avatar_Mike Wren

F-111, FB-111, EF-111, Aardvark, Merlin, Raven, Sparkvark, and Pig

Started by Mike Wren, June 08, 2003, 07:04:19 AM

Previous topic - Next topic
Print
Go Down Pages 1 ... 11 12 13 14 15
User actions

pyro-manic

#180
August 08, 2012, 01:37:43 PM
I'd guess Martel, cluster bombs, Sidewinders? Maybe an anti-runway munitions dispenser too?
Some of my models can be found on my Flickr album >>>HERE<<<

nev

#181
August 21, 2013, 12:46:29 PM
This might be of intrest to some, a picture of the two F-111K's under construction.  From the Code One FB page



https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=724509764232998&set=a.137862012897779.26971.137792852904695&type=1&theater
Between almost-true and completely-crazy, there is a rainbow of nice shades - Tophe


Sales of Airfix kits plummeted in the 1980s, and GCSEs had to be made easier as a result - James May

PR19_Kit

#182
August 21, 2013, 01:07:43 PM
Enough to make us tax-payers weep..........
Kit's Rule 1 ) Any aircraft can be improved by fitting longer wings, and/or a longer fuselage
Kit's Rule 2) The backstory can always be changed to suit the model

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

Regards
Kit

TsrJoe

#183
August 21, 2013, 01:24:22 PM
TV. Martel was to be the weapon of choice for the F.111K as well as standard British HE. bombs configured for 'supersonic' carriage ! (a weapons listing for the type shows pretty much everything else as per the F.111A at that time, think Vietnam period!)

chers, Joe
... 'i reject your reality and substitute my own !'

IPMS.UK. 'Project Cancelled' Special Interest Group Co-co'ordinator (see also our Project Cancelled FB.group page)
IPMS.UK. 'TSR-2 SIG.' IPMS.UK. 'What-if SIG.' (TSR.2 Research Group, Finnoscandia & WW.2.5 FB. groups)

Thorvic

#184
August 21, 2013, 02:02:51 PM
Quote from: nev on August 21, 2013, 12:46:29 PM
This might be of intrest to some, a picture of the two F-111K's under construction.  From the Code One FB page



https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=724509764232998&set=a.137862012897779.26971.137792852904695&type=1&theater

Nice photo Nev  :thumbsup:
Project Cancelled SIG Secretary, specialising in post war British RN warships, RN and RAF aircraft projects. Also USN and Russian warships

Gondor

#185
August 21, 2013, 02:21:07 PM
I take it that the K would have had the jettisonable crew pod.

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

Gondor's Modelling Rule Number Three: Everything will fit perfectly untill you apply glue...

I know it's in a book I have around here somewhere....

kitnut617

#186
August 21, 2013, 05:29:10 PM
Quote from: nev on August 21, 2013, 12:46:29 PM
This might be of intrest to some, a picture of the two F-111K's under construction.  From the Code One FB page

In Tony Buttler's BSP book, it says this photo was taken 'after' the order had been put on hold/cancelled and the two airframes were moved to this corner from the production line to await the UK Governments decision on what to do with them.
If I'm not building models, I'm out riding my dirtbike

rickshaw

#187
August 21, 2013, 05:46:29 PM
As the Ks were taken from the As' production line and fairly early on, too, AIUI, does that mean that the Ks would have had the same wingbox problems the As had?   Would that have meant some K crashes and groundings before they were remanufactured to fix the problem?
How to reduce carbon emissions - Tip #1 - Walk to the Bar for drinks.

NARSES2

#188
August 22, 2013, 07:42:40 AM
Hi ya Nev - good to see you on here again mate  :thumbsup:
Do not condemn the judgement of another because it differs from your own. You may both be wrong.

pyro-manic

#189
August 22, 2013, 12:05:58 PM
Quote from: NARSES2 on August 22, 2013, 07:42:40 AM
Hi ya Nev - good to see you on here again mate  :thumbsup:

Indeed - welcome back!

Quote from: Gondor on August 21, 2013, 02:21:07 PM
I take it that the K would have had the jettisonable crew pod.

Gondor

AFAIK it was standard across all variants of the F-111, so yes.
Some of my models can be found on my Flickr album >>>HERE<<<

PR19_Kit

#190
March 31, 2015, 03:26:28 PM
Bumping this thread after almost 2 yrs.  ;D

I've read the that the FB-111 was 2 ft longer than the 'normal' F-111 versions, but as I've never seen a comparison drg. I don't know where the 2 ft go. Could anyone tell me please?

And if Hasegawa actually did make an FB-111 kit (I've never seen one......) did they include the extra 2 ft correctly? And did they EVER mould the 'uprated landing gear' fitted to the Bs, Ks, FBs and Gs? Every Hase kit of the 'vark I've ever seen has the same landing gear mouldings.
Kit's Rule 1 ) Any aircraft can be improved by fitting longer wings, and/or a longer fuselage
Kit's Rule 2) The backstory can always be changed to suit the model

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

Regards
Kit

jcf

#191
March 31, 2015, 04:12:39 PM
According to posts on this thread, no stretch, it was considered but never happened:
http://tdhp.fr.yuku.com/topic/18356/Which-Aardvark-and-Sparkvark-to-choose#.VRsn-359lSU

The lengths quoted in the Putnam on General Dynamics are as follows.

F-111F: 73' 6" (w/out probe)
FB-111A: 75' 6.25" (with probe)

  ;) ;D

PR19_Kit

#192
March 31, 2015, 05:03:08 PM
Quote from: joncarrfarrelly on March 31, 2015, 04:12:39 PM
According to posts on this thread, no stretch, it was considered but never happened:
http://tdhp.fr.yuku.com/topic/18356/Which-Aardvark-and-Sparkvark-to-choose#.VRsn-359lSU

The lengths quoted in the Putnam on General Dynamics are as follows.

F-111F: 73' 6" (w/out probe)
FB-111A: 75' 6.25" (with probe)

  ;) ;D


Thanks for that JCF.  :thumbsup:

Next time I'm at Cosford I'll be measuring the probe on the F-111F they have there. What ever happened to standards?
Kit's Rule 1 ) Any aircraft can be improved by fitting longer wings, and/or a longer fuselage
Kit's Rule 2) The backstory can always be changed to suit the model

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

Regards
Kit

DarrenP2

#193
April 02, 2015, 04:08:41 AM
RAF ones could have goten harpoon like the F111c

Librarian

#194
April 02, 2015, 04:42:21 AM
Quote from: PR19_Kit on March 31, 2015, 03:26:28 PM
Bumping this thread after almost 2 yrs.  ;D

I've read the that the FB-111 was 2 ft longer than the 'normal' F-111 versions, but as I've never seen a comparison drg. I don't know where the 2 ft go. Could anyone tell me please?

And if Hasegawa actually did make an FB-111 kit (I've never seen one......) did they include the extra 2 ft correctly? And did they EVER mould the 'uprated landing gear' fitted to the Bs, Ks, FBs and Gs? Every Hase kit of the 'vark I've ever seen has the same landing gear mouldings.

Many years back I made several of the Has kits. The only discernable differences I recall were cockpit consoles, wing length, burners and air intakes. Lovely models but you were forced to have them slats and flaps out, and they didn't provide the special MERs the 111s had. I certainly don't recall the fuselages being any different.
Print
Go Up Pages 1 ... 11 12 13 14 15
User actions