ShadowRaider

It might just turn out that this new manufacturer is not actually a new one. And here is a link to their web site (much more convenient than the FB page that keeps insisting that you log in), where the expected price can be seen: http://www.modelcollect.com/newproducts

Martin, thank you for responding to my question regarding the decals. Good news! >> So aggressors will be C7 based I suspect I am very sorry to correct you, but - according to available sources - F-21A was based on Kfir C1, not C7. Certainly it has some differences.

Dear Martin @ AMK, Could you please consider adding USN and/or USMC variants as decal options? (as some undoubtedly know, the F-21A was in service with VF-43 and VMFT-401 for "Aggressor" adversary training)

Petr, thank you very much for responding. I still hope that your Skyraider is released. If it is accurate, and if it includes (as you have hinted before) various options and weapons, then I will definetely buy a Special Hobby kit, regardless of how its price compares to competitors.

Dear Petr, A new company called Skale Wings has recently announced the release of the 1/72 scale AD-5W Skyraider. Basing on available pictures their model seems to be a good one. But that is only one variant, whereas you (Special Hobby) have mentioned before an intention to release the full range of "wide-body" Skyraiders. Could you possibly tell us something about your (Special Hobby's) progress on this particular kit? We haven't heard anything from you since April 2014.

>> We need new mould B/C/D And what is wrong with the F-4B from Hasegawa?... (except the fact that it is a bit expensive) In my view, Hasegawa does very good F-4B, J, S and RF-4B. Academy's F-4J is good too, sure. But, raised panel lines on this reported Monogram / Revell kit?.... To be re-released in 2016?.... Wow.... Anyway, those who are ready to build a kit with raised panel lines would probably not care for differences between F-4B and F-4J. To kids, it surely makes no difference.

Andrevell, thank you for your reply.

Dear Tanmodels team, I am pleasantly surprised at how quickly and positively you react to feedback received from modellers. I wish other model kit manufacturers were similarly inclined. All the best in you future projects! (and don't forget about the 1:72 scale, please)

Completely agree with those that say that THE best aviation-oriented and photo-oriented web site is ruined completely. For ten years now I've been visiting Airliners.net every day (except when I was on holidays). I never post and never comment, but just search for photographs and enjoy them. Now it looks like it is 100% targeted on those who don't know what a keyboard and a mouse are for, and are only capable of sticking their fingers at the screen. And yes, I did send my feedback to the Airliners team straight away. In their reply they are very polite and they say that "if you give it a chance, you'll appreciate the new improved features". I'm sorry but I don't want no "new" features. I want to use those that worked perfectly well before this "change". 90% of the time I used Airliners to search for specific photographs that I want. For example, I used to go to "Search", type "EA-18G" (or "RF-4B", or whatever), clicked a button, and got hundreds (or in some cases thousands) of photos found in less than 1 second. I selected "60 photos per page", and again the search results were rearranged nearly instantly. Switching to each next page took much less than 1 second. And how it works now? Now, when I use the same search options / same screens, it takes about 1 second for a single photograph to appear on the screen while I scroll. So 60 photographs = nearly 1 minute. Why should I give this "a chance"?...

Mr. Andrevell, 1. Can we hope that in production kits the canopy will be of better quality, compared to what we currently see on your photographs? (here and on the FB page that you're referring to) 2. Can we hope that in production kits the colour of the U.S. National Insignia will be Insignia Blue, as prescribed? I must say that what I currently see on your photographs (here and on the FB page) looks way too light to me.

As expected, the plastic is exactly the same as in their original F3D-2 kit. Perhaps my review of that kit, where I try to list some of the shortcomings that must be corrected, might be of help to some. Link: http://alexsmodelling.blogspot.com/2016/03/f3d-2-skyknight-sword-model-kit-review.html Regards, Alex

>> Nice, but I'd really like the fighter. You only have to wait, I believe. This is an entirely common practice among many model kit manufacturers: the least wanted version gets released first, while the most wanted version is the last to be released. The F9F-8P recce bird is definitely the least wanted (well, the least interesting) version of the Cougar, and it is already released. Now comes the F9F-8T trainer, which offers many more colorful options (including Vietnam War H&MS-13 planes). Not to worry, some time in the future we will see the F9F-8 fighter announced as well. PS: It is not my strategy, it is theirs. So please don't shoot the messenger. Regards, Alex

>> I hope to get .... and the wonderful Proteus from Unicraft Be careful, sir. This is what you could be getting when buying a Unicraft product: http://scalemodels.ru/images/2015/11/1447726821_img046.jpg

A new 1/72 Grumman Duck is excellent news! As for the earlier vs. later versions.... Consider this: like some other vendors, Valom is known to have released / announced several variations of the same kit in the past (e.g. Fouga Magister; F-101). It may well prove to be the same with the Duck in due course.

>> ref.72105 - Ryan L-17 A/B Navion (US NAVY) I wonder, is this box (and decals therein?...) supposed to represent a U.S. Army L-17 from this photograph? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ryan_L-17_Navion_on_USS_Leyte_1950.jpg Or is it a pure what-if markings options? As far as I know, the L-17 was not used by the U.S.Navy.