Jump to content

Pappy

Members
  • Posts

    3,286
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by Pappy

  1. Hopefully the re-worked title will now answer that question Thanks very much gents Thank you very much, everything fits so well it and there was really only one basic colour. I have to agree, this kit flies together (sorry couldn't resist!) and I can see myself building a few more. I am sure that the Eduard kit has finer detail but for the price, it is hard to beat the value of this kit. Thanks very much, I love doing cockpits so it does not seem like a chore. G'day people, Well I have spent most of the weekend doing the ol' fill-sand, repeat (FSR) dance. The issue is not to do with the fit of the kit, Tamiya have really excelled in that department but rather it is the detail. The kit features beautifully recessed panel lines but North American's practice at the time was to putty the seams on the forward half of the wing, prime, sand and then paint the wings in gloss silver dope to reduce drag and extract as much aerodynamic performance from the laminar flow wing. That means that most of the wing panels needed to be filled. I brushed on some liquid filler and lightly wet sanded. I did this twice and there were some persistent spots that needed additional applications. Once satisfied, I masked off the panels that would not have their seams filled and shot a primer coat over the top to see how it would look under paint. The primer was also wet sanded with sanding sponges to get a nice smooth finish as befits such a speed queen I am pleased with the result - smoother than a baby's proverbial! A cheeky test fit followed to ensure all the parts still play nice together The fit is still sublime. By way of reward and as a motivation during the rounds of FSR I painted up the u/c. I have added some brake lines to the main gear as well as decal data plates. My reference pics show that the airfield conditions that 3SQN was operating in were very basic and the aircraft were consequently quite grubby with the wheels being very muddy. The pics also show that the main fairings (the larger wheel door covers) were closed with only slight sagging evident so most of that wheel well detail will not be seen. This saves me the trouble of replicating all the hydraulic 'spaghetti' that is missing, cheers, Pappy
  2. G'day people, I have been waiting for this GB to roll around. I have had this one in the stash since the last Mustang GB. I ran out of time to build it that time so hopefully I can get this one built this time around. I cracked the bags on this one today and while only intending to have a quick peek, one thing led to another and some paint brushes were used in anger.... The end result at end of day's play today I had some PE handy and although I dd not use all of it, most of it was handy. The seat beltswere especially welcome as I did not fancy using the provided decal. The only additional detail added by me was a couple of electrical cables for the radio Although there are some pretty healthy looking ejector pin marks, there were only a couple that needed removing from each fuselage half, the others will be hidden from view when the fuselage halves are joined. I also managed to get the wing together Plus a cheeky dry fit I have often heard this kit referred to as a 'mojo restorer', and I can see why, after a day it is nearly assembled! Despite owning a few Tamiya kits I have not actually built that many but I can see the appeal as Tamiya's reputation for excellent fit and engineering has not disappointed. The main gear bay does feature a major inaccuracy in the the rear of the kit bay features a bulkhead that follows the bay opening whilst IRL the rear of the bay was the main-spar which was recessed further back. Airfix and other contemporary kits correctly represent this feature but I am not bothered enough to correct it. I don't think the bite is worth the chew but of course others may feel compelled to correct it. I still need to source decals and and a few other bits and pieces so I expect there will some ebb and flow while I wait for these bits to arrive, cheers, Pappy
  3. Be the first! Pappy
  4. Great subject and agreat start, watching with interest, cheers, Pappy
  5. G'day Enzo, The airbrakes were disabled for in-flight use on later variants (and the perforated doors replaced with the sold doors but there were excpetions) and they could be opened to access equipment for ground maintenenace. The early A-6As initially did not have the wingtip split airbrakes but this feature was added once the fatigue/cracking issues associated witht the fuselage airbrakes was discovered. As you can see in the pic of the EA-6A, these aircraft retained the use of their fuselage airbrakes as being based on early build A-6As, they did not have the wingtip speed brakes. The lack of actuator fairings above and below the wing is the give-away, cheers, Pappy
  6. Deep Saxe Blue (DSB) is the correct colour for practice rounds (typically referred to as HES - High Explosive Simulated) but these rounds can vary in hue. Practice rounds do not contain any explosive fill and are rated for flight and can be dropped as their CofG and mass equivalence is similar to a HE round If the HES round has been built up to be dropped from new stock, then the colour will be more vibrant than a round that has been built up and just used to practice ground loading which may be stored outside in the weather and hence subject to fading, oxidation and other weathering effects. Just to confuse the issue, a practice round can also be painted olive drab but with a DSB band on the nose denoting an inert fill. This is rare and typically done when someone wants to make their air show display jet look tough. Drill rounds usually refer to rounds that are not cleared for flight and used for ground training only. These drill rounds are a darker blue like Oxford Blue and typically have the words "DRILL" and "NOT FOR FLIGHT" stencilled in white, As stated above HES rounds may also be used for the same task in which case they may take on a faded and weathered appearance. cheers, Pappy
  7. I remember when I bought my first 1/48 Airfix Buccaneer kit (the legacy kit not the re-tooled one), I was also speechless, it was the WORST fitting kit I had ever seen. It did go together well once I learned that the secret to joining the fuselage was to do it is stages, cheers, Pappy
  8. Maybe try looking at Zvesda, they do several MIL Mi-8/17 kits cheers, Pappy
  9. One other thing, The Academy F-111 kits seem to include most of the EF-111A parts in the common sprues along with both the TP1/TP2 intakes. If you wanted to build a Raven and could not find their kit readily available, you could buy the Ozmods Raven tail and just use any of the Academy short wing F-111 kits as a workaround, cheers, Pappy
  10. 🤣 I just spilled my coffee! Great story! Pappy
  11. G'day Filler, I believe these are resin copies of the Academy kit part(s), no extra detail or corrections applied. I think the intent was for people to paint them up as stand-alone examples of applicable 'tail art'. Unlike their USAF counterparts, most RAAF F-111s had art applied to the fin (instead of the nose) when special schemes were applied. These trophy tails allow people to just make the tails instead of the whole jet, at least that is what I think the intent was, cheers, Pappy
  12. G'day Ed, Many thanks, that is exactly what I needed, gps dome and no tail sensor, it looks like ALE-40 mod as well, cheers, Pappy
  13. G'day Mike, Thanks. I have read Mr Vark's guides previously and although they are an excellent source of generic information my questions are more specific. Thank you for the link to the flight manual, that is very much appreciated, cheers, Pappy
  14. G'day people, I want to build a Raven (Spark Vark) and while looking through the on-line pics I have seen a few different equipment configurations. The areas that I need information concern the CMDS installation at the rear of the jet on either side of the engine exhausts, the tail and the area in front of the windscreen. My subject jet is 66-0044 (Straight Flush') based at Cannon AFB and my questions are, 1. Did this jet have the GPS dome installed in front of the windscreen when it carried the nose art? The GPS dome seems to have been a later addition. 2. What type of CMDS config was installed. I believe the initial fit was ALE-28 but later pics show Ravens were upgraded with the ALE-40 system which had larger fairings and four dispenseres per side for a total of eight 3. Did the rear of the ECM 'football' have the IR sensor installed or was this plated over? The system was removed toward the end of the Raven's service. and finally some generic questions. Most F-111s have antenna panels embedded within the Forward Equipment Bay (FEB) doors 1101/1102/1201 and 1202 however it seems from the pics that on Ravens the 'I' shaped antenna on the rear FEBs (1102/1202) was deleted and that some of the ECM panels on the fwd FEBs were also deleted? It is hard to tell as the light camouflage colour makes it hard to see the outlines of the dielectric panels, cheers, Pappy I assume that the Compass Sail and Strike Camera fairing swere also removed/not installed? cheers, Pappy
  15. Hi Dennis, That was extremely hwlpful, thank you Hello Tomas, that ias very kind of you, no rush but I am leaning towards the Grigio Azzurro Chiaro now G'day Giogio, I have never had succuss spraying Lifecolour. Still, I can use that asa reference point to match in some other paint range. The Stormo site suggests FS36307 as an approximate match in one of their tables - that one I have! Thank you all for the prompt replies, cheers, Pappy
  16. G'day people, I have acquired a Classic Airframes CR-42 kit and know almost nothing about them. What colour would the cockpit interior have been painted? Trolling though on-line pics of museum examples I am a little wary The overall colour appears to be a blueish grey, and assume it is grigio azzurro scuro-can anyone suggest an equivalent acrylic colour please? The instructions are pretty vague. The a/c fuselage had a metal tube frame with fabric covering and metal panels around the engine. The doped fabric covering does not appear to have the reddish hue on the intewrior side as per allied aircraft? cheers, Pappy
  17. Try and keep me away! cheers, Pappy
  18. G'day Colin, Lovely stuff. I have one of these and and squirreling this build away for reference when I get around to mine. cheers, Pappy
  19. They must be Hades bombs as used in Iron Eagle Pappy
  20. I agree with this list but will add: A lot of the once abundant AM stuff for the Has kits is getting harder to find as most of the available stuff is optimised for use with the Tamiya/Kinetic kits (except weapons) The Has kits don't really offer much in the way of stores, typically some external pylons, the three gasbags, sometimes the MXU-648 luggage pod and a pair of very average AIM-9L/Ms and AIM-120Bs The Has wing drop tanks have incorrectly shaped fins (small pointed ones instead of the truncated type) and very large castellated attaching blocks which make for a very strong join but inaccurate and ugly Has kits typically had two canopy sprues, one clear and one smoke tinted. This allowed the modeller to tint their own canopy if desired (or use the already tinted version) but additionally, gave the option for a mix of tinted and clear canopy combinations. Sometimes you will see a pic of an F-16 with a tinted main canopy and clear rear portion, which is a nice option. additionally, you will need to polish out the mould seam (Tam/Kinetic as well), two canopies means you may have the option of a spare if things go sideways The Hasegawa F-16F (block 60) is not too bad either although you could probably graft the extra bits onto a Kinetic D for max accuracy If you don't know the differences between the various blocks and upgrades, will you be worried about the small errors or omissions in the kit? The Has F-16s can be had cheaply secondhand and build up very easily and quickly. They generally fit very well but suffer in a direct comparison with the Tammy kits as far as detail goes., the u/c bays are almost devoid of any detail and the intake and exhaust is truncated and obviously too short. The Tamiya kits are superbly engineered and fit as you would expect but you pay a premium for that. If you were to add a resin seat/PE details and some aftermarket weapons, the Has kits start to look like good value if you can get them cheap. In oz, secondhand, they typically go for $10-$15, vice the $80-$90(new) for the Tam kit or the $75 for the Kinetic kits. if you spend about $39-$40 for a seat/exhaust and the differences in detail level start to narrow. Weapons are a personal choice, many people buy the Tamiya kits and still end up buying PE and resin to replace the cockpit/weapons and exhaust with 'better' details I like the Kinetic kits for the two seat variants (B/D late block), to my eye the parts bear more than a passing resemblance to the Tamiya kit, maybe they were just 'inspired'... Pappy
  21. G'say Chris, Great work, looking forward to seeing more, cheers, Pappy
  22. G'day Ray! Crikey, you have been busy and the work is looking very good. I would not rush just to get it done for ACT as I would hate to see a careless mistake undo all the great work so far. Looking forward to the finished article, cheers, Pappy
  23. G'day Stoz, I agree with all the comments, and I have a stalled kit as well. The kit can be a hard slog if you want all the access doors closed as it was designed to be built with these doors open. If you go down the doors open route, the kit is a far easier proposition. The kit also has a number of errors in addition to those pointed out by PP such as the duplicated APU. The APU details in the rear left u/c bay are correct, but KH copied these in a mirror image for the right u/c bay which is incorrect. The kit seat is the incorrect type for an RAF example and if you want to replace it with a resin seat the cockpit is too shallow and you will need to remove a portion of the lower seat for it to fit correctly. KH supply the side consoles and instrument panel details as PE overlays. Although this seems like a nice idea, the relief is very fine and does not take a dry-brush easily. Having said all that, there are aftermarket resin sets which supply additional detail for the areas underneath the open access covers. I closed all the doors on mine as it will be posed in-flight. The nose avionics doors were easy to fit BUT, I left off the avionics detail insert and glued the panels from the inside before attaching both nose halves to aid in getting these level. The cannon doors were not too bad a fit either, they just needed to test fit and gently sanded a few spots around the edges to get a nice fit. The real pain is the engine bay doors as these consist of several panels in different planes. If you don't want these open, you are for a fight. KH originally released the ADA variant, with a very nice complement of French weapons. Unfortunately, KH took the lazy option and just included the same stores sprues for the RAF version which means you need to buy aftermarket stuff for a tooled up Jag especially if you don't have an Airfix kit to steal the stores from. You could wait for Airfix (or someone else) to release a better kit, or build it without shutting all the covers, or you could put the effort in to build with the covers shut however, only YOU can decide if the bite is worth the chew. The KH kit looks great in the box and surface detail is significantly better than the old Heller/Airfix kit and many of the so called 'reviews' gushed over it when first released. You don't see a lot of the KH Jags on the comp tables, no doubt the reputation has scared people away. If you are not a very skilled modeller or are time poor and only get to the bench occasionally, sell your kit and then buy an old Airfix kit, it will be cheaper and less stress, it fits okay (not great) and lacks cockpit and undercarriage detail. The panel lines are much heavier and the smaller parts like pitot probes and antennas for example are quite chunky. To me, the most annoying feature is that he auxiliary air inlet doors are moulded partially open when the should be flush at speed or when the a/c is static. It is correctible, it just needs some plastic card and scribing but annoying to have to do. With some AM and fresh decals they come up well. It is also pot luck with the decals as these were often out of register. cheers, Pappy
  24. I think this question has come up before, cheers, Pappy
  25. To add, 15 ex USAF FB-111As were bought and operated by the RAAF, the only export customer for the F-111. These jets had undergone the AMP prior to RAAF service and were 'de-nuclearized' post AMP following which they were re-classified as F-111Gs. They were used in the tactical strike training role in RAAF service to conserve the hours of the ageing F-111C fleet and supplementing the F/RF-111C fleet if required As conventional bomb trainers, although they could carry GBU-10/12 bombs they would not have been able to self-designate targets and would have been reliant on either another (Pave Tack equipped) F-111C or ground designator (SF) to lase for them. As far as conventional bombers went, they were pretty good with quite respectable CEPs regards, Pappy
×
×
  • Create New...