Berttt Posted June 25, 2004 Share Posted June 25, 2004 (edited) In Nanashi's description of the AMM-1, there is a description on how the GU-11 can be replaced with two four run pallet's of missiles. I have a heap of Hasegawa AMM-1's lying around and wouldn't mind scratching something together. The thing is I can't get my head around what something like this would look like. So I am asking the aircraft wise here at MW for suggestions. Is there any weapon pylons that exist currently to hold four weapons, other than the Apache's Hellfire rails? Cheers, Berttt Edited June 25, 2004 by Berttt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Akula Posted June 25, 2004 Share Posted June 25, 2004 not 4 missiles... there are planes that i've seen with 4 bombs to a pylon... but not missiles... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Opus Posted June 25, 2004 Share Posted June 25, 2004 How about something like this but with 8 AMMs? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted June 25, 2004 Share Posted June 25, 2004 That's 4 single pallets, for an F-14 belly w/4 Phoenixes. Can't think of anything with 4. I bet it's physically possible to connect an LAU-115 with 2 LAU-127's on it, onto an SUU-59 with 2 LAU-128's on it. Probably wouldn't be electrically compatible, etc, but I think the physical connection is possible. Or in English: Take a Hornet's double missile launcher adapter, with 2 AMRAAM rails on it, and load it onto an F-15's pylon, with 2 AMRAAM rails on it. You'd get 4 AMRAAM's on a single pylon. But it sure wouldn't be pretty, nor compact at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skull Leader Posted June 25, 2004 Share Posted June 25, 2004 to say nothing about the drag and weight considerations... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Opus Posted June 25, 2004 Share Posted June 25, 2004 i was intrigued by this concept so I made quick mock up with cardboard and 2 sided tape on my 1/48 to see what it would look like. This is the best config I could come up with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Opus Posted June 25, 2004 Share Posted June 25, 2004 This is the cardboard piece I made. It's simple but it allows for full t-formation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheFrenchOne Posted June 25, 2004 Share Posted June 25, 2004 i was intrigued by this concept so I made quick mock up with cardboard and 2 sided tape on my 1/48 to see what it would look like. This is the best config I could come up with. Not bad, not bad at all. IMO with such mod the valk deserves to be put on such a display stand Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurel Tristen Posted June 26, 2004 Share Posted June 26, 2004 In Nanashi's description of the AMM-1, there is a description on how the GU-11 can be replaced with two four run pallet's of missiles. I have a heap of Hasegawa AMM-1's lying around and wouldn't mind scratching something together. The thing is I can't get my head around what something like this would look like.So I am asking the aircraft wise here at MW for suggestions. Is there any weapon pylons that exist currently to hold four weapons, other than the Apache's Hellfire rails? Cheers, Berttt Just note that the description on the missiles is an unofficial one by the MAT fan group-still cool though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurel Tristen Posted June 26, 2004 Share Posted June 26, 2004 i was intrigued by this concept so I made quick mock up with cardboard and 2 sided tape on my 1/48 to see what it would look like. This is the best config I could come up with. very cool I always wanted a model with that loadout. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander McBride Posted June 26, 2004 Share Posted June 26, 2004 Pretty cool. Still, I want to see a Valk with 5 gunpods! (4 in place of the missile pylons) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chronocidal Posted June 27, 2004 Share Posted June 27, 2004 Hmmm... 8 missiles seems a little awkward... Maybe 6 on a single center rack would make more sense? F-105s and A-4s carried bombs that way... of course, again, those are bombs.. might not work for missiles. But the single rack of six would allow it to be attached to one arm, with a mount like the gunpod... and maybe give the battroid a heavier punch.. if it was rigged to fire the same way as the gunpod, with a self contained launching system, you could use it like a bazooka to launch missiles in battroid mode, instead of being limited to the gunpod. Would be pretty useless in close quarters combat though, unless the pylon itself was a weapon of some sort. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coota0 Posted June 27, 2004 Share Posted June 27, 2004 Take a Hornet's double missile launcher adapter, with 2 AMRAAM rails on it, and load it onto an F-15's pylon, with 2 AMRAAM rails on it. You'd get 4 AMRAAM's on a single pylon. But it sure wouldn't be pretty, nor compact at all. I can actually think of a reason. On the opening night of the Gulf War (the first one) and the following day, the F-15's had planned to use a tactic that was referred to as the "Missile Wall." 4 Eagles would fly in a line abreast formation ahead of the bombers and attack jets, when the Iraqis moved to intercept they would all launch missiles. I magine having this many AIM-120's on each F-15. Each missile is self guiding after being lauched you could splash the entire Air Force of a small country. The drawback is the lack of fuel economy, you would have to be planning on getting rid of those missiles quick, but if you're planning on being one of the lead fighters into a country that hasn't had one shot fired at it yet it doesn't sound to bad. With good tanker support it would be no problem. A few problems: 1) Tanker support 2) Not being engaged by the enemy Air Force 3) Drag 4) Being jumped in close Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Berttt Posted June 28, 2004 Author Share Posted June 28, 2004 (edited) I have had a look and I think I might use a similiar system to what Opus suggested. The idea is I'll use a some strips of styrene with with a bit of detail thrown in on each arm, and put two pylons inline per side with two missiles on each. Or I could ditch the eight missile idea and fit two pylons on the centreline with three wepons each. This set up will go on my RAAF 75SQN VF-1J that I'm planning, not that I'm jumping on it straight away, I've got to finish the VF-1A Super that I'm working on now, along with a VE-1, and a cannon fodder VF-1A Gerwalk - I have a lot of work ahead of me that's for sure. Thanks to everyone that replied, it helped clear things up a bit. Cheers, Berttt Edited June 28, 2004 by Berttt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spellbinder99 Posted July 22, 2004 Share Posted July 22, 2004 Berttt, any particular reason you want to do a RAAF 75SQN VF-1J? Will it have the black diamonds or the Top Hat on the fins ? Cheers Tony Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seph1roT Posted July 22, 2004 Share Posted July 22, 2004 (edited) How about something like this but with 8 AMMs? ????????? Those are Mavericks Antiground targets not antiaircraft ones . And the mavericks aren't properly missiles since they are optical guided and u have to maintain the optical lock on to hit the designated target . The antiaircraft missiles do rely on the acquiring system , they are launch and forget , expecially in a dogfight , bot the thermal guided and the radar guided , not only in bwr but in close combat too . U simply can't expect a pilot that launches eg 4 missiles can mantain an optical lock , or even an heat lock , on all of the targets expecially if one is on his 12 and one on his 6 . A plane with that loadout can only fight one way .... beyond visual range then converting to battleroid mode . But he can return to home only if he's 1vs3 or 4 . If the enemies are more than 4 bye bye Valky And ,of course , everything it's possible in sci-fic terms but if we think to reality just a microsecond , placing the missiles so close to each other can only cause pre-detonation in the launch procedure resulting in the pilot reaching the Valhalla at light speed I can actually think of a reason. On the opening night of the Gulf War (the first one) and the following day, the F-15's had planned to use a tactic that was referred to as the "Missile Wall." 4 Eagles would fly in a line abreast formation ahead of the bombers and attack jets, when the Iraqis moved to intercept they would all launch missiles. I magine having this many AIM-120's on each F-15. Each missile is self guiding after being lauched you could splash the entire Air Force of a small country. Well seen this only now Sry for the edit mods . Well there is another drawback Even the Belize's air force has chaffs or flares on its planes So u must put in count 2 missiles=1 kill in bvr beeing veryyyyyyyyyyyyyyy optimistic . If 1 missile = 1 kill in bvr , well the pilot it's a dude that has been in the sky for the first and last time in his life But u can't think every pilot in an enemy air force it's so dude Edited July 22, 2004 by Seph1roT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Berttt Posted August 11, 2004 Author Share Posted August 11, 2004 Berttt, any particular reason you want to do a RAAF 75SQN VF-1J?Will it have the black diamonds or the Top Hat on the fins ? Cheers Tony Tony, What follows is really only my interpretation . I always considered the whole UN Forces situation to be a bit odd. Rather I see it operating in a similiar way to the way the U.N. does today. They decide to send in a peace keeping mission and request the personnel from various countries. Since the technological beakthroughs gleaned from the ASS1 were meant to be shared by all I could imagine countries around the world purchase and maintain their own fleet of VF's. Obviously some countries are going to be able to purchase more than others, but they contribute where they can. The cost of a VF would be astronomical so Stonewall/Bellcom would want as many countries on board as possible, just like Lockheed/Martin and the F-35. Very rarely does the Royal Australian Air Force purchase an airframe "off the shelf", instead thay jam al sorts of weird and wonderfull stuf into their assets, sometimes good, sometimes bad. So I couldn't imagine them going for a bog standard VF-1A, and instead purchase the better VF-1J as their standard. I chose 75 SQN because I thought that a VF-1 done up in a similiar scheme to the 75th annaversary "diamonds" would be cool. And because most of the other RAAF squadrons have boring squadron markings. The decider on why to do a RAAF jet? Well I'm sitting at my desk only a few hundred metres from the majority of RAAF Hornets right now...... So to answer your question, the VF will have probably have both diamonds and the top hat (on the tail) I have also fooled around with the idea of a 2OCU VF-1D and a ARDU VF-1S in Gerwalk (Hasegawa of course!) Brett Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spellbinder99 Posted August 11, 2004 Share Posted August 11, 2004 Good reasoning! I am ex-RAAF Hornet groundcrew myself and served in Tindal from the opening of the base in 1988 and was in Willie before that with 2.O.C.U., plus I was on Orions in Edinburgh for 6 years so I have an ARDU connection as well. I would actually like to do a VF-1 in Fox's 75 Sqn markings as a tribute to him, the best C.O. I ever had in my time and a life tragically cut short..... I would do a Fast Flying Fighting Turds one, but they have big enough heads allready.... I am currently in the Middle East and have been for the last six years working on Jaguar Strike jets.....thank god not in Saudi.. Cheers Tony Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Berttt Posted August 11, 2004 Author Share Posted August 11, 2004 Tony, No wonder you liked my idea A lot of people say that about Foxy, it's too bad what happened. I haven't been to a Hornet SQN yet, at the moment I'm at FACDU on PC-9's. I'll probably be posted accross next year. I might even do a FAC VF yet Before that I was on J-Model Hercs at Richmond. In fact you probably know some of the guys here if you were at Edinburgh/ARDU. Yeah I know what you mean aboout Saudi, I spoke to some the guys that came back after working for BAe from there and things went sour preety fast. Cheers, Brett T PS I really shoul get off my lazy arse and finish these kits!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.