WolvoWill

There has been suggestion over on PPRUNE that the aircraft may be time expired - the F3 suffers rather more than the GR4 from fatigue issues oweing to its operating environment (medium altitude 'dogfighting' tends to be rather harder on an airframe than even low level flight in terms of absolute g loading), and the way the wing wasn't re-designed for the heavier and longer F3 (carrying nothing on the outboard wing pylons for its service life was discovered to actually increase the fatigue of the wing, rather than reduce it as hoped). As part of the GR4 update I believe the airframe received considerable structural work to help extend its useful life - the F3 has never undergone such a comprehensive mid life update and as such never received any structural repair/replacement/modification. Some of the airframes are relatively 'new' in terms of outright age, but if the flight hours are gone then theres little that can be done - look at how the USMC has had to draw down its F/A-18D Night Attack fleet and disband some squadrons (most recently the Moonlighters) over recent years as despite the first 'D' model Hornets being delivered just in time for Desert Storm, thus being pretty 'new' compared to other jets in the inventory, so many have reached their fatigue limits despite the vast majority of the D fleet (or maybe even all of it?) ever being commited to a carrier. Then theres the F-16N jets operated for a short time by the US Navy, in the aggressor role they were having the wings flown off them almost every sortie, and were knackered and ready for the boneyard within a remarkably short amount of time! So for a modern jet to run out of fatigue life so quickly is unusual but not entirely without precedent.

The ECR kit has no gun ports, so a GR4A is the way to go.....I'd venture that most squadrons have a GR4A amongst their fleet, but there are fewer 'A' models than the regular GR4. so you're slightly limited in which specific aircraft to model. Operational squadrons at present are split between RAF Lossiemouth and RAF Marham, with 12, 14, 15 (the OCU) and 617 at the former, and 2, 9, 13 and 31 at the latter. The fast jet and weapons operational evaluation squadron (41) at RAF Coningsby also flies two or three GR4s for trials work (no GR4As though, I just mention it for completeness). All squadrons can have specific and colourful squadron markings, though at the moment the RAF is in the process of removing all markings when repainting them so few aircraft remain in full markings, with many now sporting only partial squadron markings or even a blend of both (e.g. 'XV' logo from 15 squadron on the tail and a 31 squadron logo on the nose!). Personal choice is the way to go - personally I reckon 2sqn and 31 squadron carry the best markings at present, and 15 the worst (being very plain indeed). In terms of colour schemes, at the moment the fleet is in a period of transition from one scheme to another.. Old scheme - dark camoflage grey lower surfaces and dark sea grey upper. New scheme - overall medium sea grey. Radomes too vary between jets, some retaining the original black painted one, whilst some have been repainted in camoflage grey. There seems little real pattern - one can see any combination of camoflage scheme and radome if you look hard enough, so check your references and decide on a specific jet. Normal stores load would be wing fuel tanks (operationally the larger 'Hindenburger' tanks are preferred, but for training jets can be seen carrying either these or the smaller tanks - think the ECR comes with only the latter). Two AIM-9L missiles can be carried for self defence. Outboard, the left wing pylon will have a Skyshadow ECM pod (or for most training sorties a ballast 'dummy' grey painted BOZ-107 pod0, whilst the right wings outboard pylon will have a BOZ-107 pod. Weapons on the under fuselage stations can include ALARM missiles (the jet can carry 2 or 3), 1000lb Paveway or enhanced paveway laser guided bombs (1, 2 or 3), 2000lb paveway III bombs, unguided 1000lb'ers, TIALD or Litening 3 RD targetting pods, Brimstone anti-armour missiles (up to 12 in 4 racks of 3!), Storm Shadow cruise missiles, or CBLS-200 practice bomb dispensers. Theres a big choice of things that go bang! 1/32 isn't really my scale but I know the flightpath set for the 1/32 Tornado, whilst expensive, is excellent and really helps to spruce up the cockpit. Lots of photo etch though, and definitely a set for the more advanced modeller in my view. Hope this helps...its worth having a search though, reckon we have a thread a week on the 1/32 Tornado and what's needed to convert the IDS or ECR kits to an RAF jet (if only Revell would re-release the GR1 kit....would make things a hell of a lot easier!)

Some awesome looking sheets there - may add the Airfix Nimrod to the christmas wish list Any other MA previews you care to share with us Jonathon? Cheeky to ask I know, but I'm very interesting in the next round of sheets featuring Typhoons and Tornados!

ZG757 must have been repainted more than any other Tornado over the past few years.... 2004 - Regular barley grey/light aircraft grey camo - http://www.airliners.net/open.file/0943439/M/ 2005 - One of the earliest to receive the medium sea grey scheme - http://www.airliners.net/open.file/0949453/L/ 2006 - The gloss black scheme as mentioned - http://www.airliners.net/open.file/1087444/M/ Early 2007 - A partial return to its 2004 scheme, but the spine and canopy framing remains gloss black Intriguing to see that photo of ZG797 (thats with a 9!) from 2006 carrying such a similar scheme to ZG757, but with the nose chequerboards and a stylised fighting cock logo instead of the squadron crest! Seeing Wing Cmdr Beech's name on this jet is interesting too - both jets have carried his name at one time or the other. ZG757 has been done in 1/48 form by Xtradecal and Model Alliance, but ZG797 hasn't been featured on anyones sheet - the existence of another jet so similar in scheme to 757 completely pass me by until this thread! I did ZG757 in its current scheme earlier this year.......

Agree with Plasto potentially being a bit of a plastic eater - got a Hawk 100 (to be an RAf T2) with big sink marks on the wings above the landing gear bays on the upper wing surfaces thanks to my overly liberal application of the stuff to completely fill in the open bays below (I build all my models wheels up as though in flight, and the airfix Hawk is less than kind in letting me shut the door easily...). Its fixable for sure, but a problem I could definitely do without!

Thats one of the things that puts me off the anniversary jets - whilst the Model Alliance decals look fabulous, their size makes them awkward to position and I worry that they won't actually fit to the shape of the jet that well in some instances . I think have a spare set of the 9 squadron anniversary markings though should you need them to help touch up/replace any decals that prove difficult to apply, which you're welcome to have free of charge - always like to see Tornado models (am umming and aahing over one for my next build ).

Keep the airfix kit as a spare in the stash - if Italeri re-issue their ADV kit unchanged from the original moulds then it will still need some bits from the airfix kit to update/accurise it, unless you're happy modelling a jet from the earliest period of its service life (pre-1991)

Brave man! The kits canopy is rather off though - windshield is too long and thus the canopy profile is completely out. Always ends up looking a bit funny to me . The rest of the kits deficiences can be remedied rather more easily through use of aftermarket bits and modelling skills - though lots of both are required! EDIT: The paragon fin correction isn't necessary for the airfix kit (the italeri kit is the one with the fat bit at the base of the tail - one area where the airfix beats the italeri offering). Thinking about it a lot of the paragon bits may be sized for the italeri kit rather than airfix - the flaps in particular are likely to be awkward if they're sized for Italeri and not airfix. The airfix kit is best used, IMHO, as a spare parts source to accurise the Italeri kit - fuel tanks, decals, chaff dispensers, BOL rails, ASRAAMs and decals are all worth having

That boxing of the kit doesn't come with the Kormoran missiles though (and they're not available anywhere else in kits of aftermarket land IIRC), hence the high price for the dedicated 'Navy' kit

Obviously they're gonna be GR4s from the thread title but which serials/scheme? Any anniversary jets planned?

Talking to yourself Graham? Which 9sqn and 31 jets are you planning to build?

I'd do something similar myself - never mastered rescribing, even using the 'correct' tools (olfa p cutter, duck tape etc) it always looks a right mess

Isn't 'the best' way to go (in terms of detail at least) to get the old rare as hens teeth Monogram AV-8A kit, and graft on the Airfix SHAR nose, fit a fuselage plug, and add the associated other gubbins (like British specific cannon, modified airbrake, and the tail RWR fairing etc?). Sounds like an excercise in sadism to me, I'd spend time sprucing up the airfix kit which (given the same effort) would turn out as well if not better as it requires less drastic surgery! But apparently the surface detail of the monogram kit is better than that of the airfix.....so I'm told!

To clarify, its largely the same as the IDS kit, and contains decals for an RAF jet from Desert Storm, an Italian IDS, and a German Navy (Kriegsmarine?) version. If I recall correctly, the air to ground weapons included are slightly different from the IDS kit - you get two Kormoran missiles and their associated launch adapters, and a single German/Italian air force specific 'Cerberus' ECM pod in place of the pair of Skyshadow pods that are included in the IDS kit. You get 4 bombs too, but they're incorrect for a British jet (and not entirely accurate for the Luftwaffe/Kriegsmarine or Italian air force either!). I reckon 17 Euros is expensive as hell too - though the Germans will love that kit and pay a premium since you can build a Kriegsmarine jet straight from the box, unlike any other boxing!

Makes sense - seems to me that the Italeri IDS comes with the smallest supersonic tanks, where as the ADV boxing has the 'normal' version of the small tanks...for Hindenburgers one needs airfix. Just need to source an ADV kit now as a source of fuel tanks...how hard can that be

Very nice indeed - love the dual GBU-12 loadout. Think my next build will be a 'D' Hornet, based around the Hobbyboss kit though and in 'Green Knights' markings...dual GBU-12 and dual zuni pod 'FFAC' loadout

I was having a look at an Italeri Tornado IDS kit last night in preparation for a future build, and was having a look at the fuel tanks to decide which ones to use - either a set of the larger Hindenburger tanks or the smaller ones included in the kit. However I noticed when comparing to a built example of the F3 kit that the fuel tanks included within the Italeri Tornado IDS kit are a fair bit smaller (and thus potentially inaccurate) than those included in the Italeri 'ADV' F3 kit, yet both are of the same smaller size and style. I always presumed their were only 2 sizes of Tornado tanks, and that the Italeri kits only included the smaller of these tanks - but which is more accurate, the ones included in the IDS boxing or ADV boxing of the Italeri 1/48 kit?

Operation Corporate = the military operation to retake the Falkland Islands!

So subtle Jonathon May put one of these on pre-order...first foray into 1/72 since way back when but its a modern British subject, so something of a 'must have' as far as I'm concerned

Just how big will this be when finished? Modelling a Chinook appeals but I have a feeling finding space for it to go aftewards will be bloody difficult

'Its only plastic after all' would be my take on it - honestly some people take things far too seriously when it comes to modelling subjects. Personally I'd be inclined to build aircraft that still exist and/or are still flying, rather than one that crashed, though each to their own if you want to build a crashed 'un! Nothing to do with it being morbid or anything, just I tend to think of ones that were lost as being less than the ideal example for a model - assuming the purpose of the model is to show off the aircraft, surely you'd want one that did its job and flew into a happy retirement or continues to do so, rather one that was somehow converted into a big smoking hole in the ground!

Hope to see photos of the finished model soon then

Posted some to you yesterday! Should turn up soon

You and me both! Drop Ian a message at Heritage aviation, neil at paragon, david of drpepperresins etc....surely someone would be willing to start casting such a part (which ideally would just be based upon the 100% LERX from the Harrier II Plus kits, and thus easily copied to make a mould for production). Would willingly pay up to the £6 mark were one available in resin - beats the hell out of buying a whole new £20-odd kit to steal a couple of parts (well, 3 in fact).

My sheet (when I finally bought one) never even came with a stencil set! Though based on what you'd said about the sheet I wasn't especially bothered about that