WolvoWill

Its a very nice looking model - however its a 'what-if' of a pre-production spec airframe. Fine to use as a guide to building the Revell or Hobbyboss kits, because the differences between the pre-production and in-service aircraft are quite small - the gun fairing, and chaff and flare dispensers on the rear fuselage decking just inboard of the flaps. The overall build sequence is identical so for giving tips on construction the differences between this prototype-ish model and the real deal flying off French carrier's makes no odds. I do feel it would be worth pointing out these small differences on your WEEAC disk though, for accuracies sake. In terms of accurising the kit, its a case of picking up either the Wolfpack Designs conversions for F1/F2 standard Rafales, which include all the relavent airframe mods, and then utilise the Skyraider designs decal sheet, then you're good to go.

I'm in for this, probably build two jets in 1/48. Either a 56 or 111sqn F3, and a GR4 of some description - not sure on the markings for that but 41sqn or something from Lossie as I have already done a Marham jet! Will

Looks a good start, think I'm gonna have to hurry up with my 'straight from the box' offering, lest you beat me

To make a GR4, yes, you'll have to open up the RHS cannonj! To make a GR4A (the 'A' is a recce variant with IR linescan gear instead of the 2 guns) tho the ECR kit is okay, tho u will have to find decals for the sensor windows and add the extra blister fairing under the nose! Also check ur references - dont want to have a GR4A airframe dressed in markings and wearing the serial of a normal GR4!

Still a rare kit to see for sale, but not for too much longer I expect as it is being given a limited re-release in the US, apparently funded by Stephens International (US kit distributor). I pre-ordered one from Sprue Brothers.

Aye I've seen and built those, much better than the Airfix offerings! Any chance of some Brimstones whilst you're pondering some Tornado weaponry? Also applicable to the Harrier and eventually Typhoon.

Nice to see the Raptor pod The very last boxings of Airfix's GR4 had Storm Shadows and a Raptor pod in - mind you, the Storm Shadows are completely inaccurate and crudely moulded! The RAPTOR pod is usable though it has very heavy and somewhat overdone panel lines. So aftermarket bits would be nice!

Looks great, a lovely build of a lovely jet - can't say I've ever seen a photo of the Lightning in those colours before but it sure looks good. Can't wait to get my hands on the Eduard boxing of the F6 when it finally arrives...tempted to do it in this scheme having seen it, though the draw of a firebirds jet is strong. Are you going to add any firestreaks or redtop missiles to it? Would add some additional colour as 'eye candy' though I appreciate some prefer the look of a clean jet

Haha thought I'd get that sort of reaction though I still think its fugly . Give me a Sea Vixen, Lightning or Hunter any day over the week over that monstrosity (to my eyes the Javelin looks like the sweetheart offspring of a Vulcan that got raped by a Buccaneer...and the latter jet is no looker in itself, though at least it was redeemed by being good at its job where as the Javelin always underperformed somewhat).

Is it just me who's not a fan of the Javelin? Ugly as sin if you ask me, far too chunky in the wing and a T tailed Delta...what were they thinking? The Sea Vixen on the other hand is an awesome looking beast

Humbrol's Desert pink in enamel is number 250 'Matt Desert Sand'. Its a bit dark so a touch of white and a drop of yellow helps its appearance and make it closer to the faded look of real Granby Tornados. The Italeri/Airfix kitbash is well established - from the Airfix kit you can happily use the following bits, depending on variant: Fuselage pylons (they feature the correct 'crutching pads' around the store attachment points unlike the Italeri offerings) Outer wing pylons (Italeris ones are too deep and the Airfix ones fit perfectly as well as looking better) Fuel tanks (Most GR1s carried the big 'Hindenburger' tanks for combat missions over Iraq - of note is that the smaller tanks that come with the Italeri kit are undersize, so Hindenburgers are a must, either that or nick the small tanks off the Italeri F3 kit as these are the right size unlike the Italeri IDS kits offerings) BOL rails and undernose FLIR fairing (for GR4s only, and BOL rails aren't used that often...) Weapons (the Italeri weapons are not great, and some airfix tornado offerings come with a wealth of good weaponry) Will

Will take some pics of mine at some point, though at the moment I only have two worthy of display, both in 1/48 and from the Italeri kit - Shiny Two and a 25sqn Tornado F3. All my other Tornado models (of which there was a Desert Storm GR1, a 2 tone grey GR4 of 9 squadron, and an F3 in 43sqn anniversary colours) were broken a few weeks ago . The F3 is being slowly rebuilt, only due to its rarity rather than being particularly easy, but after stripping the others of usuable parts both will be heading for the bin.

Always been something of a favourite of mine, the Jag, but an able dogfighter it ain't...loses energy too fast, is underpowered - noticeably so when flying at medium level, or hot/high, or with a heavy weapons load! That it was designed with part throttle reheat to make engine out landings a more palatable prospect suggests how much it could have done with a bit more go, a problem which could have rectified had the GR3 upgrades gone as far as had originally been suggested. A 16 degree max AoA before you risk leaving controlled flight isn't going to help get your nose pointed in the right direction very quickly!

The reds are also all far too orange, so the roundels or anything that has a red part is going to look a bit too bright and stark on any model you choose to use them on

Good news thank you!

I'm struggling to find a picture or set of pictures that shows them to be different, because they look *very* similar from the front and few photos show the rear of the pod! I'd take a photo of the Hasegawa LAU-61 and Belcher CRV-7 if I had a decent camera as the differences are clearer side by side. The Belcher bits set instructions includes line drawings of the CRV-7 pod - its the LAU-5003C that is used by the RAF. These show the slight taper to the rear becayse, unlike the US pod, there is a fairing to help contain blast at the rear of the pod. The US 19 shot pod (LAU-61) just has a flat rear end with exhaust tubes, with no fairing over the blast tubes, and is thus perfectly cylindrical excluding the nosecap. The 19 shot CRV-7 pod (LAU-5003) is a bit fatter and thus stubbier looking than the US pod. Here are the instructions... http://www.belcherbits.com/images/148conv/bb18inst.pdf

Dark bronze or gunmetal wheels would look the mutts IMHO. Great build of a great car this far IMHO

Am happy to be proved wrong by spike but i'm not aware of any kit offering - the US 19 shot pod that is relatively common in kits is subtly different in size and shape to the LAU-5003 used by the RAF, tho it does look similar at a glance so depends how accurate you want to be! Are you doing an afghan harrier by the way? GR7s out that way carried a 6 shot and a 19 shot pod, whilst GR9s would usually carry a pair of 19 shot pods.

The only option I know of is the Belcher bits 1/48 CF-5 update set, which comes with a lot of different types of CRV-7 pods - 2 types of 19 shot, and also the 6 round training pods. Casting quality is decent enough, would recommend it tho as its the only option its that or nothing! :-)

Alright Bob? The anniversary marked jet is Typhoon F2 ZJ910, its the 29sqn display aircraft for the 2008 season, its not a special scheme as such (sadly) but it wears an additional badge below the squadron markings on the fuselage sides that says '90th Anniversary - Royal Air Force'. A few photos of the aircraft and the badge on Airliners.net... As for the intercept markings theres a handful of aircraft marked up with them - ZJ932/DB is the one you've seen before, but I'm trying to find images of the other aircraft with such markings....

Cheers Mike for your comprehensive answers! Interesting to hear the P&W is inferior, yet so many of the export customers have ended up with it when compared to USAF purchases which numerically have been seemingly biased towards the GE powerplant since it became available (more block 30s, 40s and 50s than any x2 blocks with P&W power). Look at he Polish jets for example, as by all other measures their aircraft are pretty much as good as any F-16 out their - a case of choice, or taking what their offered through the FMS program?). It also surprises me how some operators are happy to operate a mixed fleet with both types of engines. The USAF is big enough for this to make some sense, and politics plays a part I'd guess too, to keep both US manufacturers in business, but for say, the Greeks, having F-16s with both engine types in service seems to present a logistical and engineering issue that needn't happen if they'd chosen and stuck to one engine type for successive purchases of different blocks.

Why was that the case, any particular reason or just a case of 'it just happened'? Seems odd to manufacturer an airframe that is essentially an A model yet with block 50 spec systems (which is what a production MLU is right?), why not just start with a C? Did Lockheed have a lot of airframes or A model components it wanted to use up or something and the ROCAF was the first willing recipient? Another Viper questions which I've always wanted to ask, and since you seem to be one of the experts over on this forum - which flies better, and which is preferred by maintainers/operators, the P&W engined variants or GE? I expect flight performance wise they are much the same, but surely one engine must break more than the other? Cheers

P&W and small mouth (NSI) I think? Wasn't until Block 30 F-16Cs that they had anything but as far as I am aware....

Wow, am surprised! My apologies - I didn't think AMRAAM had been cleared as the primary user (USMC) wasn't interested in air to air weapons and wanted its aircraft primarily for moving mud.

Its a good model for sure, but some things jump out at me that prevent it from considering it as amongst the best models I've seen... Firstly the loadout - the AV-8B+ has never actually been cleared to carry/fire AMRAAM as far as I am aware, so its a theoretical loadout to start with. Then look at the stripes on the missiles - blue bands for an inert motor, but yellow for a live warhead. Just wouldn't happen, its inaccurate for either a live round or a CATM. The colour variation owing to pre-shading is too stark and somewhat overdone to be realistic to my eyes, though it'd certainly still catch my eye in the plastic, and the landing gear and cockpit detail and painting looks awesome