CT7567

Probably an exception to the rule somewhere in the multitude of variants and conversions, but generally the difference in windows being present or not is how they were delivered - i.e. the windows were there or not, it was not a case of openings being "blanked off" in the sense that any outline would be visible on the exterior.

Well if you're doing a Falklands-era model, what you need is actually Extra Dark Sea Grey - originally over white undersides, which were painted over on the way south toward the conflict zone. Overall Dark Sea Grey replaced the EDSG/White scheme as the new standard post-Falklands.

So in Russia... defect marries you? I was fortunate and both of my Zvezda Herks have unbowed windscreens, but one suggestion in addition to the advice above for self-repair would be dipping the part in hot (not boiling) water before *gently* bending back to its intended shape. Most clear styrene is more brittle than any "solid" version because the formulation doesn't allow for the "resilient" elements of the typical chemical mix. Softening the prt before bending should help improve flexibility and reduce the risk of cracking.

By no means an expert either, but the "major task" @frapes75 refers to is, I believe, true only if you are trying to replicate the late configuration/full standard "Peace Icarus 2000" upgrades which were the final Phantoms in Greek service. While the 3-tone "Aegean Ghost" scheme was unique to upgraded airframes, early in the program (begun circa 1997) there were definitely some airframes that wore the new scheme but did not have all of the mods seen later in service. When 71751 attended the 2000 RIAT she wore the 3-tone grays but did not have the nose IFF modification. For modeling purposes it was a standard F-4E with the following features: - Slatted wing - Slotted stabilators - TISEO camera mounted to the port wing leading edge - DECM antennae on the forward intake "shoulders" (these are similar to the US Navy F-4J/N/S ALQ-126 antennae, a unique feature of Greek F-4Es from delivery) I can't speak to the belly AIM-7 launchers being reconfigured for AIM-120 at the time, but I'm not sure how visible the difference actually is - and of course if you load AMRAAMs in the bays, no need to worry what the launch mechanisms look like 😄 Similarly I can't speak to any cockpit upgrades, but those would be fairly straightforward to represent, especially if you opt to close the cockpit.

Looks like that's the sprue map for the F-16F two-seater, which features the enlarged dorsal spine running full length from the cockpit to the tail (Sprue U plus some other parts). The F-16E single-seater tail base is sprue R: https://www.1999.co.jp/eng/m/image/10144510

Common and often-repeated inaccuracy: Heller's original Hawkeye kit was actually a reboxing of the Lee clone of Fujimi's dated tooling. Fujimi's E-2 tooling was originally released as an E-2B and has been updated to a C and several times with various changes in the parts breakdown. Lee's kit was a close copy of one of Fujimi's releases, but the parts arrangement on the sprues and other details such as primary panel line depth/width are distinct to the Lee release and Heller reboxing. [Source: I have Heller, Lee, and multiple Fujimi boxings in my stash]

Obviously would need better photos to confirm, but before I read your comment my interpretation of what's shown is a unique variation of the white over green scheme, with the "light blue" simply being the effects of lighting and subtle shadows. It appears the engine block and lower fuselage (from the rear "crease" line) are solid white with green stripes remaining only in the area between. I can't fathom a reason for using a third color so subtly different for a temporary scheme.

The USAF Museum recently repainted the X-32 prototype and posted the work in progress on Instagram. I noticed someone commented there asking about the FS 595 shade of gray used 😄

The kit plastic for this release was still based on the Strike Eagle demonstrator - 71-291, originally built as one of the prototype TF-15As (better known as F-15Bs). She famously wore the unique Euro I style camo and literal "airshow load" of CBUs that Hasegawa represents at the 1980 Farnborough Airshow There was never a prototype Strike Eagle in the traditional sense, as the initial production models pretty well matched what was put into service as outlined above. From the time they first rolled off the factory floor all Strike Eagles had several notable differences from the A-D models, most notably: - CFTs with a single longitudinal and three tangential pylons each side (the F-15C 'FAST Packs' and later CFTs have some subtle shape differences, and later in production the tangential pylon shapes changed slightly but they were never anything like the Demonstrator MER configuration). - Clip load gun ammunition system with a hexagonal fairing on the underside near centerline - The enlarged tires noted above required bulges to the main gear doors - Nose gear strut also has some detail differences unique to Strike variants - In addition to the "featherless" exhaust nozzles (removed on most A-D models well before the E existed), the E was the first type to eliminate the wedge shaped aerodynamic tailhook fairing between the exhausts, a blank vertical plate terminating at the base of the nozzles and the hook end left exposed (this was later adopted by C/D models) - The fairings at the ends of the horizontal stabilizer mounts originally terminated in angular points, but Strikes had ECM antennae added (rounded cylinder or a 'chisel' shape, one or both sides, depending on variant and timeframe) Hasegawa has eventually picked up pretty much all of these details using additional sprues, but any older boxings (and other kits from Airfix, Academy, Italeri, and others) are likely to miss some/all of these features.

The thermal protective coating is standard for all bomb types carried aboard U.S. ships, so it would be an unusual exception for a deployed Marine F-35's ordnance to *not* have the coating. Note there is nothing otherwise physically different about "protected" vs "unprotected" ordnance with respect to the bomb assemblies - e.g. a GBU-12 can have a protected or unprotected 500 lb bomb as its warhead. From a modeling standpoint aside from the coating, the protected ordnance also has multiple stripes on the nose (vs. single ring on unprotected), so this would be noticeable on "dumb" bombs; however, most if not all of the guidance section assemblies (GBU, JDAM) cover the nose stripes so the coating is the only visible difference with those types.

For modeling purposes, the only significant differences between the Block 40 and Block 50 would be the stores carried and the larger holographic HUD on the Block 40 (obviously not an external feature, and only noticeable in scale to someone that knows what they're looking at). In USAF service the Block 40 was unofficially referenced as the "F-16CG" and would be more likely to carry LANTIRN pods on the chin stations, while Block 50 "F-16CJs" were usually tasked with the Wild Weasel role and carried the ASQ-213 HARM Targeting System pod (originally to starboard only). Later upgrades have brought these to a largely common standard (the "F-16CM").

Savin you some Google-fu, here's the Begemot Su-27K/Su-33 Page which includes a link to their full instructions in PDF format with FS 595 equivalents and common hobby paints in the color table at the end. As @tsepajev noted, the Moskit was never carried operationally but Begemot's sheets (available in 1:72 or 1:48) include the pre-production demonstrators that were displayed with the missile loaded if you want to replicate the real "airshow load," or line birds from the Kusnetsov if you prefer a "might have been."

Caracal Decals did a USAF C-130 Sheet that includes the gray MAC shields, unfortunately now OOP but you may be able to find a distributor that still has them in stock. If the color versions will work, check the same manufacturer's C-135 Generic Markings set which includes both "high viz" and "low viz" variants (with/without the white background to the shields).

Can't confirm if this is a new tool or rebox of Revell's, but the best single-source site for information on "Braille scale" armor kits I've found is https://www.onthewaymodels.com/

As reported elsewhere Round 2 has acquired the license to issue new and revised Star Wars kits including many of the MPC classic kits dating back to "a long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away...." Now it's been reported that one of the forthcoming updates will be the iconic Han Solo's Millennium Falcon with corrected sidewall parts based on the aftermarket upgrades available via Shapeways by "308 Bits" Instagram Link While no doubt this kit will never match, much less surpass, the FineMolds or Bandai Perfect Grade kits, this should be a welcome improvement to a classic kit at a much more affordable price point.

Zvezda's C-130 kits are by far the most accurate and detailed 1:72 Herks currently available, so the short answer to your 'starting point' question is 'yes.' I'm not immediately familiar with the specific details of the variants you want to model, but the Zvezda kits released to date offer four models: C-130H - basic transport variant, the late production standard of the 'first generation' design with 4-bladed propellers C-130J - 'next generation' transport, most notable upgrade being the 6-bladed scimitar props, with other detail differences C-130J-30 - similar to the C-130J with a stretched fuselage for added cargo capacity AC-130J 'Ghostrider' - gunship variant of the C-130J, with variant-specific mods to the fuselage The tooling is designed to allow swapping parts between variants, so for example if you wanted a stretched 'first generation' variant, you can combine the C-130J-30 fuselage with the C-130H wings, engines, and details (and would have a complete 'short body' C-130J left over). I mention this because I know the USMC operates both standard and stretched variants. Most C-130 conversion kits available were designed for the Italeri tooling (best of the previous offerings before Zvezda was released), but many parts would still be usable on the Zvezda kit.

I think this is only partly true. Be mindful that there are a couple of Revell releases from circa early/mid 1990s for an HC.1/CH-47D that are actually reboxes of the Matchbox kit, well before the Italeri tooling existed. (For the record the Matchbox kit is reportedly the most acccurate in shapes, though typical of its brand and vintage with respect to detail). The post-2000 Revell Chinook kits are indeed reboxings of the Italeri kit (reportedly with updates made at some point), however to the best of my knowledge these have only been for the MH-47E special operations variant with the expanded sponsons. I believe all of these kits do include the necessary parts for a 'vanilla' HC version though, since Italeri's basic approach to the MH-47 was tooling what amounts to an injection-molded conversion set rather than an alternate fuselage with replacement parts as such.

When this has come up periodically in the past there has been fairly widespread consensus that Mr Color's rendition of the F-2 "ocean scheme" colors is a good match. (Thread) For a reasonable starting point in more readily available standards, the lighter blue is close to FS 35109 and the darker is near FS 35045. Also keep in mind photos can frequently skew the intensity of the blue hues, so if mixing to match be sure you are following photo(s) that have other colors in the image to check color balance.

Nothing listed at all on Scalemates for 1:48, the 1:72 kits are the largest they report. The Revell kit is certainly superior, but given its age and relative simplicity there's nothing fundamentally flawed about the Heller version. Raised panel lines and "snap together" fit, but without the gross compromises this often entails for smaller subjects. I actually have both the Revell transport and the Heller Gabriel in the stash, and have considered swapping the ECM parts as a conversion but don't feel I would need to throw the base kit away. Note Revell have released a couple of later boxings with alternate parts for the late-production "NG" and EloKa self-defense mods, not included in the first issue.

This thread over on ARC is 3 years old so the link may be gone, but post #4 on page 1 includes a dropbox reference to Pave Tack drawings. The thread includes several images and some discussion that may be moderately helpful. Also, for purposes of checking your outline you can look for underside photos of an F-111C in flight (easier to find than F-111Fs since the latter were retired before digital photography was ubiquitous). Other than the RF-111C conversions I believe all the Aussie Varks in later service had Pave Tack fitted.

Judging from the spine I'm fairly certain that is a 9.13S ("Fulcrum C"), which combined with the white nose cone and what seems to be the original standard, albeit weathered, camouflage scheme, I see no reason to think this isn't one of Ukraine's own. Can't assist with more photos or a bort number, but the photo of 'White 19' at the top of this article shows a similar airframe and markings (sans sharkmouth) in recent Ukrainian service.

I believe the exhaust configuration Italeri modeled is only correct for the original 'Supercobra' prototype, which was designated as "AH-1T+" rather than AH-1W (obviously to confound Googling 40 years later 😄). Despite its striking color scheme, I don't think this has ever been offered in anything but 1:35 scale for the Academy/Fujimi kit.

No complaint about seeing this kit back on the market (hopefully refurbished, and likely more affordable than Academy or Tamiya), but if they're going to market it for an F-16A or MLU scheme it would be good if they at least added an A-model vertical tail. Looks like that test build just cut the forward blade antenna off the C-model parts. 🤔

Whatever lease/purchase of ESCI molds happened after AMT/Ertl gave them up, the molds that were produced (or updated) by AMT after it acquired ESCI are also still in existence. The KC-135 family was an original AMT production, not ESCI, and in current production via Italeri. Same for the Ju-88, produced by AMT (likely from unfinished work by ESCI). Later - circa 200 AMTech (a standalone company) used AMT/ESCI toolings to produce new variants of types like the Ju-88S and EC-135N, but AFAIK none of the Ju-88s have been in production for at least 15 years or so. Other AMT molds - including licensed properties like Star Wars & Star Trek - are still being. produced (with some updates) by Round 2. Steering back to Phantoms, the ESCI J(UK) boxing (kit 9045, labeled as 'RAF Phantom / F-4S') and the Ertl reboxing F-4S (kit 8692) are the only versions of this tooling that I'm aware of to include all parts needed for the S version in one kit. The Italeri C/D/J "Phantom Aces" boxing doesn't include slats or ALQ-126 parts.

With the goal of an S in mind, worth noting that the J boxings (by ESCI, AMT, or now Italeri for their C/D/J) do not typically include the outboard slat parts - as seen on the Scalemates photo of the J/S sprues, these are separate pieces on an offshoot from the lower wing sprue, and gated off (or did not yet exist) for most, likely all, C/D/J production. Similar to the notes above, you could cross-kit the slats and inboard actuators from an ESCI E/F kit to a J and have an unslatted E left over, but this is still doing it the hard way if you can't get a Hasegawa (and you're unsatisfied with Italeri).