David H

What? Mach 2 isn't good enough for you? -d-

Well.... i sure know which one I'M gonna build!! https://farm1.staticflickr.com/160/403063846_9c8dbb67da_b.jpg https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2557/3786421439_64e183e526_z.jpg?zz=1 -d-

The Heller 707-320 series is a very nice kit. Its engines are a bit lacking in detail (especially with today's technology) but keep in mind the kit dates back to roughly 1985-86. It's much more accurate overall than the Lockheed Constellation that predated it by a couple of years. I'd say the biggest knock against it is its size; once assembled it becomes ponderous and awkward to handle. Its engineering doesn't easily lend it to joining wing to fuselage late in construction. Brad Shinn did a beautiful Pan Am 707-320 a few years back from the kit. Best 707 model i ever saw. There are allegations that the cockpit is 2 mm too high, but i fail to see the sense in lopping it off and reattaching it with all the filling and sanding that comes along with that, especially on a bare metal finish. david

The most authoritative build of the HiPlanes kit is found in Brett Green's original Osprey title on modelling the F4U Corsair. Not the much later ADH Publishing book, which was solely focused on the 32nd Tamiya kit. While i'm not an authority on late-version Corsairs, the HiPlanes kit is regarded as the best in 72nd scale, though due to its prehistoric injection molding technology, requires a greater than average amount of work to prep the parts for assembly. -d-

Well, i've got my choice narrowed down to either 48th or 72nd scale, and its gonna be a Tamiya kit, but i'm still faffing about which particular version. it will definitely NOT be a cliche Corsair. david

A very cool project. I really like the looks of the early "pencil point" Crusaders. An early one viewed head-on, with the wing up and everything else down has got a lot of visual complexity and interest, as "Superheat" would say... david

if only i was near my kit stash i'd rummage about and see if i have a spare set of -J tailplanes. Might be able to find out around Christmastime. -d-

BTW i saw a very nice rendering of the Special Hobby kit a the IPMS Seattle contest a few years ago. I think it was built by one of the folks from Vancouver, BC. Absolutely stunning build. -d-

Initial pics of the sprues, instructions, decals, and box art just appeared on the Frog Model builders forum, also posted to airlinercafe.com. From the quality of the images, it looks very nice to my eye. The big question i think everybody is wondering about is how well Roden managed to execute on the complex engine pylon shapes. That i cannot really speak to. david

Oh wow that is just awesome. What a Brute of an aeroplane. Built like a battleship, and it flew like one. david

Beautiful Job. What the world needs more of is love for the Martin B-26. david

You ask an excellent question- What would have happened if the Whirlwind development was continued further?? If the Whirlwind was equipped with handed Merlin 60s, the handling characteristics in terms of directional stability would have improved, as would single engined handling characteristics. Directional control on takeoff and landing would have been much easier. Obviously the plane would have been some knots faster. Having said that, the increased weight of the Merlins no doubt would mandate an increase in wing area to compensate and allow for an improved rate of climb and service ceiling. Depending how much the plane was enlarged would dictate how much of a range improvement you could get, working on the assumption you would get increased internal volume for fuel tankage. I think one reason the Whirlwind was not taken further was demand for Merlin engines. This is working in a vacuum on the assumption Merlins could not be built under license. A Whirlwind required 2 engines compared to only one for a Spitfire or Hurricane. The Air Ministry was probably perfectly content to allow the Whirlwind to go along while it used the Perigrines, but if it placed an additional demand on Merlin production it would be ruled out. Finally, i suspect the RAF was almost as dubious of multiengine fighters as the USAAF was. However, as we now know the P-38 was the perfect plane for air combat in the Pacific where range is critical. Interestingly enough, plans were drawn up to test Merlins in the P-38, but it never went beyond the proposal stage. Possibly for similar reasons. Lockheed did build a radicalized high-altitude derivative called the P-49, but i don't know much about it. Just my thoughts. Others know more. david

Nice Job Spencer. It seems this kit, more than most, really deteriorated fit-wise, with each successive pressing over the years. Good on you for toughing it out, and fighting the good fight. david

Nice job. I think the propeller hub is too shiny, but otherwise i like it a lot. Nobody ever does "The Reluctant Dragon", so its nice to see. david

What kind of Sorcery is this?? I have it on good authority that this kit cannot be built!! Splendid Job! david

Latest i heard was sometime before Christmas. Has anybody seen it yet? Mee excited. david

Hey- Whatever happened to your Blueberry and Vanilla-flavoured FJ-3 project?? -d-

A very impressive looking model. Nothing looks quite like a Tu-22. While a cool looking plane, my understanding is it was not a lot of fun to fly, being heavy on the controls and it looks like it could get uncomfortable on long duration missions. A lot like the Swearingen SW-227 Metroliner actually..... But, like the mighty San Antonio Sewerpipe, if you could fly a Tu-22 i'll bet it pretty much proved you could fly anything. -d-

I don't know very much about the shape nuances of the MiG-25, but that resin nose improvement looks beautiful. It'll be kind of a pity to cover it up with paint. The Trumpeter RA-5 Vigilante BTW, is in need of the same kind of "Help" so to speak. david

Darren Rhodes is right; the low angle shots make the model. -d-

i started cutting mine off the sprues tonite..... -d-

After seeing Mitchem's beautiful Ethiopian Airlines 720B, I just recently started cutting mine off the sprues and i'm very pleased with it so far. I look forward to the VC-10s. Would it be unreasonable to ask for a Convair 880 and 990? I live in San Diego, where they are still fondly remembered. When the coughing stops, from all of the smoke...... david

Beautiful job Mike! Unlike the 720, the engines appear well proportioned and not out of place with the rest of the model. Do i understand correctly that you sanded the mounting pads flush on the lower wing surfaces?? It really looks like a 720. Much more so than the Minicraft 707 resembles a 707. Withholding judgement on the new KC-135s till i buy one. Great stuff. Thanks ever so much for posting! david

Holy #$%^!! That is just jaw droppingly beautiful. So many 48th scale B-17 builds look like clunkers. This is definitely not one of em. Plus, i even like the version. david

Beautiful job Mark. It may not be scratchbuilding, but its skilled model making at its best. david