Phantome

I'm a relatively experienced modeller and never felt the need to use markers. Perhaps a red one makes sense for some gear door linings (basically only USN birds) but that's it, seems like half your budget is being blown on markers which is a bit overkill. I really don't understand what you'll be using them for. Not sure why you also need so many panel line colors. A dark grey is suitable for 90% of all aircraft (and perhaps a black for interiors). You will rarely need browns for aircraft. Paint retarder is not 100% necessary unless you're airbrushing really small details freestyle (like mottling on Luftwaffe aircraft in 1/72 scale), nor are the photo-etch saws unless you already know what you're going to use them for. Same with decal adhesive. What's the point if you're going to be building new kits? You have an Italeri kit in your cart and Italian decals are among the best in the business.

Viper experts, a few questions: 1) Were ALQ-119 pods painted white during the Gulf War? Most 80s pictures show them white but I can't really tell from the Gulf War pics if they still remained white or had been painted light grey by then. Also, some pods (namely ALQ-131s) looked quite dark, were they painted 36118 by any chance? Or olive drab? 2) When loading just two bombs on a TER rack, was the layout always outward/center or right/center? The dstorm.eu site has both port and starboard pylons as right/center but I find that a bit odd, but haven't seen a pic of an F-16 head on to confirm. If you don't get what I'm saying, what I mean would be this: BOMB BOMB EMPTY ........... EMPTY BOMB BOMB or EMPTY BOMB BOMB .......... EMPTY BOMB BOMB Thanks!

Having extensive experience with nearly every paint brand in acrylic I will say only this: NO brand has 100% accurate colors. None. It's a matter of trial and error, and yes, it's expensive to buy tins that end up being of no use. Because of its spray qualities I use Gunze for nearly all US/RAF aircraft unless the color is unavailable (RAF Ocean Grey), or completely off (FS 36118). I use Tamiya for generic colors or in the rare case that it matches a real one as I think their coverage is the best (Tamiya white and yellow are godsends). I also use them for clears including Tamiya smoke for post-shading. Vallejo for interiors and sometimes for tanks as they have a good range and brush well, which is needed for touch-ups. Finally, Akan for Russian colors which are notably absent from other ranges. I may start using Lifecolor as they are the only ones that do French colors. I have not had good experience with their lighter colors though, finding them an absolute pain to cover nicely, but their darker ones were less problematic.

I think it's both good and bad. Good: you have a range of weapons and other goodies (MERs, TERs, pods, etc) in a relatively inexpensive set that can be used with relative ease with kits of any other manufacturer. Each set will definitely last you more than one build, which means you're basically getting a weapons load for about £3-4. Way cheaper than resin. Weapons sets after V are also of very good quality and I-IV aren't too bad although slightly dated. My main complaint is that there are still some notable omissions. There's no pylon for single-Mavericks, no F-16 TER (i.e. TER-9A), no HARM except a very crude one in the older sets. There's very little in the way of 80s/90s NATO armament as well which is a shame given that I assume their Jaguars and Harriers sell relatively well. The decals are also not very comprehensive in some cases and miss out on key stencils. Beyond that, the main "philosophical" reason to dislike them is that it's an excuse for Hasegawa to sell kits without weapons. I do think that all kits should come with at least one full weapons loadout, and preferably more if it's a kit where you can't source extra weapons elsewhere. It can't possibly be that expensive for kitmakers to include this: you can use the same tooling for numerous kits. Note that some of Hasegawa's newer kits include parts of a weapons set or even a full one: their EF Typhoon for example. It's still overpriced though. So in a nutshell, that Hasegawa makes weapons sets: GOOD. That it then sells overpriced kits with no weapons: BAD. (That said, the main reason Hase kits are overpriced is the UK distributor costs: you can typically get them for 1/2-2/3 price including shipping by ordering directly from Japan).

A stupid engineering decision from Zvezda if you ask me. Requires filling/sanding off the joint as it does not correspond to a real panel line. Given that all variants of the Fulcrum have a different upper fuselage, it would have made sense for Zvezda to just mold the wings and fuselage together the way Trumpeter did. And at the very least, if you're going the route of separate wingtips, at least make them more sturdy: they're connected only by a tiny tab :/ (in other words, brace yourself for destruction if you accidentally grab it by the wingtips once finished) Good luck on the build though, it's more painful than the Trumpeter but is more accurate (Trumpeter totally botched the spine)

My 2c: Airfix kits are getting progressively more expensive despite not showing an equivalent progression in quality. Surface detail is still not up to par to most other manufacturers (Italeri notwithstanding) and there's still a short-run-ish feel to them, which is evident in their fit: I have not had a single new Airfix kit without significant fit problems. It's a shame because they've now had quite a number of years to improve but struggle finding one new Airfix kit that is substantially superior to that of some other manufacturer, the exceptions being those where Airfix has no competition (like the Swordfish). If you're going to charge £13 for a Me 262 which will likely have some accuracy and fit issues, why not just spend an extra £2 and get the Academy which is still the benchmark for this plane on this scale (mind you, has some fit issues too)? Or get the Revell at half price.

If anything, that yardstick on this forum is of excessive and often unwarranted praise. Yes, I know it's BRITmodeller and Airfix is a British institution but still, the lack of objectiveness in many people's comments on Airfix kits on this forum is quite hilarious when you see it from unbiased eyes. Trench-like panel lines = "detailing is slightly overdone but looks good to me" Terrible fit = "there are some problem areas but I can live with it" Poor shape = "some issues but looks like a XXX to me"

Well, actually nobody seemed to notice but the HUD had snapped off when I took the pics! I didn't realize until later but thankfully stole it from the F-16 kit that I binned after I finished this one

I actually e-mailed you about that sheet! Alas, it didn't have the dark walkway markings and the "666" codes are a thicker style than the old ones. Maybe you can reconsider reprinting your old F-16A sheet? *wink* *wink*

Thanks! About time I finished a build not in the last 24 hours before the deadline

That's great to know! Which means my weapons load may not be that inaccurate

Here's a pic of 667 carrying the above configuration and which served as the inspiration!

"Woe to you, oh Earth and sea, for the Devil sends the Beast with wrath Because he knows the time is short Let him who hath understanding reckon the number of the Beast For it is a human number, its number is six hundred and sixty six" - Iron Maiden ("The Number of the Beast") The Aircraft I've always wanted to do a RNoAF viper since I find their uniform grey scheme to be quite interesting compared to the standard viper camouflage used by most countries. I noticed that a lot of their markings started with 6, some were 66x, and I thought... could there be a 666 around there? Being Norway, birthplace of black metal (which I happen to like), I knew there would! Indeed, the RNoAF's 666 is the original 80-3666. According to info from f-16.net, the prudish US engineers refused to work on this plane unless the 666 was covered up. It also happens to be a test bird. I decided to build this aircraft in its original form, an F-16A rather than the updated AM version. Alas, there are no markings out there to do this since Vingtor's "early F-16s" sheet is now OOP. Thankfully, it's "late F-16s" sheet worked well as there were enough 6s and 9s to do the fin numbers. I have read that early RNoAF vipers had dark grey walkway markings rather than black ones, so that would be the only inaccuracy that I'm aware of. The Kit I used the original Revell F-16A boxing which has a Belgian "Spitfire" aircraft on the artwork. It is currently the best representation of a F-16A in The One True Scale. For some strange reason, my copy had some sprues in the older light grey (with a yellow-ish tint) color and others in the more recent standard grey. The transparencies weren't tinted either which is great since 666 had a smoked rather than a golden canopy. I sprayed Tamiya smoke (X-19) thinned at 5:1 from the inside for this effect. Norwegian and Danish vipers come with a searchlight on the starboard nose, necessary since so many missions are over water. I drilled a hole where appropriate and glued some plasticard from the inside so the tiny transparency would stay put. Being a Norwegian viper, I of course wanted to be armed with Penguin anti-ship missiles. Although there is no picture of 666 carrying them, being a test bird it is likely to have done so at some point. I later discovered a picture of 667 carrying a menacing 4x Penguin load, plus 4x Sidewinders. I have no way of knowing if this configuration was ever carried by 666 but it was too cool to ignore. For this, I needed two extra weapons pylons which I took from an older kit that I was planning to send to modelling Valhalla (i.e. the bin). The Penguin missiles themselves were taken from the Hasegawa Weapons Set V and are beautifully rendered and have their launchers included too. The Revell F-16 is relatively hassle free, with an excellent cockpit (no aftermarket needed IMHO), accurate dimensions, and mostly good fit although like many Revell kits, the landing gear is a bit fiddly. Note that the instructions don't say to put any nose weight but although it is not a tail sitter, its center of gravity is quite precarious and does tend to fall back with the slightest nudge, so I do suggest putting in at least some weight (less than 5g will suffice). Panel lines are quite fine but, sadly, Revell didn't bother with any rivets which makes it look a bit dated compared to the amazing new(ish) Tamiya F-16. Alas, the Tamiya can only be built as a block 50 and I'm losing hope that any earlier variants will be released in the near future. Decals All decals including stencils came from the Vingtor "late RNoAF F-16AMs" sheet. The decals are very thin but easy to handle and snuggle in perfectly with Microset/Microsol. The only annoying thing is that they are too crammed into the very small sheet which makes it annoying to cut. I have a love-hate relationship with Eastern European decals (some are far too thin) but these were an absolute joy to work with. Painting/weathering The aircraft was painted with Gunze 36270 while the nose was painted Gunze 36118 (woefully light for the real thing but makes a good viper nose). Norwegian aircraft have their canopies painted black on the edges and this was done as well. Pylons and the centerline fuel tank were painted Gunze 36375. The red/white squadron fin marking was painted manually since there was no decal for it. Thanks to the climate, Norwegian birds are typically very clean, and so only mild weathering was done, with a Humbrol dark grey panel wash and later, some streaking with Windsor & Newton oils. Enjoy! #HailSatan #AveSatanas #nemA

Aircraft: JASDF F-15J TacMeet 2013 Kit: 1/72 Hasegawa OOB

Comparison to an old Mod Eagle kit that is now in modelling Valhalla (not without having donated its engine exhaust). The older one was painted with Lifecolor

Ok, done!

Aircraft: USAF Bitburg Gulf War MiG killer, "UZ" Kit: 1/72 Hasegawa Decals: Two Bobs Eifel Eagles

Ok finished pics

Enamel, being oil-based, probably looks the best even when dry. Whenever I miss wiping off a bit of enamel wash from an aircraft and later rediscover it after a matte coat, it still looks like an oil stain. Humbrol has an oil colored wash which might come handy. Otherwise, Burnt Umber tends to give a red/orangy when thinned and streaked even if it looks brown in the tube.

One thing I forgot to do before priming: painting the canopy black on the outside after masking. I was too lazy to then paint it after built. Maybe I'll remove it one day and do it if I'm particularly bored. Although not evident here, there are only two Sparrow missiles as I only had 3 and figured it would look stranger to have 3 than 2 (I've never seen an Eagle carry just 2). All the missiles came from the spares box, with the Sparrow from Academy Hornet kits and the Sidewinders and AMRAAMs from Revell F-16 kits.

Finished! Should have painted Lifecolor :/ Still, a worthy experiment for getting Mod Eagle in acrylic

The decalling was time consuming but not as annoying as it might appear. Hasegawa could have perhaps merged some of the small yellow stencils from the upper fuselage together to make it easier. I also had two mini-disasters at this stage. The first was that I had erroneously included the wrong starboard fin: the JASDF birds do not have the fat fin antenna at the top that the USAF ones do, they have the same thinner ones on both fins. Rather than remove and repaint, I decided simply to saw off and swap the antennas. Disaster averted. The other problem was that, because I used Mr Mark Softer for the decals (you pretty much need to for the thicker Japanese decals), it burned some of the paint on the wings near the roundels. Thankfully it was not near any of the other decals so it was simply a matter of repainting. Disaster reverted.

Long-delayed update. Model near-finished but I only have some pics from the post-painting and decalling stage. Will hopefully finish up tomorrow I used Gunze for both the light and dark ghost greys. I realized that my only bottle of dark ghost grey was nearly gone and also nearly dried out. Seems old Gunze paints tend to get darker than a fresh bottle so the contrast was quite noticeable when in reality the difference between the two greys is relatively minor. Despite that, I liked it. The dark grey was sprayed freehand, as I typically do with Eagles.

Ok, had forgotten about this but time for a big update. I actually already finished the aircraft but haven't gotten around to taking pictures of it so these are the last ones: the first just after painting, and the second after a coat of Klear. I was not impressed with Vallejo's representation of 36251. It's too dark and the decals that corresponded to it practically turned invisible. I know that the Mod Eagle stencils are, by nature, very subtle but you can still pick them out. I was, however, much happier with XF-82 as a substitute for 36176. The blue-ish tint came out well, but would have looked better if 36251 was lighter and warmer. I still think the Mod Eagle colors from Lifecolor are the most accurate in acrylic