[John Youngs]

The thing I do NOT like about the vast majority of diecast "swing-wing" models is simply the fact that the wings on the models themselves DON'T swing!! Let's face it: Some of us want to display them with wings swung back - some fwd. But Armour, with the F-14, Tornado, etc; keeps them fixed in the swept-back position. That sucks big time!! For that reason alone, I won't collect them. Maybe Admiralty Toys will make a few 1/18th scale models of the various "swingers"? J

[John Youngs]

Originally Posted by FormerViperDriver

Only Australia, and not for much longer (2010 retirement. The Aussies are getting 24 Super Hornets to replace it while waiting for the F-35).

Too bad. It was a cool jet, albeit not nearly as famous as some others... But very hard on the maintainers.

FVD

FVD - You're right about the maintenance on these things - HA! However, that being said, IF I had to own but ONE airplane, for the rest of my life, and NO others - period - SO LONG AS SOMEONE ELSE WAS "FOOTING THE BILL" on maintenance, fuel, and insurance - and could fly it as much as I liked - anytime I liked - I would opt for the '111 in a heartbeat!! Why?? Simple: It can fly FAR - It can fly FAST, AND, it can fly FAR FAST!! Beyond that, the other thing I love about that airplane is not so much that it's a two-seater - it's the fact that it's a SIDE-BY-SIDE two-seater (I'd also love to own a Cessna A-37 just for this reason, as well!!) You can actually turn & talk to the guy sitting next to you, without resorting to a nasally-sounding mike all the time!! The other (last, but certainly not least) thing I liked about it was, of course, the swing-wing. You could slow down and land at "normal" jet speeds - and use fairly short (everything being relatively, here... - HA!) runways to operate from. Check out the photos of one of the few Cessna A-37's registered & flying in the US today, in private hands. Wouldn't YOU like to cruise up to your favorite ramp in one of THESE puppies... - - Cheers, John

[admin]

I'd likely go for every variant that was produced of this aircraft in diecast. There're a surprising number of significantly different paint schemes for this bird.

Example:

The NASA birds (four shown below)
Over a span of about 23 years from 1967 to about 1990, records indicate around six General Dynamic F-111 Aardvark aircraft at the NASA Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards, California. During this time span, four areas of significant flight testing stand out. The first tests occurred during the late 1960s when NASA worked on evaluating problems with the early F-111A (#63- 9771 and #63-9777) for the Air Force and Navy. The early 1970s through the late 1980s brought the second and third phases of testing with an on-going effort to improve the F-111A (#63-9778). The second phase called transonic aircraft technology (TACT/F-111A) added an highly efficient supercritical wing and later the third phase applied advanced wing (Mission Adaptive Wing-MAW) flight control technologies and was called Advanced Fighter Technology Integration (AFTI/F-111A). The fourth effort, utilizing an F-111E (#67-0115), ran from 1973 to 1976, and used an engine with an electronic control system (fly-by-wire) in place of the traditional hydro-mechanical system. This program called the integrated propulsion control system (IPCS) helped validate the Digital Electronic Engine Control (DEEC) concept. With the phasing out of the TACT program came a renewed effort by the Air Force Flight Dynamics Laboratory to extended supercritical wing technology to a higher level of performance. A joint NASA and Air Force program called Advanced Fighter Technology Integration (AFTI) was born. In the early 1980s the supercritical wing on the F-111A aircraft was replaced with a wing built by Boeing Aircraft Company System called a “mission adaptive wing” (MAW). This wing had an internal mechanism to flex the outer wing skin and produce a high camber section for subsonic speeds, a supercritical section for transonic speeds, and symmetrical section for supersonic speeds. The surface irregularities from leading edge slates was eliminated and trailing edge flap effects reduced. The use of flexible wing skins to produce a smooth upper surface brought this wing a little closer in concept to that of a bird. A digital flight control system provided automatic changes to the wing geometry. The system had four automatic control modes: (1) Maneuver Camber Control - adjusting camber shape for peak aerodynamic efficiency; (2) Cruise Camber Control - for maximum speed at any altitude and power setting; (3) Maneuver Load Control - providing the highest possible aircraft load factor (4) Maneuver Enhancement Alleviation - in part attempting to reduce the effects of gusts on airplane ride. The AFTI/F-111 MAW system had 59 flights from 1985 through 1988. The flight test data showed a drag reduction of around 7 percent at the wing design cruise point to over 20 percent at an off-design condition. The four automatic modes were tested in flight with satisfactory results.


Potential tooling change requirements:

• MAW (Mission Adaptive Wing). The wing of the F-111 was modified so that the curvature of the leading and trailing edges could be varied in flight.

[admin]

Here's a cool F-111 pic that I had to post just because it looks cool.

[lanslide]

YES - YES - YES!!! This is one of my all time favorites! An early Vietnam version please.

[Armour Addict]

Originally Posted by FormerViperDriver

The best F-111 plastic model, by far (and I guess the only one available right now) is the Academy 1/48 scale one, which I have in my collection. I posted a picture of it in another thread somewhere, and you can also see it in my "collection" thread. It's a good mould (much better than the old Monogram in the same scale which was pretty bad), but pretty large in that scale.

FVD

That's the model I also want for my collection. Hm, I hope I stumble across one sooner or later!

Cheers,
AA

[Migmauler]

No offense to Aardvark drivers, but I'd pass on this one. Simply not a pretty plane to look at. Rather ugly in fact. I'd much rather see a kick butt version of an F-8 or F-4 or even an A-7. Shoot, even the aesthetically challenged A-6 has more charm than an F-111 (sorry!).

[FormerViperDriver]

Originally Posted by John Youngs

FVD - You're right about the maintenance on these things - HA! However, that being said, IF I had to own but ONE airplane, for the rest of my life, and NO others - period - SO LONG AS SOMEONE ELSE WAS "FOOTING THE BILL" on maintenance, fuel, and insurance - and could fly it as much as I liked - anytime I liked - I would opt for the '111 in a heartbeat!! Why?? Simple: It can fly FAR - It can fly FAST, AND, it can fly FAR FAST!! Beyond that, the other thing I love about that airplane is not so much that it's a two-seater - it's the fact that it's a SIDE-BY-SIDE two-seater (I'd also love to own a Cessna A-37 just for this reason, as well!!) You can actually turn & talk to the guy sitting next to you, without resorting to a nasally-sounding mike all the time!! The other (last, but certainly not least) thing I liked about it was, of course, the swing-wing. You could slow down and land at "normal" jet speeds - and use fairly short (everything being relatively, here... - HA!) runways to operate from. Check out the photos of one of the few Cessna A-37's registered & flying in the US today, in private hands. Wouldn't YOU like to cruise up to your favorite ramp in one of THESE puppies... - - Cheers, John

John, these are all great points. All very true. The 111 would indeed make a great jet to own privately (if one could afford it), just for the reasons you mention.

In addition, assuming you don't get an "F" model with the Pave Tack craddle mod, the bomb bay allows you to carry lots of stuff back from your trips (even furniture, up to a point) to keep mom (or yourself) happy.

However, for aerobatics, it's not the best thing. But it will do them alright (just needs lots of airspace).

FVD

[FormerViperDriver]

Originally Posted by Migmauler

No offense to Aardvark drivers, but I'd pass on this one. Simply not a pretty plane to look at. Rather ugly in fact. I'd much rather see a kick butt version of an F-8 or F-4 or even an A-7. Shoot, even the aesthetically challenged A-6 has more charm than an F-111 (sorry!).

No offense to non-Vark drivers, but all the planes you mention are way uglier than the beautiful 111 (particularly the A-6 and A-7 - the SLUFF, for Pete's sake).

Of course, the F-4 and F-8, while not beautiful in the classical sense, are certainly purposeful looking and do have a rugged charm to them. But the A-6 and A-7, you got to be kidding!

FVD

[Aircrafty]

Check this link and left click on the Aadvark image for a series of 25 pics of RAAF F-111C's at the last Red Flag excercise (07-02) in February 2007: http://www.skippyscage.com/aviation/...702/index.html

Don't worry, if you don't like flying pigs there are others to see there

These aircraft flew from their home base at RAAF Amberley, Queensland, Australia to participate in the exercise at Nellis AFB Nevada: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAAF_Base_Amberley