: Is Eris true?
Malaclypse the Younger: Everything is true.
Neo: Even false things?
MtY: Even false things are true.
Neo: How can that be?
MtY: I don't know man, I didn't do it.
Principia Discordia

Twitter: @hws5mp
www.minds.com: @HaroldWeaverSmith

Offline chrisonord

  • DIDN'T READ THE QUESTION PROPERLY
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 5324
  • Paint it gloss??......HOW DARE YOU!!!
Re: Spinners' Strike Fighters Thread - No.6 Sqd Impala FGA.1's
« Reply #2413 on: January 12, 2021, 01:23:35 pm »
That is yet another  marvellous  idea. I  have had the Italeri  one sat in the for sale pile. I know what I must do with it now :thumbsup:
Chris
The dogs philosophy on life.
If you cant eat it hump it or fight it,
Pee on it and walk away!!

Offline NARSES2

  • Nick was always on his mind - just ask the Pet Shop Boys
  • Global Moderator
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 43477
Re: Spinners' Strike Fighters Thread - No.6 Sqd Impala FGA.1's
« Reply #2414 on: January 13, 2021, 06:25:55 am »
Must admit the Impala does look "right" in RAF markings  :thumbsup:
Decals my @r$e!