Anyone fancy a bomber build?

Here's where the general chat and organization of Group/Shared Builds takes place, with Guidelines, the GB/SB Calendar, and an Index to completed GBs.

Moderator: PaulBradley

User avatar
Dazzled
Modelling Gent and Scholar
Posts: 9592
Joined: October 1st, 2011, 11:08 pm
Location: Mid Glamorgan, South Wales
Contact:

Re: Anyone fancy a bomber build?

Post by Dazzled »

I would sign up for this one as I have a couple of bombers I'd like to build but the unpredictability of my job means that I can't commit to the time constraints of a GB. :sad:
COLD WAR S.I.G. LEADER

Wherever there's danger, wherever there's trouble, wherever there's important work to be done....I'll be somewhere else building a model!
User avatar
Martin R
Modelling Gent and Scholar
Posts: 4695
Joined: May 1st, 2011, 7:53 am

Re: Anyone fancy a bomber build?

Post by Martin R »

So, when do we want to do this? Unfortunately, I cannot propose & go atm & I am involved in the Matchbox gb in Feb so would not wish a clash with this. 6 weeks starting in March or later?

Regards

Martin
Martin R

"the 'R' stands for 'Representative'."
User avatar
Kitaholic
Modelling Gent and Scholar
Posts: 3765
Joined: November 10th, 2014, 7:53 pm
Location: 5 mins from SMW

Re: Anyone fancy a bomber build?

Post by Kitaholic »

march sounds good
Regards

Gord

Desperately trying to find his MOJO, don't know where I left it
User avatar
JohnRatzenberger
Why is he so confused ?
Posts: 15708
Joined: April 5th, 2011, 3:42 pm
Location: Living on a sandbar - Nags Head, NC.

Re: Anyone fancy a bomber build?

Post by JohnRatzenberger »

6 weeks, roughly centered on March would be good for me.

Just to clarify, this is a "generic" bomber GB -- anything designed to carry bombs (as primary mission/ordnance). Torpedo and army-coop were excluded -- which I assume also excludes fighter-bombers, patrol bombers, and some other mixed role aircraft.

So that would allow heavy, medium, light, attack, scout/dive bombers ? Or should we further define it ?
Are experimental (not whiff) aircraft allowed ?
John Ratzenberger :???:
It's my model and I'll do what I want with it.
User avatar
MarkyM607
Modelling Gent and Scholar
Posts: 9153
Joined: January 5th, 2013, 1:16 pm
Location: Cambs

Re: Anyone fancy a bomber build?

Post by MarkyM607 »

jRatz wrote:6 weeks, roughly centered on March would be good for me.

Just to clarify, this is a "generic" bomber GB -- anything designed to carry bombs (as primary mission/ordnance). Torpedo and army-coop were excluded -- which I assume also excludes fighter-bombers, patrol bombers, and some other mixed role aircraft.

So that would allow heavy, medium, light, attack, scout/dive bombers ? Or should we further define it ?
Are experimental (not whiff) aircraft allowed ?
I was going to say operational only but I do have a 1/144th Sperrin so I'm good either way. I also fancy getting around to my airfix b-24.
Hoping to return to modelling sometime this year!! :lol:
Owner of Marky's Model Emporium since 2013!.
User avatar
Stuart
Raider of the Lost Ark Royal
Posts: 19195
Joined: February 25th, 2013, 4:55 pm
Location: Forever England
Contact:

Re: Anyone fancy a bomber build?

Post by Stuart »

It'll be interesting to see how this develops - When you get into the jet age I think then line between Bomber/Ground attack/Multi-role starts to blur - I mean the Tornado is technically a bomber.
Stuart Templeton I may not be good but I'm slow...

My Blog: https://stuartsscalemodels.blogspot.com/
User avatar
Martin R
Modelling Gent and Scholar
Posts: 4695
Joined: May 1st, 2011, 7:53 am

Re: Anyone fancy a bomber build?

Post by Martin R »

jRatz wrote:6 weeks, roughly centered on March would be good for me.

Just to clarify, this is a "generic" bomber GB -- anything designed to carry bombs (as primary mission/ordnance). Torpedo and army-coop were excluded -- which I assume also excludes fighter-bombers, patrol bombers, and some other mixed role aircraft.

So that would allow heavy, medium, light, attack, scout/dive bombers ? Or should we further define it ?
Are experimental (not whiff) aircraft allowed ?
John,

That's my way of thinking; if it's designed primarily to carry out a bombing mission only, then it's in.

Regards

Martin
User avatar
Martin R
Modelling Gent and Scholar
Posts: 4695
Joined: May 1st, 2011, 7:53 am

Re: Anyone fancy a bomber build?

Post by Martin R »

Sir T wrote:It'll be interesting to see how this develops - When you get into the jet age I think then line between Bomber/Ground attack/Multi-role starts to blur - I mean the Tornado is technically a bomber.
Hi Stuart,

The GR1/4 is absolutely a bomber in my book. However, I wouldn't necessarily include the Jaguar or the Harrier GR variants; I would define them more as CAS types. The Buccaneer of course is in.

F111, B-52, B-1, B-2 yes; F-15E, no.

[edit:in my first post, I wrote that an F-15E would be eligible; by my original logic, it wouldn't]. The basic airframe must have been designed 'to carry bombs for the bomber role'.

Regards

Martin
User avatar
DazDaMan
Modelling Gent and Scholar
Posts: 5643
Joined: March 7th, 2012, 3:45 pm
Location: Penicuik

Re: Anyone fancy a bomber build?

Post by DazDaMan »

So would a Nakajima B5N "Kate" be out the window?
Daren

Half-assed Spitfire builder!
User avatar
Kitaholic
Modelling Gent and Scholar
Posts: 3765
Joined: November 10th, 2014, 7:53 pm
Location: 5 mins from SMW

Re: Anyone fancy a bomber build?

Post by Kitaholic »

Martin R wrote:
Sir T wrote:It'll be interesting to see how this develops - When you get into the jet age I think then line between Bomber/Ground attack/Multi-role starts to blur - I mean the Tornado is technically a bomber.
Hi Stuart,

The GR1/4 is absolutely a bomber in my book. However, I wouldn't necessarily include the Jaguar or the Harrier GR variants; I would define them more as CAS types. The Buccaneer of course is in.

F111, B-52, B-1, B-2 yes; F-15E, no.

Regards

Martin
Would the F-4 Phantom class as a bomber? It was more than capable of many roles but would that detract from it's bomber role?
Regards

Gord

Desperately trying to find his MOJO, don't know where I left it
User avatar
fredk
Modelling Gent and Scholar
Posts: 6194
Joined: May 1st, 2012, 6:25 am
Location: Donaghadee, N'rn Ir'n

Re: Anyone fancy a bomber build?

Post by fredk »

The F4 Phantom II was primarily designed as a missle-only armed air defence fighter.
Although used as a bomber in the Vietnam war its primary function was as a B-52, F105, etcetera fighter defence thus the reason a gun-pack was developed for it then the E version with the gatling gun in the nose
Think Spitfire or P51; fighter first, late models [Spit.VIII and later] carried bombs but retained their fighter first role.
Al speling misteaks aer all mi own werk..
Its not just how good your painting is, its how good the touch-ups are too.
User avatar
Martin R
Modelling Gent and Scholar
Posts: 4695
Joined: May 1st, 2011, 7:53 am

Re: Anyone fancy a bomber build?

Post by Martin R »

fredk wrote:The F4 Phantom II was primarily designed as a missle-only armed air defence fighter.
Although used as a bomber in the Vietnam war its primary function was as a B-52, F105, etcetera fighter defence thus the reason a gun-pack was developed for it then the E version with the gatling gun in the nose
Think Spitfire or P51; fighter first, late models [Spit.VIII and later] carried bombs but retained their fighter first role.
Couldn't have put it better meself, Fred.
Martin R

"the 'R' stands for 'Representative'."
User avatar
Martin R
Modelling Gent and Scholar
Posts: 4695
Joined: May 1st, 2011, 7:53 am

Re: Anyone fancy a bomber build?

Post by Martin R »

DazDaMan wrote:So would a Nakajima B5N "Kate" be out the window?
Hi Daz,

According to Wikipedia, the Kate was designed as a torpedo bomber, so no.

Wasn't the Val a dive bomber?

Regards

Martin
User avatar
fredk
Modelling Gent and Scholar
Posts: 6194
Joined: May 1st, 2012, 6:25 am
Location: Donaghadee, N'rn Ir'n

Re: Anyone fancy a bomber build?

Post by fredk »

I'll be sticking to something that doesn't need too much discussion; something like a H.P. Halifax or Boeing B-17
Al speling misteaks aer all mi own werk..
Its not just how good your painting is, its how good the touch-ups are too.
User avatar
DazDaMan
Modelling Gent and Scholar
Posts: 5643
Joined: March 7th, 2012, 3:45 pm
Location: Penicuik

Re: Anyone fancy a bomber build?

Post by DazDaMan »

Martin R wrote:
DazDaMan wrote:So would a Nakajima B5N "Kate" be out the window?
Hi Daz,

According to Wikipedia, the Kate was designed as a torpedo bomber, so no.

Wasn't the Val a dive bomber?

Regards

Martin
The Val was indeed a dive-bomber.

The reason I ask about the Kate was because they did drop modified armour-piercing shells on the Arizona during the Pearl Harbor attack. In fact, I believe the Airfix kit is one of those aircraft, but I could be wrong. They were also used as land-based bombers later in the war.

I reasoned that, if I didn't get to do the Kate in the Pearl Harbor GB, I could have used it in this one. It's no big deal, though! :)
Daren

Half-assed Spitfire builder!
Locked

Return to “The Group/Shared Build Chat”