Jump to content
This site uses cookies! Learn More

This site uses cookies!

You can find a list of those cookies here: mysite.com/cookies

By continuing to use this site, you agree to allow us to store cookies on your computer. :)

JeffreyK

Members
  • Content Count

    1,151
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

538 Excellent

About JeffreyK

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Osaka, Japan

Recent Profile Visitors

4,785 profile views
  1. ...except in the kit they're not...The nozzles and wheels are the two weak points of this otherwise very nice kit. J
  2. Beautiful model and execution! And you eliminated the step as well. Really well done. Cheers, J
  3. I'm pretty sure a zero-duties trade deal relates to customs duties alone, it has nothing to do with VAT. I've just had a look and the import duty threshold was £135 in the UK. So the new regulations will only have an effect on larger orders. The VAT threshold is £15 and that remains unchanged. If you get "caught", you're still liable for 20% VAT plus RM's famous handling charge. J
  4. Different intake bullet (generator vs starter) on Navy vs. AF types and different cross sections between early and later Hasegawa tooling.
  5. I've made a few correction items for the Academy kit - stabilators, A/C intakes, correct early seats... I also made whole new tail section, made from a Hasegawa tail, extensively reshaped to match the Academy aft fuselage contour. I left it unfinished though as it will be a nightmare to cast and more difficult to install than the ZM shape correction parts. As the ZM tail has more detail than Hasegawa I'm now pondering the idea of trying to make a ZM tail fit to the Academy fuselage (even though we know the A. kit a bit too lean over the engine shoulders) just to get a decent B model...Or finish off the Hasegawa tail part. One day... J
  6. That's looking sooo good! J
  7. Looks very interesting indeed - but what is your reference re. the C-1 seat? TO my knowledge, the Stanley/Lockheed C-1 was used only in the F-104A, B and some very early C's and D's, relatively soon to be replaced by the upward firing C-2 seat. I don't think any G models were ever fitted for downward ejection - the C-2 was standard before the G came along. The canopy internals would have been visibly different as well. Is there perhaps a confusion between "early" and "late" seat relating to the early C-2 seat vs. the late Martin Baker GQ-7? Your picture looks very much like the C-2 seat. Cheers, Jeffrey
  8. ...and back again, also quite some time ago by now.
  9. We haven't decided that yet. Once we get to tooling we will look at the marking options. With only 29 SR-71's, Kursad has narrowed the field quite a bit for us though. However, tail art was usually short-lived and liveries changed... Cheers, J
  10. I think the walkway and hatch/panel outline decals may be a problem as well as perhaps the NASA livery, but the rest of the tail art, numbers and stencils will certainly be usable as they're not outline/shape specific. Our kit will come with its own decals of course so you can supplement the ones from the Caracal sheet that won't fit. J
  11. ...so still waiting for this one... I hope one day it'll come out. No aftermarket decals for this either. J
  12. Just had a look at reviews of the Meng kit and it looks like they faced a similar problem with the stabs, but have managed a somewhat more elegant split then Kitty Hawk. Filling is still needed though. Cheers, j
  13. It's speculation, but to me this looks like the work of a tooling shop not used to sophisticated model kit production. My guess is the Kitty Hawk kit designer had put the split lines for the stabs onto/next to existing surface features (and a split like this is necessary as the part would be too thick at the base for a solid one-piece moulding but too thin at the edge for a 100% split along the edge), but at the tool shop (not at Kitty Hawk) they discovered that the split location chosen by the designer is still not good enough for trouble free plastic injection (too thick/too thin..) and thus a tool designer not experienced with model kits just moved the splits to optimise the parts for injection moulding. But as your work is concerned, great stuff! Looking forward to seeing the finished article. Jeffrey
×
×
  • Create New...