Retired Bob

Hi Warren Same for me, loved the look of this aircraft and bought four, yes 4 when it came out in the 80s (Microscale decal sheet with 4 x options) They and several hundred other kits followed me around the UK and Germany during my RAF career, anyway enough about that. Eduard have just bought out several etched sets for this model and @billn53 did a superb build of this kit not long ago, if I was not up to my eyeballs in half built kits I would be dusting off one of mine to start. Good modelling, hope it goes well.

Hi Dennis, @Corsairfoxfouruncle I have read through your wip, there are some nice photos on that site, decisions, decisions. But I must finish some of the kits that I have already started first, but I've said that before.

Loverly Ardvark, nice to see one of these.

That is a beautiful looking Hunter, Now stop it, it makes me want one and my stash is too big already.

Hi Dennis, I am a big fan of the mighty Phantom and have a lot of books. The one that brought my attention to the Louisiana ANG was Colors & Markings Vol 3 of the F4C by Bert Kinzey, it showed normal wrap-around camouflage aircraft plus the two tone gray aircraft, but it did not mention that they were painted like that for Red Flag. So I Googled Louisiana ANG and found out more from an AirForce site that included the photo, I was hoping for FS paint numbers and upper wing shots, if I was really lucky some underside details. But apart from the fact that they were painted just for Red Flag in a temporary camouflage scheme, plus the controversy over the squadron nickname, not much else. I obtained the Caracal decal sheet #CD48038 for ANG F4s but it does not mention these temporary markings, but it does have the squadron nickname both in black and white. So that is what I have and know, so if you have found out some more information I would be happy receive it as I have an Academy F4C or two waiting in the stash. Bob.

They are formation lights, They were fitted new to F4Es and F4Js and their developments F4Gs and F4Ss. They were then refitted to F4Cs and F4Ds. I am going to build this aircraft in 1/48th. The full markings are on a Caracal sheet. As mentioned this was a temporary camouflage for Red Flag, and each aircraft was different.

I can only imagine it would mean a separate compartment, older designs would have had more than one compartment, but they may have contained the same type of fuel. Because the fuel was pumped out there were several outlets that can be selected by valves, if you ever look at a the "workings" of one of these vehicles, there is amaze of pipework, valves and controls to route the fuel to different outlets and through different size pipes at different pressures.

The overhead booms carry small hoses used for filling by "open line" with a trigger nozzle much like at a petrol station. When filling say a Spitfire, it has several tanks between 40 to 60 gallons and they are filled individually, with top fill opening caps. (just like filling your car) There are larger hoses to deliver larger quantities, modern aircraft have a single pressure refuelling point, you attach a large hose by pressure coupling and fill all the fuel tanks at usually 50 pounds of pressure, 200 litres a minute. The fuel tanker pumps the fuel through a choice of several valve controlled hoses to deliver to different aircraft. Hope this makes sense.

They are called emco hatches, all tankers have at least one, depending on how many compartments they have, it allows entry into the tank for cleaning and inspection (empty and purged of fumes) Some tankers have multi compartments where different fuels can be carried, and each compartment would have an entry hatch, not to be confused with internal baffles to prevent liquid surge when the vehicle is moving. they are not generally used for filling anymore because of environmental concerns. Guess what I used to drive?

That is just the sort of pattern of furniture the MoD would supply for your married quarter, sofa, disruptive pattern, sitting for the use of. That would be the stores speak or nomenclature to describe it. As for the wall paper, obviously three ducks were not enough.

Bill, not wanting to waste any plastic, you could always do a Sherman tank on a set of white wall tyres (sorry, tires) with chrome hub caps.

Pete, the data link pod was pointy end forward, the bulbous rear received the picture signal from the TV guided missile and transmitted the commands back to it. The receiver and command transmitter were in the back of the pod because after launching the missile the aircraft did a 180 degree turn, away from the "danger zone" It could only operate one missile at a time. Your picture is indeed a TV Martel training simulator, used to train the back seater to "fly" the missile towards the target. It did not control the aircraft, the pilot simulated the missile attack profile on the "target" ship. The pointy Anti Radar missile, once it obtained the operating radar signal was a fire and forget weapon, and could not be controlled after launch. With an airburst proximity fuse in the large blast warhead, as it dived on to the target it detonated, blasting away all the aerials on the ship leaving it "blind" so that the TV missiles with their armour piercing warheads could sink it. Both missile types were replaced by the Sea Eagle missile by 1990. Bob

There are many ways to put the wheels and tracks onto the tank, whatever way you decide is fine, but you always end up needing three hands. Thank you, I hope I can keep building models for another 25 years, I might finish all the ones I have bought.

Only if your house catches fire.

I'm sure they will fit, as long as they are not all glued together. I make the top and bottom sections of track links apart, paint them, and when the wheels are ready attach the track sections together. This is what I am working on now.......not a T-34.