David Hingtgen

Exactly that. Black plastic bins. Some of them had buckets. Hey, pylons are useful places to hang stuff, when there's nothing else on them. Working airbase, planes coming and going all the time. Lots of stuff to move around, bins/containers all over. I stuck my head up an exhaust and it was still warm...

Best overall shot of the one I looked at the most (one behind it also checked some stuff): (Sun was BRIGHT, practically overloaded the camera)

(Impossible to get the entire flightline from up close, so here's some pics showing them lined up from afar)

Tail logo is a Viper's head, mouth way open baring its fangs. See it's an F-16 squadron and all.... NVG's---the little "dark room" to try them is only like 5x5 feet so couldn't really give comments in that area (depth). Let's just say I was really impressed with how they worked. Simulator--well it's actually been "broken" for a while (they take a lot to fix) so you couldn't turn it "on". But got to fiddle with all the buttons, etc. F-16 cockpits are small, you literally have to move your knees out of the way to hit some buttons on the main side-displays. Found out how exactly the throttle works (much much smoother and slicker than I imagined, I'm sure you could tweak it 1% at a time if you wanted) as well as how afterburner selection works: There's a stop at full mil power, then it's more of a "rotate left" rather than lift up to go past it into afterburner. There are no stops for the afterburner settings, you just have to kind of feel/guess where zone 2, 3, etc are. But from talking to the pilots, most go either min burner or max burner, there's little point in other settings.

Going to keep this short to start with, but I basically feel the need to gloat somewhere where it'd be appreciated. Anyways, let's just say I made some connections, and got a little tour of the local ANG base, and got to see lots of F-16's up close, try out some night-vision goggles (they are amazing), get in an F-16 simulator, and generally have a better experience than any airshow can provide. PS--got to stick my head up an F-16 intake for the first time ever.

.5cfm at 20psi---don't know if that'd be sufficient for some things. Would probably work for a lot of paint/brush combos, but many Iwata's say they need 25psi at .5cfm for optimum flow for anything moderately thick. (I spray acrylics, and like to thin as little as possible)

At the moment I'm leaning towards just an airtank but with a high-quality regulator etc to start with. Then (if refilling tank becomes tedious) snagging an Iwata Sprintjet or Createx TC2000, or something along those lines. Airbrush still undecided, anywhere from Badger 200 to Iwata Eclipse. Dixieart.com has nice TC2000+Iwata packages... PS--wondering about necessity/advantages of quick-connects for the airhose etc.

Well one of the problems I encounter is that absolutely nobody says anything more than "pretty quiet" "fairly quiet" "fairly loud" or "really loud" for any particular compressor. And two people can call the same compressor "quiet enough to sleep by" and "loud enough to wake up neighbors 4 doors down". I really need numbers/accurate descriptions. People are quite fond of saying "90 decibels" for something that's like 40... Also still wondering about Iwata Sprint Jet. And Scorpion II: http://www.dixieart.com/Silentaire_Scorpion_Compressors.html

I could care less about the neighbors, it's me that the noise concern is for. As in, I get annoyed by the hum my VCR makes when it turns on... If nothing else, canned air is quiet.

At the moment I'm leaning towards a tank-only air supply, to fill at the gas station. Then will save up for a while for a truly silent high-end compressor. (I hate noise). Anyone have a ratio for "size of tank versus how much you can airbrush" or something? Wonder how big (or actually, how small) of a tank to get. Smaller would be easier to lug around, bigger of course wouldn't need to be filled as often. But another factor is the "lugging it in and out of the house to actually spray". Local Wal-Mart (well, the one 20 miles away, not the 5 mile one) has a surprisingly good selection of air stuff, can get a nice regulator and filter/moisture trap, and lots of fittings.

I have no idea. I thought it was more along the lines of "whichever stages had remixed music for the Power Fighters" got it. As in, there aren't remixed music for every stage, just some. I could of course be totally wrong. Will probably beat 3 tonight and start 4. Heh heh--having never played MM1 before, I just started going through, and took out 4 of the bosses with the mega buster. Iceman and Elecman were the only ones I had weapons for.

I remember the episode first described, but nothing else. Amazingly, I have an old Testor's catalog, with "Super Carrier" kits! It's supposed to be the USS Georgetown, CVN-71. (or so they say) Kit was the Nimitz, BTW. They also had an F-14, F-18 and AV-8B kit. US Harriers are sometimes on "real" carriers, but it's pretty darn rare, and hasn't been done in decades AFAIK. Doubt they'd be on the show, or they were using fairly obscure footage.

Arrow had to use Sparrow I? OUCH. Has that ever hit an enemy plane, ever? For people wondering, the AIM-7D/E (main Vietnam models) are IMPROVED versions of the original Sparrow III, which had a "much improved" 7% success rate or so compared to older Sparrows. (Which are so out-of-date/bad the Sparrow III has been renamed simply Sparrow, and that's how most of the world knows it--Sparrow I and II are best forgotten) Sparrow I and II are of course really the AIM-7A and AIM-7B, but share almost no parts with the AIM-7C/D/E/F/H/M/P Sparrow III's. (just like the whole aircraft renaming thing like A3J>A-5 and F4H-1>F-4B, missiles were renamed too, so that screwed up the designations/names a bit, but at least missiles came out with much shorter designations) PS--shooting satellites in orbit isn't hard, F-15's can (and have) done so. But they stopped because anti-satellite missiles (even though not ICBM's and not silo nor submarine launched) were considered to be in violation of some treaty... PPS--I'm sure we'd be happy to sell Super Bugs with snowshoes.

Beat 2 (first time in a decade), then 1 (never played it), now working on 3, which I probably have the most hours on, excepting X4. Then on to 4/5/6. PS--pause trick DOES work on MM1, just a b*tch to get it to work. (or at least with Navi mode menus) Only worth it for yellow devil, and beating all 4 bosses successively in Wily Stage 4. Too hard to do for final boss, and easy enough without it.

Absolutely.

The Tomcat's main jigs were destroyed. An executive order couldn't get more Tomcats made. And you cannot go back and "recast" a plane from parts. The tolerances are TIGHT. A 727 main spar has such finite tolerances, the factory climate in the area has a +/- .1 degree limit (metal expansion rates), and they stop every machine in the factory, the guy has to wear rubber shoes on a foam pad to avoid vibrations, and pretty much the entire factory holds their breath when they install the 4 main pins. And with the F-22 superiority issue: numbers matter. 50 F-22's will beat 50 of most anything else. They will not beat 200 of anything else. Also, it has been a long time since there's been a "big" engagement. 4 on 4 is the biggest we've seen in a while. Up against North Korea or someone, it'd be like 100 on 100. When you get bigger fights, luck becomes the main factor. If you've got numbers like that, it means any (or all) of 100 people could be going after YOU. Or you could be going after the same guy that 99 other people are. Aircraft type doesn't really matter in that scenario, pure numbers do. Lots of planes carrying lots of missiles.

Top Gun 2 should have come out in like 1990. Plot and explanation to the audience is simple: "Maverick's now flying the F-14D Super Tomcat. 40% more power than his old jet." There. And blow some stuff up. The time for a sequel has long passed.

I love all the people on various boards who think those are CG screens. Heck, they still think the AC4 stuff was all CG. Namco can wring out more graphics power than even Square, on the PS2. PS--yes, I love the F-14 vs 18 pic. PPS--went to airshow today, saw Super Hornet demo, and do its control check run-up. Will compare how the AC5 one is.

The new Omega Supreme's biggest problem is it Gobot-esque 1-step transformation. 2 steps, if you count clicking the train and ship together.

Thanks much for the link. I've been pretty sure about a .5mm for a while now, if I go with an Iwata. And of course the Omni came up, as it always does. Still considering maybe a Badger 200 with the widest nozzle possible for "general" stuff, and an Eclipse for anything less than 'entire plane' situations. PS----am I correct in assuming that ANY internal-mix airbrush will be noticeably superior to something in the "sprayer" category like this (what I currently use, with canned air no less--still, very quick and simple, ultra-easy clean up:

The more I read the more confused/indecisive I get. Point to make: Above all else, I really just want to paint an entire F-14 one single color (and many planes just 2 colors, top and bottom), and have the paint be smooth, guaranteed. No free-hand camo, no 1/16in lines. Just a nice even spray to cover the plane (or half a plane) smoothly and easily. With as little skill necessary as possible. Recommendations based on that? I'd trade a bit of smoothness if there's a "fool-proof" airbrush for applying acrylics onto large areas... Also--if for a given skill level a high-end brush will "almost certainly" (and without needing more skill just to get it to spray) deliver increased SMOOTHNESS of finish when spraying at max width, that's a plus. But if they only do fine lines better, that's utterly pointless for me. PS--I did find the Campbell-Hausfield compressor at Wal-Mart today. Only $68. Wonder if it's the right one, most people report them more expensive than that. 100PSI max, 2 gallon tank, and regulator. Add water trap and it's ready to go. Maybe it's not the "quiet" one, though from what I hear "quiet" means like 90 decibels.

-F-8III super crusader(gator)vs F-4S phantom II F8U-3. An F-4S is nothing but an upgraded J, which is basically a navalised D w/slats. -Rafale vs EF2000 typhoon Typhoon -Harrier II vs JSF F-35B Sea Harrier would fare MUCH better, but F-35B. -X-32 vs A-7 corsair II Fugliness: tie. Bombing: A-7. Fighting: X-32. -F/A-18D marine night attack vs F/A-18F super bug Doing what? Strike, recon, tanking, air-to-air? -Mig-29M vs Su-35 Su-35 -F-2 vs F-16 Hmmmmmn. Be more specific. F-16C Block 30D will beat a LOT of planes in the air. A Block 50 with the HTS removed will also do VERY well. Block 42's probably the worst for air to air. -F-20 vs F-8 F-20. F-8 rocks, but the F-20's insane, and still has twin cannons. -RF-5E Tigereye vs RF-8 RF-8. Sleek and fast. -A-10 vs A-9(another match northrop lost...wonder why) A-10 -F-20 vs golden eqagle korea F-20 -B-1B vs Tu-160 blackjack(fdamn this is a big plane) B-1B, due to quasi-stealth. -F-117 vs F-35A Umm, air to air? F-35. Bombing--I vote for F-117. -F/A-117X navy Vs F-35B Ooooh, tough one. Don't know.

Actually, price isn't really much of a consideration. I'm steering away from the high-end ones more based on complexity----I won't have the skill to use them effectively. I don't need something that can do 0.1mm lines until I have the skill to paint that. This'll be my birthday present to myself, so $100+ isn't a problem. I am still looking at Iwata HP-C's and such. Though I don't know if double-action would be the best way to start off my "finally getting a REAL airbrush" journey. One of my local shops has a Badger 200NH "on sale" for $70. Same shop also had an Iwata (Eclipse I think) and it just really struck me as high quality (the other shop keeps them in the box, can't look at them).

My guess is that it'd turn any kit into a puddle of goo. Regular krylon eats plastic, can't imagine what the plastic-bonding stuff'd do

F-14B/D top speed is rumored to be 2.5+ F-14's still have a stronger windshield, and more advanced intakes, than the F-15, which are the main limiting factors. Take a Mach 2.4 plane, add 30% more power, and you'll go faster. PS--hey, I'm all for one-sided "tests" showing that we need more F-22's. PPS---having a higher top speed doesn't really mean you can "out run" an F-15. Mig25's can keep that speed up for like 90 secs. F-14's have among the longest "dash" times, due to sheer size/fuel capacity. Flankers would do well, too. And the F-22 would beat them all. Mach 2.5 for 10 minutes is nothing compared to 2.0 for an hour. Most planes that can go Mach 2+ can only do so for minutes at a time. SR-71 and Concorde are among the few planes that can do it for a long time. Just think about it--most fighters have enough fuel to have a combat radius of a few hundred miles, just cruising around at Mach 0.9 with 3 full drop tanks. Now if you need full afterburner and have to give up your drop tanks to go 1,500 mph, how long do you think they can do it before they run out of fuel?