|
|
Post by red on Sept 8, 2008 1:25:26 GMT
I'm wondering if anybody would be interested in a ficticious repaint of the AVIANCA B707-320B using much of the existing paint, but, changing the cheat lines a bit, relettering to CENTRAL PACIFIC, and adding red to the engine nacelles?
What I'm really looking for is a kind of a combination of the Avianca 707 blended with Gary Carlson's VC-137C/B707-320B SAM 26000 in the "Air Force Two" 1995 colors, but using the Avianca Red in place of the white, and a deeper hue of red up front (replacing the blue) and on the nacelles. I suppose that I'd need Gary Carlson's permission, and will have to look up and see who painted the AVIANCA 707, as using their aircraft as a starting point would require their permission, also.
I've been wanting to get one of these done for quite some time, and it seems to be darn hard to get anything repainted in FS9/FS2004, unlike the MSTS Train Simulator, where you can get almost anything you want done fairly quickly. Even a fellow who has done a great deal of MSTS reskins for me who is also an active flight simmer (there's a lot of "cross pollination" between the two hobbies, it seems)...a fellow that even is able to design entire locomotives from the ground up and has done exquisite work for me on a periodic basis said that he just doesn't know how to get into FS9 reskinning.
I'm also asking for help on the stock FS9 B747-400 using the SOAR Airlines texture as the basis for a new texture, but, that is more of an orange, and even if somebody comes through on that, it would be a mere approximation of what I really want. If I could get a 707 painted, that would make it easier for somebody to paint the 747, likewise, the reverse would hold true. Then, while I'm not interested in a "virtual airline," just a "ficticious one," if somebody liked the result, they would then be welcome to use the end product as the basis for a new virtual CENTRAL PACIFIC airline.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dan K. Hansen on Sept 8, 2008 8:48:00 GMT
You wouldn't by any chance have a link to a picture would you? Does make things easier for the painters.
|
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Sept 8, 2008 11:42:19 GMT
Sorry to have to disappoint you "RED" .... but .... we (HJG) don't do "FICTICIOUS REPAINTS".
HJG only specializes in realworld subjects .... however .... if any of our painters feel inclined to want assist you with your request then they're most welcome to do so .... of course !
Mark C
AKL/NZ
|
|
|
|
Post by red on Sept 10, 2008 4:47:42 GMT
You wouldn't by any chance have a link to a picture would you? Does make things easier for the painters. I realize that HGJ doesn't officially repaint ficticious airlines per the post from the other individual, and my appeal is to anyone willing to do one unofficially, which could then be posted as a reskin for others to use for "Virtual Airline" usage or however they see fit. It is kind of hard to post a screenshot since I haven't found anybody yet to do a two-dimensional guide. However, here is the Gary Carlson VC-137C SAM 26000 in the 1995 "Air Force Two" livery, officially referred to as the official "89th Airlift Wing" livery of Andrews AFB to differentiate it from the full-blown Air Force One livery currently worn only by VC-25A/B747-2GB4s SAM 28000 and 29000. I feel like the "Air Force Two" cheat lines are better. I'll post the best screenshot of that, then, add the AVIANCA-COLUMBIA B707-320B below, as the resulting CENTRAL PACIFIC 707 (it can either be a B707-320B or the VC-137C, contingent upon full permission from the painter of each, of course). I'll have to come back and add the AVIANCA plane after I add it to Photobucket. Let's see how this goes... Gary Carlson's VC-137C SAM 26000 as "Air Force Two" over Lake Wenatchee, WA...this would be the easiest texture to use as the Alcad Aluminum is in place, gold striping in place, which would be retained, etc.  The black anti-glare panel would be retained on 707s (but not new aircraft such as 757s, 747s, etc.), and simply imagine keeping all cheat lines, the U.S. Flag, gold striping in place, and changing the blue below and in the window striping area, and on the engine nacelles, to a deep red color, while the white would be replaced by a color similar to, if not the exact color as the HJG AVIANCA B707-320B. I am loosely...and "very loosely"...trying to match the aircraft to the following locomotive in Microsoft Train Simulator format:  The silver on the locomotive would give way to the existing gold on SAM 26000, and, it would be up to the repainter as to which color would be best to use for the tail number, preferably N973HG, and, CENTRAL PACIFIC on the upper fuselage. I think that the result would be quite attractive, and aside from the "name change" from UNITED STATES OF AMERICA to CENTRAL PACIFIC, would involve ONLY color changes to the white and blue with retention of all cheat lines. Here is the HJG AVIANCA COLUMBIA B707-320B which rather gives 60 percent or so of what the resulting CENTRAL PACIFIC B707-320B or VC-137C would look like (I wanted to give credit to the painter, but couldn't find any reference in any of my Readme Files, so pardon me, I do not mean to offend...yours is a beautiful aircraft, whoever you are:  For an additional bit of "fun," here's an image that I intend to post along with a montage of mostly HJG aircraft, but, also some newer planes by POSKY, and, payware scenery of Andrews AFB, MD from AlphaSim (was well as their Sikorsky VH-D SeaKing "Marine One" helicopter)...a kind of "History of the USAF 89th Presidential Airlift Wing). This image shows President George W. Bush and Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair after deboarding from a C-32A/B757-2G4 Intercontinental, specifically SAM 094, Tail Number 90004, which is one of four which is generally used as Air Force Two, but also for VIP Transport, Foreign Head of State Transport, First Lady Transport, and often used by the SecDef and SecState...President Bush has also used each of the 4 C-32As as Air Force One, as well as the various 89th Airlift Wing Gulfstream Vs and the new C-40B "Clipper" B737-7CPng Boeing Business Jets, of which 17 have been recently acquired and which wear this paint scheme. Interestlngly, original Boeing artist's renderings of the C-32A/B757 showed an aircraft painted up just like SAM 26000 above, complete with the Alcad Aluminum, black anti-glare panel, etc. I'm not sure why they chose to go with solid blue underneath. I feel that the C-32As are very attractive as they are, but it would have been interesting to see them painted with the shiny Alcad Aluminum underbelly. Current USAF policy for whatever reason now reserves the Alcad Aluminum for the primary Air Force One airframes, or for the eventual successor to the VC-25A/B747-2GB4s, literally the last of the "Classic 747s," but also a "hybrid," incorporating a lot of the features of the B747-400, and these are the only 747s to sport the GE engs used in the -400s, as they were still undergoing construction even as the -400 line was already being produced. Rumor is that the next pair of AF1 planes will be the B747-8, but this would probably come at mid-cycle in the 747-8 design cycle, since SAM 28000 and SAM 29000 have less flight hours than your typical AAL 767 on the Chicago to Los Angeles run acquires in just a YEAR, and spend 70 percent of their time indoors in climate-controlled storage getting polished, etc., with C-Checks and D-Checks, and major component replacement done at HALF the recommended Boeing maintenace intervals. So here's the C-32A with the AlphaSim "George Bush" scenery object...LOL:  Here's one showing the Cheat Line Detail amidships on SAM26000 in the "Air Force Two" Scheme:  And one closeup for the cheat lines on the rear end of Gary Carlson's VC-137C/B707-320B Interconinental:  Per above, the "stainless steel-looking" Alcad Aluminum would stay in the same place, untouched, as would the Gold Stripe of the 89th Airlift Wing. The changes: The blue below would retain it's present shape and cheat lines, front to rear (and on the engine nacelles), with a deeper red color. The white would be replaced by a red similar to the AVIANCA 707 above. If anybody is interested--I've been working on trying to get this done for two years--I'd be glad to send any other information via Private Message, initially, then via email. I'm certain that somebody who repaints could "Flip" the white and blue into a two-tone red effect in, what? Five minutes? Those who paint aircraft would probably have a better idea than I as to what the best color would be for the CENTRAL PACIFIC in place of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. I assume that retention of the U.S. Flag and "jagged Gold Stripe" on the tail wouldn't be a major problem. Mark...thanks for your statements of support. |
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Sept 10, 2008 5:24:56 GMT
Anyone (HJG or otherwise) able/willing to help "RED" with his ficticious repaint request ? "IF SO" .... kindly drop him a PM ! "RED" .... if you can get someone to paint your request for you then I've got no problem regarding your posting it elsewhere .... so long as it remains a "TEXTURE ONLY" release (folk will have to be directed back here for the aircraft base pack/ model/FDE, panel/cgauges/core files, sound, and efects etc) .... and so long as it remains freely available to all whom want to access it. OK !  Mark C AKL/NZ |
|
|
|
Post by red on Sept 10, 2008 5:33:52 GMT
Anyone (HJG or otherwise) able/willing to help "RED" with his ficticious repaint request ? "IF SO" .... kindly drop him a PM ! "RED" .... if you can get someone to paint your request for you then I've got no problem regarding your posting it elsewhere .... so long as it remains a "TEXTURE ONLY" release (folk will have to be directed back here for the aircraft base pack/ model/FDE, panel/cgauges/core files, sound, and efects etc) .... and so long as it remains freely available to all whom want to access it. OK ! Mark C AKL/NZ Thanks, Mark, for the support. With my DialUp  , I'd have to let the repainter upload to the appropriate websites...AVSIM, FlightSim.Com, but, would be very glad to write, or help write the Readme files directing those who might be interested back here to HJG, explantion that it is a ficticious aircraft, etc. If the texture were successful--who knows???--perhaps it might drum up a bit of new membership and interest in the real aircraft and repaints here at HJG. Are you the one who repainted the AVIANCA-COLUMBIA plane? I feel that the VC-137C platform would be **MUCH** easier to repaint, since 98 percent of the work is already done. I haven't a clue as to how hard it is to reskin a bird, but, do know that if you have an existing texture of SAM 26000, and all you had to do was change the white to a bright red, and the blue to a deeper red, and simply reletter a name on the fuselage, this would be much easier than a repaint "from-the-ground-up." Regards, Clayton "Red" |
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Sept 10, 2008 5:57:30 GMT
No problemo !  FRUSTRATING isn't it !  I understand only too well .... because I'm still living in "DIAL-UP HELL" myself ;D However .... so long as you can maintain a connection speed of at leat 48000 BPS, it should represent no more than a 10-15 minute upload .... from my personal experience. "NO" .... that one, and all our Colombian (or HK registered) aircraft, was painted by my highly talented friend and HJG colleague Camilo LUENGAS. "GOOD LUCK" with your quest .... and I mean that i all sincerety too ! Mark C AKL/NZ & BOG/CO |
|
|
|
Post by red on Sept 10, 2008 9:13:26 GMT
Mark:
Yes...even in "DialUp Hell," uploading a "Texture Only" wouldn't be so bad, since we wouldn't be sending an entire plane, core files, etc., but would be referred back here.
The real work would be giving proper credit to people such as Gary Carlson (if the VC-137C is used...which I really hope it is as it would require nothing more than a "color swap" of two of the base colors and retention of existing cheat lines), the HJG, and wording AVSIM and FlightSim.Com "blurbs" about this being a "texture only for the Historic Jet Liners Group airframe, whichever one it ends up being"...if it ends up being done at all.
|
|
|
|
Post by red on Sept 18, 2008 14:32:42 GMT
Browsing around...looks like QUITE a backlog on projects!!! At any rate, since one request was made for photos/screenshots to help the painters, I thought that I'd add in this Air Greenland B757-200B Intercontinental (hard to believe the 757 is now a "Historic Jetliner," isn't it?!?...wow). Contrasting this with the AVIANCA-Columbia B707-320B above, unless my eyes are a bit off, the red of the AVIANCA on the upper fuselage, with this darker/brighter hue of red on the front lower fuselage and on the engine nacelles, retaining the gold striping and cheat lines of Gary Carlson's VC-137C SAM 26000 above might have just the right effect. My interest renewed in this by my receipt yesterday of my 1:100 Scale Model of SAM 26000 in the full Air Force One colors by the former TCMPacificModelWorks, now ModelWorks, LLC. Amazing how close in size the VC-137C/B707-320B is to the same scale "Air Force Two" C-32A/B757-2G4 is...fuselage of identical cross section and about the same length, but, longer wing span on the 26000. At least these fit in the backlit curio cabinet along with the USAF C-40B "Clipper" B737-7CPng Boeing Business Jet...NOT SO with the 1:100 Scale VC-25A/B747-2GB4 SAM 28000, which must remain free-standing in the upstairs study, here. No way will THAT fit in the curio cabinet!!!  As for the 707/757 comparison, comparing scale models, it is quite apparent that the less common B757-300B would have a considerable amount more room inside, though with the same fuselage cross section. Amazing that the cross section of the 707 lives on today in the newest "New Generation" B737s...and while I feel that the 757 has a very sleek nose reminding one of a Lockheed Constellation, the newest 737ngs in production today have pretty much the same cockpit and pilot window arrangment of the old 707s...  |
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Sept 18, 2008 21:26:03 GMT
They may look identical .... but .... I'm not sure they're always so readily interchangable without even minor modifications.
When the QFM team returned B707-138B VH-XBA to service up in the UK .... some 2 or 3 years ago .... one of many things they had to source was a replacement forward right windshield portion .... since the original had been cracked. The replacement windshield section actually came from a B727 .... and then had to be modified in order to fit.
There's many other bits'n'pieces between B707, B720, B727, & B737 aircraft which simply aren't interchangable too .... given the evolution of design improvements over the years.
From memory I think there was only something like 25% (or less) commonality between B707's and the military C135 SERIES version of these aircraft (which looked basically similar) during the early production years back in the 1950's.
Mark C
AKL/NZ
|
|
|
|
Post by red on Sept 18, 2008 23:25:19 GMT
They may look identical .... but .... I'm not sure they're always so readily interchangable without even minor modifications. When the QFM team returned B707-138B VH-XBA to service up in the UK .... some 2 or 3 years ago .... one of many things they had to source was a replacement forward right windshield portion .... since the original had been cracked. The replacement windshield section actually came from a B727 .... and then had to be modified in order to fit. There's many other bits'n'pieces between B707, B720, B727, & B737 aircraft which simply aren't interchangable too .... given the evolution of design improvements over the years. From memory I think there was only something like 25% (or less) commonality between B707's and the military C135 SERIES version of these aircraft (which looked basically similar) during the early production years back in the 1950's. Mark C AKL/NZ Ah yes...I assumed there would be minor shape differences, etc. to the extent that you couldn't literally "repair" a 707 with a new 737 nose and windows...at least do so and have it "absolutely original," but, I just think it's quite amazing that the Boeing narrow-body cross-section, and, general shape and window arrangement are so similar from the beginning of the jet age to the newest models currently in production. Right now, I'm trying to figure out what the "role" of the 787 Dreamliner's is going to be. The "replacement" for the B757-200B Intercontinental per Boeing is the B737-900ER "New Generation," the greatly stretched version of the 737, looking in many ways like a 707 with two engines. Yet the Dreamliner is a narrow body, so, I wouldn't think that it's a 767 replacement? And surely it's not a replacement for a newly-developed Next Generation 737. And the 747 has a long future ahead of it as a passenger liner and freighter with the upcoming 747-8 which will incorporate many of the Dreamliner interior design elements...if one goes to the Boeing website to look at interior concepts for the enlarged 747-8...on the exterior a "stretched" -400ER, still nicely "proportional" with the longer "hump" remaining proportional to the longer fuselage behind it...on the interior, it looks almost like a Galaxy-Class Star Ship off of Star Trek, with some very interesting mockups, also, of "VIP" 747 Boeing Business Jets with interiors that have to be seen to be believed. Which leads one to imagine how opulent the next pair of Air Force One 747s will be in another decade or so. So...any ideas on what the "purpose" or "role" of the Dreamliner is if the new 737-900ERs are the 757 replacement, the relatively new 777 is the competitor to the A330, no current plans to drop the 767 (though it probably will be the next to go at any rate), and, thankfully, a newer, bigger, nicer-than-ever 747 line is being developed??? As for the B737-900ER, a very nice, economical airliner to operate in this day of unheard of fuel prices...much cheaper than the MD-80 or 757 to operate in this era of airlines struggling to survive. But, the price??? The stretched-out 737 doesn't have the "Hot and High" capability of the 757, and, the 757 is a "hotrod" per many airline pilots and my senior mechanic uncle who works on them at AAL...the 757 per the mechanical side is one of the most solidly-constructed planes in the fleet, easy to maintain, very reliable, almost a pleasure to perform either routine maintenance or even heavy overhauls on, and, greatly loved by the AAL (and other airline) pilots for their climbout and speed performance. The 767 is almost on a par in that area, but the 757 is truly the "overpowered hotrod," and, with that extra power comes a margin of safety sometimes when one gets in a pinch. The price of change...the B737-900ER, almost the same size and almost the same range as the base 757 (back to it now being a "Historic Jetliner"...makes SOME of us feel old to realize this...  )...it does the same job as the 757, but, with the efficiency and cost-savings comes an aircraft that is not "fun to fly," basic transportation. A plane that "gets the job done," but, lumbers into the air without any thrill, takes its time getting up to cruising speed, and, strangely, the GE engines on AAL's 737 fleet, while basically reliable, aren't as robust as the Pratt & Whitney 2040s on the 757s. The P&W engines rarely need to have oil added to them, for example, while the GE "twins" almost always need 8 to 9 quarts of oil added after each trip if of extended duration...very strange. I haven't heard of this oil consumption problem on the larger GE engines on the Triple Sevens or the 747-400s, but the smaller GEs on the 737s GUZZLE oil and must be checked and topped off constantly. Very strange for state of the art technology, in my opinion. It is said that CHANGE is inevitable, but PROGRESS is not...this seems to be the case here, doesn't it? |
|
|
|
Post by garryrussell on Sept 19, 2008 8:50:49 GMT
The 757 has basically a modified 727 fuselage
The only reason it looks so different is that right at the last minuet they swapped the 707 type cockpit area with the 767 type and also added a conventional tail..........BTW it was only every the upper lobe that remained fairly common not the lower lobe or entire nose.
The is basically a lengthened twin engined 727.
Boeing actually used one of the wings thown up for the 767. There were many different wings they were examining and they found one of them was suitable for the 757.
The 757 was a follow on from the 727-300 but they decided instead of another stretch they would take it further and later to make it as common as possible to the 767 as far as crewing was concerned.
Just before launce the 757 was just as it is now but with the standard boeing nose and a 727 T tail without the third engine
Garry
|
|
|
|
Post by red on Sept 23, 2008 11:55:53 GMT
They may look identical .... but .... I'm not sure they're always so readily interchangable without even minor modifications. When the QFM team returned B707-138B VH-XBA to service up in the UK .... some 2 or 3 years ago .... one of many things they had to source was a replacement forward right windshield portion .... since the original had been cracked. The replacement windshield section actually came from a B727 .... and then had to be modified in order to fit. There's many other bits'n'pieces between B707, B720, B727, & B737 aircraft which simply aren't interchangable too .... given the evolution of design improvements over the years. From memory I think there was only something like 25% (or less) commonality between B707's and the military C135 SERIES version of these aircraft (which looked basically similar) during the early production years back in the 1950's. Mark C AKL/NZ Now THAT would be interesting to see...a prototype 757 with the standard Boeing nose! I assume just one aircraft made it out in this fashion, or maybe you're talking about final pre-launch design gyrations. I'm glad they changed it and had one unique nose...maybe it's just me, but the 757 was the most beautiful aircraft Boeing made (well...in a tie with the 707). That sleek "Lockheed Connie Nose" added so much character to it...I'm really sad that it is now a "Historic Jetliner," which to me...is any large-scale Boeing (or whatever) aircraft that is no longer in production. Yes...they'll be around for years and in large numbers, but, they've now entered into the realm wherein "there shall be no more." I'm glad the USAF 89th Airlift Wing got 4 before it was too late. Per a book that I have, some of the USAF brass thought that the 767 would have been more suitable for the C-32A mission, but, I suppose the cost differential won out. I do not expect such penny-pinching when the next pair of AF1 airframes are procured...I hear that while there are no plans whatsoever to replace SAM 28000 and 29000, there will probably be some serious shopping aroune around midterm after the 2012 election, considering that it will take 5 years or so to build them...kind of amazing how the requirements have changed beginning with the 747s currently in use...it only took months to get the SAM 27000 online in 1973, and simply diverted an aicraft from a Nigeriaj Airways order. I need a bit of clarity: I knew that the 757 was the 727 replacement, and, there was a lot of discussion before deciding to make it a twin, give it flight deck (if not nose shape) commonality with the 767 so that crews trained on the one were qualified on the other, etc. I know that the 727 and 757 share the same fuselage cross-section, and, I believe with the 737 D+Classic on yo: Didn't BOTH share the same fuselage with the 707, however (in cross-section, not length, front and rear end taper,etc.)  Or...do ONLY the 727 and 757 share the same cross section? I thought that they were all common until my 1:100 Scale VC-137C/B707-320B SAM 26000 arrived and was placed into the Curio Cabinet with C-32A/B757-2G4 SAM 081 (Tail No. 80001) and C-40B New Generation B-737-7CP "Clipper" Boeing Business Jet SAM 040 (Tail No. 10040). These are very accurate scale models by TCMPacificModelWorks, now just ModelWorks. I've always seen the similarity between the USAF 737 and 757 except for the length. But, while I knew that the wingspan would be measurably greater (even to the naked eye) on the 707, and that fuselage length would be similar to the 757-200B, it could be an illusion, but, it looks just a wee bit "fatter." But I'd always understood that just as the 757 was an outgrowth of the 727, the 727 was a scaled-down 707 for a different market niche. I guess I could measure circumference, but, factual data would give me the answer. [NO...the 1:100 Scale VC-25A/B747-2GB4 SAM 28000 did NOT fit in the Curio, but is freestanding upstairs in the study, and thus, must be brushed and wiped from time to time...it's nice to have up here anway]. I did bring SAM 26000 (in the Air Force One Scheme) upstairs to compare to SAM 28000, and in short, there IS no comparison. It is like comparing a B-17 to a B-52. While most of us have seen documentaries with interior footage of both the 707s and the newer 747s in Air Force One service (and the 707 seemed quite large, roomy, and spacious, particularly the 1973-model SAM 27000 with its classy cherry wood paneling...more spacious than the Boeing Business Jets the CEOs of the largest Fortune 100 Companies have the privilege of riding in), but when you compare them side by side, the amount of additional room available, and the vast difference in length, fuselage diameter, and wingspan is just an incredible contrast...a plane built to cram a zillion people in with all of that wide open space inside...it must be like taking a fast ride on a cruise ship. It must be nice to be "on the team." |
|
|
|
Post by red on Sept 23, 2008 12:21:45 GMT
You wouldn't by any chance have a link to a picture would you? Does make things easier for the painters. Now...I do. Someone has agreed to take on the project as a B747-400ER (which CENTRAL PACIFIC has in abundance...the ex-USAF VC-137C/B707-320B is a VIP/Corporate jet, but identical to this...I think one or both of the planes after the VC-137Bs SAM 970--972 were actually the new -320B Intercontinental...I know ONE of them was...and both were scrapped, as was one of the original 1959 models, SAM 972...they were immaculate and in top condition inside and out even as the scrapper's torch went after them...I'd hate to have seen that...there was no "gradual deterioration" of "laying up period"...one minute they are among the most well-maintained, elite planes on earth, and the next, they were scrap metal chunks). It is unfinished, as is obvious...I'll show it in stages as it develops for those who are interested in the "birth of an airliner." I'm hoping to get the "CENTRAL PACIFIC" in black outline as is the case with the gold pinstripe. After two years of looking around, I almost fell out of my chair when somebody actually sent me an image (not from this group, and I'll give him credit if he gives me permission to publicly post his name, but not before). I still want my "Queen of the Skies," the VC-137C with its roaring TF33 Turbofans...maybe this will make it easier. I'll provide another port side view of Gary Carlson's VC-137C 26000 in the 1995 "Air Force Two," or more accurately, "89th Airlift Wing Paint Scheme" immediately below to show the direct lineage from the "Air Force Two" scheme as it would be applied to the much-newer B744...the VC-137C would retain the black anti-glare panel, I'm thinking. This is a blend of the Rock Island Red/Burgundy/Silver paint scheme with the 89th Airlift Wing Paint Scheme. Even with this, it was rather hard to explain at first, even with a barrage of images as I showed above, but, he finally figured it out with a "second wave" of images, further explanation, and...he nailed it RIGHT TO THE DOOR. We still have to silverize the lower fuselage with Alcad Aluminum (or I shoud say "he"...all I'm good for is the general idea), taking care of the burgundy engine nacelles, and, of course, coloring in the U.S. flag at the rear. The CENTRAL PACIFIC Airlines B747-400ER (this one is also a corporate jet, the "Andromeda"...the 707 would be the "Orion," but, the VIP/Corporate planes are painted no different than the rest of the passenger pool or the air freight subsidiary):  And, the lineage to the SAM 26000 is obvious, though while in the end, the 747 used some of the cheat lines of the USAF 747s SAM 28000 and SAM 29000, I feel that to the untrained eye, the result does NOT appear to be a "rehashed" Air Force One or Air Force Two...even though it really is...I hope that this also shows the basic simplicity of what I wanted/want for the VC-137C, which wold only need three color reversals, but no changes to the cheat lines, and less "building from scratch" than was required on the 747 above:  Above is SAM 26000 in its last year of operation, still making State Flights as Air Force Two and even Air Force One in the Clinton years, as well as "Phoenix Copper" First Lady flights for HRC, both of who used SAM 26000 and SAM 27000 extensively (and President George W. Bush and Laura Bush used SAM 27000 on flights to the TSTC Waco Airport for visits to the ranch as "Air Force One" right up until just before it made its last flight to California just days before 9/11 in September, 2001). I promise to get more active in the Screen Shot section...am building up my Photo Bucket collection. I couldn't resist throwing this one in, as this would be about the right angle from someone seated facing the Ranking VIP at the "President's Desk" aboard SAM 26000 in the Forward Stateroom/Offfice. A view of the flexing wing and the two sleek P&W TF-33s with the receding Chicago skyline as the plane heads east to Andrews AFB. I'd imagine that the President himself would have something of a similar view from his desk aboard one of the 2 current 747s. I never could figure out why they gave the President the huge spacious office in the 2 747s, and then...seated him so that he flies riding BACKWARDS. That one escapes me on every level, but it has grown on me over time. However, I think that if I were the P, I'd order that the desk be turned around so that the P faces foward and his guest, if he has one, rides backwards. Considering all of the interior design changes SAM 26000 underwent until it finally matched the 27000 in layout (but not decor), I find it amazing that 3 Presidents, Bush, Clinton, then Bush all found riding backwards at their desk acceptable??? Any one of them could have said, "Turn all this around." But all have seemed satisfied. Maybe they like to watch the wings and the engines and receding countryside?  |
|
|
|
Post by garryrussell on Sept 23, 2008 13:02:26 GMT
Hi Red A good strat..but... There is no point in showing the paintkit Only when it goes into FS will you know if it lines up and if the colours are right Getting it into FS is the first thing you should do before you start painting and only work on how it is looking in FS Garry |
|
, I'd have to let the repainter upload to the appropriate websites...AVSIM, FlightSim.Com, but, would be very glad to write, or help write the Readme files directing those who might be interested back here to HJG, explantion that it is a ficticious aircraft, etc.
As for the 707/757 comparison, comparing scale models, it is quite apparent that the less common B757-300B would have a considerable amount more room inside, though with the same fuselage cross section. Amazing that the cross section of the 707 lives on today in the newest "New Generation" B737s...and while I feel that the 757 has a very sleek nose reminding one of a Lockheed Constellation, the newest 737ngs in production today have pretty much the same cockpit and pilot window arrangment of the old 707s...
)...it does the same job as the 757, but, with the efficiency and cost-savings comes an aircraft that is not "fun to fly," basic transportation. A plane that "gets the job done," but, lumbers into the air without any thrill, takes its time getting up to cruising speed, and, strangely, the GE engines on AAL's 737 fleet, while basically reliable, aren't as robust as the Pratt & Whitney 2040s on the 757s. The P&W engines rarely need to have oil added to them, for example, while the GE "twins" almost always need 8 to 9 quarts of oil added after each trip if of extended duration...very strange. I haven't heard of this oil consumption problem on the larger GE engines on the Triple Sevens or the 747-400s, but the smaller GEs on the 737s GUZZLE oil and must be checked and topped off constantly. Very strange for state of the art technology, in my opinion.
