landerso47
ACCESS: Restricted
- Joined
- 9 May 2019
- Messages
- 10
- Reaction score
- 18
Just blown away by this models accuracy. The thinness of the wings alone.....
Just blown away by this models accuracy. The thinness of the wings alone.....
What about the book about these designs?
... Best would be to ask the authors at La Jetée, really. I've just done images (130+ and a promo vid ) for it, but have no involvement as to how, when, why ...ect.What about the book about these designs?
Okay, thanks!... Best would be to ask the authors at La Jetée, really. I've just done images (130+ and a promo vid ) for it, but have no involvement as to how, when, why ...ect.
Hi uk 75,....
Sadly those lovely schemes would not have been applied to the real planes if they had ever entered service. I suspect that like many early airliners they would have been left in natural finish with just small lettering for the airline names.
That's a lovely video. I'm curious about how you rendered it, what sim, if any, you used. Your test livery looks like a perfectly period correct TWA scheme. This is the basic scheme a plane delivered in early 1978, per the schedule printed in Aviation Week, would have worn.Oh I see Well I've not played with that 2707-300 model for a while. Last time was 2 years ago I did a touch and go at Edward AFB whatif vid:
Will have to redo a -300 at one point anyway, but as a 1/144 scale model, so will see of a 321 seats type is doable... Already did a 1/200 scale version, will post images in the models section if interested.
Yes it's supposed to be the TWA scheme but without "TWA", someone knowing much than me about airlines/airliners suggested that livery. works well for the time frame, like a prototype painted in one of the launch customer colours used in test before having the whole correct livery for promotion purpose.That's a lovely video. I'm curious about how you rendered it, what sim, if any, you used. Your test livery looks like a perfectly period correct TWA scheme. This is the basic scheme a plane delivered in early 1978, per the schedule printed in Aviation Week, would have worn.
#178 in US Supersonic Transport(SST) Program post-1971 thread .What is this?
I don't think there was any engineering issues involved. Yes, the plane would be titanium and titanium sucks to work on. Lockheed figured it out in the 1950s.Apart from any ecological/economical aspects, what are the pure engineering/technological considerations/limitations with respect to the Boeing SST ever actually taking to the skies and meeting its basic performance specifications? Asking for a non Boeing employed friend here ...
Very good question. We need Boeing's answer.Apart from any ecological/economical aspects, what are the pure engineering/technological considerations/limitations with respect to the Boeing SST ever actually taking to the skies and meeting its basic performance specifications? Asking for a non Boeing employed friend here ...
Seems there was provision of a "TV camera" installed inside the fuselage, with a retractable episcope, giving view to the whole front gear and fuselage/nose when taxying. Maybe other angles too....
The major challenge I've seen from reading the General Description of the 2707-300 (pdf in this thread, I can upload a copy if you need one) is that the cockpit is a long way ahead of the nose gear, so the ground handling is a bit tricky to keep the nose gear on the pavement. Could be fixed by giving the pilots a camera attached to the NLG to display on the control panel, but a TV camera in the 1960s was not a small chunk of equipment.
Ah-hah! And there we go, a way to see that the pilot is keeping the nose gear on the yellow brick road and out of the dirt.Seems there was provision of a "TV camera" installed inside the fuselage, with a retractable episcope, giving view to the whole front gear and fuselage/nose when taxying. Maybe other angles too.
View attachment 756574