tempestfan

Chris Gannon, but as apparently this is a merged thread, he was mentioned already in the other one.

Move up one scale and get the Eduard Weekend F6F. Not sure how they are priced right now but the 2 or 3 I have cost under 10 € each. I think Eduard also does a 1/72 kit of the Hellcat, which probably is also very inexpensive as a Weekend boxing and should be very well detailed if it shares with its bigger brother.

If you're feeling adventurous, you could dress up the ancient Revell F-4J as a J(UK), with lots of work. The Phantom referred to above is not an RAF Phantom in the sense of a Spey one, but from the two handful of stopgap Js for 74 Sq.

Thanks for the tip-off! Just ordered from a platform starting with "a" but not continuing with "m" :-), at an extremely good price, under 40€ delivered & including import VAT. I guess this will be a nice complement to that massive "official" biography by Cesare Gori I bought in Milan a couple of years ago, and his Ali titles. Looks exactly like a "Classic" title but not (yet?) found under that category at Crécy.

Clicking on the "spacer.png" and then on the tiny photo symbol shows the pics for me - a bit awkward but it works.

A bit late to this end of the party, so others may have commented, but if you consider Spit I and 24 two different aircraft, I think it's a bit tough to have the Kfir as merely a sub-type of the Mirages - clearly it was a development of the Mirage, but with such a lot of changes; similar for Vampire & Venom - different engine, entirely new wing for the Venom, a bit like Panther & Cougar. Sure the Monogram kit is based on that ancient Strombecker mould? I never compared them as I only have an empty Strombecker box, but in contrast to the other Monogram kits based on existing Aurora tools (e.g. F-111A, A-7A, WW I stuff), the A-37 appeared some 15 years later, and the conversion of the mould would have required some fairly drastic retooling - in essence, only part of the airframe shapes would have been useful.

Wonderful! I confuse the names - was it TOM Tom Morgan who loved to put a great number of ragged holes on his subjects, be it Aurora, Hawk, Monogram, Lindberg, or (Steve?) Locher? Other strange things are going on there. A Spitfire IX (or XIV) with SIX evenly spaced wing cannon. Or perhaps it's an MB.5 on secret mission... Funny thing with the 190 is that apparently they had no idea whatsoever of anything Luftwaffe and copied the USAAF inventory number...

Heresy!

The RN type is not in itself "longer" I think but extendable to increase AoA on launch, and extended usually only on the catapult. The RN type has a second pair of scissor links for that extending section, so if you add this to the FGR.2 type, you should be close - unless you want it in launch position.

I am pretty certain the FoxTwo title was still available at AirDoc/shopofphantoms when I had a look around a couple of weeks ago. It's a great booklet. In addition, if you are after the prototypes/early aircraft, I heartily recommend (again) the book by Francis Mason published ca. 1985 at IIRC PSL (there was a similar title by Alfrd Price at Ian Allan at around the same time). Not sure how many cockpit pics are included, but IIRC there were a number. This book used to be cheap as chips on the 2nd hand market. Also valuable are Aeroguides 4 and 24, which cover the GR.1 very early after a couple of years service, respectively, including dedicated cockpit sections.

Looking at the German callouts for 64 and 69, I wonder whether they are actually a "reverse" translation of the supposed English "translations". "Light" translates to both "Licht" and "hell" in German (just the same as it's in English), but I have never heard of any colour being called "Licht-..." in German, apart from some references to 65 and 76 - in English-language literature. [EDITED in: Just had a look into the RAL classic range, and much to my surprise, there is a "Lichtblau" (5012, a MUCH darker colour than 64, 65 or 76), and several other colours including "Licht-". So I was wrong, as so often... However, I could not track down any RAL colour even including "Lohfarben". Following Monogram's logic, "Light" may either be blue or tan - but not red, green or yellow? I see not much sense in those names, and sincerely doubt they are official or have ever been used in German(y). "Lohfarben" is also a German colour name I have never come across.

I do interpret the picture that they are neither missing nor fully pitched up - if anything, I suggest they are pitched down. There is a spanwise "light" strip at the rear end, which I think is the large trim tab. Even with the rather drastic angle of the tail to the ground, that tab - if it's the tab - probably would not be seen with any significant "lift" applied. Anyone around with a full scale 410? I think we are in dire need of doing some trials about the effects of fire and explosions to come to a satisfying conclusion - Aktenzeichen XY! I keep seeing a lot of things, everyday, everywhere (I have vivid imagination ;-)), but - so do I.

plus the elevators are continuing almost to the tip - puzzling!

The 287 had a very angular fin/rudder shape, a deep rear fuselage to accommodate a tail turret, and as such a high tailplane position. The wreck in question - unless it actually is a pile of several - is most probably an inline-engine aircraft with a spinner. Re the tailplanes, were the tips possibly made of wood? I assume if that had been the case and had burned away, one would see scorching of the areas next to it, but just an idea.

Dear Mr T-Shirt, I am saddened to learn that apparently you do not only frequent this (lifesaving) forum but other modelling fora as well. But I will forgive you (possibly) as that unnamed other forum is another modelling forum (tinkering with cars again, are you, ey?) and not a collecting forum If and when I go somewhere on holiday, I do not expect anyone to speak German. I will try to at least learn some chunks of the respective language, if only "please" and "thank you" for starters. I consider that as a matter of a modicum of respect - while I am not particularly enamoured to the concept of "nations", I respect the concept of culture. And I hope to keep up to my own yardstick with at least the wording of my posts, if not at all time the contents. At the mo, there is precisely one member here which I'd consider to put on an ignore list. But I won't, even if he claims to know all on a subject. and his posts are so incredibly badly translated from Alpine-German that he can't have run them through an online translator - he must have done it himself. Man vs Machine, man loses. What if Sutherland had been invaded by the Netherlands? Would that make a difference? And - did you check the lineage? Some William of Oranje influence there - possibly?

The photo in Wiki shows a totally different fin shape; and the Hs 130 was fairly huge with a quoted span off 33m and a length just under 20m. While not much remains to judge the size, I think the fin would be larger on the Hs than the one as it appears in Rob's photo.

I will repeat myself here, your Ginter book is top notch. I actually read it (doesn't happen that often :-)). Hope you still have my e-mail address?

As I remember them, the engines on the Frog Oxford are not exactly a high point of the kit. Maybe not as bad as those on the Baltimore, but still the cylinders are just some slim tubes with a few rings around them.

Exactly

As it's a prototype, I guess it could be moved to RFI The profile shots you posted really make it look like a racer, a fairly lethal one.

There is a difference between "flaps" and "slats". I am not an aerodynamicist, but IIRC the flaps were for low speed lift improvement (e.g. on t/o and landing), while the slats are to help high speed manoeuvers by keeping the airflow close to the upper wing surface, in particular during tight turns. The slats were a fallout of the F-15 programme and not adopted on it, but introduced first on the F and then on middle to late block E's. 1972/3 or thereabouts. Both the flaps and the slats are on the inner and outer wing section as applicable - but only slats with slats and flaps with flaps, if that makes sense. Slat wing Phantoms have three fairings close to the lower inner wing leading edge each side for the actuators, but they are usually only visible from certain angles and/or relatively close up. Here is a very clear pic of the slats, and of the stabilator slot.

I ***think*** the fuselage was always one piece on the dedicated "short" and "long" fuselage sprues, but there may be a "seam" between the common (between short and long kits) rear and front section where the master may not have joined perfectly. Not quite the same but similar to the old Revell Catalina where you can see ghosted u/c wells on the Boat versions.

Hmmm, just had a look around which tooling it is, their own (Testor's co-financed) or Esci. Cybermodeler claims the former, but positively states it has recessed detail. Which unless they retooled their own kit similar to what they did with some Supermodel kits, means it is the Esci. But that was not your question I think the Esci kit is still a sound basis for a model. However, the Heyl Ha'Avir F-4s developed considerably over their VERY long life, both with "standard" upgrades as well as with Israeli-specific stuff. I can recommend the two-volume book set by AirDoc/Double Ugly, but that will probably be over the top for your purposes (and Vol. 1 may be hard to get/pricey). As this is a "hard wing" kit, you are somewhat limited to early E's, but this also means that it will be quite close to one of the early deliveries, which the decals depict. IIRC they were mostly used for strike missions, so the purely air to air armament may be not fully appropriate. One pic to hand shows 183 with apparently 6*Mk 82 high speed on the centreline pylon and 3*M117 on each of the inboards, another 172 with again 6*M117 on the wings and what I make out to be another five on the c/l (both Osprey Aces #60).

I am pretty certain one respected reviewer commented on the 1/24 Airfix kit when it was new that it correctly represented the raised rivets behind the wing profile apex, and included a very low angle shot of the Chicago B to demonstrate. Mind you, they were not Tyneside style, so the shot had to be low angle and close up to make them visible. And looking at the wings of the Hendon D, I'm not completely convinced that they are not raised - finely, but raised. Which, even if it were true, raises (pun intended) the follow-up question whether any aftermarket rivets even in 32nd would look convincing.

Nice find! The MB A was among my early kits - I didn't apply he decals as I couldn't make my mind up between Louise and The ArizANG bird. --- I agree with Duncan, no 45° corner cutting there, apart from the lower bar in the wing "F". I am not sure if it's also present on the fuselage; it rather looks like the upper bar is cut down the opposite direction, but that is probably a visual trick.