[FormerViperDriver]

Overall, I have to dissagree with the ranking of Witty's F-15 above their F-16. The main reason is that the overall shape of their F-16s (single and two-seater) is very well rendered, and that's more important to me than surface detail (as long as that itself is in the "aceptable" category, which is certainly the case for the Witty F-16s).

The Witty single-seat F-15 has a major flaw in the shape of the aircraft at the rear of the canopy/fuselage junction, where a bump exists when none should. I won't even talk about the two seaters, whose canopies are just competely wrong (as pointed out by several people in this forum) and make these models totally unbuyable for me. I can see people buying the single seaters, but IMHO the Gaincorp F-15 is superior because its shape is correct (even though it IS true that the Wittys are superior in other ways, and Gaincorp should have avoided that silly opening avionics panel on the left side of the nose. Moving/working parts are NOT always better).

Just my opinion. It just shows that different collectors have different priorities when picking which models to buy, not necessarily that I am right. Models are just that, models, and cannot be 100% accurate in every respect. But one of my top requirements is that the overall lines of the aircraft be accurately rendered, which is why I have said in another thread, for example, that I will skip the new FM Mirage III, as it clearly does not meet this requirement.

Just my two cents...

FVD

[flyXwire]

Hey FVD, what's your opinion on the Revell F-16s? Thanks.

[FormerViperDriver]

Originally Posted by flyXwire

Hey FVD, what's your opinion on the Revell F-16s? Thanks.

Sorry, I can't really give a good opinion as I don't own one, and only examined one in the box at a store about 3 years ago, I think. It seemed OK when I looked at it, but it's been a while and I'd have to take a more recent, closer look to give good advice.

Even though I used to fly F-16s, I don't focus on buying F-16 models more than other subjects (I do own a few in various scales, of course).

FVD

[flyXwire]

Originally Posted by FormerViperDriver

Sorry, I can't really give a good opinion as I don't own one, and only examined one in the box at a store about 3 years ago, I think. It seemed OK when I looked at it, but it's been a while and I'd have to take a more recent, closer look to give good advice.

Even though I used to fly F-16s, I don't focus on buying F-16 models more than other subjects (I do own a few in various scales, of course).

FVD

Thanks for that, FVD. So tell me, how much 'G' forces can you tolerate (given your age at the time) when you were doin' it in the Falcon/Viper? Just curious....

[FormerViperDriver]

Originally Posted by flyXwire

Thanks for that, FVD. So tell me, how much 'G' forces can you tolerate (given your age at the time) when you were doin' it in the Falcon/Viper? Just curious....

I was 38 years old when I last flew the Viper (11 years ago). I routinely pulled 9Gs then, but only during the Basic Fighter maneuvers (BFM) training sorties (1 v 1, usually against another F-16 but sometimes other fighters such as F-18). Air-to-Ground sorties usually did not exceed 5 or 6 Gs, and the Air Combat Training (ACT), meaning multiple F-16s versus many (F-16s or other types) maybe around 7, but sometimes up to 9Gs also, on occasion.

The somewhat reclined seat (30 degrees) of the F-16 does hlep with G tolerance. Opinion varies as to how much, but it does help.

The F-16 could pull lots of Gs for pretty long (duration is a big factor in how painful pulling Gs can be). After a couple of BFM rides, you could be fairly exhausted. In fact, the rule was that if you flew three times in one day, the third sortie could not be a BFM mission.

FVD

[skysurfer808]

Hey FVD;

Great info about the G's encountered in the F-16, that's really educational. People just don't realize how demanding flying these things can be.

Have agree on the canopy issues of the F-15s, that was discussed a lot on the previous forum (MH1), so I didn't beat a dead horse. The Witty F-14 also has canopy issues, but overall when you look at ebay prices and "boxability" witty scores pretty well.

Note, the Witty Tomcat also has stabilator issues, they just don't seem to stay put.

Skysurfer808

[FormerViperDriver]

Originally Posted by skysurfer808

Hey FVD;

Great info about the G's encountered in the F-16, that's really educational. People just don't realize how demanding flying these things can be.

Have agree on the canopy issues of the F-15s, that was discussed a lot on the previous forum (MH1), so I didn't beat a dead horse. The Witty F-14 also has canopy issues, but overall when you look at ebay prices and "boxability" witty scores pretty well.

Note, the Witty Tomcat also has stabilator issues, they just don't seem to stay put.

Skysurfer808

Agree on the stabilators on Witty F-14s. I only have one, the NASWC, and the stabs have a bit too much anhedral in them. The canopy is OK, though, my understanding is that this was a problem only on early Witty F-14s. Of couse the main flaw in mine is the B-model nozzles when it should be an A model. But I do like the model overall, I certainly don't regret buying it, even when I compare it to my Century Wings VF-84, which while better was also more expensive.

My underlying point on the F-15s, though not explicitly stated, is that people seem to forget the Gaincorp option. IMHO, they are maybe the best out there, for the reasons indicated.

On the Witty F-16s, though, I don't have much negative to say, if anything. I really like them a lot.

FVD

[PappyB]

Originally Posted by skysurfer808

Hey FVD;

Great info about the G's encountered in the F-16, that's really educational. People just don't realize how demanding flying these things can be.

Have agree on the canopy issues of the F-15s, that was discussed a lot on the previous forum (MH1), so I didn't beat a dead horse. The Witty F-14 also has canopy issues, but overall when you look at ebay prices and "boxability" witty scores pretty well.

Note, the Witty Tomcat also has stabilator issues, they just don't seem to stay put.

Skysurfer808

Could you all beat the dead horse for this former MH I member who didn't see the hubub over the twin seat canopy the first go around? (Though maybe I don't really want to know as I really dig my Israeli F-15... )

And I forgot to put the Su-27 on the ranking list.. is it perhaps the best Witty jet, or are there obvious gaffs with this one as well?

[zed550]

the problem with the witty f15b/d is the front windshield not the canopy itself but for some reason they produced a different part which is too shallow.
i have tried a windshield from a single seater that was loose and it is a perfect fit,why they did this i do not know as the only difference is the main canopy.as for the c model the slight hump at the rear is correct for two seaters but its my guess that witty used some artistic license here using the same mould for both would keep the costs down.

[FormerViperDriver]

Originally Posted by PappyB

Could you all beat the dead horse for this former MH I member who didn't see the hubub over the twin seat canopy the first go around? (Though maybe I don't really want to know as I really dig my Israeli F-15... )

And I forgot to put the Su-27 on the ranking list.. is it perhaps the best Witty jet, or are there obvious gaffs with this one as well?

Pappy,

Looks like Zed550 may have hit the problem on the head (and found a potential solution) on the F-15B/D canopy/front windscreen. If he says it works, it's worth a try, assuming you have a spare single-seater windscreen, that is.

He also has a good explanation for the bump on the rear of the F-15A/C's canopy, but that still doesn't make ot right.

On the Su-27, Witty has again messed up with the canopy. The canopy (including windscreen) digs too low/deep into the fuselage compared to the real thing. However, I don't consider that bad enough to recommend not buying that model, which otherwise looks just fine. But again, the Gaincorp effort is much better IMHO. So I bought their stuff, not Witty (granted, the main reason I did was because they came out first).

I just wonder sometimes why manufacturers make such apparently simple mistakes, which detract from otherwise very worthy models. Why, why, why?

FVD