Phantome
-
Posts
609 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Events
Profiles
Forums
Media Demo
Posts posted by Phantome
-
-
Also, worth pointing out the sole annoyance of the Hasegawa kit: it's not designed for an open cockpit. However, I suspect it should not be too difficult to do so with some minimal modifications (the canopy is, thankfully, a two piece, just nothing in place to keep it open)
-
I have not had the pleasure of building the Hasegawa kit but it looks great in the box and basically comes with a full European Weapons Set. Get it directly from Japan and it should be around £25-30 which is about a tenner less than the UK price.
The original Revell kit is one of their poorest efforts. Bad fit, huge wing seams and surface detail is a bit plain (no rivets, lots of flash). It does not look nearly as good as their Tornado. That said, the decal sheet is impressive and probably worth the price of the kit alone if it were aftermarket! Has markings for all initial Typhoon users. I suspect if you have the patience to build it up while resisting the urge to bin it, it looks nice in the end... alas I didn't.
I cannot comment on Revell's second kit as I have not bought it.
Avoid the Italeri... that's all I'm sayin'...
-
Hello,
Quick question: can anyone enlighten me with the story of USAAF/USN green seat harnesses? I notice that all the Eduard photoetch seatbelts have half of them in beige and the other half in green but I have never seen pictures of any US aircraft with green harnesses during the war though I have read that they were used late in the war (1945). Can anyone shed more light on this story? Around what time did this become commonplace? Did all aircraft switch to green or just certain manufacturers?
From the looks of it, methinks Eduard should have gone for mostly tan seatbelts on their sets, and just offered one or two green.
-
Could totally take out an M1A2 SEP TUSK. No question.
-
3 hours ago, Silverkite said:
Wolfpak decals should start to make stencils on top of those decals
Luigi
Good luck with that. Sadly Wolfpak seems to force you into paying £15 for a decal sheet with one subject that is interesting and 5 other planes that you have no intention of ever building. It's a shame that they don't concentrate on same-subject sheets at more affordable prices. Their research is top notch though, gotta give them that.
-
1
-
-
19 hours ago, Borisz said:
Whats the problem with the Academy kits?
That they're not as good as the older Hasegawa kits.
-
1
-
-
On 2/28/2019 at 1:16 AM, Plasto said:
Producing an accurate and high quality kit is once thing. Selling it in volume on a consistent basis is another.
In there lies the answer to why a lot of stuff isn’t done by mainstream manufacturers...
I guess that's why they avoided doing a Ki-61....
... oh wait
-
Looking at the sprues my main complaint is that there's only 2 fuel tanks. This is unfortunate, since Gulf War birds typically carried all three.
Does anyone know from looking at it whether it can be turned into a Gulf War bird?
-
The Fujimi looks fabulous in the box, I have no built one yet. I have also had the Italeri in my hands and it looked great too, though detail was less crisp. But look around and both finished builds look the part so you can't go wrong.
The Fujimi A-6E TRAM boxing is very frequently found on eBay, if you're lucky you can get it for £15 or so (as I did a year or so back) but mostly goes for around £20-25... which actually is not a bad price given it's size and quality.
The A-6A and KA-6 boxings are rarer and go for anywhere around £20-35
-
On 2/28/2019 at 9:32 PM, Silverkite said:
If it was for me then sorry, I'm not Eduard's boss, I'm just noisy cause I fail to understand their market practices not only from their side but many others like Tamiya's lack of a complete F-16 family and in the meanwhile they pick a Spitfire and a BF-109, or Hasegawa and their lack of F-4C/D reboxes, been 11 years since their last 1/72 F-4C/D and nearly 20 years since their disappearance from catalogue.
After all I like to yell at the clouds
Luigi
I feel your pain.
I've been complaining about the lack of marketing acumen by many (most) modelling firms, but for some reason modellers on forums seem to complain endlessly about kit engineering while simultaneously thinking their marketing people are geniuses
-
On 2/26/2019 at 4:27 AM, Christopher Hall said:
Thanks for the links and the advice, my dad owns his own modelling company and I have access to his casters/printers if I can get the design work down..... (I've seen their work and it's amazing, you can actually read the 1:700 scale writing)
WW2 is my preferred era and I know that I'm probably over shooting by looking to start with such a wide range, I'm looking to set my goals high and push to achieve them.
It's going to be a long term goal as I know that there are many many many different marking for the same aircraft depending on pre/post war and purposes served during the war.
I will take any information and advice on board and see where it takes me thanks again for your help =).
I hate to pour cold water over this but there's a few points that I think you should really consider first before jumping into decal making (which I have considered myself).
1) The decal industry is the product of people being very dedicated to modelling and wanting to add value and fill niches. It is not exactly a hugely profitable one: margins and low and if you are profitable, it's probably just to finance the next sheet rather than expecting a Ferrari anytime soon. Many decal companies fold quite quickly, probably because most of the owners aren't rich and therefore aren't prepared to take even minor losses; the more established ones like Microscale benefit from the fact that they sell other modelling supplies besides decals and which makes them profitable. Many decal "companies" are simply one-man outfits which at most get research assistance from others on an ad hoc basis. They do it for the love of modelling, not out of financial reasons. Aside from the fact that your dad has a modelling company, how into modelling are you actually? I ask because you clearly just joined this site and these are your first posts, and this seems to be a question that would be asked after years of modelling and knowing the industry.
2) Decal companies acquire reputations for accuracy. Look around this forum and you'll often find threads of "are X company's decals are accurate?" and you'd be surprised at how many of them don't (there's a recent thread on Kit's World which was not very flattering, and Aeromaster - which was once one of the bigger ones around before they too went the way of the dinosaurs- was also known as "Errormaster"). On the other hand, many of the ones with the best reputation are those that are focus on particular subjects (ej: Begemot with modern Russian aircraft, CAM on US Navy aircraft). When you say something like "I'm looking to set my goals high and push to achieve them", this actually seems like the exact opposite strategy of how to approach decal making: start small, focus on a particular subject, get a good reputation, and gradually expand your reach. Remember: the grand majority of modellers don't buy third party decals. This is a niche industry for a small subset of the modelling market, one that is going to be highly critical of poor quality and shoddy research.
3) Modellers don't just want more [insert country] decals. They want subjects that haven't been approached. Again, this is something that comes after years of modelling as well as historical interest in the subject matter and realizing "why are there no Bosnia/Kosovo F-15 markings in the market"? "Why are there no hi-viz F-16 stencils?" "why can't I find the 'Jumpin' Jacques' P-51 in 1/72 scale?". We really don't need another 'Big Beautiful Doll', or Spangdahlem Viper, trust me.
Anyway, again sorry for being a Negative Nancy. Decal making is a cottage industry that runs on love and dedication of the subject matter, not entrepreneurial acumen and infinite ambition.
-
3
-
-
Not sure why you didn't mention it, and nobody has spotted it either but... that's VERY impressive rivet work!
-
1
-
-
On 2/16/2019 at 1:42 PM, Murph said:
From a modeling POV, the only two changes for MSIP were the ability to carry the AMRAAM and the PACS Panel in the cockpit. Everything else was a part of different upgrades that preceded, were concurrent with, or followed MSIP even though modelers often roll them into the MSIP upgrades.
Regards,
Murph
But that too was added on a rolling basis. The first MSIP bird was rolled out in 1985, and yet the first incorporation (hastily) of the AMRAAM took place in the dying days of the Gulf War, without it being fired.
I think the mistake is assuming that MSIP represents a variant of a F-15, when in fact it's a program of gradual improvement and that at any given point in time, aircraft may have had some of these improvements but not all.
http://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_fighters/f15_25.html
-
10 minutes ago, Troy Smith said:
Hmm, the colours are based on their book, Real Colors of WWII, and there are problems with that.
see here for info on that
noted resrachers say the British ones are not good, German ones suspect.
Some maybe OK, but they really were color matching under daylight simulation..... but read the link.
Interesting stuff... and disappointing why they dismiss expert opinion like that. To be honest, I have not been particularly impressed with the accuracy of most of the Spanish companies, Vallejo and MiG Ammo have a plethora of stinkers.
On the other hand, I have used the AK colors and so far, I have found them to be better than the alternatives. I used them on a M1 Abrams and a Challenger and both look the part (will take a pic tomorrow in daylight for accuracy). The others look good in the tin though there are some exceptions: Desert Pink looks really off and I recently got a hold of their RAF ocean grey which also is suspect. I still think on the whole, they probably - on average - more accurate than most of their rivals though the bar is quite low in some cases.
-
1
-
-
I love Tamiya paints. They spray extremely well and have the best coverage of any acrylics on earth. I use Tamiya almost exclusively for basic whites and yellows precisely because they're the only ones that can cover even black pretty decently. Tamiya and Gunze are usually my go to paints because they don't smell as bad as lacquers, dry quickly (Tamiya particularly), and have better translucency than water-based acrylics. This is quite important to me since I embraced black-basing.
However, I concur that they are quite vulnerable to scratching. Far more than Gunze which dries rock solid. Just be careful with your models and avoid any heavy handed work until it's sealed. Also, unlike Gunze, Tamiya paints don't sand off evenly, an important consideration if you make a mistake or if you plan on using them as a primer (though if you know you won't need to sand the model anymore, X-1 gloss black is an excellent pre-NMF primer).
My main gripe with Tamiya is their inaccuracy. Most of them do not correspond to an actual color. I have little patience for mixing paints so I'm limited in terms of the range of Tamiya paints I will use. But there's still plenty (NATO tank colors, German tank colors, XF-24 makes a great FS36118, XF-4 great zinc chromate, etc.)
-
1
-
-
I've had no problems thinning these with IPA. They spray beautifully well and can be combined with Gunze paints too.
-
Latecomer to this thread but very good work on a very tricky color. I just got my hands on an AK turquoise and it looks good though I feel it could have used a tiny hint of green in it. I still prefer the paint to err on the side of too blue than too green.
AK has recently come out with its Real Colour Air line and includes a cockpit turquoise. I wonder just how much it differs from their standard acrylic but my impression on accuracy for this line has so far been very good (mostly their tank colors).
-
On 1/23/2019 at 4:08 PM, is it windy yet? said:
Oh sugar. See I don’t know much about F-15’s. There are no notes in the instructions. The decal placement guide, which can and may be wrong do not depict the long raked back antenna under the nose. I always thought that antenna indicated MSIP. I might be too far along to change things up now. Thanks for your knowledgeable insights Murph.
The main physical changes between MSIP and non-MSIP jets are
1) a tiny rounded sensor at the top of the nose, just behind the radome
2) The exposed arresting hook
https://thaimilitaryandasianregion.files.wordpress.com/2017/02/7b75ecda.jpg?w=625&h=620
3) A radar warning receiver on the starboard tip of the rear fuselage (right next to the trailing edge of the stabilizer)
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/aircraft/fighter/f15/f15_15.jpg
compare with non-MSIP bird:
https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-ee9865c5857cbfb5acee50cf143d5e52-c
Not sure if all three were installed simultaneously, as someone else mentioned, the antennae were changed independently and by themselves do not indicate whether an aircraft is MSIP or not.
-
2
-
-
Both the Akan and MRP paints look great (and great builds btw!). Looks like MRP will give you a better recent paint job, whereas Akan looks a bit faded. I would not mind either. I have been increasingly disappointed by Akan's adhesion problems (acrylic) as they always rub off on the edges. They also tend to be a bit darker than they should though clearly not in this Eggplant shade.
Just a head's up: AK has recently come out with its Real Color Air range and includes Eggplant. They are acrylic lacquers but the smell is quite tolerable, not much worse than Gunze's (the H-range, not the much smellier C-range). They also spray beautifully. I love MRP paints but 1) they're expensive and 2) smell god-awful. At least we now have options!
https://ak-interactive.com/product/dark-eggplant-grey-fs-36076-10ml/
-
On 1/30/2019 at 10:07 AM, Harry_the_Spider said:
Don't need any more. Got no space. Got enough for 5 years of building. Got nowhere to put them when they are done.
So, now that I have got that off my chest... Who does the best 1/72 RAF Tornado GR4?
You don't have too many kits, you have too small a home.
-
7 year bump...
Just to chip in with another alternative a bit similar to Giorgio's but quicker:
1) Find an online version of the camo pattern (typically from a site that has the instructions like 1999.co.jp or super-hobby.com) and open it up in any graphics software.
2) Place the built up model over the screen and scale the image to fit the model
3) Place the thickest version of Tamiya tape (40mm) and tape it on your screen over the pattern you will be cutting out
4) Using a SOFT liquid pen (so as to not damage your screen) gently trace the camo pattern on the tape. Most screens should be bright enough that you will be able to easily see the pattern through the tape. Most screens nowadays are also tough enough that you'd really need to press hard on the pen to damage it. I have never had a problem.
5) Carefully remove the tape from your screen and place it on your cutting mat. Cut out the pattern. Ready!
-
1
-
1
-
-
10 hours ago, Giorgio N said:
In these 5 years we've also had a new 1/72 kit from Sword in both high and low back guise
I found them unbearable to build and strongly regretted selling off my AZ kits (which I never got around to building). Suffice to say I binned the one I was building and sold off the other two.
-
On top of accuracy issues, they are also quite expensive, usually a tenner or more for as little as two aircraft and no stencils...
-
2
-
-
FYI the latest Revell reboxing of the Italeri kit has Desert Storm markings. Also unlike many other releases the Hellfire missile decals are actually yellow
-
1
-
1/72 Special Hobby P-40K "Soviet Air Force"
in Ready for Inspection - Aircraft
Posted
Airfix kits aren't exactly shake 'n bake you know...