There are calls for a civil Merlin as well, l cant see how it can justify a stand alone so it'd have to be a free update for both the Navy and RAF packs, again another hard call and again the jury is still out.
AndyG, have you been monitoring my endless stream of requests/suggestions to Phil and Michael on this subject? That's exactly the pitch I've been giving. Maybe they will listen to an outside voice. You seem to have bent Phil's ear on the Javelin. :dance: First email this morning started with "let's do something to give the Javelin a jumpstart". So we're back on that one. That's fine, I've come to really like the aircraft over the last month.
Reading through the thread AND the seperate Javelin thread I finally have to agree with DaveB - There is something slightly "off" about the
Alphasim Javelin - its the jet pipes - theyre are too long for the tail
I just posted an interesting FAW9 paintscheme of a Mk9 that was used
by Avro Canada as a chase plane and the jetpipe and afterburner are
markedly shorter. Not bitching - love the aircraft and its a hoot to fly but
have to admit when Im wrong
I have bought the Javelin and I like it Brings back memories of building a Frog kit of one many moons ago
Re the jetpipes being too long - I am not convinced. I have just had a look at a few pics and plans and they look OK to me. Remember this is the Mk9 which (like the Mk8) had the later Sapphires. All of the other Marks had shorter tails - either the 'pen nib' or the short pipes as seen on the Mk7.
DispatchDragon wrote:
Reading through the thread AND the seperate Javelin thread I finally have to agree with DaveB - There is something slightly "off" about the
Alphasim Javelin - its the jet pipes - theyre are too long for the tail
I just posted an interesting FAW9 paintscheme of a Mk9 that was used
by Avro Canada as a chase plane and the jetpipe and afterburner are
markedly shorter. Not bitching - love the aircraft and its a hoot to fly but
have to admit when Im wrong
Hum, not sure. :think: I just paint the things. I don't recall running into any panel line alignment problems back there and that is usually a dead give away that something isn't quite right when I have to start fudging things. Or it just means the panel line guide I used was of the same dimensions as those the modeler used. Who knows? :roll:
Where is this paint scheme you mentioned?
Also, to anyone who has the initial release of the Javelin and picks up the 1.1 update please read my post in the announcements section of the Alphasim forum. It will explain how to gain an additional aircraft from the combination. (Hint: If you are just buying now download it in two parts if still available.) Please don't read this as a shameless plug by Alphasim, I'm just trying to help fellow simmers out.
As for the burner cans being 'off', well spotted - they are supposed to be like that. I'm suprised no-one on this forum picked up on that.
Looking down from the top, the alignment of the cans follows the taper of the fuselage sides, you can even see that the two reheat flames follow that line as they converge on each other, pretty obvious that one. However, what's really odd is that the Javelin cans are tipped slightly downwards when viewed from the side - now that looks wrong, but that's the way they are designed ! I have no idea why this is so but if required I can show several side-on pictures which demonstrate this oddity.
AlphaSim wrote:As for the burner cans being 'off', well spotted - they are supposed to be like that. I'm suprised no-one on this forum picked up on that.
Looking down from the top, the alignment of the cans follows the taper of the fuselage sides, you can even see that the two reheat flames follow that line as they converge on each other, pretty obvious that one. However, what's really odd is that the Javelin cans are tipped slightly downwards when viewed from the side - now that looks wrong, but that's the way they are designed ! I have no idea why this is so but if required I can show several side-on pictures which demonstrate this oddity.
For the same reason that prop aircraft have 1-3 degrees of side and down offset built into the engine mountings. It's to counteract increased lift (zooming) imparted by increased thrust from the engines. In effect it forces the nose down slightly. Side thrust counteracts prop torque. N/A to jets of course. Remember on a delta it's one hell of a wing area.
I built many R/C models Phil.
AlphaSim wrote:As for the burner cans being 'off', well spotted - they are supposed to be like that. I'm suprised no-one on this forum picked up on that.
Looking down from the top, the alignment of the cans follows the taper of the fuselage sides, you can even see that the two reheat flames follow that line as they converge on each other, pretty obvious that one. However, what's really odd is that the Javelin cans are tipped slightly downwards when viewed from the side - now that looks wrong, but that's the way they are designed ! I have no idea why this is so but if required I can show several side-on pictures which demonstrate this oddity.
For the same reason that prop aircraft have 1-3 degrees of side and down offset built into the engine mountings. It's to counteract increased lift (zooming) imparted by increased thrust from the engines. In effect it forces the nose down slightly. Side thrust counteracts prop torque. N/A to jets of course. Remember on a delta it's one hell of a wing area.
I built many R/C models Phil. Including a Javelin.
Mickey D wrote:I built many R/C models Phil. Including a Javelin.
2 Questions then -
1) DF or Turbine?
2) Where are the bloody pictures?!?!
Neither. It was a slope soarer. I cheated slightly 'cos I gave it an all moving tail plane for better manoeuverability. It was 48" span with a veneered foam wing and fuse. The wing was an Eppler semi symetrical section.
It flew pretty near scale too. When slowed to landing speed it yawed just like the full size.
I have a pic but it's the silly looking tw*t holding it that's the problem. I'll see if I can find it if you're interested.
In my opinion the planes from ALPHA are externally very impressive. Very good exteriors and textures. They capture in shape the real subjects.
The problem is that probably Alpha is loosing clients because prefers to produce several planes each year ( some very esotic and interesting, without any doubt ) but with minimal 2D and VC .
The prices more or less are the same of other paywares. I recently bought the SAAB SAFIR and I can say that ithe plane is 100% like the real thing inside. All VC is working and in this case I prefer to buy 2 or 3 "perfect" planes each year (the SAFIR, The Dornier 27 or the Wings of Power and Carenado production) instead of an Alpha product. May be these other ones are a little bit more expensive but in principle I enjoy to fly planes seriously from the cockpit . Rick Piper (he is an Holy Saint, really ) is doing the right things (freeware ! but this is another story) .
Quality versus quantity? I prefer the first option. :think:
That's exactly the pitch I've been giving. Maybe they will listen to an outside voice. You seem to have bent Phil's ear on the Javelin. :dance: First email this morning started with "let's do something to give the Javelin a jumpstart". So we're back on that one. That's fine, I've come to really like the aircraft over the last month.
