Phantome

I do too. Alas, Academy P-51C has not yet arrived... nor has the Mr Setter/Softer. Will do sanding/filling later today. Also having a philsophical debate on what to use for Olive Drab. I've typically used Tamiya X-62 but I find it's too dark and does not reflect fading. Gunze's H52 (for USAAF) looks way too brown. And H78 (for Army) also looks a bit too dark. I'm convincing myself that H73 might be just it. It's too brownish for its original intention, RAF Dark Green, and when you put it next to X-62 it does look like a lighter shade of it. Indeed it eerily looks like the Gunze equivalente of Xtracrylix Faded Olive Drab (which is my color of choice for US vehicles). Will do some airbrush tests later as well.

Meanwhile in P-51D-land, cockpits assembled. I will use Eduard Superfabric seats but I do not have white glue on me right now so this will have to wait until next week. I feel like my desk is North American's assembly line circa 1944 I also painted all other interior parts besides the cockpit in Tamiya XF-4 which is to me the best representation of Yellow zinc chromate in acrylic. As I said at the beginning... shake and bake. The Tamiya P-51D is probably my favorite WW2 kit ever. Just so perfect in every way. Tomorrow I'll do a bit of puttying/sanding where necessary (not much!) in preparation for paint time which I hope to do before Saturday so I won't have to rush through the builds before the deadline.

Check out all this plastic! I originally used Gunze H58 but thought it looked a bit light. Plus I do not like using Gunze for interiors since they are terrible for brush touch ups. So I sprayed Vallejo Interior Green on top which turned out to be great since Vallejo behaves better over paint or primer than plastic. Here's how the P-51B looks. Revell wood brown was used to brush paint the floor As assembled:

With only a few days left until the GB is over, I'm going to attempt an extremely ambitious triple Mustang build taking advantage of the fact that both the Tamiya and the Academy Mustangs are extremely good 'shake and bake' kits that should not cause me much trouble. Here's a summary of the builds and (possible problems) 1) Academy P-51B "Bonnie B II". Taken from the Xtradecal D-Day sheet. Alas, this particular P-51B had the fin fillets which the "Old Crow" boxing does not have. I ordered the P-51C kit that does but has not yet arrived. That still does not stop me from building up everything except the separate tail section. 2) Tamiya P-51D "Detroit Miss". Have always wanted to build this one so here's the chance. 3) Tamiya P-51D "Jumpin' Jacques". I have some old Hasegawa decals but I'm slightly terrified of how thick they'll look on natural metal. I ordered some Mr Setter/Softer from Japan a few weeks ago but waiting for that to arrive. If it does not arrive by early Saturday I will replace it with something else. The "JJ" will be armed with two bombs, rather than drop tanks, hence why I chose the F-51 kit.

Can we just stop pretending that the defense of trench-like panel lines is nothing more than a defense of nu Airfix kits?

I respect your opinion but frankly, I find their XIX to be terrible. Italeri-like panel lines, no wheel well detail, etc. etc. I'm placing my bets on an AZ new tool or ... *drool* Eduard

I like your logic. My wallet doesn't, but my heart does.

Nobody said it was a survey of the overall model buying/building population, if it was, Italeri would have done the survey in model shops not on a forum. Clearly they value the opinion of more seasoned modellers. Yes, you can argue that the main weakness of the poll is that the sample is not random but it's a bit of stretch to say that an outcome of 90% dislike is of no representative value whatsoever. P.S. a degree in economics is more statistics heavy than any science, engineering or comp sci degree. Only mathematicians, actuaries, and finance majors have us beat. We can still lie with numbers though

I know that some people these days dislike "experts" but as an economist and therefore with formal training in statistics, a sample of 70 people out of a population of 3,000 is actually pretty representative, with a margin of error of around 6% either way. That means that since 90% in the sample disliked trenches (63 out of 70), at least 84% of the total population dislike them... and possibly as many as 96%.

Is it just me or is this another case of the resin making community being like, "Let's make resin parts for this highly sought after variant of an extremely popular kit that is sure to sell great!" "Nonsense Johnson, our priority is to fix millimetrical errors in obscure kits that only rivet-counters will care about" I mean you'd think this being the UK and the Tornado being such a popular kit, and most of the kits sold being Revell, and Revell not bothering with a GR.1 (as they usually never bother with different variants), this has KA-CHING $$$ written all over it. Then again, I am not the owner of a resin company.

That's an amazing build. If the Sword doesn't really offer much of an advantage in build ease and quality, I'll probably stick with my AZs. Still curious though if anyone has done both...

This is the only seller that I know of in the UK http://coastalcraftmodelsuk.com/akan_paints.php There are a few more in Europe though, or on eBay. But I'd say go with MiG Ammo since they'll be cheaper. They usually are quite accurate!

They're almost identical in quality and behavior as Vallejo, so if you've used Vallejo, Ammo is no different. Vallejo thinner works great with them but as others have said, if you want the best finish, use Mr Color Levelling Thinner. Like all paint brands, they are a hit and miss when it comes to accuracy. For Russian colors, I would prefer Akan paints. Expensive and not easy to find in the UK but very accurate and spray beautifully (very similar to Tamiya/Gunze but without the smell!)

Wheels up for those special dioramas or display builds that look good on a desk (with a stand). Wheels down for everything else (i.e. 99% of builds). They just look so much better when on the ground and there's so much detail you miss otherwise.

Mega bump! Now that Sword has entered the market I was wondering if anyone has any hands on experience between that and the AZ. I have a few AZ in the stash and wondering if they're worth replacing with the Sword kits which are quite cheap. There's a really great review here but only compares Sword with Fujimi. http://www.hyperscale.com/2016/reviews/kits/sword72095reviewmd_1.htm

I so hope the GWH 1/72 F-15E comes out before this...

And their obsession with tigermeet/special markings is really getting on my nerves

I've been quite disappointed with Revell over the past 2 years or so so not surprising at all. It's sad to see how they have fallen compared to their golden age in the late 90s/early 2000s when they were cranking out some gorgeous kits, of quality to rival the Japanese. Their latest stuff in 1/72 is unimaginative, fills no gaps that are sorely needed, and in some cases is bordering on mediocre (the panel lines on that Gripen... aaargh!)

The German-language equivalent to the English-language "Like most kits, construction begins with the cockpit..."

Awesome build. I see you also added extensive rivetting since like all modern Zvezda kits, there is none

Killer job on the Academy Hellcat. Such an underrated kit...

I don't do 1/48 but that GWH kit looks amazing. I wish we had an equivalent in 1/72 (Hasegawa is still pretty damn good but could use a more modern kit).

Had an idea for a GB that I believe has not been done but which is both very specific and yet has a broad range of possibilities: THINGS WITH TORPEDOES. Basically any instrument of warfare that has ever carried a torpedo can be included - Torpedo bombers (ex: Avengers, Swordfishes, Barracudas) - Fighters armed with torpedoes (Fw 190) - ASW bombers (B-24) - ASW aircraft (Catalina, P-3, Nimrod) - ASW helicopters (Seahawk, Lynx) - Destroyers, frigates, corvettes - PT boats - Submarines Model must visibly include a torpedo or carry one implicitly (bomb bay, torpedo tube). Great opportunity for a mixed sea/air and WW1/WW2/CW/Modern GB! And no shortage of British subjects too...

The thing that's a pain is removing the bulge, since there's a big risk of accidentally slicing off the raised detail (panel hinges I believe?) below it. The old Hasegawa had relatively simple external detail and did not have those raised bits which makes it easy.

Not sure why they are bothering with an A-6 in 1/72 given that the Fujimi is near perfect. That said, a new MiG-31 is more than welcome. Hopefully not too pricey...