|
Post by mumbles on Oct 7, 2018 18:24:27 GMT 12
I have noted that the RNZAF Skyhawks, Strikemasters and Macchis all had roundels only on the top of the port wing, not on top of both wings which was usually normal. Why was this? Was it to not compromise the camouflage effect too much? And was an RNZAF thing only, or was it a practice adopted from overseas? Was US practice as far back as WWII, and has been adopted at various times by other air forces (including the RAF) since. The A-4's in particular were painted in a standard USAF scheme when manufactured and this would have extended to the national marking placement. I suspect that not compromising the camouflage may have been a reason among other visual considerations, but I'm intrigued now so will apply some google fu and look into it.
|
|
|
Post by mumbles on Oct 7, 2018 18:21:09 GMT 12
Don't the Aussies have the roundel only on the upper surfaces (both wings) of some aircraft?. Depends on the type. RAAF Hornets don't have roundels on the upper wing surface at all.
|
|
|
Post by mumbles on Oct 3, 2018 19:58:22 GMT 12
Yep, looks like it from those 3d images. Sad thing is, much of that interior detail will be lost once the fuse is closed up. I dunno, with the size of the model and the transparencies a lot of that will be visible. Zoukei-mura does the genuinely invisible stuff
|
|
|
Post by mumbles on Oct 3, 2018 11:20:45 GMT 12
Wouldn't be surprised if this is a leg-pull - HK models is releasing one very soon, and the market for a model that big/expensive isn't likely to be huge... Some of us know some of the people at WNW, and the chance of this being a leg pull (especially with the CAD imagery now posted) is about nil. It's not something they do. The market may not be huge but WNW's reputation is such that this will likely be the best kit of a Lancaster ever produced.
|
|
|
Post by mumbles on Sept 15, 2018 17:59:03 GMT 12
No-one is implying this was a existing society "destroyed" by Maori though. We don't know anything about it. Maori don't know anything about it. The people who still claim to have descended from those who were here before Maori don't know anything about it. Hell, it could easily have been built by early Polynesians, they built stone structures on Rapanui and other places. Or it could have been built by 19th century saw millers as someone suggests. But we'll never know till they allow an indepth investigation and dig, rather than send some DOC or regional council geologist to have a squiz... It wasn't built by anyone, and who is this mysterious "they". Just because a couple of racist nerks on the internet might embrace the possibilities and add their own spin does not mean people with a genuine interest in history and a curiosity should not be allowed to find out more about what it really is. And they should not be all profiled as (potentially) racist, that is stereotyping of the wort kind. I wasn't profiling anyone as racist, merely stating a fact. This pseudoscience nonsense of pre-maori occupation of NZ is not supported by any credible or irrefutable evidence, but is used by some groups and people to devalue maori occupation and accordingly their treaty rights and claims.
|
|
|
Post by mumbles on Sept 15, 2018 11:00:28 GMT 12
What intrigues me most is they have never allowed a team of archaeologists to go in ad excavate it properly to find out how extensive it is and to look for more clues.If it's just a natural rock formation then it does not matter a jot that the soil is removed from it. So why has it not happened? Are they terrified they might find an ancient pyramid? Who is "they"? Archaeologists won't be interested in it because they understand that geologists know what they are talking about when they say it isn't man made and they have better things to do, like digging on actual historic sites. Debunked 20+ years ago. skeptics.nz/journal/issues/41/a-new-age-myth-the-kaimanawa-wallowlcation.com/humanities/Kaimanawa-Wall-Ancient-Wall-from-Lost-Cvilization-or-Natural-FormationThese things are also used by some to pursue a distinctly racist agenda, which I object to.
|
|
|
Post by mumbles on Sept 15, 2018 0:25:19 GMT 12
This one intrigues me a lot. Myself not so much. I'm happy with the science given for it being a natural formation, besides other factors that preclude anyone but polynesians being the first inhabitants of NZ.
|
|
|
Post by mumbles on Sept 6, 2018 21:00:17 GMT 12
|
|
|
Post by mumbles on Sept 3, 2018 19:25:14 GMT 12
Yes it is the best choice in my opinion. plus it is what the Air Force wanted from all the conversations i have had with No. 5 Squadron personnel. And the four airframes thing is not really an issue, fromwhat I have been told with the major lack of spares for Orions they are lucky if they have that many now able to fly on any given day. Might not be an issue when they are all shiny and new, but eventually they will age and the lack of airframes will be telling. 6 should have been the minimum with 3/4 available at any one time Did anyone say something like that when 5 P-3s were chosen to replace 12 Sunderlands (or however many were left servicable of the original 16 when the P-3 purchase was decided)?
|
|
|
Post by mumbles on Aug 7, 2018 9:34:49 GMT 12
Sorry ready to be shot down but amiss to not mention the ninth Super Rugby title for the awesome Canturbury Crusaders. Great for the region and their supporters, give it a couple of years and will have run out of fingers and have to start counting them on your toes, again sorry, red and black! Wondering how popular the team would be if they were renamed the Jihadis, which is what the crusaders essentially were
|
|
|
Post by mumbles on Jul 18, 2018 10:42:59 GMT 12
How on earth do you figure that Saratoga? Saratoga needs to realise that the NZDF are servants of the crown, and must abide by Government direction in terms of PR. In the case of the ACF, the government had made the decision to disband it, and the RNZAF in particular was not in a position to question that in PR terms. There was a deal of lobbying by concerned parties externally of defence, but to no avail. I think what Saratoga is getting at is that while the Army and Navy both had superb print and TV campaigns in the mid-late 90's, the Air Force by comparison was practically invisible. It is not the only factor, but possibly a significant one in creating the environment where disbanding the ACF was publicly permissible.
|
|
|
Post by mumbles on Jul 11, 2018 20:16:12 GMT 12
Another batch of photos from Tony: If this is South Vietnam those could be RAAF Canberra's in the foreground I think they are USAF B-57's. You can just see the long canopies on them.
|
|
|
Post by mumbles on Jul 11, 2018 16:54:18 GMT 12
Yawwwwwn. I should move this thread into the Flight Simulator board with all the other fantasy air force stuff... I dunno, nobody has suggested A-10's backed up by AC-130's as an ideal force mix yet (as I've seen elsewhere ).
|
|
|
Post by mumbles on Jun 14, 2018 22:48:30 GMT 12
Do those date back to before the days of digital photography and Photoshop? Or are they more recent creations? Definitely vintage. There is a four-engined NATTS Friendship in a mid-80's issue of Wings as well.
|
|
|
Post by mumbles on May 29, 2018 22:45:37 GMT 12
|
|
|
Post by mumbles on May 29, 2018 22:40:52 GMT 12
|
|
|
Post by mumbles on May 27, 2018 13:05:19 GMT 12
Besides Avalon, Taupo, Auckland and Wellington have all managed to host air displays while managing commercial traffic. Unless there is anything specifically mentioned I'm not sure there is anything to worry about.
|
|
|
Post by mumbles on May 18, 2018 9:52:30 GMT 12
If this is driven by a few families who suggested it, why are the families not paying? Why should they? They didn't choose for their relatives to die and be interred on foreign soil while in government service. And I am particularly perplexed as to why they are accompanied on these trips by a Maori party to sing and carry on. If that's your attitude and description I'm not sure if there is any amount of explanation that will suffice. There are no plans to repatriate my great uncles buried in France but I would be honoured by such an accompaniment if they were.
|
|
|
Post by mumbles on May 2, 2018 10:58:46 GMT 12
I am confused by the finflashes. You have mixed operational roundels with high viz finflashes on some aircraft. And for that matter operational aircraft generally don't wear finflashes of any sort these days. You don't see them on the RAAF and RCAF Hornets for example. Hi-vis is the new lo-vis Granted these are boss/CAG jets but they are still line aircraft
|
|
|
Post by mumbles on May 2, 2018 10:50:39 GMT 12
Maybe a Taiaha instead of the fern for the 2Sqn jet and spine flashes (like the RAAF Classic Hornets) instead of the squadron titling? Cool idea Funny you should say that as I was playing around with the 14 Sqn patch to capture the winged Taiaha but my graphics program wasn’t playing ball hence I went with the simple fern. I will have another play and will include the red and blue tail flash. Meanwhile I hadn't even noticed you were talking about 14 rather than 2 in the text! A Black Falcon on the fin would be cool
|
|