Well I never…

Judging by the comments on this one, I won’t be posting my WIFs! :D:D

Where’s the irony smiley!

Blue, his modelling skills are lacking (I get the feeling he acknowledges as such in the piece), I wouldn’t dare show anything on the internet with that paint and finish.

Irony old chap 🙂

A Griffon powered aircraft with no change to the nose profile, exhaust stubbs, and a single small diameter three bladed prop?

To be fair, the “history” claims this is a stock P-40E operated by the CAF in FAA markings. No worse than a Buchon in German markings, then. It is a bit of a cop-out on the part of the modeller, though – it would have been more interesting to see a proper Griffon profile.

But I like it.

😀

You can tell Moggy’s back, the ‘i’ has been corrected!

I mean what ever next with these what ifs,
a huge single seat, single engined fighter for the Fleet Air Arm built by an aircraft company not renowned for building fighters, failling with a massive RR piston engine, using an almost experimental gas-turbine driving contra-rotating props set up, and still persisting with putting it into production after many prototypes pranged…
Come on now, that’s just silly…..:D

Blue, his modelling skills are lacking (I get the feeling he acknowledges as such in the piece), I wouldn’t dare show anything on the internet with that paint and finish.

I wonder if he is the aviation correspondent for a national newspaper :D.

Can’t be- no matter what kit he built it’d come out as a Spitfire or Hurricane if he was! 😀

Hmm. Think the politest thing is to say nothing. Seems to be a reasonably competent modeller though.

Meanwhile, back on planet earth, I think the paint on my Olympus-powered Shackleton’s just about dry enough for a second coat… :dev2:

What makes it even more entertaining is that the guy actually believes what he is writing. I wonder if he is the aviation correspondent for a national newspaper :D.

I think you missunderstood my first line there Ben, I’m just saying it’s a lousy attempt.:)
Knowing WFs superior knowledge of post-war FAA aviation, he would know where that model belongs!:p
I think the listing at the end to various references and articles on the ‘Kittiwake’ is quite funny though.

Almost as good as the tail wheel Gannet model that he showed me!:eek:

I like a lot of “WIF” ideas, Ben and I drolled over the Israeli TSR-2 as well as the Gulf war versions, but this one, ummm – a P-40 with its ground looping behaviour with added weight up front onto a carrier, a smaller RN carrier at that ? It doesn’t set my imagination alight at all.

I was saying that its a what if just in case that WVF thought that the chap was being serious with the history that goes with it 🙂

It’s not though is it.
Five minutes of any sort of thought what so ever (and an extra 15 mins painting!) could have produced a really great result.
A Griffon powered aircraft with no change to the nose profile, exhaust stubbs, and a single small diameter three bladed prop? It would have been a five bladed single, or more likely on an FAA type, a six blade contra-prop, and it takes some serious stretch of the mind to imagine any of the Warhawk family to be in service in the very early post-war period, let alone well beyond the the retirement dates of the Seafire, Sea Fury, and even the jet Attacker.
I like ‘what ifs’ as much as the next man, but you still need to apply a little bit of the thought process to it!

:oOr is it just me…..

Excellent What If there 🙂