Jasdf Gb

[Damian2]

we also need someone who can cope with a photograph of my entry being sent to
them in the post and them posting it up here for me.

nev, a JMSDF CVN is a very good idea! as you may know the USN carrier forward based
in japan is due to change from a CV to a CVN this year i think. uss george washington
has been mentioned.  B)

You can send the pic to me and I'll post it up for you

As for the CVN and expanding the sphere of the GB to cover the JSDF as a whole. Sure why not

[ysi_maniac]

Hmm, I'll admit to a few ideas along these lines that seem tempting at the moment.  The first thoughts that come to mind are a F-106J and the extreme F-4EJ-Kai proposal that included a new wing aerodynamically derived from the F-15's wing.

Sounds super cool, do you have more info?

Not much, I know that the McAir model designation was 98-MS and that, if you compare them, the F-4 and F-15 wings have the same root chord.  You'd have to add the wheel wells to a set of F-15 wings to do this as a model, but it's not that difficult.  I suspect that any such version might well also have the blown, instead of framed, windscreen.

Wing tips bent upwards???  

[elmayerle]

Hmm, I'll admit to a few ideas along these lines that seem tempting at the moment.  The first thoughts that come to mind are a F-106J and the extreme F-4EJ-Kai proposal that included a new wing aerodynamically derived from the F-15's wing.

Sounds super cool, do you have more info?

Not much, I know that the McAir model designation was 98-MS and that, if you compare them, the F-4 and F-15 wings have the same root chord.  You'd have to add the wheel wells to a set of F-15 wings to do this as a model, but it's not that difficult.  I suspect that any such version might well also have the blown, instead of framed, windscreen.

Wing tips bent upwards???

Nope, flat just as on the F-15.  With the right aerodynamics, you really don't need the upbent wingtips.

[elmayerle]

we also need someone who can cope with a photograph of my entry being sent to
them in the post and them posting it up here for me.

nev, a JMSDF CVN is a very good idea! as you may know the USN carrier forward based
in japan is due to change from a CV to a CVN this year i think. uss george washington
has been mentioned.  B)

I can just see the JMSDF buying a Nimitz-class for their use, of course, in JMSDF service it'd be the Yamamoto-class    

[nev]

Upon further reflection, I think for the late 60s on (which was the timeframe I was thinking of), a CV would be more appropriate than a CVN - the Kobe protocol and all that.

Forrestal class?  Or Kitty Hawk?  The main role of the MSDF is ASW, and the carrier is considered an "offensive" weapon in Japanese politics, so I was thinking of re-jigging the air wing.  Take out 1 or 2 of the strike squadrons and beef up the Viking/Sea King complement.

Hmm, need Eddie's input on this....

[Damian2]

Ummm just a quick question. What do we need to do to get this GB approved? Other than pm the mods that is...

[Brian da Basher]

Well it looks like you've got enough folks interested to make this viable. You might want to go back over and finalize the proposed rules and determine who's going to moderate. Here's what the group build calendar looks like:

USAF GB until Sept 18th

1 Week GB Aug. 26th to Sept. 4th

I Love Spats! GB Sept. 1 - Nov. 1. (pending a final roll call)

Proposed Nordic GB early fall - Jan. 1st (provisionally)

Secret Santa Dec. 25 - June ? '08

We've also got the Piston Perfection group build pending. I'm still waiting to hear about the timeframe.

I hope this helps.

Brian da Basher

[Damian2]

Ok guys I pm'ed Brian the particulars for the GB.

You'll notice I've added a month so start 1st Aug '07 end 1st Feb '08. Nice and long as I intend to enter other GBs too

Finally is there anyone who wants to help me mod this monster I've created??

[anthonyp]

I really love how you keep ignoring the CG/SAR build, proposed for Q3 or Q4 of this year, Brian.    

[Brian da Basher]

I really love how you keep ignoring the CG/SAR build, proposed for Q3 or Q4 of this year, Brian.   

I haven't heard enough firm info on this to be able to offer much help. Feel free to PM me with the proposed rules and timeframe. If you've got between 8 -10 interested parties, we could probably add it to the calendar.

Brian da Basher

[Scooterman]

I really love how you keep ignoring the CG/SAR build, proposed for Q3 or Q4 of this year, Brian.  

I haven't heard enough firm info on this to be able to offer much help. Feel free to PM me with the proposed rules and timeframe. If you've got between 8 -10 interested parties, we could probably add it to the calendar.

Brian da Basher

Not to threadjack but I've been waiting for the CG/SAR build too........  

[ysi_maniac]

Hmm, I'll admit to a few ideas along these lines that seem tempting at the moment.  The first thoughts that come to mind are a F-106J and the extreme F-4EJ-Kai proposal that included a new wing aerodynamically derived from the F-15's wing.

Sounds super cool, do you have more info?

Not much, I know that the McAir model designation was 98-MS and that, if you compare them, the F-4 and F-15 wings have the same root chord.  You'd have to add the wheel wells to a set of F-15 wings to do this as a model, but it's not that difficult.  I suspect that any such version might well also have the blown, instead of framed, windscreen.

Wing tips bent upwards???

Nope, flat just as on the F-15.  With the right aerodynamics, you really don't need the upbent wingtips.

What about tail configuration? Remains original Phantom's? Horizontal tail plane from F-15?

Low F-15's wing would need to work in wheels wells, as you noted. But, what about shoulder mounted F-15's wing?

The intakes: I would respect F-4's but could test wedge shaped F-15 intakes.

Thanks for your help.

Carlos.

[Damian2]

Ok boys and girls this GB is on!!

On the modding team we have myself and Howard of Effingham.

The time frame: 1st August 2007 to 1st November 2007

Rules are in the first post. If there's any queries please feel free to pm me or email me at: damian@mighty.co.za.


D2

[anthonyp]

Oh, come on!  SIX MONTHS?!  You can probably get as much participation, if not more (since people won't be distracted by the holidays) in three to four months.

There's all this interest at the beginning, then, six months later, maybe ten completed entries, whereas, with the 1-weekers (and other shorter duration GB's like the Airfix one), you get that and maybe more completed models.  I'm serious.  Go look in the Knacker's Yard at the GB's and how many completed builds there are in each one (except the ancient ones, where they never really finished).

[elmayerle]

Hmm, I'll admit to a few ideas along these lines that seem tempting at the moment.  The first thoughts that come to mind are a F-106J and the extreme F-4EJ-Kai proposal that included a new wing aerodynamically derived from the F-15's wing.

Sounds super cool, do you have more info?

Not much, I know that the McAir model designation was 98-MS and that, if you compare them, the F-4 and F-15 wings have the same root chord.  You'd have to add the wheel wells to a set of F-15 wings to do this as a model, but it's not that difficult.  I suspect that any such version might well also have the blown, instead of framed, windscreen.

Wing tips bent upwards???

Nope, flat just as on the F-15.  With the right aerodynamics, you really don't need the upbent wingtips.

What about tail configuration? Remains original Phantom's? Horizontal tail plane from F-15?

Low F-15's wing would need to work in wheels wells, as you noted. But, what about shoulder mounted F-15's wing?

The intakes: I would respect F-4's but could test wedge shaped F-15 intakes.

As far as I know, the wings were low, as on the standard F-4 and the "horizontal" tail remained the same.  I think the idea was a wing change to improve performance without major changes to the fuselage.  If you want to take it farther, s full "glass cockpit" and the ECM fit of the actual F-4EJ-Kai would be good tweaks as would the blown windscreen that never saw widespread use on the F-4E before they left the fleet.  For  different direction, consider adding the intakes and conformal saddle tanks of the F/RF-4X proposal by GD.