Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  • Interests
    Too many!

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

Robin-42's Achievements

Established Member

Established Member (3/9)



  1. Great finish, the topside colour variation is perfect! Also a great demo of detailing vs not.
  2. I started this sometime last century..... It was the plated Thunderbirds boxing. I was going to just do the panels on the seams, but it wound up way too shiny for a Korean bird. It looks a little shiny in the photo’s, but looks better in the flesh. I backdated it to an F84E, by filling in the refuelling door and aux intake doors. Tailpipe should have been extended a mm or so, but I didn’t bother. I couldn’t see how to eliminate the seem inside the intake, so I fabricated a plug. Decals went on well, but the red areas broke up a bit. It looked like normal weathering, so I left them alone. One bomb has gone missing, I will add them when it turns up. Gem of a kit.
  3. I love it when you guys build something I have never heard of! Especially when it looks umm, err, interesting? Thanks for sharing.
  4. Thanks for the help guys. Bob and Micheals drawings answered all my questions except what was the performance difference between the two styles of tanks. I may finally pull my 1/72 Revell Voodoo out of the dark recesses of my stash.
  5. Sadly, I actually own the Canadian profile book and flipped through it looking at photo’s. Went right past the drawings. Doh! As Homer Simpson would say. Anybody have any data on improved performance with the “Streamline” tanks. I bet it wasn’t much with all the interference drag.
  6. Having only recently realized that the Voodoo had two different tank designs, despite looking at photo’s of Voodoos for decades, the only reference I can find states they were the same capacity, longer and with a smaller diameter. They appear to be used later in the Voodoo’s service, although some RF101C’s appear to have been fitted with them. The nose and tail profiles are different. Is anyone aware of any drawings or info at all on them.
  7. For years I have wondered why a profile pic of the first prototype seemed to show a bigger canopy. Is the real answer the canopy stayed the same, the rest of the airframe grew? I am only talking about the fuselage frames around the canopy, not the nose or intake.
  8. I have been watching these with interest. Re-building a built out of date kit that can be had unbuilt for peanuts........ Makes me building a Novo Attacker that was missing an entire upper wing seem logical!
  9. Decals can be annoying with older kits. I would suggest you experiment with thinning the paint. It looks like it is drying too fast to give a gloss finish on both kits.
  10. As Tony stated, great set, excellent service.
  11. Outstanding in every way! Your detail painting skills are a marvel. Thanks for sharing.
  12. USAF nailed it with this one. https://airshowstuff.com/v4/2021/a-10-demo-team-unveils-new-special-paint-scheme/
  13. Excellent work! I am looking at two in my stash right now. One day......
  14. Things have been happening on this beast, most of which involves filler, sanding and priming. I did manage to fit the carb intake and horizontal stabs. Getting the elevators to fit is an ongoing trial. The leading edge of the fin seems a little thin, I might bulk it up a bit. Dark spots are my favourite filler for building up leading edges-gap filling superglue.
  • Create New...