Des

Congratulations on that Phil , the claimed lack of discretion is obviously discretionary which is quite possibly one of the Ferengi Rules of Acquisition (Blame Netflix and obsessive watching of Deep Space Nine re-runs when I could be modelling instead).

I was in the Dundee branch a couple of weeks ago and noticed that the modelling and model railways section had been moved to the other side of the store and reduced in size by somewhere in the region of one third to one half of what it had been previously , all the usual brands were still represented but in smaller numbers with Airfix perhaps still having the greatest presence. I am planing to visit their Falkirk store next weekend and expect to find much the same has happened there. From comments made by my wife who was looking for some craft materials I got the impression that this might have been part of a wider re-organisation than merely reducing the modelling stock as she discovered that the choice of things she was looking for was much reduced from her previous visit a couple of months ago and that for some items the choice had been reduced to a single range from a single manufacturer where previously there had been a far wider selection. As regards pricing policy a couple of years back I decided that I really did want an Airfix Valiant after all , obviously once all of the overstock bargains had ended and it was getting a bit harder to find , and saw one in Hobbycraft for £40.00 which I think was to the top end of RRP when it was first released and decided that by that point I was not going to find it anywhere for much less especially if postage was added and so bought it. The box was rather tatty having been on the bottom shelf of the display at the right height for passing shopping trolleys, sticky pawed toddlers and pushchairs which the shop manager who served me commented on , I suggested that maybe in those circumstances a couple of pounds could be knocked off the price but was apologetically told that individual stores have no discretion whatsover in making such decisions.

Just tried it and it works although being Photobox it is very , very slow in loading which was acceptable for free but yet another reason for not paying them a penny. Will come in very handy in identifying specific images whenever I get enough time to find hosting elsewhere and start to change over , many thanks Steve.

Photobucket eventually caught up with me yesterday and so I will have to scour this post when considering an alternative means of linking images. However this morning those lovely people at Photobucket sent me an e-mail advertising their direct sales website 'PB DEALS' "It's just another way for us to show our appreciation for your continued support of Photobucket!" advertising all sorts of items ones life would be better off without although it does include the 'Illumibowl Toilet Nightlight' which they might find useful for filing their current business model when they cannot pay their electric bill.

Been there .... done that ..... deleted the images ..... but rather oddly noticed at an airshow soon after that while the RAF Typhoons had their intakes carefully blanked off those on an adjoining Eurofighter from another European nation were left open to the air and passing cameras , have also seen them very clearly visible as the backdrop to TV interviews with senior RAF Officers and during TV reports from the production line at Warton rejoicing in the success/bemoaning the collapse of the UK Aviation Industry depending on the official news policy of the day. Although not quite as 'secret' as the few feet of padded wall covering visible through the open door of the Sentinel R.1 and the 'no photographs at all of the aircraft even from a couple of hundred yards away if the door is open' order given to photographers at one airfield even although one had been at an airshow with the barriers allowing access almost within touching distance of the open door a few weeks earlier and the crew seeming apparently indifferent to the cameras pointed that way.

Stunning work and as has already been mentioned I also thought your first image was of the real aircraft. Were you tempted at all to hang a HAWK SAM under the wing as the Iranian's have looked at to supplement the AIM-54?

From everything that I have read on UK Phantoms dating back to when they first entered service it seems that the gun pod was used solely by the RAF including from my rather hazy memories of RAF Leuchars Airshows of the day those FG.1 re-directed to 43 Sqn. from very early in their service well before the rest of the fleet were withdrawn from Royal Navy service and adapted to carry it as well. I have a vague recollection that the Navy did not use the gun pod for the same electrical safety issues aboard carriers that led to the FG.1 carrying the standard subsonic rated 2" Rocket Pods already in use on other naval types rather than the supersonic rated 18 Tube 68mm Matra 155 Pods favoured by the RAF.

Did this in 1/48 a few years back and according to the references I used then a Phimat was carried on both outer wing stations , cannot remember now exactly where I found this but suspect it might have been from an issue of Air Fan or Air Action.

Well done, an excellent job , looks very much the part and possibly the inspiration to complete a project started over twenty years ago. Bought the F.6 many , many years ago having watched John Adams demonstrate one on the Saturday of the Scottish Nationals when they were held in Stirling , thought long and hard about it overnight and went back through on the Sunday (I lived a lot closer then) to buy one and since have got as far as assembling the both wings and the main fuselage but always chicken out of bringing them together and finishing the job. So might do something about it soon unless something equally shiny distracts me.

Great looking Tornado , have plans to do a Marineflieger IDS shortly from the 1/72 Revell kit and hope that I can do as good a job.

Looking at Detail & Scale Volumes 2 and 21 for the F-101 photographs and drawings show the nosegear doors to have a roughly triangular cross-section inner face detail and when the the doors are open the they are canted out at an angle which has the inner face detail hanging down vertically from the fuselage forming a right angle when seen from the front. If the kit parts have this inner face detail hopefully this information might help but if not pm with an e-mail address and I will scan the relevant material.

Not wishing to appear equally 'super picky' but I thought that I might clarify your rather less than accurate comment published above concerning someone else's alleged inaccuracies. Neither of these apparent mistakes mentioned appear in the latest issue of Scale Aircraft Modelling a.k.a. SAM published by Guideline , they actually appear in the latest issue of Model Aircraft which is published by SAM Publications who also confusingly (to some perhaps) publish Scale Aviation Modeller International sometimes abbreviated to SAMI.

I have never built the Revell kit although I am about to start on one soon but your experience is rather par for the course with every other Tornado kit I have ever built. What I have done in the past is to fix broken off pylons back in place by using a fine drill piece on a pin drill to make a hole in the pylon , superglue a section of paperclip into place and once cured superglue the pylon and store into a fixed position using the locating hole in the wing. The combination of the strength of the superglue and rigidity of the paperclip being secured into the parts at both ends has always worked for me for wing stores problems and for those other Tornado bugbears of broken main undercarriage legs and tailerons snapping off at the swivel joint. Be a pity to see all of your work so far wasted so hope this helps.

ZA595/061 was a GR.4(T) based at Marham or so it would seem and which suffered a bird strike, apparently near to where I live , in January 2014 but made it safely into Leuchars where it was deemed unsuitable for repair and was taken by road a few months later to Leeming for RTP. Last images I can find on the internet were taken about six months before the accident and show it without unit markings and carrying its assigned '061' fin code.

What a strange comment to make.