http://b.johnwurth.com/?p=110 (http://b.johnwurth.com/?p=110)
I ran across this today and thought it worth sharing here.
QuoteThere were a lot of things we couldn't do in an SR-71, but we were the fastest guys on the block and loved reminding our fellow aviators of this fact. People often asked us if, because of this fact, it was fun to fly the jet. Fun would not be the first word I would use to describe flying this plane. Intense, maybe. Even cerebral. But there was one day in our Sled experience when we would have to say that it was pure fun to be the fastest guys out there, at least for a moment.
It occurred when Walt and I were flying our final training sortie. We needed 100 hours in the jet to complete our training and attain Mission Ready status. Somewhere over Colorado we had passed the century mark. We had made the turn in Arizona and the jet was performing flawlessly. My gauges were wired in the front seat and we were starting to feel pretty good about ourselves, not only because we would soon be flying real missions but because we had gained a great deal of confidence in the plane in the past ten months. Ripping across the barren deserts 80,000 feet below us, I could already see the coast of California from the Arizona border. I was, finally, after many humbling months of simulators and study, ahead of the jet. I was beginning to feel a bit sorry for Walter in the back seat.
There he was, with no really good view of the incredible sights before us, tasked with monitoring four different radios. This was good practice for him for when we began flying real missions, when a priority transmission from headquarters could be vital. It had been difficult, too, for me to relinquish control of the radios, as during my entire flying career I had controlled my own transmissions. But it was part of the division of duties in this plane and I had adjusted to it. I still insisted on talking on the radio while we were on the ground, however. Walt was so good at many things, but he couldn't match my expertise at sounding smooth on the radios, a skill that had been honed sharply with years in fighter squadrons where the slightest radio miscue was grounds for beheading. He understood that and allowed me that luxury. Just to get a sense of what Walt had to contend with, I pulled the radio toggle switches and monitored the frequencies along with him.
The predominant radio chatter was from Los Angeles Center, far below us, controlling daily traffic in their sector. While they had us on their scope (albeit briefly), we were in uncontrolled airspace and normally would not talk to them unless we needed to descend into their airspace. We listened as the shaky voice of a lone Cessna pilot asked Center for a readout of his ground speed. Center replied: "November Charlie 175, I'm showing you at ninety knots on the ground."
Now the thing to understand about Center controllers, was that whether they were talking to a rookie pilot in a Cessna, or to Air Force One, they always spoke in the exact same, calm, deep, professional, tone that made one feel important. I referred to it as the " Houston Center voice." I have always felt that after years of seeing documentaries on this country's space program and listening to the calm and distinct voice of the Houston controllers, that all other controllers since then wanted to sound like that, and that they basically did. And it didn't matter what sector of the country we would be flying in, it always seemed like the same guy was talking. Over the years that tone of voice had become somewhat of a comforting sound to pilots everywhere. Conversely, over the years, pilots always wanted to ensure that, when transmitting, they sounded like Chuck Yeager, or at least like John Wayne. Better to die than sound bad on the radios. Just moments after the Cessna's inquiry, a Twin Beech piped up on frequency, in a rather superior tone, asking for his ground speed. "I have you at one hundred and twenty-five knots of ground speed."
Boy, I thought, the Beechcraft really must think he is dazzling his Cessna brethren. Then, out of the blue, a navy F-18 pilot out of NAS Lemoore came up on frequency. You knew right away it was a Navy jock because he sounded very cool on the radios. "Center, Dusty 52 ground speed check". Before Center could reply, I'm thinking to myself, hey, Dusty 52 has a ground speed indicator in that million-dollar cockpit, so why is he asking Center for a readout? Then I got it, ol' Dusty here is making sure that every bug smasher from Mount Whitney to the Mojave knows what true speed is. He's the fastest dude in the valley today, and he just wants everyone to know how much fun he is having in his new Hornet. And the reply, always with that same, calm, voice, with more distinct alliteration than emotion: "Dusty 52, Center, we have you at 620 on the ground."
And I thought to myself, is this a ripe situation, or what? As my hand instinctively reached for the mic button, I had to remind myself that Walt was in control of the radios. Still, I thought, it must be done – in mere seconds we'll be out of the sector and the opportunity will be lost. That Hornet must die, and die now. I thought about all of our Sim training and how important it was that we developed well as a crew and knew that to jump in on the radios now would destroy the integrity of all that we had worked toward becoming. I was torn. Somewhere, 13 miles above Arizona, there was a pilot screaming inside his space helmet. Then, I heard it. The click of the mic button from the back seat. That was the very moment that I knew Walter and I had become a crew. Very professionally, and with no emotion, Walter spoke: "Los Angeles Center, Aspen 20, can you give us a ground speed check?" There was no hesitation, and the replay came as if was an everyday request. "Aspen 20, I show you at one thousand eight hundred and forty-two knots, across the ground."
I think it was the forty-two knots that I liked the best, so accurate and proud was Center to deliver that information without hesitation, and you just knew he was smiling. But the precise point at which I knew that Walt and I were going to be really good friends for a long time was when he keyed the mic once again to say, in his most fighter-pilot-like voice: "Ah, Center, much thanks, we're showing closer to nineteen hundred on the money." For a moment Walter was a god. And we finally heard a little crack in the armor of the Houston Center voice, when L.A.came back with, "Roger that Aspen, Your equipment is probably more accurate than ours. You boys have a good one."
It all had lasted for just moments, but in that short, memorable sprint across the southwest, the Navy had been flamed, all mortal airplanes on freq were forced to bow before the King of Speed, and more importantly, Walter and I had crossed the threshold of being a crew. A fine day's work. We never heard another transmission on that frequency all the way to the coast. For just one day, it truly was fun being the fastest guys out there.
A classic.
lol, suck it, Hornet boy.
That's excellent! Very cool! :cool: And such blazing speed, and probably not even at full throttle!
That was good.
:lol: Good stuff.
when I was a pre-teen in the early 80s the SR-71 was my favorite military jet-- until I realized it carried no armament.
Quote from: derspiess on March 20, 2013, 09:29:45 AM
:lol: Good stuff.
when I was a pre-teen in the early 80s the SR-71 was my favorite military jet-- until I realized it carried no armament.
That's one of the reasons I lost interest in the Mosquito.
I always thought the SR-71 was interesting, but only in a very technical manner.
I think all of my fascination with military aircraft is directly proportional to how much fun I imagine it would be to pilot one.
And the SR-71 seems pretty uninteresting to fly - almost certainly incredibly technically demanding, but not really "fun".
I would much rather have the Hornet drivers job...
Good story.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on March 20, 2013, 09:32:14 AM
Quote from: derspiess on March 20, 2013, 09:29:45 AM
:lol: Good stuff.
when I was a pre-teen in the early 80s the SR-71 was my favorite military jet-- until I realized it carried no armament.
That's one of the reasons I lost interest in the Mosquito.
Well there was an armed version of it, YF-12, not sure if it ever entered service.
Plus there was the prototype blackbird/s with the still faster recon drone mounted piggyback.
As for the Mosquito, not sure lack of armament is a 'valid' criticism as probably the majority were armed, some rather heavily so. And often it makes sense that reconnaissance planes are unarmed.
Quote from: Berkut on March 20, 2013, 09:36:33 AM
I always thought the SR-71 was interesting, but only in a very technical manner.
I think all of my fascination with military aircraft is directly proportional to how much fun I imagine it would be to pilot one.
And the SR-71 seems pretty uninteresting to fly - almost certainly incredibly technically demanding, but not really "fun".
I would much rather have the Hornet drivers job...
Yeah, just look at what the SR-71 pilot in the OP said: "Fun would not be the first word I would use to describe flying this plane. Intense, maybe. Even cerebral." Though it seems flying one gives you about the best views you'll ever see without actually becoming an astronaut.
For fun flying, I'd think the best bets would be the last generation of piston-engined fighters. They used technology that had been around long enough that it was reasonably reliable, and were probably easier to fly for the most part than earlier fighters, yet the pilots were still in control and not overwhelmed by the techology, plus they were capable of pretty high performance. Though I guess some of the last open-cockpit biplanes would get close to that--nowhere near the top speed, but manouverable, and you'd get that wind-in-your-face thing going for you.
Quote from: dps on March 20, 2013, 10:27:02 AM
For fun flying, I'd think the best bets would be the last generation of piston-engined fighters. They used technology that had been around long enough that it was reasonably reliable, and were probably easier to fly for the most part than earlier fighters, yet the pilots were still in control and not overwhelmed by the techology, plus they were capable of pretty high performance. Though I guess some of the last open-cockpit biplanes would get close to that--nowhere near the top speed, but manouverable, and you'd get that wind-in-your-face thing going for you.
From what I saw at a couple airshows, the MiG-15 seems to be pretty fun to fly.
Great story g. Thanks.
Quote from: dps on March 20, 2013, 10:27:02 AM
For fun flying, I'd think the best bets would be the last generation of piston-engined fighters. They used technology that had been around long enough that it was reasonably reliable, and were probably easier to fly for the most part than earlier fighters, yet the pilots were still in control and not overwhelmed by the techology, plus they were capable of pretty high performance. Though I guess some of the last open-cockpit biplanes would get close to that--nowhere near the top speed, but manouverable, and you'd get that wind-in-your-face thing going for you.
¿What about a counter-insurgency turboprop? Or even better, an A-10 on CAS.
Thanks for sharing, grumbler. :)
Quote from: mongers on March 20, 2013, 09:59:44 AM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on March 20, 2013, 09:32:14 AM
Quote from: derspiess on March 20, 2013, 09:29:45 AM
:lol: Good stuff.
when I was a pre-teen in the early 80s the SR-71 was my favorite military jet-- until I realized it carried no armament.
That's one of the reasons I lost interest in the Mosquito.
Well there was an armed version of it, YF-12, not sure if it ever entered service.
Plus there was the prototype blackbird/s with the still faster recon drone mounted piggyback.
As for the Mosquito, not sure lack of armament is a 'valid' criticism as probably the majority were armed, some rather heavily so. And often it makes sense that reconnaissance planes are unarmed.
Armed "version" and armed "version". The YF-12 lost the competition for the next generation Air Force fighter to what became the F-15 due to maintenence and reliability issues iirc. An american Foxbat with less payload, higher speed, higher altitude, massively longer pre-flight prep and the tendency to get jet fuel on everything nearby just didnt' seem relevant in a world where the soviets weren't even thinking about nuking american cities with deep penetrating long range bombers armed with cruise missiles. The soviets were however planning on using cruise missiles launched from long range bombers to attack carrier groups, consequently the American Foxbat was the F-14.
Re: the Mosquito and it's successor the Canberra (the mosquitos post war jet engined replacement) they were multi role multi engine fighter/bombers. They played every single combat role except torpedo launching and strategic bombing. The Mosquito is not an example of how a scout/recon plane can be adapted to other roles. It is an example of an exceptional design and production plan that managed to fill every single niche that didn't already have a plane specifically designed for the role as well as being able to perform competently in most roles when and where it was required. This was especially useful since it didn't consume any strategic resources apart from the merlin engines it used. The canadian ones used an american built merlin version iirc so those didn't used anything of real consequence in terms of material. It's brilliance lay in it's versatility both in being able to make up the numbers in roles which were already underequipped and filling new unplanned for roles (like pathfinding and strategic recon).
:lol:
:lmfao:
Super story and brightened up my day. Thanks grumbles.
Quote from: dps on March 20, 2013, 10:27:02 AM
Yeah, just look at what the SR-71 pilot in the OP said: "Fun would not be the first word I would use to describe flying this plane. Intense, maybe. Even cerebral." Though it seems flying one gives you about the best views you'll ever see without actually becoming an astronaut.
QuoteRipping across the barren deserts 80,000 feet below us, I could already see the coast of California from the Arizona border.
That says it all right there. Operationally, it must've been an absolute spoogefest back in the day, flying over Soviet airspace at the edge of space with all those fantastic surveillance bells and whistles. More starship than aircraft. Probably a different kind of fun than dropping CAS ordnance with an A-6 Intruder, but complete fun nonetheless.
QuoteFor fun flying, I'd think the best bets would be the last generation of piston-engined fighters. They used technology that had been around long enough that it was reasonably reliable, and were probably easier to fly for the most part than earlier fighters, yet the pilots were still in control and not overwhelmed by the techology, plus they were capable of pretty high performance. Though I guess some of the last open-cockpit biplanes would get close to that--nowhere near the top speed, but manouverable, and you'd get that wind-in-your-face thing going for you.
Couple years ago, I took my Dad down to a place outside Front Royal, Virginia that offered rides in a Texan trainer, with as much acrobatics as you were willing to take. Even got a cockpit video recording of the entire flight. He had a total blast. Looked like Snoopy in that flyer's cap.
Quote from: Viking on March 20, 2013, 05:33:31 PM
Quote from: mongers on March 20, 2013, 09:59:44 AM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on March 20, 2013, 09:32:14 AM
Quote from: derspiess on March 20, 2013, 09:29:45 AM
:lol: Good stuff.
when I was a pre-teen in the early 80s the SR-71 was my favorite military jet-- until I realized it carried no armament.
That's one of the reasons I lost interest in the Mosquito.
Well there was an armed version of it, YF-12, not sure if it ever entered service.
Plus there was the prototype blackbird/s with the still faster recon drone mounted piggyback.
As for the Mosquito, not sure lack of armament is a 'valid' criticism as probably the majority were armed, some rather heavily so. And often it makes sense that reconnaissance planes are unarmed.
Armed "version" and armed "version". The YF-12 lost the competition for the next generation Air Force fighter to what became the F-15 due to maintenence and reliability issues iirc. An american Foxbat with less payload, higher speed, higher altitude, massively longer pre-flight prep and the tendency to get jet fuel on everything nearby just didnt' seem relevant in a world where the soviets weren't even thinking about nuking american cities with deep penetrating long range bombers armed with cruise missiles. The soviets were however planning on using cruise missiles launched from long range bombers to attack carrier groups, consequently the American Foxbat was the F-14.
Re: the Mosquito and it's successor the Canberra (the mosquitos post war jet engined replacement) they were multi role multi engine fighter/bombers. They played every single combat role except torpedo launching and strategic bombing. The Mosquito is not an example of how a scout/recon plane can be adapted to other roles. It is an example of an exceptional design and production plan that managed to fill every single niche that didn't already have a plane specifically designed for the role as well as being able to perform competently in most roles when and where it was required. This was especially useful since it didn't consume any strategic resources apart from the merlin engines it used. The canadian ones used an american built merlin version iirc so those didn't used anything of real consequence in terms of material. It's brilliance lay in it's versatility both in being able to make up the numbers in roles which were already underequipped and filling new unplanned for roles (like pathfinding and strategic recon).
Why are you telling me this, I know all of that, no doubt most of the rest of the forum does too. ;)
Did I say it was ? Or might I have been commenting on it being unarmed ?
Quote from: Viking on March 20, 2013, 05:33:31 PM
Armed "version" and armed "version". The YF-12 lost the competition for the next generation Air Force fighter to what became the F-15 due to maintenence and reliability issues iirc. An american Foxbat with less payload, higher speed, higher altitude, massively longer pre-flight prep and the tendency to get jet fuel on everything nearby just didnt' seem relevant in a world where the soviets weren't even thinking about nuking american cities with deep penetrating long range bombers armed with cruise missiles. The soviets were however planning on using cruise missiles launched from long range bombers to attack carrier groups, consequently the American Foxbat was the F-14.
The YF-12 didn't lose out to the F-15 - it was from the generation before the F-15. The F-12 program was cancelled because the need for it disappeared with advances in ICBMs and especially SLBMs. It had been designed as a long-range interceptor, not a fighter per se. The F-15 and F-14 were primarily air superiority fighters. Neither was "the American Foxbat." You could argue that the Phoenix missile was a purely interceptor missile, but that didn't make the F-14 an interceptor. It just gave an air superiority fighter like the F-14 the capability to act in the long-range-interceptor role when necessary.
Uh yeah, calling the F-14 the American Foxbat is a bit of an insult.
Oh, no some one compared an American interceptor to a a Soviet interceptor. The horror!
The F-22 is the American Foxbat: An expensive waste of resources built to counter an opponent that didn't exist.
Quote from: Neil on March 20, 2013, 11:14:09 PM
The F-22 is the American Foxbat: An expensive waste of resources built to counter an opponent that didn't exist.
Canadians have nothing worthwhile to say on the topic. *cough*AVRO Arrow*cough*
Quote from: Viking on March 20, 2013, 11:26:36 PM
Quote from: Neil on March 20, 2013, 11:14:09 PM
The F-22 is the American Foxbat: An expensive waste of resources built to counter an opponent that didn't exist.
Canadians have nothing worthwhile to say on the topic. *cough*AVRO Arrow*cough*
Wait a minute... Aren't you from Iceland?
Man, I wouldn't want that albatross around my neck.
Quote from: Viking on March 20, 2013, 11:26:36 PM
Quote from: Neil on March 20, 2013, 11:14:09 PM
The F-22 is the American Foxbat: An expensive waste of resources built to counter an opponent that didn't exist.
Canadians have nothing worthwhile to say on the topic. *cough*AVRO Arrow*cough*
:hmm: What's your point?
Quote from: Grey Fox on March 21, 2013, 07:19:40 AM
Quote from: Viking on March 20, 2013, 11:26:36 PM
Quote from: Neil on March 20, 2013, 11:14:09 PM
The F-22 is the American Foxbat: An expensive waste of resources built to counter an opponent that didn't exist.
Canadians have nothing worthwhile to say on the topic. *cough*AVRO Arrow*cough*
:hmm: What's your point?
It's just Canada; aviation; AVRO Arrow;
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi152.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fs189%2Fdovielr%2Fnelson-haha.gif&hash=405a0c58e6c6263e6d8af331f4eaba8e496e9ea5)
That's pretty much all I need.
Quote from: Viking on March 21, 2013, 06:03:43 PM
It's just Canada; aviation; AVRO Arrow;
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi152.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fs189%2Fdovielr%2Fnelson-haha.gif&hash=405a0c58e6c6263e6d8af331f4eaba8e496e9ea5)
That's pretty much all I need.
If you are going to mock Canadian military aircraft, mock the CF-100 Canuck. They actually built that turkey in large numbers.
The Canuck did an amazing job of what it did: Flying around and not actually shooting anything down. Compare that to the Su-15.
Quote from: Neil on March 21, 2013, 07:34:00 PM
The Canuck did an amazing job of what it did: Flying around and not actually shooting anything down. Compare that to the Su-15.
:lol: Touche.
Some of those American interceptors weren't much good either. Like the Starfighter, which had a nasty tendency to kill Germans. Which would be good during WWII, not the Cold War.
I loved the Starfighter. Even had a model kit and obsessed over it.
Quote from: Ed Anger on March 21, 2013, 08:55:38 PM
I loved the Starfighter. Even had a model kit and obsessed over it.
Just remember to not eject from the early models on takeoff.
Quote from: PDH on March 21, 2013, 08:57:39 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on March 21, 2013, 08:55:38 PM
I loved the Starfighter. Even had a model kit and obsessed over it.
Just remember to not eject from the early models on takeoff.
It burned on the runway. There was a tragic pouring of model glue and a lit match thrown on it. Damn jap sabotage.
That is such a great story I'm 100% positive it was posted on languish before.
Quote from: Ed Anger on March 21, 2013, 08:55:38 PM
I loved the Starfighter. Even had a model kit and obsessed over it.
Couple of my favs has always been the F-5 and the Mirage III
Quote from: Barrister on March 21, 2013, 09:00:26 PM
That is such a great story I'm 100% positive it was posted on languish before.
I know. My model stories are fantastic.
Quote from: Ed Anger on March 21, 2013, 08:55:38 PM
I loved the Starfighter. Even had a model kit and obsessed over it.
I actually had a model starfighter in luftwaffe colours... my dog ate it. The whole process seemed highly appropriate.
Quote from: Ed Anger on March 21, 2013, 08:55:38 PM
I loved the Starfighter. Even had a model kit and obsessed over it.
Bet you could stab someone with it.
Quote from: Ed Anger on March 21, 2013, 08:55:38 PM
I loved the Starfighter. Even had a model kit and obsessed over it.
When I was a kid, most of my modelling were aircraft carriers, but as far as airframes went, I'd grab ever F4 Phantom package I could find in any scale. Yes, even the Kraut ICE version.
Although my room's pride and joy was a monster 1/48 scale Revell kit of a Rockwell B-1 Bomber before it went into production. Hung it from the ceiling, it was too big to put anywhere.
Actually, it turned out being my Dad's pride and joy, as it was so maddening to put together, he assumed assembly duties personally. :lol:
I loved Battleships. The South Dakota was my pride and joy. Except for the heavy use of glue on the aft turrets. :blush:
The Graf Spee ended up burning in a kiddie pool in the backyard. Damn Limeys.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 21, 2013, 09:14:03 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on March 21, 2013, 08:55:38 PM
I loved the Starfighter. Even had a model kit and obsessed over it.
When I was a kid, most of my modelling were aircraft carriers, but as far as airframes went, I'd grab ever F4 Phantom package I could find in any scale. Yes, even the Kraut ICE version.
Although my room's pride and joy was a monster 1/48 scale Revell kit of a Rockwell B-1 Bomber before it went into production. Hung it from the ceiling, it was too big to put anywhere.
Actually, it turned out being my Dad's pride and joy, as it was so maddening to put together, he assumed assembly duties personally. :lol:
Yeah those era kits especially the Brit and American companies were often not that well made, I guess in part because of the stiff developing injection moulding technology.
Much modern stuff, even from the mass market companies, goes together rather well. You can get a 1/24th Mosquito from Airfix for a decent price:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hyperscale.com%2F2011%2Fgalleries%2Fp7hg_img_40%2Ffullsize%2FMossie_pic_10_fs.jpg&hash=56b64610962ead5128074b79298ba44691c486f8)
http://www.hyperscale.com/2011/galleries/mosquito24js_1.htm (http://www.hyperscale.com/2011/galleries/mosquito24js_1.htm)
Yeah I also made a Starfighter, I think it was a revell.
And I also had an concept rock album about the german Starfighter scandal, I kid you not. :cool:
:punk: Mosquito Mosquito AWESOME AIRCRAFT. Looks good.
Quote from: Ed Anger on March 21, 2013, 09:19:18 PM
I loved Battleships. The South Dakota was my pride and joy. Except for the heavy use of glue on the aft turrets. :blush:
The Graf Spee ended up burning in a kiddie pool in the backyard. Damn Limeys.
I had a huge number of waterline warships. My favorites were Hood, Iowa, Hiei and Gneisenau.
I'm building a waterline Vittorio Veneto. Now there's a good looking dreadnought.
Yeah, the Italians made lovely ships, even though there were some defects in fighting qualities. I just bought a big reference book for the Littorio class.
Right now, I only do 1/350 scale ships. I've had a partially done Prince of Wales in the closet for a couple of years.
Quote from: Neil on March 22, 2013, 07:26:27 AM
Yeah, the Italians made lovely ships, even though there were some defects in fighting qualities. I just bought a big reference book for the Littorio class.
Right now, I only do 1/350 scale ships. I've had a partially done Prince of Wales in the closet for a couple of years.
http://www.amazon.com/Littorio-Class-Largest-Battleships-1937-1948/dp/1591144450
This one? I thought the price was a bit steep, is it worth it?
The Tamiya 1/700 PoW was my favourite when I was a kid. I used to dream of the 1/350, well out of my reach financially. And physically too, as they kept them on the upper shelves.
Something about those quads, maybe. Same with the Richelieu, intriguing ship.
That's the one. It's really in depth, so if you're interested in how the ship comes together, it might be worth it. The price wasn't really an issue for me, as that seems to be pretty much the going rate for a decent warship book. And I've bought a lot of warship books.
The Tamiya 1/350s are really affordable these days, it seems to me. There's a hobby shop near here selling them for 80 dollars or so. But yeah, when I was a kid there was no way I could afford that. Then again, even the waterline ones weren't exactly cheap. Some places were charging 30-35 bucks for a battleship.
Quote from: Neil on March 22, 2013, 07:54:07 AM
That's the one. It's really in depth, so if you're interested in how the ship comes together, it might be worth it. The price wasn't really an issue for me, as that seems to be pretty much the going rate for a decent warship book. And I've bought a lot of warship books.
The Tamiya 1/350s are really affordable these days, it seems to me. There's a hobby shop near here selling them for 80 dollars or so. But yeah, when I was a kid there was no way I could afford that. Then again, even the waterline ones weren't exactly cheap. Some places were charging 30-35 bucks for a battleship.
Oh, some shop on ebay is doing the KGV for 35 quid, I'm tempted, but know I'd never get around to making it. :(
Add the aftermarket stuff and paint and it will be a lot more :)
It's both inspiring and demoralizing, but look at this 1/700 Roma: http://www.modelshipgallery.com/gallery/bb/it/Roma-700-kk/index.htm
Picture no.10 has a lighter next to it for scale. Amazing stuff.
Quote from: Maladict on March 22, 2013, 09:27:25 AM
Add the aftermarket stuff and paint and it will be a lot more :)
It's both inspiring and demoralizing, but look at this 1/700 Roma: http://www.modelshipgallery.com/gallery/bb/it/Roma-700-kk/index.htm
Picture no.10 has a lighter next to it for scale. Amazing stuff.
Yeah, how do those people do it, mind boggling.
I haven't got the steady hands to do that.