Blacktjet

This has gone a bit off topic! Back to the 'RR' emblem, I'm convinced it's a metallic background. I seem to remember getting the Modeldecal sheet when it was released and being disappointed that it was a solid plain colour whereas Micro Scale had supplied the background clear (IMRC)! I'm doing XV424 in 1/48, I'm spraying all the RWB and making my own decals as the CAM decals are dreadful and not that accurate.

The 'RR' emblem on the nose, my memory is that the background was silver or rather chrome foil. Can anyone confirm this? Difficult to tell from photographs but some seem to show that it isn't white.

I saw a demo earlier this year, for a new printer that could print optically clear parts - could even print sceptical lenses! It was at a crowd funding stage and was supposed to have launched last April but not seen anything since, I've forgotten what it was called - anyone know anything about it?

Thanks, I've got those from an earlier build but I can print any markings as required. I wasn't sure if the timeline for that scheme and squadron fitted in with the possibility of carrying the Blue Danube. Edit: Just checked out the instructions on-line, Airfix show that aircraft to be in a gloss white finish, I'd prefer to do a satin white scheme.

I want to build a Valiant in the early satin white finish, with the black and grey nose radar covers and preferably with either full pale or the intermediate pale markings. Would it be correct to display the model in this scheme with a Blue Danube? If so, any suggestions for a/c registrations and squadron markings would be helpful. Thanks

I've just opened a couple of these, the fuselages are covered in sink marks, not an issue on the first release.

Serviceability! Each 3/4 a/c squadron would constantly be trying to borrow airframes from other squadrons or declaring to be nonoperational. Added to that, from a cynical point of view, I suspect government would ask why so many airframes were required if squadrons could manage with 3/4 and cut the numbers.

I would have thought that the new 3d printed decals technology would be perfect for producing rows of vortex generators and for ease of application.

Only recently been updated, previously showing the B.2 'in a field' on finals - that some Internet news blogs claimed was China!

Google maps has caught a B.2 that has slid off the runway with a collapsed main U/C, complete with emergency vehicles.

RAF pilot/s flying Sea Harriers scored missile kills in the Falklands - surely that would count as the first RAF missile kill.

My best (worsed) ebay experience was the sale of an Airfix Tristar a few years ago, title read "Missing parts and part assembled SEE PICTURES AND READ DESCRIPTION". The pictures showed a layout of the parts with rings around the assembled parts (doors fitted) and tings around where the missing parts would have been on the sprues, each ring numbered in the picture and then the corresponding numbers itemised and described in the description. Message from buyer - "You didn't say the kit was started and it has missing parts"!

Never owned one but wasn't the old Frog kit a -420, like the Airfix kit? Revell did a -120

Earlier this year, I had to buy Anycubic's Skin colour resin - it was the only colour in stock, I've never had a failed print with it, fine accurate prints, cleans easily and cures quickly.

I was at II(AC) RIC 81 - 84 I recall seeing a tractor towing a trailer with ALQ.101 and Phimat (don't remember the year) but never saw them fitted on an aircraft so I guess they were new trial/test equipment. We attended TAM 84, I would have thought they would have been fitted for that exercise if in general use but I didn't see any jets with them. Found this from 1987 https://www.aerialvisuals.ca/AirframePhotoViewer.php?Serial=80849

Just been confirmed that by someone who was toilet roll bombed by Buccaneers during a TACEVAL at Waddington. Maybe the plan was to do a toilet roll bombing tour with the black Buccaneer.

My thoughts too but you'd be surprised at what things a disbanding squadron will get up to! Can't think of any other reason why they would have fitted 2 x CBLS to an aircraft that was painted in a scheme that was expected to last just a few days.

Could the above dispense paint marker bombs? I've recently been sent two pictures of the Black 16 squadron Buccaneer, it was fitted out with 2 x CBLS.100 on the outer pylons, also painted black. I was on 2 squadron at the time and a friend on 16 told me that the intention was to beat up all the airfields with the a/c and I was wondering if there might have been the intention to paint bomb the runways.

Here's ZE809 https://images.app.goo.gl/9Dsip88FXY7oHBvZA

Unfortunately that figure for the T.2 span doesn't state what the measurement includes, I think it's over the rails which would put the kinetic span approximately 6mm over sized. Excluding any attachments to the wing tips, I don't think there's any difference in measurements between the T.1 wing and the T.2. I reckon the kinetic wing is 3 - 4mm to long at the tips. Also, the wing fences are too far inboard. A measurement of the actual aileron span would be handy!

I am aware of that but it is very close to the current T.2 cockpit panels - certainly closer than the kit parts.

http://www.hyperscale.com/2013/reviews/accessories/kinetick32003reviewbg_1.htm

Kinetic issued a pre-painted etched cockpit set to upgrade/correct the kit. Anyone seen these for sale anywhere in the UK?

Just picked up one of these cheap, there's a question mark over the shape of the wingtip and there appears to be an extension at the tip, making the ailerons and wing too long in span. I'm not aware of increase in span of the T.2 wing over the T.1 - other than that over the rails when fitted and the blanks. It's also missing the white aerial that is located at the base of the fin and the two air data sensors located each side of the extended nose. There are also a few other communication/navigation aerials missing but these may have been recent additions to the RAF Hawk.

Check the line that the canopy and windshield sits on the fuselage against photographs - I've yet to see any drawings, kit or conversion that has the canopy and windshield sitting at the correct angle.