Tom Cooper

And even if you threat my life now, I couldn't point you at specific stats: I simply read a number of relevant articles over the last few years. In essence, and although completely ignored in the public, print is booming (and so also publishers that concentrated on print) - alone because of much improved quality (like digital-offset, for example) - while the entire hipe about digital issues is actually a part of advertising campaign by specific companies. Again: this does not mean there is anything 'exclusive' or 'definite'. It's certainly so that some people do prefer digital issues. It's just so that they remain a minority (and very tiny, at least in most of cases). EDIT: I should add that the articles in question were describing the situation in the USA (specifically: East Coast) and German language area. And then that most of articles in question were stressing that what makes printing publishers as successful is foremost a high quality of their products (not only high quality of print, but also that of their authors, editing, design and setting, etc.). This is causing me to at least 'lean' in direction of concluding that the situation in the UK is likely to be similar - although it's perfectly possible that it's actually different (particularly because, well, sorry to say it, but much of stuff published in relation to our 'sphere of interest' in the UK is not really what I tend to associate with the word 'quality'). The articles in question were not specific in this regards.

OK. Sadly, that's where I can't help with precise details on colours. They were 'similar', but obviously not the same like those used in the 1980s.

Erm... so, just to be sure I understand the content of this thread correctly: when I draw an artwork ('colour profile') of some RAF or Fleet Air Arm aircraft... say, RAF Shackleton AEW.Mk.3...I'm a criminal breaching 'crown copyrights'?

Like several times the last few years there was lots of noise at first... then some light - or even ultralight - aircraft appeared about 1,5km (roughly a mile) away. Couldn't even hear it, and I'm terrible in ID-ing such types. The noise came from two Eurofighters trying to 'intercept' it. It was actually funny watching them 'sitting on their tails' while trying to decellerate to what was probably near-max speed of the object of their interest. Not sure if the light aircraft missed the border (happens 2-3 times a year, I'm living quite close to Hungary), or if it was an exercise, though...

Just one note re. 'digital issues': these are not as popular as often advertised. No doubt, there are people who are buying them. But, by far not as many as thought: they're actually still a tiny minority.

There's an entire 'family' of pods for unguided rockets calibre 2.75in, including LAU-3 (20 rounds; also used by F-105s), LAU-7H (7 rounds), LAU-7A, LAU-10, LAU-12H, LAU-19A, LAU-19H, LAU-32, LAU-49A, LAU-59A, LAU-61, LAU-68A etc. up to at least LAU-131... I guess they have 'Modell' designations too, but I do not know these.

...ah yes, and not to forget: one of 'heaviest' configurations for this type at all... Namely: - 2x M118s (3,000lbs/1,500kg heavy demolition bombs) on inboards, and a drop tank under the centreline. Don't know if there are any M118s to get (no matter what scale), though...

It always depends on what would you like to show, i.e. your preferences. Generally, Mk.82s - although 'already' available - were used quite seldom in the 1960s. There was abudance of M117, and these were expended in really immense numbers, especially by F-105s. By far the most photos - especially those showing aircraft underway to North Vietnam - show a MER with 5x or 6x M117 under the centreline, 2x drop tanks and 2x ALQ-87 jammer pods (or ALQ-71 or ALQ-72) on outboard pylons. An 'early alternative' (while F-105s were still not camouflaged) were LAU-7 or similar rocket pods under outboard pylons (usually without any caps). A less usual 'mix' I saw only once would be similar, but the MER was loaded with 4x M117s (on its sides) and 2x Mk.82s (on bottom stations). Instead of ALQ-87s, M117s were carried on outboard pylons. M117s also had Daisy-cutter fuzes. Guess, this was some sort of CAS-configuration for ops in Southern Vietnam (keep in mind that average Thud-pilot flew about 50% of his obligatory 100 sorties over South Vietnam). If carried, AGM-45 Shrikes were installed on outboard pylons (always in pairs, or at least that's what photos are showing). But most of photos showing Shrike-armed F-105s are actually those of two-seaters... Note: F-105Ds were originally not wired for AIM-9 Sidewinders. But, a few were modified to carry some, sometimes in late 1967 or so, after the type began suffering losses to MiG-21s. I think there was even a double-rail installation, similar to that carried on inboard pylons of F-4s. Counterweight on the other side was nearly always the ALQ-87 (sort of a 'pre-requisite' for any mission into RPVI).

...and I'll talk with Harpia about some sponsoring (shouldn't be a problem to get a few copies of 'Fall of the Flying Dragon').

Very nice. Erm... that is: not so much. There's not a single photo of that batch of 12 MiG-17Fs delivered in early October 1956. And all of them were destroyed in Anglo-French air strikes. The only photos that became available are showing MiG-17Fs delivered after that war. Similarly, all attempts to get any of pilot log-books from that period were unsuccessful, so there are no details about their serial numbers - which were applied, so much is sure. There's a 'guess' if you like, that their serials were in range 11xx - but that's the only 'clue' available... Should you decide to apply these, then use matt black. 'Translating' our 'Western' (i.e. Arabic) digits into 'Arabic' (actually Persian) digits should be no problem: Anyway... good news is: you need not learning Arabic. All the maintenance stencils were applied in English, in blue colour. Four-digit construction numbers (applied on all removable surfaces, like rudders, flaps, covers for various bays, even hardpoints for drop tanks) were applied in red. Known examples for post-1956 aircraft are 8044 and 8047. Of course, if you're working in 1:72, not much of this is going to be seen. But should you manage to get some decent decals for maintenance stencils, your modell is surely going to look much better. Ah yes... colour: I recommend Alclad's 'Aluminium' - overall. Plus some 'silver-blue' for air-brakes, gun-blast pannel, and various covers ('access pannels'). 'Exdraken' did fantastic in his build of a MiG-17PF (<=thread with plenty of detailed instructions in this regards and even more of good photos of excellent painting). Don't forget: - ID-stripes in black (3 around wingtips, with the middle one being 3x as thick as the outter ones; 2 around rear fuselage) - 'walkways' along the joint of fuselage and wing (usually applied in dark grey) National markings: - should be green-white-green (for period 1931-1958), without any white crowns though (it was 'EAF' already since 1952) - roundels in 6 positions - fin flashes.

If you need any help with research, let me know, Holme. Albert Grandolini did plenty of research about Civil Transport and Air America and published several articles about them too (none in English, though). If anybody might know certain aircraft, then it's him. Means: can always forward your questions...

Oh, very good. 'Egyptian'. 'But', from what period, what livery and serial number, what equipment etc.?

MiG-17F - for what air force (in what markings)?

...and you're not the only one...

Aha! OK, if we're now at the level of propagating specific air forces for this build... I have a 'better' idea! Iraqi MiG-21MF serial number '1019': the only MiG-21 to wear kill markings for an Israeli Mirage (shot down in 1973) and an Iranian F-4 Phantom II (shot down in 1980). Illustration bellow is showing it as after the October 1973 Arab-Israeli War: When it comes to MFs, there's nothing to beat that baby.

OK let me know. Though I guess you'll go for post-overhaul 'version', then there are extremely few (less than a dozen) of photos showing LAAF MiG-23MLs in their original livery, and they are extremely hard to get. I think there are absolutely no decal sheets providing markings (especially serials) for them, either.

Hey Gordon, any idea about serial/code and period you want to build?

Well, the Soviets did fly MiG-21MFs - but in Egyptian markings, in Egypt, from March 1970 - June 1972. ...and most of MiG-21MFs were delivered to their customers painted in beige and olive green (that is: most of MFs were exported outside Europe, that's why I say 'most').

Nobody in for an Iraqi MiG-29 with (French-made) Remora ECM pod, just for example...?

Just a sec: a MiG-23ML from 'first period' (delivery in 1986 until about 2000) or 'second period' (overhaul in Russia, in early 2000s untl today)? Namely, colours used were similar, but still different. Just for the start, the old camo included the BS381C/388 beige and light admiralty grey; the new - not.

So, 'only a small bulge forward of the wheel door'? But this one on all FB.Mk.52s...? If so, OK, thanks: that makes sense.

I don't have any photos of RAF Vampires, so can't say. What's confusing about that 'bulge' is that it seems to have at least two different forms. One has a straight bottom, leading at high angle downards from bottom of intake, towards the rear. On some aircraft it appears to end where the front part of the wheel-bay cover ends. On the others it's like 'more rounded', and might include a part of the wheel-bay cover... And then there are photos that show nothing of this at all... 'Confusing' (and frustrating) to put it mildly...

Yes, that was standard practive - for the RAF. But - at least gauging by what I know about various decal sheets - it's 'next to unknown' as 'standard practice' for various Arab air forces. Good (although 'unrelated') example: Iraqi Furies, Vampires, Venoms, Hunters etc. all had their serials applied on bottom wing surfaces (plus on covers of front undercarriage bays, in the case of jets). But, how many decal sheets containing decals for these types in Iraqi service are containing 'extra' serials (for application on bottom wing surfaces and on covers for undercarriage bays)...? *********** Anyway, two (or more) question/s about Vampire FB.Mk.52s: 1.) some photos seem to show them having some sort of a 'bulge' along the lower (bottom-side) joint of wing and fuselage. But, most of photos in question show examples already equipped with ejection seats: AFAIK, FB.Mk.52s delivered to Egypt lacked ejections eats. Furthermore, most of linedrawings do not show anything 'unusual' in that area. So, was there 'something' or 'nothing at all', and if: then in what case...? 2.) I'm lacking close-up photos of EAF Vampires, so no clue what was stencilled on them. When studying photos of F.Mk.5s and FB.Mk.52s from other air forces, it seems they show entirely different of sets maintenance instructions or warning inscriptions. Any ideas about what exactly was 'standard' for stencills on Vampire FB.Mk.52s from about 1949-1952 period?

A very interesting detail; thanks for raising this topic. There are actually very few (less than a dozen) of photos of Egyptian Vampires available. Two or three are showing them from the right side, but no extension of that fairing is to be seen. That said: the first Egyptian Vampire should've been a 'vanilla' F.Mk.5, rest FB.Mk.52s (with those built in Italy apparently retaining their anti-glare pannels). BTW...another (potentially) interesting detail about Meteors: they've had their serials (in Arabic and in Persian digits, just like on their rear fuselages) appliled on bottom surfaces of each wing. There is only one photograph showing these, and it's not particularly clear - but it seems: 'in flight direction' under the right wing, and 'rearwards' under the left wing, always in between the engine nacelle and the hardpoint for drop tanks (i.e. inboard of roundels). Haven't researched a lot about these jets so far: is this something 'new' or 'already known'...?

AFAIK, T.Mk.7s were unarmed. Photos of EAF T.Mk.7s show also no launch rails or else. That said: just run into a few potos of EAF Spitfires F.Mk.22: they did have underwing launch rails, or at least holders for them - though these were installed before delivery.