NorthBayKid

I don't think Paul is going to return to business as it was before the fire. He's having health issues that may force him into retirement.

The problem with that is that the Hasegawa cowlings are wrong as well. The side intakes are not symmetrical on the Hasegawa parts as they are on the real aircraft, and they are also too small and shallow.

That’s the only system an F-4J was capable of using. The USAF versions had a boom receptacle on the spine.

The Iranians have a thriving industry producing all the parts in they need.

Yes, the yellow area is primered metal. The 737 fin is still built the same way it was in 1967.

The kit comes with LED lighting, although it's very bright white and not really appropriate for the incandescent lighting used in 1912. The Facebook threads have talked about ways to either replace them with warmer white LEDs, or possibly give them a thin overpaint of off white or tan paint to warm up the colour. I can confirm that the angle of the stem (bow) is correct according to photos and plans of the real ship. I think they took a shellacking when they showed their original test shots and completely re-tooled the hull. I don't see any evidence that they hacked out the bow area and re-did it (you should be able to see a faint joint line on the inside of the hull), but the production part looks much more like the real ship. I was ready to chuck this one if they hadn't fixed that, since it threw the whole look of the ship off. Happy they did!

BAC 51519 is a custom mix (the "BAC" is a Boeing-specific code) used to get aircraft paint that matches the corporate colour specs that the livery designers came up with (Pantone 654). The colour scheme springs from that, not the other way round.

Anyone else tackling this monster? Mine arrived in the Great White North today - it’s HUGE! I’ve been following a couple of threads on Facebook and there is some great information on what needs to be done to her. It’s going to be impressive!

The US FS595 colours do not have names. Any names attached to them are attached by someone other than the US government. The whole point of the exercise when the 595 system was implemented in the 1950s was to eliminate the confusion caused by different names for the same colour, differing standards, etc. Be all that as it may, none of the Delta jets I’ve seen with my own eyes look anything like the blue that I’ve seen with my own eyes on Blue Angels F-18s. Delta’s blue (per the colour standard I posted) is much darker.

I looked at doing that many years ago. Doesn't look too difficult with some sheet plastic and putty.

It being fixable isn't the issue. With a one-second glance at images of the model anyone who has ever looked at a Tiggie can see that the nose is utterly unlike the real thing, so why, in the age of LIDAR scans and CAD design, should they have got it so badly wrong? We shouldn't need to fix an issue like that. I hope Mr. Adams had a hand in getting it right!

This is a photo I took at Pima Air Museum of a Blue Angels F-18, which (according to the volunteer) is still in its original Blue Angels paint. This is much brighter than anything on a Delta airplane.

The US only has one Insignia Blue colour - FS 15044. These colours are for web and print use, but they are the equivalents to the custom paints used on the aircraft. Corporate identity departments' job is to ensure uniformity. There is essentially no difference to what you see on the aircraft. I was just in Atlanta last week (thanks to United for the cancelled flight - I sat there for hours), and every Delta aircraft I saw looked exactly like the sample above. None of them looked anything like the Blue Angels.

The real thing is Pantone 654, which is vastly different from any Blue Angels airplane I’ve ever seen. Here it is from the Delta corporate identity document on the current colour scheme: Much closer to US Insignia Blue than Blue Angels blue, which is a vibrant royal blue colour.

Best you can do is look at a photo and look at your paint rack and see what comes close. If you start looking closely, there are all kinds of colours to be seen on those “green” airplanes. Modelling that would be a great challenge (one I have considered more than once). Just recreate what you see..

I truly wish the whole “doped” thing would die a painful death. The real things were red coloured self-adhesive material. Basically the WWII equivalent of red duct tape.

And don’t forget that GWH has an F-14A coming long fairly soon-ish.

There’s an old saying in the legal profession: they gotta catch ya before they can hang ya...

So the 1/72 version is fine, or the 1/72 version has the same jowls? It can’t be both. If the 1/48 kit actually looks like that I am *supremely* disappointed. It would seem no one at Airfix ever looked at a photo or a real Tiggie.

Heard from Neil a few days ago. He has his first production parts in hand and is prepping them. He will be posting some updates soon. As with all projects like this, it’s taking longer (and undoubtedly costing more) than originally anticipated.

It’s a green tinted clear film that is applied to the bare aluminium to protect it during production and shipment from Spirit Aerosystems in Wichita, Kansas to Seattle. Tamiya clear green would be a good starting point, over a base of NMF just like the real thing. The colour varies a lot, as you can see in photos, depending on which part of the a/c you’re talking about. Some panels are fibreglass or other materials that don’t get that coating, which gives a varied finish. I’ve always wanted to do some 737 fuselages in the water as they appeared after the derailment accident a few years ago. I have a friend who works in the Boeing factory in Renton where the assemble 737s. He said it’s not unusual for them to arrive from Wichita with bullet holes in them.

Am I the only Britmodeller user who finds the organization of the forums needlessly complex and perplexing? I would never in a million years have thought to look in a “rumourmonger” area for a new kit announcement. It’s not a rumour, it’s a fact. Not the same thing at all. Lukgraph kits are superb. Some of the best resin that’s ever been produced.

Let the rejoicing begin! Lukgraph kits are superb quality, and the CAD renders for the Rapide are positively mouth-watering! https://aeroscale.kitmaker.net/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=34780&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=facebook&fbclid=IwAR0X0kozSgKo5Kv5lR3fA8pdSwU04HwByZjpADlkSrmJjE3tU-u24QIEMJk

But wait, I thought all 3D printed things that come out of computers were perfect!?!? I'm so disappointed now

To each his own, but the kit has very obvious (to me) and very significant basic problems in shapes and details. A friend of mine is attempting to build it and he said the fit of most of the major parts leaves much to be desired, and that the surface detail is inconsistent (all of which is pointed out in the review, which is very much a fact based evaluation, and not just opinion). The answer to the OP question is no, you can’t build an F-14A from the AMK kit.