Skull Leader
-
Posts
2131 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Gallery
Posts posted by Skull Leader
-
-
Phalanx, that's sound advice. Just watch and learn for a month or two and you'll see how the social currents of the board move. We don't really have any knuckleheads to watch out for just now (I have personal people I'd just as soon not talk to or deal with, but I won't slander them here in public, but we members of IHAC maintain a list!
). Just bear in mind that there are real pilots and crews from every branch of the service and many from other countries that are members there, and if approached nicely, they'll be a wealth of knowledge for model builders. Just don't take their word on aircraft outside of their profession (for example, most USAF pilots don't know how to do anything but talk trash about USN jets... even when they're trying to look and sound official.)Just like here, make sure you're posting in the appropriate board (or after looking at all of them and being unsure, posting in the one you think is closest)
... and above all, post pics of your work! It's a model-building site and we all like to see pics!
-
Which one? Both arguments got so intense as to see an ARC member get banned.
about the Tamiya vs. Academy 1/32 F-16 kits:
When a very pixilated test shot of one of the sprues of the academy kit was released, a then-ARC member went so far as to say that the kit would suck like no kit had ever sucked before. It was later discovered that he had served in an advisory role for Tamiya when they had released their own 1/32 viper kit, so naturally he was a little partial. Multiple people called him down for striking out at a kit that no one had even seen yet, much less had a chance to build. He basically went on to call anyone that spoke out in defense of the academy kit as a weak-minded fool. The moderators finally had enough of him and banned him. They later allowed him to return, but I've yet to see him post (although I've noticed him lurking from time to time)
about the Super Hornet flap "flap":
ARC member "X" asked the ARC community which of the new 1/48 Super Hornet E kit was the best (Revell or the Hasegawa). ARC member "Z" went on to tell him that the new revell kit was about the biggest waste of time possible just because the wing flaps were hard-molded to the kit (whereas the Hasegawa provides the flaps separate, so you can drop them). He tried to say that a no time while the SH is on the ground are the flaps raised in anything other than a fully dropped position. A barrage of pictures proving otherwise arise and he goes on to say that those MUST have been taken immediately after shutdown (despite one of the moderators insistance that the pics were taken a number of hours after shutdown). Argument then shifts from being about the super hornet to the credibility of the moderator (which everyone promptly jumps to defend), ARC member "Z" finally pushed one button too many and faced the wrath of the mighty "Vorpal boot of banning" +10.
-
As much as I am loathe to defend Dick Cheney, the more I think about it, the more I can see a certain logic behind his shooting the F-14 in the face (*badum ching*). It's not hard to imagine some of that fine, brand new tooling for F-14D Super Tomcats falling into the hands of the IRIAF for their Ali Cats. His Jihad against the F-14D is still questionable, but once the decision to buy the Super Hornet was made, destroying the Tomcat tooling was at least logical.
The real beeyatch of the situation is that according to some of the guys that lurk on the Tomcat sunset forums that used to work up at Pax River (where the Tomcats were manufactured, for those who don't understand) said that even though the toolings were ordered DESTROYED, they were carefully dismantled and stored away in the event that congress saw the error of their ways (to be fair, Grumman was talking a LOT of sh!t in their proposals on the hill... they *knew* they had a hot fighter on their hands and they were doing their damnedest to convince congress that they couldn't live without it). I guess someone had to take Grumman down a peg or two, I just hated it that the pentultimate First response/interceptor platform the world has ever known had to suffer because of it.
-
Just don't start a "which is better?" or "this plane vs. this plane" thread. We *HATE* those kind of discussions over there (it's academically proven that they'll get out of hand there). The moderators take a pretty hard line on stuff like that these days (they even went as far as to completely shut down one of the forums for a few days because people couldn't keep their ignorant thoughts to themselves)
-
Not necessarily so. Rumor has been around for a bit that they've pulled at least one of the prototypes (or both? I can't remember) back out for more testing, possibly in a strike fighter/bomber role. I can't seem to find anything in print on the 'net about it, but given that David is the YF-23 Super-fan, if anyone knows where to find it, it's him (outside of Tomcats, Viper Zeros, and Su-22s, I'm out of my area of diehard interest)
-
I must be the only X-men fan in the world that really enjoyed this movie. You guys are starting to have me convinced that I somehow have terrible taste in film or something. (then again, the list of "accepted" films worthy of praise on this site reminds me again why I don't pay any attention to you guys when it comes to finding movies worth watching)
Did it have it's flaws? Of course it did. Could they have done a lot more with the storyline? Surely, the same could be said of pretty much every book/comic-to-movie franchise.
Nevertheless I thought they did a pretty good job considering the script they were handed. Further to the point, Comic-dynamics 101 pretty much mandates that no death is ever permanent. Every X-men character on the roster has died more than once during the series' run. That's the beauty of being a comic book fan. Even if your favorite character goes down in a blaze of glory (or in some cases, an incredibly cheap metaphorical shot to the back), you can expect that said-character will probably be back within the next 10 issues. This rule isn't concrete of course, but that's really how it is in the marvel universe. If there *is* an X-men 4 (and the title is licensed, I believe), you can bet the family farm that anyone who died will probably return... and those who have seen X3 have every reason to believe this is a possibility.
I do wish they'd spend more time wrapping up storylines than introducing new ones (say, had they stuck with the "days of future past" storyline for the second movie, instead of going into Wolverine Issue #50)
Things *I* enjoyed:
-the brief cameo of a Sentinel robot
-More screentime (however brief) of Colossus and the use of the "fastball special"
-Iceman finally "icing up"
-"I'm the Juggernaut, bich!" (google it. It was a reference/homage to a web-comic done about the Juggernaut)
-a REALLY naked Rebecca Romjin
-
I really hope Hideo doesn't do a repeat of MGS2 and not make Snake the primary character. I liked MGS2 a lot (all dog tags, beat every difficulty even extreme), but Raiden was extremely anoying and will never be as good as Snake. Big Boss in MGS3 was the greatest decision yet, I absolutely love that game and I wish I could continue as Big Boss.
I don't understand what people's beef is. Raiden moved in the same way, used the same items, and pretty much performed the same as Snake did in the first chapter. If you don't like the dialogue, switch it to Japanese and use the subtitles.
-
Don't pull the trigger Snake! Don't do it!
Pull an Alien 3 Ripley, or Terminator 2 T-800 death. It's not like they can't find his corpse and use his body for stuff with the way he was going to shoot himself... ... ... If he even manages to kill himself. He's more likely going to miss the important stuff and turn himself into a drooling vegetable.
Did anyone see the Medicom MGS4 Snake that's being worked on?
Something tells me there's a lot more to that scene than what we've been shown. I find it difficult to believe that Snake would just commit suicide right there in the middle of town
-
Do people really still like this franchise? Every Metal Gear game after Solid on the PS1 was crap.
Raiden ruined Sons of Liberty, and the ending made no sense whatsoever. There were so many mysterious clues about what was really going on and then -- nothing. They never explained how they fit together or what they meant (a la The Matrix and the Silent Hill games). Why was the colonel talking to me, the player? Who the fart knows.
Snake Eater suffered from poor gameplay -- the overhead view where you can't see more than ten feet in front of you, no transition when switching back from first-person view (leaving you lost thanks to your camoflauge), a pointlessly tedious execution of first-aid, and the stupid camoflauge outfits that you could change into, instantly, every ten feet or so, while people were looking for you.
Also, Snake Eater's villains were extremely juvenile and unbelievable, often acting like the bad guys from Power Rangers.
The games are praised due to fanboyism and bad taste, pure and simple.
You're wasting everyone's time. Obviously you don't like the series so you really have no reason to be in on this thread.
-
I don't see any confusion. I only see what will be a kickass conclusion to an excellent series.
Maybe this new re-invented Raiden will be more acceptable to the masses (I thought he was just fine the first time)
-
And another one is the F-14's ability to bomb. Granted, IIRC, such a capability is already built into the plane to begin with, but it's still a big deal that an airframe not optimized for bombing could bomb, and bomb well. It was a big deal because the military can now conceivably get more out of an airframe without spending a single dime (well, at least not more than to get some electronics hung off a rail somewhere..).
If, by that, you mean the lantirn pod, it's worth noting that The F-14 wasn't the only aircraft to receive this upgrade. Both the F-16 and the F-15E (long considered ground-attack mainstays) also got this...
-
Thrustmaster HOTAS Cougar. My old F-22pro/TQS combo finally gave up the ghost so I figured it was time to upgrade.
And speaking of doing a good VFA-103 re-paint, does anyone know what the Navair rules are for where you can put tailcodes on the horizontal stabs? I know you can't put them on the rudders but are there any other restrictions? I'd like to try and paint something that's as close as possible to something that could actually fly.
The going rule so far that NAVAIR has mandated is that tailcodes are to be aft of the formation light. A number of squadrons (103 included) are pushing to get the rule changed so they can put their tailcodes on the INSIDE of the tails (like many tomcat squadrons had them).
What one of the pilots was telling me was that once they go to sea, there's really not anything the high command can do about their paintjobs. So if there are any changes they want to make, it'll probably happen then (Mango mentioned that 103 had plans to paint the tails of the linejets Euro I grey like they had on their Tomcats as soon as they leave port.)
-
It's not that bad. It's not a Tomcat by any stretch of the imagination, but it's still an impressive aircraft.
(here's a pic I shot at the the Ft. Smith airshow... me and some of my friends took the crew out to dinner... I got the WSO's number, she's cute!
-
We've had a guy track the tail (I tried to when the story first went public... of the 4 airframes I *thought* it might be from, it turned out to be from none of those, someone else had the skinny on it). It was from an VF-101 F-14A that crashed off of Key West back in 2002. It's been on one hell of a journey.
-
first pic of the GM Sniper Gundam Fix, not what i was hoping for maybe when i see the finished figure i may think otherwise, i kind of figured the RX-78 would be just the normal Ver ka that they just released, just in a different color. not a big release if i do say so, i am far more interested in the ZII
Why does Mr Katoki want to mess with the MSV Sniper design
the original design was cooler
This design FAILS.
-
-
But a fantastic piece of fiction it is, regardless of what Brown or anyone else says. I don't believe a lick of it (this from someone who has his eye on becoming a mason someday if God wills it). But it's fun as hell to read about and enjoy! (I liked both DaVinci and the prequel, Angels and Demons).
Looking forward to the movie in a couple of weeks!
-
I guess its an age thing. Those of us who saw them in the theaters, who grew up knowing them one way, want to be able to see them that way again. For us, the SE films detract from the experience, not add to it.
I beg to differ. The only one I didn't see in the theaters was ANH. I still prefer the new DVD versions.
-
The MiG-23/27 line has never been that popular amongst enthusists as they are, let's face it, not the sexyist beasts out there. They are however quite capable airframes, and let us not forget that most russian fighters are designed for the close in knife fight. So, with those big swing wings fully out I could see a MiG-23 giving an F-16 a run for its money in a turning fight.
Also in regards to the 30mm cannon, yes a single burst from it is more then enough to disable or destroy an F-16, american planes for the most part are not designed to take that kind of punishment. Warsaw pact aircraft on the other hand are, and can take a lot of punishment, not surprising when they are primarily built for a defensive role.
I'm rather fond of them, but then... I'm like that with most swing-wing designs
-
-
I agree. Admittedly though, we pay them to be in movies, not spout about religion, politics, or anything else
(that said, I rarely notice when an actor/actress steps up and says something not movie-related. I just ignore it)
-
Why not? At slow speeds it's got those wings stuck way out there to catch more lift, single, centerline-mounted engine, just like the F-16... probably has a pretty similar roll rate. In fact, I think I'd rather have the MiG than the F-16 in a turning fight. Pretty much ALL of Mikoyan's jets are reknowned as superior turning fighters, and the MiG-23 has a lot of power behind it in the engine to quickly recover lost energy. (David, you're usually better at analyzing stuff like this than I am, wanna jump in here?)
I'm not saying Falcon 4.0 isn't flawed somehow, but rather that in real life, a Flogger vs. Viper encounter at knife range would definately not be a walk in the park. But then, I'm nothing more than an armchair pilot... so my thesis could very easily sink
-
That is incorrect. Studio Nue had no involvement with Macross II.
My bad, meant Big West.
-
Speaking of aircraft...
I got back into Falcon 4.0 (well, Allied Force, which I DL'ed, since my Falcon disc isn't here), but this time I'm kind of good at it, EXCEPT...
Plus, Mig 23's have little or no problem keeping up with an F-16... something's just wrong with that thought...
Of course, doging crappy Russian SAMs and AA missles (30 year-old models) is hard enough...
I could easily see a MiG-23 keeping up with an F-16. Early F-16s(A and B models) can only just barely clear Mach 2 in a dead sprint descending (with no loadout), and the heavier later models I believe are only good to about 1.9 mach, while the MiG-23 can punch up to something like Mach 2.3 in a similar configuration (Russian engines are known for their raw, unadulterated power... especially that Soyuz R-35-300)
As a side note, I recently "found" a copy of Falcon 4.0 AF and I'm still learning to fly. I just recently got to where I can bring the plane back to the ground in one piece... I'm a long way from learning to use the radar or anything like that, much less flying into combat.
Aircraft Vs Super Thread! 2
in Hall Of The Super Topics
Posted
The final consensus was that there IS no final consensus. They could be found in a variety of settings depending on many different factors.
The pics in question were Ken Middleton's. Perhaps you can ask him.