Jump to content
This site uses cookies! Learn More

This site uses cookies!

You can find a list of those cookies here: mysite.com/cookies

By continuing to use this site, you agree to allow us to store cookies on your computer. :)


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

89 Good

About e8n2

  • Rank
    Established Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Suisun City, California
  • Interests
    Mostly 72nd scale aircraft with some sailing ships (1/96 or 1/100).

Recent Profile Visitors

1,059 profile views
  1. Early B-17 internal colours

    I am working on an Academy B-17E right now, and based on the photo above, it is an E. This was an official photograph, possibly taken before delivery of the aircraft pictured. The lay out of the windows are what is on the nose section of the kit. It does make me feel better seeing this photo as I figured that the crew in the bombardier's position would be sitting on nothing much more than stools fixed to the airframe. I have the rear of my aircraft done in zinc chromate yellow as per Dana Bell's book. To each their own! Later, Dave
  2. Early B-17 internal colours

    On page 94 of Dana Bell's Air Force Colors Volume 3, there is another photo of a B-17E. The caption reads "The waist gun position on a B-17E. Interior skin, ribs, and stringers are zinc chromate (yellow). The interior of the sliding hatch is unpainted. (Color identifications for these photos come from wartime Kodachromes.) There could always be variations between different factories. Maybe Dana will be along to add any information he might have since the book was originally published. Later, Dave
  3. RB-57F Wheel Wells

    You mentioned in an earlier post about the RB-57 being at a simulated flightline for SP training. Boy do I remember that! We called it the humping grounds because in general as a close-in security guard you were supposed to be checking out the aircraft from every direction, walking (humping) around it. As to the aircraft in the shot on this post, IIRC Superscale, back around 30 years ago,did that aircraft on a B-57 decal sheet, but they showed it as being a B model, not an A model! Accuracy has never really been their long suit. Later, Dave
  4. Vintage Airfix Kits

    That does look nice! I imagine that you had to scrounge around for the decals and maybe threw in some home made decals. I don't ever remember the kit coming with Philippine Navy markings, but you never know. Later, Dave
  5. Vintage Airfix Kits

    It looks nice and shows that a lot of work has gone into it to bring it up to something like the real aircraft, but it would not do well at a model contest. Airfix made the stab a swiveling assembly and you will note that there are large gaps around it that allow it to swivel. These gaps are not there on the actual aircraft. The model was also done as a B model F-4, which is really the only model it could really represent. I have lots of classic Airfix kits in my stash, and for some kits, they still are the only game in town. As an example, the F-84F. Far superior to the Italeri kit, and I recently picked up a second hand kit from Rebel Hobby in Sweden, so now I have three of them. Later, Dave
  6. Shorts c-23 Sherpa

    The last published edition of T.O. 1-1-4 from July of 1998 does not list the C-23 for camouflage schemes. I also checked the last edition of the March 1978 basic version of 1-1-4, which came out in July 1993, and it is not in there either. This is not surprising too much as the F-16 was never carried in 1-1-4. T.O. 1-1-4 is no longer in the USAF technical publication system. There was a standard scheme for the aircraft, but since humans were painting it there were bound to be some slight variations between aircraft. Later, Dave
  7. Vintage Airfix Kits

    As far as the F-4 kit is concerned, I totally disagree. It is best tossed in the trash because it is nothing but trash. The wing does not have the humps for the fatter tires of the C/D/F/J versions, the only pylons are the Navy ones, and there are no windows in the space between the two cockpits as on the real aircraft. Interior detail is sparse, which was typical for most kits at the time it originally came out. Check out the review sections of the Detail and Scale books for the later Phantoms for more on what is wrong with the kit. Later, Dave
  8. S-58/UH-34 question

    No matter which version it was, I would highly recommend that you get the Eduard etched metal set 72224 to detail the interior. Neither Italeri or Hobbyboss have the roof and the engine shaft housing from the nose to the main rotor, which is very prominent on the real thing. The Eduard set has both of these items. I just checked Hannant's and they have three in stock. I have a set for all of my S-58 derived kits (H-34 and Wessex). Later, Dave, in no way connected with Eduard.
  9. S-58/UH-34 question

    I would say that it depends on what model S-58 the Iraelis used. I have the kit and seem to remember that it has the bent leg nose landing gear. That was from the later models of the S-58/H-34 family. If the aircraft you are wanting to model has a straight leg nose gear (both legs are straight), then that is an earlier model and would need some modification. There is also the issue of the engine. The kit nose represents a radial engine version. Later versions and conversions had turbine engines with many different types of noses. Later, Dave
  10. North American FJ-2 Fury

    That's the kind of picture I was looking for. Thanks very much. Good to see that they got that part right. Later, Dave
  11. SWORD releasing 1/73 FJ Furys

    I have not ordered my FJ-3 but the FJ-2 should be waiting for me when I get back home from out of town tomorrow. I have always understood that because the FJ-3 used a more powerful engine than the -2 that the intake on the -3 should be bigger than the intake on the -2. Having seen the sprue shots earlier, the intakes seem to be the same size. When somebody has both versions at hand, could they please check the size of the intakes? Maybe a picture of the front of the two different fuselages to show if there is any difference in the size of the intake. Later, Dave
  12. Regarding F-100 and F-105 during Vietnam War

    The gray in the wheel wells called for by 1-1-4, FS16473, is noticeably darker than the underside gray of the SEA scheme, FS 36622. When I was stationed at what was RAF Woodbridge, our F-4s all appeared to have white undersides, which is how I have always done them, as it was much lighter than FS 36622. Could have been due to weathering and the scale effect of putting FS 36622 on a 72nd scale model. For what it is worth, the F-105D at the Travis AFB Museum, IIRC has gloss white wheel wells. It was painted in a one off desert camo scheme in the early 80s. Later, Dave
  13. Regarding F-100 and F-105 during Vietnam War

    Looking over the March 1978 version of T.O. 1-1-4 shows the following: F-100 Natural Metal Landing gear aluminum, wheel wells 34151 SEA Landing gear gloss white, wheel wells 16473 (aircraft gray) F-105 Natural Metal Landing gear and wheel wells aluminum SEA Same as for F-100 Later, Dave
  14. P-47 Mystery decals

    65 X and the yellow lightning bolts are from a unit in the Med. The fin and rudder were painted a medium blue with the yellow lightning bolts. At the moment the exact identification of the unit escapes me, I'm thinking either the 78th,79th or 325th FG. Darn this getting to be an old bugger! Later, Dave
  15. CAM Decals sheet 72A009 has white letters and numbers in Navy style. Nothing there though for making up a unit designation like VU-5 for example. White naval lettering and numbers decal sheets have always been in short supply over the decades I've been in this hobby. Hopefully the CAM sheet is still available, but don't hold your breath. Later, Dave