|
|
Post by wardog on May 4, 2013 17:19:19 GMT
Hi Can any one make the IAF(Israeli Air Force) 707? My first Ñhoice will be "272" or "264" for the KC-135E model which is closer to reality. I know that the main door is different in the KC-135 E and the IAF KC-707's, but i dont need it to work  My second Ñhoice will be "295" for the 707-320C model. Thanks for the help. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 4, 2013 19:14:33 GMT
cool idea!!!!!
Aharon
|
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on May 4, 2013 20:39:52 GMT
Not all military C135 TYPE aircraft can be represented by HJG .... simply for lack of the appropriate 3D model with which to support some of these subjects.
HJG maintain a policy of "AUTHENTICITY FIRST" .... meaning .... the textures go on correct model versions .... OR .... they simply don't ever get done. HJG have seldom ever strayed from this philosophy .... since putting a texture on a wrong model version would simply defeat the whole point/worth of ay exorcise.
IAF #272 and #264 can't be done by HJG since these these are, basically, B707-320C TYPE airframes .... supporting a refueling boom as well as other projections in the form of various antenaes/aerials etc. The current HJG KC135-E "would not" be a suitable/appropriate candidate model for these requests .... because it represents the shorter B707-120/B type fuselage rather than the longer B707-320B/ADVC/C version required to support these 2 IAF requests.
IAF # 295 is, probably, "more practical" though .... considering it's, apparently, a basic B707-320C airframe. It's just a matter of it first "appealing" to someone with an "interest" .... in as much as the "ability" also .... to "want" to take on this particular subject.
Mark C
AKL/NZ
|
|
|
|
Post by garryrussell on May 4, 2013 23:43:43 GMT
Apart from the shorter fuse a KC-135 has a narrower fuse and different wing....plus numerous other differences
The C-135 was a very different aeroplane to the 707/C-137.
|
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on May 5, 2013 20:30:31 GMT
That is "TRUE" .... and iappreciated also ... BUT .... the point of my own personal reference (however unclearly communicated due to my haste/lack of time) was intended to try and emphasize that the subject/s of "this particular request/s" each represent military conversions of ex civil B707-320C type airframes .... not all of which, inidentally, took up common military 135/137 (etc) type nomenclature after conversion .... according to some military inventories from around the world. These are "minor detals" which confuse any number of folk .... including some aviation professionals also  Mark C AKL/NZ |
|
