Scimitar ??????????

[Blue Noser 4,873]

Saw over on tother place, some ones been Lidar Scanning the Solent Air Museum Scimitar! Can we hope for a 48th version of this magnificent fuel to noise coverter? 😁

 

https://www.facebook.com/solentskymuseum/posts/10157882457477131

 

Edited December 3, 2021 by Blue Noser

[Grunhertz 17,497]

Yes I've seen this too (don't say 48th though, you'll  upset the locals) @RWG686

[BlackMike Models 9,906]

Just now, Grunhertz said:

Yes I've seen this too (don't say 48th though, you'll  upset the locals) @RWG686

Nah, it'll be a 1/32 scale full resin kit 

Duncan B

[Col. 8,049]

General consensus amongst what I've read seems to be leaning towards it not being modelled as research for a new kit but rather flight-sim. At least @Miggers will be pleased.

[Grunhertz 17,497]

44 minutes ago, BlackMike Models said:

Nah, it'll be a 1/32 scale full resin kit 

Duncan B

Airfix actually want to re-tool the swift and "this'll do...... " "what? Its a supermarine jet innit?" That's close enough! 

[Miggers 8,457]

7 hours ago, Col. said:

At least @Miggers will be pleased.

Got one,it's the Alphasim/Virtavia job,very much the Beast that they were alleged to be all those years ago.

It'll go for ever on a full tank of juice and drops,bags of power from those great big Avons,but it has

to be "flown" very,very carefully.

Landing can be an exciting handful to say the least.

Edited December 3, 2021 by Miggers

[Mad Steve 25,049]

I got reeeeeeaally excited when I saw Scimitar then the bottom fell out when i saw you were talking about the poncy airplane and not the tank 🙁

😬

[Jens H. Brandal 460]

I recall reading in an issue of Take Off magazine (remember those from the late 80s/early 90s?) a Sea Vixen pilot was talking about his career flying the Sea Vixen.  He originally wanted to fly the Scimitar, but was posted to the deHavilland fighter, and then realised the Scimitar was, in his opinion something like next to useless, going nowhere to do nothing...  But he did admit it was fast.

 

Edited December 4, 2021 by Jens H. Brandal

[RWG686 40,515]

1 hour ago, Jens H. Brandal said:

in his opinion something like next to useless, going nowhere to do nothing

Quite a few Scimitar pilots would disagree with him but isn't that always the case ?

As a fighter it was pretty useless but as a low level strike aircraft it was very good.

It has to be judged as a product of its time and despite its short service use, it gave the Royal Navy experience of a big complicated fast twin jet aircraft

In my opinion what the Scimitar did was prepare the Fleet Air Arm for the Buccaneer which in its S2 (and S50) form was probably the best low level strike aircraft bar none.

[Miggers 8,457]

5 hours ago, Jens H. Brandal said:

he did admit it was fast.

As the Murrycans said:

"Only the British would build an aircraft with so much power just to go subsonic"

It's certainly fast and blasts off a runway with a purpose,but it has to be treated with a lot of respect. 

I don't know many sim pilots who can handle it or enjoy it.

Edited December 5, 2021 by Miggers

[bourdon 27]

I for one will be very happy if the Scimitar fans get their wish but personally I don't have any interest. It follows on in a long tradition of anemic and under-performing FAA aircraft. Remember the Blackburn Roc anyone?

[Jens H. Brandal 460]

10 hours ago, bourdon said:

I for one will be very happy if the Scimitar fans get their wish but personally I don't have any interest. It follows on in a long tradition of anemic and under-performing FAA aircraft. Remember the Blackburn Roc anyone?

At least the Scimitar had all four guns pointing forward:)

[azureglo 2,366]

If you've good a decent pair of binoculars and don't mind creepy crawlies, book a pitch at Timsbury Manor Camping in Romsey next year and you'll see a whole load of plane shaped things (including this one) rusting way under tarpaulins in the estate fields, including a complete once flyable Venom...

PS You could also get married and throw your wedding reception there but that may be going a bit far to see some rusting 60's planes...

Who knows, if "Squadron Leader" Jones ( air cadets only) gets his wish you may  see them all fully restored and gleaming, in the giant new leisure , retail and luxury flats complex he's been trying to  get Southampton Council to approve for nearly 15 years so he can sell the land Solent Sky is on for a large sum to to property developers...or maybe not 🤣

Edited December 8, 2021 by azureglo

[Miggers 8,457]

19 hours ago, bourdon said:

under-performing FAA aircraft

Dunno about that,it was well liked for the amount of available "urge" under the bonnet at low level.

[bourdon 27]

'amount of available "urge" under the bonnet at low level'

Well it may have had power but what use was that power except to trundle. Until they got the Phantom the FAA had no idea what a high performance aircraft was like. I shudder to think what a Scimitar would have been like in a combat situation.

[Col. 8,049]

12 hours ago, bourdon said:

Well it may have had power but what use was that power except to trundle. Until they got the Phantom the FAA had no idea what a high performance aircraft was like. I shudder to think what a Scimitar would have been like in a combat situation.

A subsonic performance certainly didn't hamper the Buccaneer or Intruder in the strike role. Or indeed the A-10. Granted not much use in the higher altitude fighter/interceptor role but life at low level is lived at a different pace  

[Tolvcat 5,096]

Confirmed that this will be the first injection moulded kit from DBMK, with release scheduled for late 2023. Scale and other details are still TBC. There is also talk of a multi-media release with resin/PE.

Two quotes which appear to come from someone invloved in the new company:

"The DBMK consist of people who were involved with other scale modelling manufacturers that had and have reasonably good reputation with Scale Modelers. Example: OLIMP Models... PROresin... CSM... I am not going to mention other, ongoing business(-es) just to make sure we do not get overwhelmed with enquiries. No previous kits under "DBMK" yet."

"Yes, a conventional plastic model kit, not a diecast. May be with a release of an additional batch of a "multimedia kit" consisting of resin and PE parts. This and other options have to be considered and decided at later stage though the arrangements for the aftermarket set(-s) are done. These are very early stages to have all information (including the scale) being written in stone. There are too many factors to be taken into consideration including the budget, the subcontractors. ROI, etc... " 

Andy

[RWG686 40,515]

21 hours ago, bourdon said:

except to trundle.

Trundle?  630 knots  at sea level is hardly trundling.

21 hours ago, bourdon said:

Until they got the Phantom the FAA had no idea what a high performance aircraft was like

Got to disagree with that statement.

Remember we are talking about an aircraft of its time and when it entered service in 1958 it was a high performance aircraft. We cannot apply our 'Honours degree in hindsight' to the thinking of the time.

In combat I reckon at 600 knots  plus, on the deck, it would have done ok because ground to air stuff wasn't as sophisticated.  Thankfully it never saw actual combat .

Supersonic is very much overrated in my opinion.

How often was the supersonic capability of the F-4 used in combat?  Not very often in air to air scene I suspect ( feel free to correct me on that though) but probably was used to escape after dropping bombs in Vietnam and other wars.

 The F-4 max speed at low level was 786 knots.

 

[Grunhertz 17,497]

I have to agree with Richard on this one to a degree, remember the Shar was subsonic against mirages and F16s and  it did rather well, infact the F16 etc was designed with raw power as the idea too. The mirage in used in its performance envelope high altitude slashing attacks are one thing but if you font choose to fight at high altitude high speed it becomes a bit academic. 

Remember the f4 was at a loss without a gun in Vietnam, because the NVAF chose their battles, so the scimitar may well have held its own.

The Russians loved the airacobra because it worked in low to medium level combat exactly what the 109g wasn't made for. The Western allies hated it because it didn't work where they needed it too the same applied to the P51a 

[bourdon 27]

There is always a danger of failing to look at the weapons system and it's use as a whole. This is a trap that the FAA frequently fell into. So the Scimitar had a lot of wasted power which which limited it's capability in the roles it was utilized. The Phantom for example was 150 knots faster at sea level - the Scimitar did indeed trundle. It also happens that an aircraft will meet circumstances that the designers hadn't anticipated. Either it can be adapted or it can't. The F4 was capable of having a gun added and indeed this is what happened. It is likely that the Scimitar would have struggled against opposition and whilst I appreciate its defenders attempts to show that it had a major role one has to be realistic. It had a horrendous accident rate and there were better aircraft available for the roles it was intended to fill (even at the time). It is a perfect example of perceived imperial needs and the British aircraft industry in general then and despite being technologically quite advanced was actually an example of an obsolete mindset.

However, I note that Scimitar fans are getting a new probably very accurate kit (in plastic?) which is a very good thing. It's an encouraging sign that the hobby is strong.

Edited December 10, 2021 by bourdon

[Grunhertz 17,497]

There's no denying it wasnt a very good aircraft that was probably very good at one thing. (Something the A10 has got away with for years) but it was as you say a product of the mindset at the time and not designed in this modern era of multi role all singing all dancing invisible but butt ugly aircraft 

[RWG686 40,515]

10 hours ago, bourdon said:

It had a horrendous accident rate

We can agree on that. Over half of the production run lost.  Even allowing for Naval Aviation being more unforgiving it is very high.

Since you are very obviously an F-4 fan , I tried to find the % loss rate of that aircraft but as that figure didn't jump out and bite me I didn't bother looking further than the 761  (14.65 % of production) lost in Vietnam.  I don't know enough about the aircraft to say what its normal operating speeds were at low level. It certainly wouldn't have been  786 knots  (Of course the Scimitar wouldn't always be going over 600 knots either)

Pick any Air Force in any era and you will find aircraft which were dogs.

Judgement can't be made though unless one considers the political and financial situation at the time. Britain was broke and was in debt to the USA ( lend lease finally paid off in 2006..over 50 years after the war ended)  Britain had the capability to design but not the money or political will.

Supermarine had many plans for the Scimitar ,including a two seat version, which never came to fruition (thankfully ) because we got the Buccaneer.  

There was an aircraft designed for one role...low level strike .

I'll end this by reiterating.

The Scimitar was a rubbish fighter but a good low level strike aircraft which if we remove our rose tinted glasses and apply our honours degree in hindsight ,really shouldn't have been built. The pilots loved it whereas it must have been a nightmare for its plumbers.

From an enthusiasts point of view it was a noisy big beast and in my opinion was a beautiful sight to behold in the air. 

I do hope this new model appears before I get too old and regardless of scale, I'll have one. (or two or three )

 

 

[Blue Noser 4,873]

I'm in agreement there, if I only built fit for purpose aircraft then my shelf would be very bare and dull indeed. 

4 hours ago, RWG686 said:

I do hope this new model appears before I get too old and regardless of scale, I'll have one. (or two or three )

well that'll be at least four (or five, or six) sold then!

[Col. 8,049]

2 minutes ago, Blue Noser said:

I'm in agreement there, if I only built fit for purpose aircraft then my shelf would be very bare and dull indeed.

Likewise  

2 minutes ago, Blue Noser said:

well that'll be at least four (or five, or six) sold then!

..or seven  

Wonder if now is a good time to eBay that Xtrakit example?

[Grunhertz 17,497]

3 hours ago, Col. said:

Likewise  

..or seven  

Wonder if now is a good time to eBay that Xtrakit example?

no start it, then the new kit will miraculously appear