Victors and Canberra (Marham)

[John Young]

Some useful suggestions there guys and thank you.

I only choose 12,000ft for the refuelling altitude of the Victor to minimise the climb out time from Marham until the hoses were deployed and available for use. I think 22,000ft will work just as well, particularly with a longer refuelling track and I'll make that change.

I don't want to duplicate what you are doing or are going to do for the KC-135 flightplan-wise, and I wondered what plans you had for refuelling waypoints, bearing in mind Daryl's kind suggestion to make some. I was also wondering about a race track pattern. I can't remember if it was Lago or Just Flight or someone else that did it some years back but that worked quite well. I wouldn't know how to program one though. I guess my main concern is how to communicate with users about finding the tankers if the routes are too varied.

If there is some scope to share some common refuelling areas/waypoints, I don't need them right now, I'm going to make a start on the Canberra this coming week to go with the Victors at Marham.

Mike's multiplayer model suggestion is really good. I did get a request a few months back to strip down my AI Lancaster. That didn't have any temporary parts linked to the beacon light but I did have to remove the LODs to reduce the file size. I'll do that for the Victor.

Co-incidentally, we had a visit to Mildenhall the other week and we were invited to crawl all over a KC-135R. If it's any use, we were told that they never deploy the boom and the wing pod hoses (when carried) at the same time.

John

[fishlips]

The MP community loves the models but hates the fact that the wheel chocks, banners, etc show up on the model in game while it's being flown. Same goes for using the model with the Recorder module.

Firstly John, Amazing work on the Victor. It truely lights my day up to see these golden oldies back in the sky and to have them doing refueling flights is just awesome.

Mike JG, I never really gave thought to the MP community so that is something for us all to keep in mind.

Mark G

[MIKE JG]

Co-incidentally, we had a visit to Mildenhall the other week and we were invited to crawl all over a KC-135R. If it's any use, we were told that they never deploy the boom and the wing pod hoses (when carried) at the same time.

I'm still trying to figure out if the French do this or not. I've not seen any pictures of them with this triple setup but that doesn't mean they don't do it. Wouldn't leave much room for the jets.

Hopefully I don't find any proof of this because that will be one less version to do!

[John Young]

I know what you mean Mike, my brain is aching from working through the Canberra variants to see what I can reasonably accomplish that would please most people, apart from what I need for Marham.

I know it's not the right thread, but I have got into the habit of photographing aircraft wheels at every opportunity because I find these difficult to get right without a good source. Here are the nose and main wheel of a KC_135R in case they might come in useful (feel free to use in textures):



Also the nose emblem on 91492 of the 100th ARW at Mildenhall UK:



John

[LEBTowerGuy]

from my experience with 135s and the use of Heavy, usually it was the controllers that would use it, but the pilots would always forget. Their proper designation is H/K35R so they are a Heavy. Its more of the pilots not using proper phraseology then an actual procedural thing.

[MIKE JG]

I know it's not the right thread, but I have got into the habit of photographing aircraft wheels at every opportunity because I find these difficult to get right without a good source. Here are the nose and main wheel of a KC_135R in case they might come in useful (feel free to use in textures

See............ Now THAT right there is damm funny because I just happen to go to the Mansfield Airport open house today because I knew a KC-135R would be there. I wanted to see what I had missed on the model, LOL!

But low and behold, I too came home with pictures of.................

You guessed it!

Great minds think alike!!!!! I only wish they hadn't put the engine covers on because I would have loved to get a good, straight on shot of the fan disc. The crew was no where to be found, I don't blame them, it was crazy hot!

[John Young]

That's uncanny Mike! I too would have photographed the fan disks but the Mildenhall aircraft all had their intake covers on too.

John

[campbeme]

PM Inbound

Mark

[John Young]

Just wanted to thank Mark for making a flight plan for the Victor from Marham out to a North Sea waypoint and back for me. That's much better than having it touch and go/overshoot at a modern day Leuchars.

[John Young]

The Canberras are coming on quite well. It's been really interesting doing the research. I've built the FS9 models, added 7 LODs in each and set up the FDE. Just a few adjustments needed in the contact points.

Here's the PR9 to go with the Victors in my retro Marham scenery:



I started though with the B2 because it feeds so many of the other variants. I think it will give the Painters quite a bit of choice and hopefully a lot of fun with the miriad of liveries that were applied. Here's a 231 OCU camoflaged example:



I've also included a reflective option in the B2 model. Here's a a 15 Sqn livery with Suez Campaign stripes:



The T17A (ECM) is an ugly beast but interesting to model:



I've also made is a PR3/PR7 that has the fuselage extended by 14 inches. I just had to do this one because of the PR Blue scheme:



I'll also include a couple of German Air Force schemes for Martin over at The Owl's Nest.

Just one more model to do before I do the FSX coding. I want to make the TT Mk18 Target tug in RAF and RN colours (black and yellow underside). They are fitted with the Rushton target winch pods that can also deploy a banner. The small rocket-like targets are on the end of a 50,000ft cable so modelling them deployed at altitude is not really practicable. I might be able to do something with a towed banner though. I have only found one photo so far - it's of a B-57 with the banner quite close behind the aircraft. Does anyone know please how far behind the aircraft the banner would usually be towed. I guess if I was the pilot I would want it as far away as possible!

John

[f47420]

Looks good John.

MW

[jimrodger]

Does anyone know please how far behind the aircraft the banner would usually be towed. I guess if I was the pilot I would want it as far away as possible!

I believe there were few calls of "I'm towing the target, not pushing it!!" when they got too close.

Jim

[Stewart Pearson]

The T17A (ECM) is an ugly beast but interesting to model:

Used to see them regularly at Leuchars, John.

360 Squadron used the callsign "Warthog" for obvious reasons.

[Stewart Pearson]

John,

There are some nice images of Target Tow Canberras here;

http://forums.airshows.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=13754

Not sure what the norm was, but the Rushton System had 20000 feet of cable.

[jimrodger]

Bits and pieces about Canberras and target towing here -

http://www.pprune.org/military-aircrew/ ... rra-4.html

hope it helps.


Jim

[Makadocias]

Those Canberra's are looking really good!!!

[Rotten Ralph]

Fantastic models & paints for both aircraft John.
Are you thinking of doing the B-57 variant? as a NASA version would be a great addition to have.
When I worked at the Royal Aircraft Establishment at Farnborough, they had quite a few canberras in the Raspberry Ripple (Red,White & Blue) colours. They did look good.

[gsnde]

This is coming along great, John!

[miljan]

Looks great.Keep up with this amazing aircraft.


Miljan

[John Young]

Thanks guys for the feedback and information. The PPrune correspondence was a really enjoyable read. I think it also answered my question. Seems the banners (sleeves) were towed anywhere between 900ft (air to air mission) and 20,000 ft (ground to air mission) behind the aircraft. Quite sensiible really, particularly on the receiving end of naval 4.5" guns! Either way, it's not a realistic modelling option to deploy the targets at altitude. As I discovered with braking parachutes, even though the part isn't displayed on the ground, it still counts in the calculation of the parking spot diameter for the AI aircraft to show. A 10,000ft radius is perhaps pushing it too far! I'll still make the TT Mk18 though with the Rushton pods. I'll also add the Martin B-57 to my job list if users don't mind waiting a little longer for the output. I thought the Canberra might be popular, but there are so many variants and paint schemes. I'd like to leave some options for re-painters to have fun with.

John