Jump to content


Gold Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

684 Excellent

1 Follower

About iainpeden

  • Rank
    Iain Peden
  • Birthday 11/10/1957

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  • Interests

Recent Profile Visitors

1,261 profile views
  1. That's a question and a half and I don't know the definitive answer. However a few bits of logic may (or may not apply). The Spey Phantoms underwent final assembly in St Louis and there are pictures of them under test, in camo, in the states so I'd assume they underwent painting over there, which means either US paints were used or gallons of BS spec paint were shipped over. I also seem to remember having seen pictures of the parts we made in this country unpainted prior to shipping over; as the painting appears to be uniform on colours I'd suspect the St Louis paint shop got the job.
  2. The Esci kit is straight forward enough to build without instructions - just a bit of forethought. key things to look out for are: "C" model - shorter after burners, rounded inner wing pylons and unslatted tail planes (same if you decide to do it as a "D") and the IR sensor under the radome "J" model - longer @burners, straight edged inner pylons, slatted tailplanes and no sensor. depending on how far you want to go, you can fill the cat. hooks under the intakes for the"C" Build the cockpit, glue to the front lower fuselage section then put the fuselage h
  3. Mike How dare you be so rude about the red/white Javelin at Duxford, not only did I spend a very pleasant morning cleaning her just before the museum reopened but I say "hello" every time I do my volunteering. Oh- there's a knock on the door and a white van and 2 big lads in white coats outside. Seriously though the Javelin at Duxford is still in its test scheme and is great for original reference.
  4. Ianf mentioned 2 in the original post and has added a picture of the 2nd one - 68(?)-286 is the other one but its the starboard side as opposed to 73-184 port side. EDit: looking at -286 it hasn't got any ejector seats in and the tiger camo goes over the "big lump" on the spine which is part of the drone conversion so it's post modification (too big and wrong shape for the ARN 101 antenna I think)
  5. Feasible but my quibble is that the pattern shared by both a/c is very similar - would a clean up have been so carefully done?
  6. I never thought I'd say this but the post linked below by ianf on UKAR includes a Phantom scheme I had never seen before - 2 F-4Es, albeit drones, in Hill gray which had had tiger stripes applied. Apart from a fantastic post does anybody have information about these markings or the units which may have applied them. @Old Viper Tester and @Gene K these are for you. https://forums.airshows.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=86474
  7. iainpeden

    F-100F WW

    You mind find this useful.
  8. @Mark V and @Lord Riot I thought I'd add a little to your discussion over the colours and the grey (gray?) in particular in the F-4 European 1 (lizard) scheme. Sometime in the mid 1980s we had 3 F-4Es at the Alconbury Airshow; 2 from Seymour Johnson and 1 from Spang. All were freshly painted in the lizard scheme. However while the SP a/c was almost satin in appearance, the 2 SJ a/c looked like a charcoal drawing. I did some research years ago and got into a conversation with a paint sprayer who had worked at Kemble in Gloucestershire where many of the European based Phantoms were r
  9. Thanks for all the input. What has confused me (easily done !) is that the decal profile on the instructions give the serial number as 66-6279 when it should be 66-0279.
  10. Thanks Junchan - that is really useful. I have gone back to the instructions and they show Terrible Tyke as 66-6279 - the tail code is represented on the instructins and the decal sheet as AF60 - 270 (AF60 in small black font, 279 in large white). The photo in the link I posted confirms the 279 part but whether it's AF60 or AF66 is anybody's guess. I agree about the red stripe not always being applied but again I have a feeling from the b/w picture that it's there on -279. Also clear that -279 doesn't have the formation lights whereas 66-8730 in yours does. Thanks
  11. Hi Gene I have 2 Fine Molds kits on order - the blue scheme and the dark grey/dark green one. Favourite kits - hmm. In 1/48th it's the Hasegawa ones - but I have also made Monogram, Italeri and Revell. I enjoy my modelling but to my standard so I'd rather have 3 at £20 each than 1 at £60. In 1/72. The most used kit is the Esci one for many of the USN a/c which I find straightforward to make and it looks right. I have used Hasegawa for USAF/ANG and JASDF - as much for the decal options as anything but always find the front fuselage joint tricky. I think the Italeri one has
  12. "Ernie" Berwicks in Kettering. I hate to think how much pocket money (and salary) I spent in that place. I think the last kit I bought there was the recently released Airfix Vulcan (mid-80s). It became for a short time a jewellers then a haberdashers but is now just a boarded up derelict little gap in a row.
  13. Just to add another discrepancy; the F-4Js which the RAF got post Falklands were designated F-4J (UK) not as is sometime reported Phantom F.3 (which would have been confusing and probably got them mixed up with the Tornado F.3s also around at the time)
  • Create New...