Robertone139

"Splash the Zeros, I repeat splash the Zeros" 🤣 Building it in 1/144 right here on Britmodeller

Hopefully we get decals for the all historically important VFP-63 detachment aboard USS NIMITZ and CVW-8, the last flight to take a photo of the intact Battleship Row at Pearl Harbor before the Japanese attack on 12/7/1941.

Once only an expensive and complicated conversion project, today (or soon) a welcome straightforward build! I want at least one.

Fujimi also makes two or three British Westland built Sea Kings variants, depends on what you have available.

Tamiya is a perfect match to the D&S 1/72 drawings, while Revell differs exactly where it is deeper than Tamiya. Easily fixed.

I was finally able to compare the Academy and Revell bubbletops, as Revell does not make a comparable razorback. My reference are the D&S drawings, I found the Revell’s fuselage is only too deep right at where the shackles for the drop tank are located, everything else is right on, including the wings outline. That can be easily corrected. Also Academy’s turbocharger outlet is a bit “anemic” and on the skinny side and the general detail is a bit on the light side as compared to Revell’s. For the razorback Academy still looks to skinny around the waist before the tail, but I think the drawings are not accurate as the kit’s fuselage is a better match to the bubbletop drawings. So, Revell is a go. There’s a quite inexpensive M on eBay right now…

Howdy folks, I am on a 1/72 P-47 trip and was wondering how do the Academy and Revell Bubbletops compare, IIRC the belly TC scoop was a bit narrow in one of the twos, I am away from home and have no other access to documentation. Other than Tamiya's Razorback, is Academy better than Hasegawa and is the quick build Hobby Boss acceptable? Love the Bonnie that was flying at Oshkosh and would like to do a heritage pairing for Passionate Patsy after seeing the 310th FS F-16 retro paint job.

Jagtiger implied that the rear pylon of the CH-47A was tapered, while in the later versions like the CH-47D it extends to a point flush with the edge of the rear fuselage and it's flat. I am confused by your initial statement, do you wish to model the NEVER delivered first HC.1? If so then the CH-47A would require no modifications, the later order actually delivered would require the D variant, is that easy.

Best reference is the excellent Aerofax Minigraph.

The tapered rear pylon was abandoned from the CH-47C on, the Chinook HC-1 was based on the C model. The original order based on the CH-47B was never delivered.

Reprofiling the kit blades is not going to cut it (no pun intended) as the new blades have a wider chord a slightly cambered profile and differen root.

Get Revell or Monogram (Revell rebox and easier to find) F-16C, also Revell just reissued their F-16B as D with the required additional sprues but, alas, still missing the bulged main gear doors. For a Greek D block 52 I'd still pick the Kinetic over Hasegawa's.

Of course you should. Hasegawa's prolific family of F-16s is older and far less detailed than the Revell ones and its main gear wells are too short. Revell's family of F-16 is only missing the bulged main gear doors for later blocks and believe it or not is almost parts swappable with Tamiya's little jewel.😉

Very nice paint job, not sure about weapons load accuracy, but hecks, it's a model.

Well done! Notoriously complex camouflage and cool pilot posing. Nothing wrong with your photography either! Plus....it's a Viggen!

Perhaps what became the YF-107 (apparently derived from the F-100B) could have been the 100E? Wings, tailplanes and basic fuselage do pertain to the SuperSabre.

High Planes did release the V1/V3 eons ago.

Hasegawa's F-15EX is nothing more than their F-15SG with new decals. As such is still missing the all important pylons 1 and 9 that are actually available for all the FBW F-15s starting from the F-15SA, then SG, QA and finally the EX.

From TheDrive

Great find, thank you. On a closer look it does seem like an adaptation of one of Tornado's belly pylons.

😳 Are you sure it's 1/72? Amazing paint job!

Lovely model, I wish there was a way to mix Arma's engine and gear detail with Airfix's folding wings detail. Your build is very realistic.

There's a base of history there, ever heard of the Candy Bomber ?

Yes I have one and perhaps it is my opinion, however, as an aircraft that was designed in the mid to late 90s without a real mission requirement rather than the one to keep the Italian aerospace industry afloat, the AMX never had a real load carrying capability. It's radius of action without IFR (in flight refueling for you) and anything above 1,000lbs (that is 2 Mk.82s or equivalent) of weapons load would make it only useful for CAS. The basic mission involved the use of 6 x 500 lb Mk 82 bombs over a distance of 180 NM (about the distance from Rome to just south of Naples) , to be flown at low or very low altitude at high-subsonic speeds (over 900 km/h). We could spend hours discussing Italy's obsession with subpar British powerplant solutions (and sense of humour), yet a GE F-404 would have been an ideal solution for this aircraft , even without AB (reheat for you Brits) As far as the model is concerned, it's a model, so feel free to slap as much ordnance as you can on it for all of the 4 underwing and the single (although sled capable) under fuselage pylon, it does not need to be real. But as far as the real aircraft is concerned, Mk.82s, GBU-38s, GBU-12s (no more than 2 though) as Italy mindset never was capable of outgrowing the G-91 unless working with others on an airframe that came to cost almost as much as an F-16.