Tiger331
-
Posts
1,854 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Events
Profiles
Forums
Media Demo
Posts posted by Tiger331
-
-
Hi there,
Looking for some help with references. I want to build the new Trumpeter MiG 23 Flogger but would prefer to finish it in natural metal (or silver whatever) rather than the overall Light Grey scheme in the kit. The trouble is, I cannot find much in the way of reference as to whether those that entered Service with the Soviet Air Force did so in natural metal (or painted aluminium or some other silver colour) or whether they sported the light grey scheme from the get go.....Any advice (preferably with references) gratefully received.
Mark
-
Yeap the fact that the 1/72nd Model Alliance sheet sold out is a good indicator of the popularity of the subject matter. We could really do with a decent sheet that covers all the FAA marking options rather than just 892.
Oh yes got the book, had Patrick sign it at SMW on the Friday night and was very impressed with it, Hopefully as the book is sanctioned by Airdoc that they will eventually produce decal sheets for the FAA and UK RAF units in the same standard as they did their RAFG Phantoms
Watch this space !...
-
I've got both types (Yellow Bird and Oil Rig). The Oil Rig has vinyl tyres, open aux intake doors and droppable airbrakes. Apart from that they are identical.
Not necessarily.......The very early issues were slightly different. They had shallow auxiliary intakes, not so well detailed exhaust nozzles and other less sophisticated details. Shortly after the first releases (late 1980s) Fujimi did a limited re-tool which improved certain features.....problem was, they did not (initially) change the box art so you would need to check the box contents very carefully. Some years later they started doing limited re-issues with revised box art (such as the kit shown earlier in the thread) and the RAF 'Black Mike' version of the FG.1....these, along with the very latest re-issues, all have the better features. As my co-respondent says, go for aftermarket decals.....Model Alliance did a nice set for FAA FG.1s but again, be careful.....they switched printers for the re-print (which vastly improved the quality of the decals.....the first batch were not so good)...
Hope this helps
Tiger331
-
Nice job.....brought back memories of my childhood in Singapore.....frequently viewed RSAF BAC 167 Strikemasters and Hunter FGA.74s at both Tengah and Changi in the mid-1970s. I remember going to one of their first Open Days/Air Shows in the mid-1970s at Changi and seeing some formation aerobatics from four Strikemasters......long before the Black Knights formed. I have a couple of these kits in the 'stash' and hope to do RSAF and RNZAF examples to relive those happy days in the Far East.
Thanks for sharing your completed model for inspiration
Tiger331
-
I must agree with my co-respondents.......it is going to be quite difficult to reproduce this effect and these Hunters were very scruffy during their last few years of Service. I was fortunate enough to get a trip in WV318, one of the jets in the photo, that was then on the strength of 208 Sqn (although I flew with 12 Sqn) and it was very patchy. You definitely need to end up with the heavily weathered (used) parts of the jet in semi-gloss....the areas around the cockpit entry points, over the wings and upper fuselage were particularly susceptible given the amount of human 'activity' (clambering around the airframe pre and post-flight) and the various oils/lubricants that flowed out with a disconcerting fluidity !. Incidentally, I re-visited Lossiemouth for the Buccaneer Finale a year later and WV318 was resplendent in an overall semi-gloss finish....I understand the ground crew gave her one last polish for the day before she retired to Delta Jets down at Kemble. So, if your weathering attempts fail, you can always take an easier option but then, thats not what modelling is about, is it ?!.
Good luck....
Tiger331
-
For Trumpeter (with their breakdown) to do the T.11 would mean a whole new kit where Ali could make a new nose forwards of the firewall and new fins. There is some serious braking going on with those NZ Vampires!
John
John
RE your last point.....maybe that's why the gentlemen in the penultimate photo has one of those "phew, we got away with that" looks as he holds his head in his hands whilst walking away...!
Tiger331
-
Horrido109
Great build.....I'm particularly grateful for confirmation regarding the suitability of the Aires/Pavla detail sets for this particular kit.
I had bought these sets for the aforementioned Heller kit and was considering ditching them since I'm now going to embark on building the lesser of the two evils so to speak, since I had already picked up on the fit issues with the Kinetic family of M2000s......still a slightly better deal than the now-dated Heller/Eduard versions.
Thanks again for the info and congrats on the build
Tiger331
-
1
-
-
Yep......It's a real puzzle since the Aviation Megastore in Amsterdam had a consignment just before Christmas. I've ordered all of mine (in the absence of getting them from the UK) from Hong Kong and they work out at around £46 each.....Hobbylink Japan were recently listing is as 'Discontinued' !.....Not sure if they had had a dispute with GWH over distribution but I've just ordered the '9-13' through HLJ so maybe they sorted it. It's conceivable that the first batch sold out but they are clearly onto the second batch since the inner packaging on my most recent kit has been changed....They now encase the upper fuselage moulding in a neat little cardboard box, which has replaced the card 'top tray' seen on the earlier kits. As I understand it, GWH are imported into the UK by the Airbrush Company so maybe you should contact them for clarification.
HTH
-
Scheduled for release end of May/Early June although it's not clear which location (Far East or Europe)....judging by the mis-aligned release of the Kittyhawk Mirage F.1B (should have been in Europe in late January and its now first week of March) could be July/August before we see it here.
Tiger331
-
Hi there,
You know, I would have sworn that I had seen photos of 57th FIS Eagles regularly flying without the conformal fuel tanks but I've just scanned some of my references and they all show the jets with the CFTs !.....I'll keep checking for you but you may need to invest in some.....I'm not sure they are the same type found on the F-15E.....If they are, you may be in luck as several kit manufacturers include them in their F-15E/K variants and I think Wolfpack do them too.
HTH
Mark
-
1
-
-
By your description that the same BB pit I have. Big LOX or Nitrogen/hydraulic cylinder thingy.
Julien
Yep.......sounds very similar.....Do you see the disparity between the actual resin and the drawing (or maybe I have the wrong instruction sheet - although everything else looks OK....with the possible exception of the throttle)...
Thanks for your continued interest
Mark
-
I have looked in all my F-8 material and cant find a pic of this area behind the seat.
Its quite often masked by the bulkhead in the canopy frame behind the seat.
Black box always seemed accurate to me though.
Julien
Julien,
I'm not really questioning the accuracy of the Black Box products....As you correctly state, they tend to be very accurate...the issue is whether what I have in the box is actually the right pit, given that it does not match up with the diagram in the instruction sheet. The pit features a quite distinctive 'bridge' forward of the rudder pedals and a quite extensive rear decking (with some kind of LOX bottle or similar). Neither of these features are shown in the accompanying instruction sheet....
Cheers
Mark
-
First one ordered earlier today.....It will be finished in Royal Norwegian AF markings to reflect the fact that Sola-Stavanger is my nearest military/civil airfield and the type used to fly from there in the 1950s.
Mark
-
I've just dusted off a potential project and I'm looking through all the aftermarket bits to complete it. One of the items is the Black Box F-8E Crusader cockpit detail set for the Hasegawa kit (Item BBCS48073). I've had to do some minor repairs to the resin that broke off in the packaging but on inspecting the parts against the instructions there appears to be a major mis-match between the actual resin tub and that shown in the drawing. The tub is far more extensive than that shown on the drawing (in particular the area behind the ejection seat). I've yet to measure the item up against the intended kit but it was bought new. If it was second hand I may have more inclined to think that it had swopped out, either accidentally or deliberately. Has anyone used one of these sets and experienced similar problems ?. Do Black Box instruction sheets have a reputation for not being particularly accurate ?.....
Thanks for any assistance you can provide.
Mark
-
According to Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikoyan-Gurevich_MiG-23) 'it was essentially identical to Soviet MiG-23M' and reading through it looks like it is almost the same as the 'MS', 'MP'.
As I understand it, the only major external difference between the M and the MF is the canopy framing. The MF variant has a metal frame running down the centre of the main canopy, effectively dividing the glazing into two parts....on the M variant this is not present with only the mirror assembly 'disturbing' an otherwise clean cockpit canopy. that said, I'm sure there will be somevminor differences with aerials etc too.
Mark
-
PM sent re Starfighter
-
THanks to you all for the kind comments. I'm on a bit of a bare-metal-finish run at the moment. Anyone know where I can get a 1/48 Hasegawa Starfighter?
Mark,
I may be able to help out. Ill send you a PM. BTW nice build, I've had one of these on the go for several years and just never got around to finishing it off....don't know why since it's an easy build......Your example may just prompt me to dig it out. I was originally going to do a Yugoslavian example withba large black shark motif on the nose but i'm now very tempted by one of the Greek Air Force schemes off the new Icarus decal sheet....decisions.....decisions !
Anyway....well done
Mark
-
Nice job.......you have captured the look of this machine very well. Brings back memories of clambering over one of these in Cyprus in 1973. The USMC had been sent in to cover some evacuations of civilians from the Lebanon and deployed (IIRC) a couple of Phrogs, a Ch-53 and acouple of AH-1s. They were parked up at the British Army base at Dhekalia and the Americans kindly invited those that they had disturbed with their night flying to have a look over the, then, exotic aircraft which we had only ever seen on TV footage from the Vietnam war.
Well done !
-
1
-
-
Flightpath do a detail set for 1/48th Jaguar as well as separate weapon sets, including dumb bombs, CBU-87 and BL755 that would all do for a GRANBY aircraft. I've no experience of their 1/48 stuff but if it's as good a their 1/72 range then you won't be disappointed. Belcher Bits do some CRV7 pods as part of a detail set for CF-5.
It is Ordnance by the way
George
Chris,
I'll second this.....I've just taken delivery of the Flightpath set. I didn't realise it had as much in the pack as there is. You get a pair of resin drop tanks (nicely moulded) with photoetched fins etc, a TIALD pod and a replacement AN/ALQ-101 ECM Pod, as carried in the Gulf. You also get replacement over-wing AIM-9L rails (albeit sized for the Airfix kit and not the eagerly anticipated Italeri/Kittyhawk Jaguars), two white metal/photoetched AIM-9L missiles and an ACMI pod, also commonly seen on the RAF Jags. All of these items originate from the PP Aeroparts stable (although some were never released under that label) so their quality and accuracy are assured. David has very wisely continued to produce them. Model Alliance had also started to produce some 1:48 scale ordnance to compliment their quite extensive 1:72 selection but sadly they went out of business before the range really established itself and they are very difficult items to source.
HTH
Mark
-
Hi Folks,
Recently bought a Black Box 1:48 AV-8B Harrier II resin cockpit detail set to fit to a Hasegawa kit. I've just discovered that I have bought one designed for the Monogram kit
. Anyone tried to fit one of these to a Hasegawa kit ?. Is it an easy job or should I give it up and persevere with an Aires tub...?...really don't get on with Aires stuff after my recent experiences with both the A-4 and F-104G Cockpit sets. Any advice gratefully received.
Mark
-
Hi Laurent ... no wonder here !
For me only the SHAPE counts. Only when the shape looks ok I go further !. I don't care about the number of rivets or number of parts we will never see once the model finished !.
CAD can be wonderful or a real disaster.
At this stage this kit is a real disaster. You don't need CAD to see where a nosewheel should come. Just need to wash the sh.. some people have got in the eyes , or maybe just have a little interest in what you are doing.
This kit is not a Mirage but a flying banana ! Dassault should prosecute KH.
You can feel the guy behind this kit has no idea of what he is doing. He just want to sell kits for kids, nice toys maybe , no scale models.The Jaguar is no exception ! Just look at the wing. Must have been drawn by a blind one ( computer ! )..
I sure won't spend my money on this Computer pieces of crap. I've got the ESCI kits and a lot of aftermarket (F.M) to improve it.
The same for the Jaguar kit.
If you want to feel the difference between "amateur" and "pro " model making look at the new GWH MiG-29 ( it's a modeller's soul work , with CAD backup , and not the contrary ! )
Technology will NEVER replace the human eyesight and hand , it can only help in some situation.
If modellism goes on this way we will soon be back in the fifties but thanks to CAD and 3D printers the result will be beautiful to the eye but totally wrong !.Who cares ...we are living the century of the false prophets ...Just the image and money counts!.
Of course , reviewer will write lines and lines about all what we don't need ( the colour and quality of the plastic,the number of parts , the scale, the raised or recessed panel lines and, more important , the fact that we can look through the glazed parts or not , the shape of the box, the quality of the plastic bag in which the canopy is wrapped, the way the decals are printed and by who. One thing is sure , they won't tell you whether the model is right or not . There are no reviewers anymore , there is just a bunch of advertisers. It's high time they stop taking us for fools .
O.K. this may sounds a little harsch , totally subjective , incomplete , untrue for some , but this is really the mood I am in for the moment !
Madcop.
P.S. If only we could associate Bill Koster, Petr Buchar and other talented model designers with CAD tech , we would be saved.
Madcop
Your rather offensive rant achieves very little. As a previous corespondent has already said, why not save your energies for explaining what is precisely wrong with this kit. I've studied a fair few Mirage F.1s in my time, having regularly worked alongside them, and I have to say that I'm finding it difficult to have serious issue with what I see. I can see a few issues with shape but nothing that appears too bad in my eyes and, once again, 'we' are all judging the kit before it actually arrives in our hands !. It is certainly way better than the previous FM kit so there has to be progress.
Moving on, I also do take great umbrage at your sweeping generalizations concerning reviewers and particularly those on this website. If you want to take a moderated 'pop' at some of the reviewers that populate our (UK) printed modelling media then fair enough....I too have watched in dismay as the vast majority of our modelling magazines have become glorified monthly kit, accessory, and decal catalogues with poorly researched articles and rather shallow and often inaccurate reviews. Fortunately we have some lively internet forums and whilst we sometimes have to temper our considerations and opinions there is very often a healthy balance between the normally very comprehensive initial reviews (such as that just posted on BM for the Meng ME 410 B-1) and those that take the time and trouble to conduct build reviews.....these are extremely valuable given the 'virtual' way in which they develop and often lead to others highlighting inaccuracies etc (such as with the current Kittyhawk Jaguar A build review) .....so please do not have a go at 'our' reviewers (and I am not one of them). Please respect the time and trouble they take to help us all. I respectfully suggest you use your energy to highlight shortcomings to the various magazine titles out there....
Tiger 331 (Mark)
-
2
-
-
Not my scale but Ive been asked to make one.....Can you tell me the best kit of a F-15C Eagle in 1:144 scale ?
Many thanks
Tiger331
-
Some Chinese manufacturers are involved in a race to be the first who releases such and such kits. It's a "lose-lose" situation for me. It's bad for the kind of customer who expects the kit to give the most accurate replica of a real subject. It is bad because no other manufacturer will release a kit of the same subject. It's bad for the manufacturer because the moulds cannot be modified if an error is made. I believe that Song is working on too many projects at the same time and that he should ask a third-party to check the shapes of the CAD model before any tooling is made. Song is caught between the anvil (project planning timetable, urge to develop KH's catalog) ans several hammers (the guys for whom shape accuracy is important, the guys who want another version of the aircraft, language barrier limiting communication, culture of secrecy, etc). I'm sure that things aren't easy for him and I don't blame him but something has to change IMHO: I think that KH is currently loosing 20-30% potential customers not understanding what many expect. How many customers want an engine or PE spoilers ?
Don't forget that the Esci has at least one unfixable problem: the flat glass of the windscreen is much too wide and this makes the windscreen way too wide. I think that the KH kits will be better in this area.
Laurent's comments at the beginning of this post are, quite possibly, THE most sensible I have ever read on this website and completely echo my own sentiments. Look at the fiasco with the Hobbyboss Tornado family....though thankfully Revell now seem to be willing to take the risk of developing and releasing a hopefully more accurate Tornado (IDS at least). Whatever anyone says, the market is 'overheated' at present with far too many subjects being released at too fast a rate. Quantity does not mean quality and given the main market for these kits (middle-aged enthusiasts) who demand accuracy, something has to give. Like Laurent, I do not blame Mr Song or his compatriots working for other companies....they should be left the time necessary to properly research their product and deliver a high quality item that is 95% accurate (they need to leave some room for the aftermarket manufacturers !)....oh and lets have less of these open panels, spoilers etc...... There is only a fraction of the market that really want these. They are an unnecessary expense.
Mark
-
2
-
-
Hi Dave, that was my thougth exactly, don't do Crab fighters etc, but why stick a chopper in the mix? Unles the fighter guys are willing to give the merlin set away.
Do fighter, do choppers, keep em seperate. We don't cross dress, as it were!
Colin
Its called 'variety' and these sheets seem to have done well in the past and there are quite a few others out there doing them, with a mix of fast jet and rotary wing etc. A lot of Hannants 'standard' Xtradecals range focus on single-type subjects and whilst they clearly sell well these are not to everyones' taste. I would suggest that having a second range that is distinctly different from their main one adds another string to their bow. As some on this thread have suggested, there is a healthy market in trading part-used decal sheets and I suspect some will resort to this. I doubt the sheets will bomb since quite a few seem to like variety rather than a sheet that offers 15-20 Phantoms, Hornets or Vipers.
. Anyone tried to fit one of these to a Hasegawa kit ?. Is it an easy job or should I give it up and persevere with an Aires tub...?...really don't get on with Aires stuff after my recent experiences with both the A-4 and F-104G Cockpit sets.
Soviet era MiG 23 Flogger - Natural Metal schemes ?
in Aircraft Cold War
Posted
Not according to the Russian book (with English captions) I have on the MiG 23....They are definitely not Grey..it's just the colour photos are not that great when it comes to picking up the markings....which is what I am really after...
Cheers