David Hingtgen

The Northrop museum one is the 2nd one (which I will visit someday). The first is at Edwards AFB. Hasn't been visible since 2000 or so, AFAIK. They have it, but it's not on display. The engines are spread around, nobody has a complete set. I'm pretty sure that one of the F120's is at the Air Force Museum in Dayton. AFAIK, there are only the 4 engines ever built for the initial tests, 2 120's and 2 119's.

You know, they could have just built a YF-23 mock-up and used that. That looks "next-gen stealth". It'll still look next-gen, 2 generations from now. The only people who'd recognize it would be people like us, and we'd appreciate it. Everyone else would think it's just a really cool looking fake plane.

No, that's high-end hush-hush military technology--the stealth "gnarly" helmet.

Saw that last night on the Navy's site. My thoughts:

WTF is that. I've seen LEGO planes that are more aerodynamic. That is such pure utter crap it's not even funny. Who'd they let design it, the director's 5-year-old son? I can't wait for the "we hired "experts" to help us design the plane" press release comments.

"Hey, stealth planes are easy--just make them black with angles, and curvy upper surfaces"

The X-32 is now the SECOND-ugliest stealth. And a heck of a lot more aerodynamic.

And I'd love to see the gear on this thing, it already looks very unsuited for carriers based on its control surfaces. (A carrier plane needs much more than strong gear)

I will give them points from one thing: it looks like it can swing its wings forward from YF-19 style + canards, to have the wings meet the canard and create a canardless delta-wing design. Of course that wouldn't work even if you had YF-21-style morph-wings, but it'll look neat on screen.

And here's the 1/48 resin kit:

One of the best overall shots is actually a very well-done 1/72 Italeri, I wish I could make my Italeri kit look like this:

YF-23 was Northrop/McDonnellDouglas. And AFAIK Northrop designed most of the plane, MDC did systems/electronics. Though I think MDC did the V-tail. The YF-23 is, design/stealth-wise, the fighter version of the B-2. Same stealth concept and materials, just not a flying wing.

Well I had to sign up at a German airplane forum to get pics, but I got some (the boxart even says 'The plane we all wanted to win')

Quick real YF-23 pics, cool angles: (all the good/big pics are "boring" angles)

No, I meant 1/48 resin YF-23. Only plane in the world I care enough about to justify 200 bucks on: http://www.collectaire.com/modelpages/yf23/yf23.html

Would be very interesting to see next to a 1/48 YF-21.

No pics of the kit at the site, I've only found like 2 ever. It is basically 2 pieces, top and bottom, like all YF-23 kits. Just 2 massively complex pieces, since one has the exhaust trenches, and one has the intakes.

Still waiting for a Miang sighting...

(Actually, Juli Mizrahi has the look, and sort of the "rank", just not purple)

Anyone have a Badger 200-20? Seems to be brand new.

http://www.dixieart.com/Badger_Model_200_S...ternal_Mix.html Bottom of page.

Would you rather I just copy+paste quotes from reviews and comments? It'd be easier. I don't think I have any of them saved, but I could find them easy enough I think. Or you could just google the "rec.models.scale" newsgroup and see what you get.

I learn much of my aircraft subtle differences from model kit reviews. I swear 90% of my F-15E knowledge comes from people pointing out all the flaws in the Hase kit. Similar situation for late-model F-16's.

Combined with the fact I've never seen one in real life, I'm not really the person to ask. Perhaps Nied?

(There's just something about seeing something in real life that you can't get from photos)

I don't have one myself, but people I respect say that basically every square inch is off. It's like YF-17 vs F-18. Very similar, but totally different.

AFAIK, the best -22 kit is actually the Airfix YF-22.

Pylons--yup, and it totally ruins the stealth. Main uses will be for ferry flights, and after you've already achieved air superiority.

PS--the -22 kit's potentially biggest flaw is not "missing" stuff in the wells and bays, but the the fact that what is there is 100% fake. P-51 details would be more accurate.

Myself (and others) are waiting for the Hasegawa F-22. Which will arrive within the next 5 years if we're lucky... (If the 18th wing gets some, Hase will start work on it the next day)

Gotta agree with that--what's the point of even keeping the Minuteman around? The Trident II is superior in every way, and much newer, and portable/hidden. And with the first couple of Ohio's being converted to SSGN's, we can now increase the number of warheads in the others, to FINALLY have the FULL capability of the Trident II missiles. Darn nuclear proliferation treaties... And we're also finally converting the Trident I Ohio's to Trident II (Those which aren't becoming SSGN's at least). They're more effective now than when they were first put in service.

Well if you only really need to remove the needle, and can just spray windex and/or thinner through it to clean the rest, that's plenty easy enough. Thanks for all the info!

Still need to decide on air supply. Don't want to go over $200, would like a "quiet enough" one w/tank for below that.

I'm really leaning towards a Badger 200 at this point, as so many people here have it I figure it'd be easy to get help.

PS--anyone here use/airbrush Gunze Aqueous? They're about the only other manufacturer of acrylics that makes the colors I need besides Testors, and Testors Acryl just cannot be used as a base coat. I've ordered a few bottles of Gunze (my main colors) to try out, see if I can use it, and see how it likes Tamiya as a base coat.

Badger 200 seems pretty highly recommended. wm cheng, yours is a 200NH, right?

PS---anyone hear about using an ultrasonic(jewelry) cleaner for airbrushes? Saw a post about it on ARC, and if it works, that'd be easy. Just so Iso. alcohol in the tank, toss the airbrush parts in, and hit the "on" switch. My mom's got one that she uses about once a decade, I'm sure she'd let me have it.

PPS--reason for easy clean-up is that my clean-up area is also the kitchen, combined with the fact that I have to paint outside. I can't start/stop airbrushing sessions so easily, I have to drag everything onto and off of the deck. No workbench etc right next to a spray booth or anything.

As well as the same argument as using acrylics---solvents/cleaners annoy me more each year, so the less time I have to smell cleaner, the better.

I've also been looking at compressors, from the oft-mentioned WalMart one (very popular on many jet modeling forums), to many online/ebay variations of the TC-20 like http://www.airbrushcity.com/abc181g.htm (from what I can find, the real maker of the TC-20 is Sparmax who also makes Iwata and Silair compressors) , and I'm also wondering about Iwata Sprintjets, etc.

BTW, how essential is a tank for a compressor set-up? Seems like a lot of compressors charge a LOT more for a tank attached, when it seems far cheaper to get a decent compressor and add your own tank.

IMHO, most of the F-14's bulk comes from sheer size, not being VG. Yes, a VG mechanism adds weight. But that is countered by having smaller wings and other benefits, like creating a nice big internal fuel tank inside the mechanism central "box".

"old-school" VG weighs a lot with few benefits. Mainly dual actuators, etc. The F-14 and Tornado changed everything, by doing it right (single screw). F-111 had the mechanism right, but is aerodynamically screwed up. (F-14 is really a "Super F-111"--it's the F-111 done right)

Also, a big chunk of the F-14's weight comes from it being a carrier plane. They've got to be heavier to withstand the stress, as well as their massively beefed up landing gear, etc. Just look at how much weight the land-based YF-17 had to pack on to become the carrier-suitable F/A-18. If you made the F-15's structure/gear strong enough to be carrier based, it'd pack on a few thousand pounds in a hurry. And you'd have to add slats and slotted flaps, for even more weight, with it's ultra-simple wing and all. Great for low-weight and nice USAF bases, bad for carriers.

PS--yes, I totally agree with your main point that the weight figures for Valks are ridiculously low.

Now the interesting thing would be if the later VF-1's had the airflow adjustment slots disabled, since all F-14's had their glove vanes disabled, and later ones flat out don't have them. (not worth the weight nor maintenance).

While we're here:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewI...8112813570&rd=1

Paasche H+compressor setup. The "TC 20" compressor is advertised as better/quieter than the el cheapo central pneumatic many places sell, but I'm wondering if that's still not all that good.

Might as well get off of air cans as soon as possible! Better airbrush demands better air.

PS--would it be stupid to buy a Badger 200 just because it's a neat shade of blue?

Actually I've never tried gravity feed. I think a big part of the reason why is the whole "I have to spray outdoors" thing, and I basically need to mix paint/thinner, and bottles, and everything out on the deck. Having nice heavy flat-bottomed jars help a lot, as I can set things down, screw on lids, etc. I keep quite a few jars on hand to mix, etc.

Also, I often model big things. I have concerns about color cup size. I have been known to use multiple bottles of the same color in a single airbrush session. (As in, if I'm painting a whole ship's main color that day). I'd have to refill most color cups a LOT.

Heck, I've also looked at the Badger 250 sprayer-gun thing for some purposed. They say it goes down to 3/4 inch, that'd work for most of my airbrushing. Cheap too, worth it if for no other reason than "mass spraying" like 1/32 planes and large ships, when I literally need several square feet covered. And those things need like utterly no cleaning/disassembly. I've considered having one of them for most of my spraying, and using a nicer one only when absolutely necessary (like wheel wells and small bits, and canopies)

But how easy is it to clean?

PS--I prefer siphon-feed.

PPS--I also model large ships, and don't free-hand camo. My line-width range would primarily be maybe 1/4in to 2 or 3 in.

Yes, external mix. Nothing is as important to me than quick and easy to clean, and external mix beats everything else AFAIK. (Hey, I'm mainly used to hand-brushing and spray cans, even my $18 sprayer blows them away, a "real" airbrush could only be even better) I'll go to a double-action Iwata when I have to skill to justify it.

Unless someone knows a single-action internal mix that puts out a WAY smoother finish that is only SLIGHTLY harder to clean than an external mix, I plan to go with one of these.

So, any comments on either one, I do I just buy whichever one is most "supported" in my area? (Which looks like Badger). If it affects the suggestions:

I plan to spray acrylics through it. Mostly MM acryl, maybe some Tamiya, maybe Gunze (maybe a lot of Gunze, am going to try it soon).

I spray fairly 'wet and heavy' coats.

I have to spray outdoors, so a brush that's more "forgiving" of the weather would be nice.

90% of what I spray will be medium and light shades of grey onto 1/72 jets.

Testor's acryl is said to be good for vinyl I think, as it dries more flexible than most. It's glycol-based, pretty unique among hobby paints.

At the moment they're going too slow to have XG be Episode 5. They either have to skip big chunks, or will need like 7 games...

Still, the story (XS) isn't deviating at all about what needs to happen to get to XG. Though IMHO they could have just skipped about 95% of what happened in XS, if they want to tell "the big story". The opening FMV of XS is exactly what it "should" be, to be the very beginning of XG. And transporting Zohar in a ship through space---heck, that's what the 'key' part of the story is, IMHO. KOS-MOS, transparent noncorporeal bug aliens, etc are all secondary, unless they're going to tie it in some way. (A billion theories would work)

And we'll need all-new characters and a big time-line jump pretty soon. Like, XS 3.

The Eldridge needs to be launched soon, not 3 games from now...

As it is, it looks like they're spending all their time on the 1 paragraph summary of the very beginning of XG's story, and not all the "good stuff" which immediately precedes the game which makes up 90% of the "history" of XG. (Eldrige, Zeboim, Nisan/Solaris war, Diabolos war).

:;edit:: last bit removed to avoid potentially spoiling XS2, just in case I'm right.

XS is just like LOTR, ending-wise. Each one is just going to "stop" until you get to the last one. XS doesn't have an ending, it's just waiting for XS2 which will pick up about 30 secs after the last scene in XS.

Of course, the "original" XG still blows it away story/music/character-wise, XS's purple-haired chick has nothing on Miang.

Lots of "convertible" planes out there. F/A-18D and F/A-18F are best examples. The vast majority are set up for pilot/RIO, but they can be converted to be pilot/pilot for training duty. (The newbie is usually up front, actually). Removable control sticks are about the only thing you need to make it happen, and the right "mode" button for all the computer displays. And for planes like the F-15E, you don't need to do anything at all. Despite the back seat always being for a WSO, they all have controls and basic flight instruments in the back. Since the newbie goes up front, he's got all the instruments, as the experienced F-15 instructor in the back doesn't need anything besides stick+rudder, and the basic T of instruments.

PS: