Phantome
-
Posts
609 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Events
Profiles
Forums
Media Demo
Posts posted by Phantome
-
-
I think the color you were originally aiming for is US Army Helo Drab (FS 34031). Sadly, I know of only Model Master which produces it in Acryl (and those paints are hard to find outside the US and not particularly easy to airbrush with).
I have used Tamiya's Khaki Drab (XF-51) as a very close substitute (especially since Helo Drab tends to fade towards green).
-
1
-
-
I have a question about the legendary "Gulf Spirit", mainly what color it was during the Gulf War. I have seen many modellers build it in the ghost gray and the Mod Eagle scheme but clearly it could have only been one during the Gulf War. I am nearly convinced that it is ghost gray but just wanted to confirm.
Evidence towards ghost gray
- The few pictures of the GW show it as ghost gray looking. However, I have to say that ghost gray and mod eagle look surprisingly similar in many photos, as lighting effects come into play.
- Osprey's F-15Cs in Combat has it ghost gray
- I have yet to see a GW bird convincingly appearing in mod eagle colors although a number of GW veterans apparently switched that very same summer (like the Bitburg birds)
Evindence towards Mod Eagle
- Lots of modellers seem to do it in this camo
- Hasegawa's boxing has the 1991 version in mod eagle as well as the 2003 commander's aircraft (which I assume is the one in the box photo which is clearly mod eagle). However, the latter is a different airframe. Also, Hasegawa's instructions have the 1991 version with very few stencils which makes me wonder whether it had been hastily painted before the war.
I figure someone in this forum has the answer
-
Holy rivets Batman. Knew the kit was rivet-heavy but hadn't realized it was that overwhelming.
That said, your finish is fantastic and I still want a crack at this kit at some point
-
1 hour ago, 825 said:
This looks great. Mine has been siting for the last 3-4 years almost finished but I can't get all four wheels to sit on the ground. I must have the old canopy as it just doesn't fit.
You've done a brilliant job and it really looks the part.
I got lucky and managed to position the wings at the right angle from the start despite not checking first if the gear would touch the ground. Would have been really hard if not impossible to fix without reattaching the wings after the paint job.
The old canopy is a horror show so I've heard. I strongly recommend anyone buying this kit off eBay to check with the seller first if the second canopy is there. I'm sure those being sold at Hannants are the updated ones. Maybe since Xtrakit is Hannants you can ask for the corrected version? (They should be grateful someone bought this kit)
-
3 hours ago, stevehnz said:
Fair enough, sounds like I'll be building a toy like FA.2, 'cause I don't think I could face what you had to do.
Steve.
No human being who loves himself should
-
1
-
-
On 9/16/2016 at 9:42 AM, stevehnz said:
Right, I must admit as I typed that I was beginning to have doubts, I think it was your 2nd last paragraph before your great photos that sent me up the wrong path, so, why does this one look better than the Airfix one could. If you can do such a sweet job on this one, & it is, surely the Airfix one would be a better starting point than the MPM/Xtrakit one?
Steve.
The problem with the Airfix one are the panel lines, which have no remedy (unless you want to send them out and rescribe which will take hours/days). No matter what a great job you do painting, weathering, detailing, those panel lines will make it look like a toy in the end so it's actually a waste. I've also read that the Airfix is not that accurate and doesn't have a great fit either so might as well suffer a bit more but get a more rewarding result.
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, stevehnz said:
I think I've the Italeri FA.2 in stock, seem to remember it bring recommended over the Airfix one for the FA.2 & Airfix for the FRS.1, or have I got that the wrong way around?
Your effort looks the goods & shows no signs of your trials & tribulations. Steve.
I think you are referring to the FRS.1, AFAIK nobody besides MPM (who made the Xtrakit) and Airfix has never produced an FA.2 although there was at a time a conversion set for the Italeri/Esci FRS.1 which is a wonderful kit
-
I hate myself.
I didn't know this until I was in the finishing stages of this kit. I had an epiphany and realized that only someone full of self-loathing and nihilistic tendencies would go through and build this horror of a kit. This is the kind of kit that you would give to a modelling addict so that they never build another. This is the kind of kit you would give to a child so that he/she will take up every other hobby but this. This kit makes you question your life, your hopes and dreams, your will to live.
I was lured by the fact that a) I saw it at just £6 at a Duxford air show not too long ago and 2) it had nice, sharp panel lines unlike the horrible trenches of the Airfix kit. I had already read about the poor fit but figured I would give it a go anyway. I was pleasantly surprised to see that Xtrakit corrected one of the kit's major flaws, a canopy that didn't fit, by providing a second canopy that looked the part. Little did I know that this was the only flaw that was fixed.
In recent posts I have listed the pros/cons of the kits I built so here goes.
Pros:
- Fine panel lines, although there are no rivets
- The fit of *some* of the main parts, such as the two big fuselage halves, the stabilizer and the fin, is pretty good
- The cockpit is inaccurately detailed but detailed nonetheless
Now brace yourself:
Cons:
- Terrible fit of some other parts such as the nose and the nose part with the fuselage. Requires lots of putty and sanding
- Intakes are god-awful and also require a lot of work (the open bits are not of equal size!)
- Ejection seat is quite plain
- No locator pins on pylons or fuel tanks
- No weapons at all (including no gun pods)
- Terrible fit of landing gear, especially those on the edge of the wings (width of the landing gear does not match that of the wing part)
- Decals are super thin and virtually unusable. Plus, they have a peach-like color where it should be pink
- Assembly of the movable exhausts is ridiculously tedious
- No detail on the rear exhaust shield (yes, it's totally plain!) and it doesn't fit either (best is to cut the locator pins)
- No lever for the airbrake despite the airbrake and the fuselage seemingly having a provision for one! (had to scratchbuild)
- No raised detail on wings (vortex generators represented as panel lines)
After an initial decal disaster I got lucky and saw an Airfix kit at just £8 on eBay so it got it and used the decals. They were wonderful, modern Airfix decals are among the best in the business. I did a wee bit of scratchbuilding on the ejection seat so it didn't look so plain but hard to tell from the pics.
All in all, in the end I'm happy. Pleased that I went through and finished this dog of a kit. And I must say, it looks MUCH better than the Airfix would, despite its flaws.
Do I recommend it? Hell no. Unless you hate yourself too. If not, cross your fingers some other kit maker decides to have a go at an FA.2
-
25
-
-
Hi, Bailes,
Have you seen this:
https://www.hannants.co.uk/product/ORA7224
Not that pricey.
Another option is getting the Airfix kit and raiding it for the GR.4 specific parts. The rest is junk. Consider it an upgrading kit for Revell's
Fernando
Costs about half again what the base kit costs... that's pretty pricey!
(Or maybe I'm just cheap)
-
1
-
-
1/72 Xtrakit Sea Harrier FA.2
Actually on the verge of finishing it.
It is the most awful kit I have ever done and can't believe I was suckered into buying it because it was only like £6 at Duxford.
-
Great work, especially the chipping. The Italeri is a dog of a kit at times but doesn't look that bad when finished.
-
1
-
-
It's relatively easy to mask: just sweep the wings all the way back and mask the edge. Then extend and mask the top.
Somebody correct me if I'm wrong but correct color is dark camouflage grey/FS36231?
-
2
-
-
Hi Brit experts, illuminate me on this.
What stencils did Gulf War desert pink Tornados use?
AFAIK no they were quite sparse, and only had a (just some?) a white "Rescue" stencil on the port side, the pink vertical stabilizer angle indicators, the black Fragile Area one on the spine and the smaller danger triangles below the cockpit. My questions are:
1) Was there a No Step stencil on the gray part of the wing? (the part that goes under the sweep). I assume this was not painted over
2) What about the stencils on the Boz and Sky Shadow pods? I recently saw the replica Gulf War tonka at Farnborough and vaguely remember the Sky Shadow had stencils but I wonder how historically accurate this was.
Thanks!
-
If I may venture to suggest, next time you do a Mustang, go for the Tamiya! It's not that expensive (about £12, less on eBay) and it's as close to a perfect kit as there is in 1/72 scale.
As a second choice, the Airfix doesn't look bad either and priced in line with the Italeri. Both Tamiya and Airfix have Korean War F-51 variants. Now that you've practiced your Alclad skills, you'll be much better rewarded!
Italeri's WW2 single engine fighter selection is not the greatest in the world to be honest. Major fit issues, trench-like panel lines, multiple inaccuracies.
-
1
-
-
Which confirms my concern that we might not be seeing early (pre-90s) F-16s unless Tamiya goes for a whole new wing on future variants.
Shame since clearly only a few pieces would have been needed to design the full spectrum of Vipers.
When was the kit released? 2014? It's been quite a while. I'm losing faith!
-
Hi, Phantome,
I think they are not. Just look at the sprues in the link above (the Monogram is the same kit as REvell's). Neither the early AIM-9 pylons (16S210 I have seen them named) nor the LAU-29 "dual purpose" are molded into the wingtip. On the contrary, the strange that the current MLU boxings (most conmemoration/airshow machines) do not come with the latter.
Absolutely agree regarding the Tamiya. If you are building a USAF Block 50, look no further.
Fernando
I'm not talking about the Revell, I'm talking about the Tamiya. The AIM-120 pylons are molded into the wings. Which presumably makes it impossible to make an A or a C variant pre-AMRAAM, say, 1980s. I am not an expert on pylons so not sure what year it was introduced.
http://www.1999.co.jp/eng/image/10299546z2/70/2
I guess a big mouth Block 40 is feasible with the Tamiya but only post-1990s Block 30s? Not a Viper expert so info appreciated!
-
Hi, gentlemen,
Agree with all of these comments.
Any big mouth C can be built using the Tamiya kit. Any other (Revell or Hasegawa) requires the bulged doors/strenghtened u/c legs.
(Academy's is said to have shape issues in the nose, in the vertical fin and, for real men, the coaming. Surface is well detailed but just a bit rough. However it comes with bulged doors/strenghtened u/c. Nevertheless, having the Tamiya kit, I wouldn't consider it exception made of basis for conversions)
Regarding the availability of the Revell kit: Revell F-16C can be built as an A (the parts are there). Revell F-16B can be built as an A, provided a Rob Taurus vac canopy is added. F-16C can be built as either big or normal mouth, GE or PW engined, buts lacks bulged doors/strenghtened u/c legs.
An F-16D Block 52 Plus can be built (OOB) from Kinetic "European" box (72002). Tough kit with rough surfaces and difficult assembly; have just finished one. But has every detail more or less correct (and no nose droop!)
A Sufa can be built from Hasegawa (the old D with conversion pieces; looks good) or the Kinetic (same kit as above)
An early big-mouthed, enlarged-spined Israeli F-16D Block 30 Barak cannot be built OOB.
I would really stay clear of any kit other than Tamiya, Revell and Hasegawa (exception made, if talking strictly OOB, of the Kinetic 52 Plus -for the moment). Esci, Italeri, Hobbyboss or the other concoctions mentioned above are a generation or two behind.
Guess we leave the conversions for another post (Airwaves resin F-16D spine for one?)
FErnando
I was starting to think that but the long AMRAAM wingtip pylons are molded to the wing so you can't do one with wingtip AIM-9s.
Big omission IMHO and a strange one.
That said, for a block 50, the Tamiya is miles ahead of the Revell, it's only deficiency being an inferior seat. This is quite simply put, one of the best kits in 1/72 scale ever made.
Btw, anyone know when/if Tamiya will release earlier blocks? It's been a while and the kit does seem to be made for multiple variants.
-
What better way to get your girlfriend into modelling than.... an EGG PLANE!
There is quite a shortage of British aircraft in the Egg Plane series, would have probably wanted to do a Spitfire. Fortunately the AV-8 Harrier has markings for a RAF GR.1
Must say, it looks hilarious once finished. These are funny little kits and quite easy to make.
She built and painted pretty much all of it. The fuselage was airbrushed and some of the smaller pieces like the intakes and the rocket launchers were brush painted. She also did the decals. My only major contribution was masking of the canopy and for the camouflage pattern (with blu tack), and I did some minor paint and decal touch ups.
She seemed to enjoy the airbrushing and probably did a better job at it on her first attempt than I did on mine years ago.
Enjoy!
-
8
-
-
Beautiful! I have that amazing Two Bobs decal set and hope to build one soon
-
Some other comments about this kit which I had been meaning to build for a long time but never got around to.
Pros:
- Has amazing detail with lots of fine panel lines and rivets on most parts of the plane (see cons)
- Although the IDS version is a bit sparse with extras, the RAF and ECR kits cool weapons (especially the RAF kit)
- Decal sheets are excellent at least in the RAF and older IDS/ECR boxings which have non-Tigermeet units.
- Cockpit detail is superb and IMHO does not need aftermarket
- Wheels wells very detailed as well, as is the landing gear
- Fit is mostly good. Not Tamigawa but needs very little filler and no big gaps in the main fuselage sections
- Looks the part when built
Cons
- Nose shape is slightly off but not nearly as bad as some people claim. Can be fixed with sanding
- The movable tailplanes are rather flimsy, as are the movable pylons which I was terrified of breaking
- No weapons on the IDS version for some odd reason (lots of recce sensors)
- Wobbly and ill-fitting landing gear
- Awful canopy. Not sure if I got a bad one but all the clear parts were terribly molded. A consistent Revell problem
- Certain parts of the fuselage have really terrible surface detail, notably the lower front. Needs rescribing as the panel lines are not deep enough for a wash, and no rivets either.
- Small bits (pitots) are quite thick and toy-like
- Big sinkmarks on the airbrakes
- Intakes are a bit fiddly to build too
I have to say none of these cons are THAT bad. For £10, this is an awesome kit and probably among the best value-for-money in 1/72 scale you'll ever get.
-
Finished version (as posted in Gallery thread)
-
3
-
-
Lovely result and the colours look great, awesome! I agree that camo is one of the best, in fact I love all the proper 80's Cold war German schemes, they just look 'meaner' than the RAF or Italian schemes imho.
What did you thin the Revell paint with? Think its about time I tried some of the aqua range.
Also on the decals, as you say the Hahen decals are pretty darn expensive but are pretty good. Even better, but hard to find, are the decals in the Hasegawa 1/72 Tornado Marineflieger edition. They are more comprehensive and have better colours, however you get a pretty crap model in the box with them compared to the Revell kit, plus the price I've ever seen them for sale are more than the Hahen decals anyways, worth keeping an eye out for them though if you can get a bargain! The Hasegawa kit has decals for Norm 76 and 87 (MFG1 & MFG2), with some ok Kormorans and launchers. The Eduard ones are still the best bet for 1/72 if doing your definitive version, plus the ECR HARM launcher pylons from the Revell kit are a good representation of the Kormoran launchers, I think they are actually the same thing nearly with slightly different launch rails. Just my
on it all after looking through similar 1/72 Marineflieger Tornado options. Cracking Tornado, especially built in that kinda time!
I thinned the Revell paints with Xtracyrlix thinner. Vallejo thinner should also be equally good since they are practically the same thing. Now that I remember, I had thinned them with water the last time and perhaps that's why it didn't spray as well.
I will definitely use HaHen next time despite the price. I am not a fan of Hasegawa decals, and especially on such an old kit will probably be not in the best shape by now. It's really a shame Revell doesn't come out with a Marineflieger IDS kit. I mean enough with all the silly Tigermeet editions already!
-
Second entry for this excellent GB, a Marineflieger Tornado under the awesome and menacing Norm 87 scheme. Kit used was the 1/72 Revell with decals from the Italeri "Strike Fighter" boxing".
-
19
-
-
So, I finished
The last steps included a quick enamel wash to highlight panel lines and then, the Kormoran missiles which I sourced from an Italeri US/NATO weapons set. Eduard does a lovely Kormoran (Brassin range) since I decided this was not going to be my definitive Marineflieger kit, I would take the cheaper route (plus I had no guarantees it would arrive by this weekend).
And here it is in near-final form, just pending a matte coat
-
3
-
Your effort looks the goods & shows no signs of your trials & tribulations. 
on it all after looking through similar 1/72 Marineflieger Tornado options. 
1/72 AH-1S Cobra
in Ready for Inspection - Aircraft
Posted · Edited by Phantome
Correction, Hataka now produces that color too
http://hataka-hobby.com/products/us-army-helicopter-drab/