kekelekou

The building challenges really don't show up in the final result, very well done sir! Could you please elaborate on the difficulties and how you overcame them? (Same kit in the stack 😁)

Caution here Phil : the AFV U-2s depict so-called "small wings" U-2s (variants A to H), which cockpit size could only allow for the less bulky partial pressure suits. The larger "big wings" variants (U-2R, S, ST and TR-1A and B ) were designed so that the full pressure suits (same ones as for SR-71 pilots) could fit in. So you can't use a SR-71 pilot in an AFV U-2. Edit : Here is Francis Gary Powers wearing the MC-3 partial pressure suit in front of an U-2F. An outer layer was often worn on top to prevent capstans and laces to get tangled with switches or other itmes in the cockpit. Here is the later full pressure suit (S-1031 I believe) :

You did well! No fuel dump pipes nor System 20 housing on the trailing edges for U-2A.

Correct! I got carried away... 😒 The Senior Year nose features the distinctive huge and flat optical port (and is somewhat longer than the plain short nose) I stand corrected, thank you. But the plain short nose is still valid for operational ELINT/COMINT missions. What I don't know is if the antenna farm can/could be fitted without the slanted forward superpods and the left superpod canoe. Wouldn't be much a surprise if HobbyBoss had it wrong. U-2 WR 067P42 10212011 by Jim Mumaw, sur Flickr

Hello lads! There is nothing wrong with the nose re. operational configuration. The "long" nose houses the ASARS 2 side-looking radar. Both electro-optical and IR sensors/cameras can be fitted into the "short" nose (Senior Year systems). The dorsal pod is installed to give the U-2 data-link capabilities. So the short nose does NOT mean that the airplane is not operational, and the short nose+dorsal pod is a legit operational configuration. But there is nothing wrong in requesting the ASARS-2 nose. Just choose a good reason 🙂 http://www.blackbirds.net/u2/recce_systems/u2sensorpayload.html

Impressive results Rob! Any vacuum degasing before you poured the resin into the mold?

You are much welcome Mike. Please tag me when you start building the kit. 👍

Hi @MikeR Thank you for your kind words about the booklet. ☺️ I had never paid much attention to the tail number system used by the RoCAF, so you must be correct about the 35xx sequence. The tail number 3512 was given to article 358 which was the third U-2 delivered to Taiwan, so the expected TN should have been 3503. Another deceiving trick from the CIA? Re the Midnight Blue livery (which is my favourite too), the main issue is that the HobbyBoss kit features final, bulged air intakes which were introducted along the J75-P13B after the switch over to Black Velvet camo. The most satisfying option for you would be to "sand the bulge out" of the intakes to create the interim version to match the configuration of article 383 / 3517 in late 1965 /early 1966. By the way, HobbyBoss has it all wrong with 3512 : it was shot in Jan 1965, so the real airplane did feature neither the bulged intakes nor the long canoe. And the kit lacks a ventral antenna. But they got the Midnight Blue livery right!

@MikeR C.Pocock writes p246-250 of 50 Years... that article 383 flew both Purple Flash / Tabasco missions in mid 1967 with the tail number 3517 over a black livery. But I have no clue about the roundel size. So one single U-2 was involved in these daredevil missions. I stand corrected.

@MikeR I concur : the B-camera was more or less the standard equipment by the time of RoCAF overflights. But if you are interested in building a not-downed airplane, the two articles involved in the 1967 Tabasco missions (flights to the Lop Nor nuclear test range to drop then interrogate sensors) most probably did not carried any camera. This would make the "blank" Q bay cover fairly realistic. And if I remember correctly Chris Pocock even states the tail nummers in "The 50 Years of the U-2". Will check them later. I suppose that the covers are corrogated so that they can be manufactured from thin steel plates, but still can be stiff enough to withstand aerodynamical loads.

v1.3 is out! Link in first post updated to v1.3, and points to a short URL for analytics reasons

A « hairy » kit that has turned out to give a nicely result! Keep it up for the last bits!

Not a « shake and bake » kind of kit, but you have done great so far! Nice shading effect. Looking forward to seeing the decals!

A shameless advertisement 😁 for my booklet about the external differences of the small wing U'2s, that may interest some of you here. https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235097053-v12-is-out-the-many-guises-of-the-dragon-lady-a-tentative-guide-to-external-differences-of-small-wings-u-2s/

A shameless advertisement 😁 for my booklet about the external differences of the small wing U'2s, that may interest some of you here. https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235097053-v12-is-out-the-many-guises-of-the-dragon-lady-a-tentative-guide-to-external-differences-of-small-wings-u-2s/

Link to the v1.2 file is fixed. I am pretty sure I posted the v1.2 update on a thread in the Cold War section, but it seems it was "disappeared" somehow. Anyway, the file can be retrieved again now. Sorry for any inconvenience.

My pleasure @Hook ! v1.2 is out by the way!

Much fun indeed, @Rob G. Some areas require a bit of attention, but no show-stoppers! Which kit do you built? The Taiwanese or the USAF one? By the way, I have just discovered that some aftermarket accessories are available for Egg kits! I would go for a yellow/orange NASA NF-104 with the Fighter Toon decal sheet. But I have to build the F-2A and F-2B before that! 😁

Thank you! Glad you like it!

Hello lads and gals! I am pleased to share the pictures of my last build : the cartoon F-16D Bk50 by Freedom Modelkits. The cartoon look of the aircraft from their Compact Series is spot on (from my point of view anyway 😄). The build requires quite a bit of putty to fill in the gaps between wings and fuselage. The adjustment of the main gear with the fuse is not so easy too, with little room to sand things. I kind of failed to have the decals conform with the panel lines, so some silvering has shown up. The Gedeo matt varnish was sprayed in a rather thick layer that has resulted in some whitish areas. I’ll do better with the next one! I hope you like it anyway.

Version v1.1 is out! Please proceed to the following thread :

Hello @JeffreyK! Enjoy the read!

The "perfect" side photograph of a U-2A is in my opinion the following one (the one I cited previously, and as long as the rear fuselage is concerned 😅) : Which allows us to redraw the comparative lines on J57 and J75 powered articles : Same results with 2 different pictures! Hurray! 🤩 Conclusive results, thank again Rob.

Hallo Jochen! I promise I haven’t changed anything! The arrays in both appendixes are quite large, so they may require a bit of loading time. Anyway, I am glad it’s all sorted out.

Glad you like it! I have just checked the uploaded file, p96 looks pretty sharp to me, but p97 is a mess indeed! Another item to update in the next release. Thank you for pointing that out!