We'll just gloss over the statement in the last post shall we...

Today I was contemplating the picture for December in the Airfix Model World calendar (it hangs on the back of the toilet door).
It is a Spitfire flying in formation with a Red Arrows Hawk.
It got me wondering what was the oldest RAF aircraft that the Hawk do this with.

Quote from: zenrat on December 17, 2022, 04:20:42 AMToday I was contemplating the picture for December in the Airfix Model World calendar (it hangs on the back of the toilet door).
It is a Spitfire flying in formation with a Red Arrows Hawk.
It got me wondering what was the oldest RAF aircraft that the Hawk do this with.

Do you mean serving RAF aircraft ? If not then it could probably fly in formation with a member of the Shuttleworth Collection ? Although it might have trouble slowing down ? If a serving aircraft then is the BoB Flight's Hurricane older than their Spitfires ?

The Hawk has a hefty air brake under the fuselage, a bit like a Hunter's, so it should be bale to slow quite well, but down to what speed? It must stall around 130 kts or so (at a guess...) so it'd have a job flying with a Bristol Fighter or similar as that'd be near flat out!

I know the pic as I've got that calendar too, but it could have been good timing on the photog's part as the Hawk flew past the Spitfire.

The BAe Hawk stalls at around 106knots / 120mph. They'd want a decent safety margin for formation flying or at airshows.

The Reds have flown with the BBMF on countless occasions. I'm sure they've flown alongside Tiger Moths or the RN Swordfish flight at some point.

Chris.  I meant oldest aircraft out of all those that have served with the RAF or RFC.

OK.  So i looked up the Brisfits spec and that tops out at 123mph meaning that as Kit says the Hawk would be stalling while the Bristol Fighter was flat out.

Hawker Hart  (Top speed 185 mph) could do it with some margin for error on both their parts.

Quote from: zenrat on December 18, 2022, 03:34:00 AMChris.  I meant oldest aircraft out of all those that have served with the RAF or RFC.

Understood 

I have in my stash a Monogram 1/72 B-36 Peacemaker.  This is too big for even my largest display case so I have been thinking about, when it is finally built, hanging it from the roof of my shed.
The problem will be accumulations of dust and cobwebs.
I have decided I need a test model hanging up there in order to ascertain how much of a problem this will be.
I have pulled out a Monogram F-16 prototype which I will build OOB and wells up and hang from a string up there.

The Viper is always a good thing to build, no matter what the purpose is.  

Quote from: zenrat on December 21, 2022, 03:38:16 AMI have in my stash a Monogram 1/72 B-36 Peacemaker.  This is too big for even my largest display case so I have been thinking about, when it is finally built, hanging it from the roof of my shed.
The problem will be accumulations of dust and cobwebs.

There is also , possibly, the  problem of being struck a violent and unexpected blow to the cranium  if the line used to suspend the B36, or its fastening in the roof, are insufficiently robust.


I'd hate to think of you lying there stunned, having been donged on the bonce by a plummeting Peacemaker!

And that B-36 kit is no lightweight of course, and has a VAST amount of dust gathering wing area as well. 

You could always hang it on the wall like picture. Less dust collecting surface and much safer.

Hmmm, death by Peacemaker.   

I don't think i'd hang it directly over my bench.
There are no clear wall areas to mount it on.

Finished construction of the B-25 today.  Now, I knew glass nosed Mitchells were buggers to get enough nose weight into but didn't realise just how tough it is to find enough space.
I had filled the nose gear bay, the bomb aimers crawlway, and possibly the fronts of the nacelles (can't remember) with heavy glue and it was balancing OK without the flaps, engines or turrets.  However, with flaps and turrets being behind the main gear when I added the remaining parts it tail sat.
To get the nose back down I had to add my last six fishing weights inside the front crew access hatch and fill the backs of the engines with heavy glue.
I now have serious doubts about the strength of the styrene gear legs.
But its done.  Apart from some paint touch ups and weathering.

As it has all that weight in it and your worried for the U/C maybe the B-25 would be a good ceiling hanging testbed...

Looking forward to seeing it anyway 

Hopefully the legs can take it.  They are vertical so are in compression rather than bending and the wheel mountings are pretty chunky.

My B-27A (the chop-top B-25) has a tonne of weight in the nose & nacelles & its landing gear is doing fine coming on 3 years later.