Jump to content

Peter O

Members
  • Posts

    199
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Peter O

  1. Was that the UA72217 kit, or the "Amerikabomber" one with the Japanese headline? US72217's instructions don't show any ordnance except the large bomb, but towards the end they show other weapons fits with a note that they're available separately. Interestingly, right now the '72217 kit plus the Fritz-X/Hs 293/BV 246 accessory kit on eBay are less expensive than HLJ's "Amerikabomber" price.
  2. I have the BAe 146-100 STA boxing of Revell's kit, so I don't think I'll need to do any slicing and dicing. However, I'd like to get more information about the various countermeasures protuberances. There are some old BM threads about the CC.2, but many of the images and links are dead. This thread would be partucilarly useful if the images were still there. I'm also on the lookout for the AirDecals RAF BAe 146-100s sheet, so I'll post over in the Buy/Sell/Trade forum. Thanks for any help you can provide! Peter
  3. Some further research shows that the FAIP scheme doesn't denote an actual FAIP pilot/instructor. Apparently each FTS has one Jayhawk painted in a commemorative or special scheme, and this one is from the 86th FTS at Laughlin AFB, TX. This scheme was from 2021/2022, and has been changed this year. There are also at least two OD over Neutral Gray aircraft, one with invasion stripes, as well as overall AMC Gray. Caracal will have plenty of choices for their upcoming set.
  4. I'll definitely be getting the LOBO FAIP. I photographed that aircraft at the 2021 Pease ANGB airshow. (I tried to attach a photo, but I get "The link could not be embedded because of an unexpected error: Forbidden: "Something went wrong. Please try again.".") I'm surprised the pilot was a FAIP though, since the name under the cockpit is Capt Jarod Washington. I would think a FAIP would be a 2Lt or 1Lt. As a USAF vet I hate to say this, but it looks very USN with the black tail and skull and crossbones. Peter
  5. Duh! I've got that (actually 3 different dates/versions) but totally forgot about it. Thanks!
  6. On many aircraft tires, the two numbers are the width of the tread and the diameter of the wheel, with no outside diameter stated. I don't know if the LP meant low pressure, since heavy jet tires tend to be high pressure. The KC-135 and FB-111 tires I worked with in the late '70s were (by my 45-year old recollection!) 160 and 240 psi respectively. We used a different system, with three parts including the "Type" rating, which indicated a speed range.
  7. Are you sure? The 100 is WL (Water Line) 100, which is a vertical datum line. It's on the aft end of the line also. The station numbers are technically Body Buttock Lines (BBLs), at least in US parlance. Having said that, it's possible that the station numbers start at something other than 0, but it normally would have been stated if the nose wasn't zero. And just to confuse things a bit more, manufacturers often add or subtract length in the course of development without changing the station numbers, so just because it says 747.5 doesn't necessarily mean it's still 747.5 inches from the front. Boeing was great for doing that in the 717 (C-135)/707/720 series. Peter
  8. Scaling the drawing from the tip of the nose to the tip of the fin bullet and multiplying by 72 gives an overall length of 88.7 feet. The Martin data table on the next page gives the length as 85.1 feet. Scaling just the fuselage length gives 85.1 feet. So the age-old question (think Testors/Italeri Hustler) is whether the table dimension is LOA or fuselage length. All three of my published sources (Ginter, Wings of Fame and Kev Darling's Martin XB-51 Dragon) show the 85.1 foot length, without saying fuselage or LOA. My presumption is that the 85.1 feet is the overall length to the tip of the fin bullet. There are also some station numbers in inches on the drawing. I checked the three I could read -- 447, 647 and 747.5, and got 1/88, 1/81 and 1/79 scale. The drawing shows several places where it's been pieced together, whether the original paper version or from stitching scans together. So it can only be taken as an approximate rendition in any case.
  9. There is a lot of XB-51 information here: https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/threads/martin-xb-51-panther.50493/ More profiles by the above artist are on his page: https://www.deviantart.com/talos56/gallery/10881348/b-51-collaboration
  10. The rotors folded for storage, as on naval helos, so that would be an option. I sure don't have a 2 foot by 3 foot space to display it with the rotors extended! Whether the kit will have the option of folded rotors remains to be seen.
  11. That's a good business strategy for Hypersonic. The upgrades give them an income stream to continue development of the whole kit, and also show the quality of their work.
  12. The Space Shuttle Pilot is cheaper because the default material is the low-end White Natural Versatile Plastic. When Smoothest Fine Detail Plastic is selected, it's $15.00. From experience, the White Natural Versatile Plastic is very rough and grainy, and needs lots of thick primer/filler and sanding to produce an acceptable finish. It's a form of nylon, so it can be difficult to get paint to stick also. The Smoothest Fine Detail Plastic still needs priming and sanding, but not nearly as much, and takes paint much better. Peter
  13. My Testors model has the receptacle closed, so the door must be positionable either way. I’m sure I didn’t scratchbuild it closed. Peter
  14. It was a single door, hinged at the front. The back end of the door sealed against the forward end of the receptacle to prevent spilled fuel from getting into the airframe. Peter
  15. The inflight refueling receptacle door would be closed at all times except when refueling. If left open on the ground it would accumulate debris and contaminants. One of the crew (I don’t know which one) opened it when approaching the tanker, and closed it as the aircraft turned away after disconnecting. My guess, without references handy, is that the RIO was in charge of refueling and keeping the fuel flowing to the correct tanks to keep the CG within limits, with the pilot doing the flying. Peter
  16. Likewise your clinical reference. I can't say I've ever thought of my AMS quite that way before! I may never be able to order the Gaspatch/Hypersonic kit now 🤪 Peter
  17. You're right. It took me exactly a month from opening the Testors box to this point. And then there was a month of PT to regain the use of my sanding arm! Peter
  18. The red is silicone sealant applied to the nut ends of the bolts holding the windshields onto the frames. The flat head bolts go in from the outside, first through the outer windshield frame, then the window, then the inner framework. The windshields have a sealant strip around them that mates to the frame, but the bolts also need to be sealed to hold pressure. I was a SAC KC-135 and FB-111A mechanic back in the late '70s, and removed and replaced more than my fair share of windshields on those aircraft. Peter
  19. I don't have the new kit yet, but having built the Testors kit, I'll offer my ideas FWIW. Rather than building boxes/sleeves (which I know I would screw up), I would try a simple plastic strip that fits snugly between the top of the gear and the bottom of the gear well. If it's the same width as the top of the gear, and fills the space between the gear and the well, it should take the stress off of the trunnion pins, as well as adding rigidity. Either solvent cement or epoxy on bare, slightly roughened plastic should provide a very strong assembly. In the Testors kit, the diagonal retraction struts are quite robust, so they should be able to absorb a fair amount of side force on their own. I'm waiting for the kit to appear on this side of the pond, so I probably won't be getting it until, well... hopefully sometime next year 🤣 Peter
  20. Hypersonic's boxtop says Assembled size 103mm x 37mm x 30mm. Peter
  21. I believe they only sell direct, and don't have any distributors. A post from October on their Facebook site mentions that. Peter
  22. For aftermarket, there's also Hypersonic Models' AG-330 Start Cart kit: https://www.hypersonicmodels.com/product/ag-330-start-cart It looks great in the box, and should be a trouble-free build. Peter
  23. True enough! The biggest obstacle isn't reattaching or replacing the parts, but the fact that it isn't up to my current standards, which have improved considerably since this was built. What starts as gluing parts back on would end up as a complete strip, refilling the joints, doing some scribing, etc. I might as well buy two new ones, and graft the 2nd cockpit onto a new one 🙄
  24. The Testors/Italeri 1/48 kit can be built, but it's a lot more work than it needs to be. Years ago I built it as the B model flown by NASA after the SR-71s were retired. Sadly it's now the worse for wear as the result of a house move, but I'm hoping to fix it up to go with the new kit. Maybe by that time Revell will reissue it as a B.
×
×
  • Create New...