tempestfan

PM inbound

Most likely not - I have only 2 or 3 issues of SAMI as this mag always left me somewhat cool. I am pretty sure it was SAM - seems I'll have to go digging to find piece of mind Edit: Found it - with less than a minute searching ?!? It's in Vol. 20 #3 for May 1998. Drawings are by Mark Rolfe. Hope he did less guesswork on that one than on his DB605-engined Spit Vb

Well, what interested me regarding current stuff I got from MTL (actually not only what interested me, but a heck of a lot on top...he had great prices), but apparently he is also a think of the past - pity that. I have not yet tried the reincarnation of Müller, and am not that ambitious to do. Otherwise, I guess I could do the occasional drive to DEL if I felt the urge. But anyway, with something like 6,000+ kits or so, I do not feel a particular necessity to add more at the mo

There was a set in SAMs, and I could have sworn it was by the late Mike Keep, but as I am convinced it was in one of the few post-Alan Hall issues I have, then it must have been by someone else. It would take some digging as I have absolutely no idea where it is...

On the stbd wing in particular (outer part of flap), the intensity of the pale colour varies (to me that is), it's stronger around the dots and greyer in between. My take would be the dots are the original camou colours, over which first a "net" of the pale tone was sprayed to basically create the dot outlines, which was then filled in. I think also the fin hints that the pale tone was the topmost layer.

...or sometimes beer kegs?

I did not look in the usual places, but I'd hunch a fair share of them should still be around, as people tend to buy when new and then buy and built (or not) the improved production version. Or so I've read I overcame my laziness and fetched the D&S. Horses for courses (and I do not necessarily share the view of D&S reviews), but they are full of praise for Italeri's, but admittedly Hase is very close behind. I'd suppose you have a look at the usual places, and snap both a Hase and Italeri if and when you find one at an acceptable price. Can't go wrong with that approach. If all else fails, I should have an unboxed Italeri kit somewhere upstairs ("somewhere" with a fat underline) that a colleague smuggled out under his jacket when I worked at a big toyshop in 1990. Any criminal offences have lapsed, so no risk of fencing (had to look this one up - NATO isn't flattering all the time with its reporting names...). Another publication you may find useful is Warbirds Illustrated #17, which has a lot of pics of F-18 and F-16 development aircraft. Which brilliantly leads over: I think there was only ever one real (good) YF-16 kit, the initial Hase boxing. Not quite sure but Academy may have copied this, but Aca's (#1620, photobox) copy may also have been an early incarnation of the Hase full-size kit - just checked Scalemates, and Academy copied the original Hase kit apparently - I'd love to have one of those for my collection! Hope this isn't incoherent... Revell's H-222 is a marvellous kit IMHO, but it's full size and not a YF. Everything that came later is either a mix (Matchbox) or early production standard (Airfix, Italeri). And if you're looking for an(other) addition to your library, look for Aerofax Aerograph #1. I think this will tell you just about everything you wanted to know about early F-16 development (and a lot more you didn't). If you need someone to blame, blame it on me

You're right - still, extending them to FSD size could be a mess; and I think the separate small one at the front did go completely. In any event, it would be less work closing them up than adding them in a backdate, I guess. The tailplane "notch" IIRC simply was covered up on later ones, but the outer wing leading edge was cut back (I think too much and should have a look in a book)8 - if the latter is correct, extending the leading edge would also require some surgery and filling to get a neat job. Writing about this, I should have a built 1/48 Italeri airframe in some junk box. Somehow this thread gives me an urge to go hunting for it... Would make a nice desktop stand model.

If you had the kit already, simply all measurements *0.6667. But it will not make much sense to buy a 48th kit just for the measurements if you do not intend to build it. Wait - you could Edit: "*" instead of "+"... Italeri 130 itself was revised at least once when they extended the tailplanes to Block 15 size, and IIRC they updated numerous more parts, including replacing the "tip end" tanks with the "blunt end" variety, possibly also the Banana c/l tank. Not completely sure when this happened, but I think it was before they released the C/D boxing - possibly 1986?

That's a beautiful photo! Looking closer, the Airfix Seafire 47 rockets may do the trick (with a new fin section at least - I am ignorant about potential differences between RAF and FAA rockets).

So they did with the Skyhawk(s). And Sabre. It's really a pity that Fujimi essentially stopped doing new aircraft moulds after their Intruders.

I am not an expert, but IIRC the FSD LERX slots (above the splitter plates) and the wing dong tooth were deleted for production, among more intricate details. No M61 in the early ones at least. Not sure about airbrake, tailplanes and fins - if there were differences, then subtle ones. Basic airframe dimensions are idetical I think. Probably all doable by backdating a modern kit, but adding the LERX slots would probably be quite messy, depending on kit parts breakdown.

But if the D was built first and was better, then the A would rather be a retrograde step, not the D an improvement? --- I have no idea about the nomenclature and its reasoning, but I seem to recall reading the D had some simplifications (that may actually have made it better) over the A. I'd have to look at references, but the A may have been intended as the ultimate Eierlegendewollmilchsau true to German style and hence running into delays, with the D having a more practical strip-down approach, just as the preceding post suggests. The IX came before the VIII because the latter incorporated quite lot of airframe reengineering, while the IX basically was a V with a Merlin 60-series bolted on and a new cooling system.

Great pic- that's also a 188E? My screen is to small... 66 over white only if it's from an East Frisian Staffel - you know, the East Frisian national flag is a white Eagle on white background...

Well somehow there actually is, as much of the kit was recycled from the 1973ish GR. 1 And few MB kits without a second set of wings were known for delicacy.

I am terribly sorry but it needs a lot of phantasy to spot the blister - if anything, in #2, possibly, perhaps, but nowhere near as pronounced as in the opening pic. And no, I am not distracted by the Danish lady that must be approaching her centenary if she is still around. What's the object just below the wing root - a torn-out tank? It appears to have a marking at the side facing to the left.

I had been looking for a certain thread around here instructing to avoid a "later" boxing of the Sunny kit by Aca/Mini in line-squadron markings, but failed - but I am certain it exists. Not that old, I think. @Giorgio N, do you recall? Scalemates is great at times and not so at others - the "full family" F-18 diagram must have used the same basic design software as that used for my attorney's mailbox - just one horizontal scroll bar, at the bottom, so you scroll endlessly down/top and horizontally ad infinitum, until the day you die. Rant over That special BA boxing/bagging looks like something I should have a look for. Indeed, insofar as it relates to having "Minicraft" on the box and/or is not Italeri/Testors The question is on which moulds Revell are actually sitting currently - I have sincere hopes that most of the more modern stuff was relocated to Bünde. The big problem is that their long-time head of aircraft projects had a hard time telling a Mustang from a Phantom and a good kit from a bad (or so I was told). This probably did not help the new owners allegedly ditching the legacy Revell/Monogram/Aurora toolbank still in the US at scrap value. Atlantis is having a good time with the moulds apparently... repeat Helicopters for Industry a couple of times... Luckily I also have both the Mitchell and Marauder, but only once each. Let us hope...

Why is it that people always have to post about excellent books I was not aware of but need to have... Ordered.

Forgive my ignorance, but is that trapezoidal plate standard on late (fighter) Gs? And it's about exactly in the place where I think the camera behind the cockpit would be located.

If you mean the parts at the bottom of photo #6, I don't think they're the right ones for a Vampire/other post war users. I'm not really sure whether the "rails" shown in your post are rails at all (in the sense that the rockets use them for initial directional guidance), or more of a steadying bar between the zero-length launchers.

I am pretty certain Aca/Mini did a BA Hornet, kit 1605, which should be in my 1987 Aca/Mini catalogue. Mind you, that one shows a number of kits that were only released years later (or never, possibly). EDIT: Actually it's the 1988 one - here is a picture of the catalogue showing the kit in all its glory, and I can't get rid of the feeling its nose wheels are slightly oversize, too, and it looking just as stalky as the Mono Snap. But those are feelings, and I may well be wrong... You (or rather Revell) do not mean that in earnest??? But knowing them, I know they do... Well, Revell could have had a look at the Snap B-25 and B-26, which are both really quite good for Snaps, and have not seen the light of day sometime around when I left school. The B-26 still remains the only viable option for a low-tail B-26, if I'm not mistaken. BTW, @Blue Monday, here are some build impressions of a slightly later incarnation of the Airfix.

Agreed - I have a sizeable stash of Fujimi K/Ms bought whenever there was a good opportunity. And also agreed on the 2nd statement - kits H-6/7/8/9 are the original plastic; the moulds were extensively modified for the Royal Class boxings, and those moulds were used for H-17/18/19/20 (hope the nomenclature is correct). Sorry I do not have a correlation of the H-numbers to Fujimis newer numbering system.

I can't help with accuracy, but looking for Detail & Scale #6 may be worthwhile. 1. Sunny kit also boxed by Revell (early 80s), afterwards mould went to (Academy/)Minicraft. Not impressive IMHO 2. Minicraft was US distributor for Hase for a long time, but apparently managed to buy a load of (mainly Japanese) moulds off Entex, including the ex-Sunny. Those moulds were manufactured at Academy for some time. Just to stress Hase and Sunny are different moulds. I only have the 32nd Hase Proto. 3. Never disregard a Monogram Snap-Tite I do not think I have this, and I seem to recall somewhat large nose wheels on the built-kit boxtop - which IIRC also applies to the Sunny and Esci. 4. Italeri appears to be rather highly regarded even for their kits of production aircraft, which are an evolution of this mould. Has some nice details and is delicately moulded. 5. Esci is rather chunky IMO. 6. Airfix looks OKish, but to me looks like a somewhat unfinished/finished in haste tool, which was supposed to be released about the time when Airfix collapsed, but was delayed - at least I only have seen kits "Made in France" in over 40 years of collecting Airfix. Italeri is better detailed IMHO. 7. I'd not consider Idea - they were the Korean copying pioneers, and this most likely is a more or less well-done clone of the Italeri - if only for the fact that Italeri for some time was the only one offering a twin.

Wiki isn't the most reliable source of course, but in contrast to 72 over 50 it does not state any increase in antenna diameter of either the 100 or 109 over the 72, only improvements in the electronic components. I'll have a look into one of my various F-4 books later whether they say something; maybe the D&S on the C/D has something to offer, old as it is. What makes me doubtful is that I do not see that a 1 inch increase in antenna diameter would yield any improvement (and why an inch?). In contrast, anything larger would have necessitated some redesign to the nose behind the radome I think to blend the larger diameter in, in particular at the sides. That looks like a great resource. Not that I need more webpages in my favourites I can waste my time on, though...

I think you should add the Airfix one to show us a real racer finish, @Rob de Bie...