MikeC

I use Tamiya and Mr Hobby Aqueous - they can be intermixed, and Tamiya X20A thinner works with both. Any colour I can't get, I mix. Plenty of resources out there - eg IPMS Stockholm - for suggested mixes. I've pretty much limited my stock to those two brands now: makes life much easier.

So I clicked the link, and you say "I have always had a soft spot for reconnaissance aeroplanes ...". Yes, I'm rather into reconnaissance types too. I normally do 1:32, but I may just make an exception for this one.

There is at least one documented instance of everyone available participating, up to and including the Station Commander. Many of the stripes applied 4th/5th June were nevertheless done neatly - again, documented. And in any case, if you try and show anything other than one edge not being entirely parallel with the rest, it just looks like sloppy modelling, especially in the smaller scales. If I had £1 for every time that photo (posted above) of the Spitfire has been used to "prove" that stripes were painted sloppily, I'd be able to afford a few more Tamiya 1/32 Mk IXs to put some stripes on. In any case, there is a body of opinion that suggests it was posed.

My last finish: a British-based aggressor of the 527th TFTS. And as that was at Alconbury and was part of the 10th SRW, a nod to my recce interest as well. I started off with an old 1/32 Hasegawa kit, intending to build it from the box. But you know how it is, so there is also a bit of aftermarket: an Eduard seat harness, Flightpath AIM-9Ls done as inert acquisition rounds, Master pitot and guns, and HGW safety flags. But the cockpit (other than the harness) was from the box, the level of detail on the panel just need a drybrushing to look effective. For a 1980s kit the fit was good to excellent. The decals were from another boxing of the kit, and were supplied in response to a wanted ad on the LSP forum. Please ignore the slight decal silvering on one, I thought I had it glossy enough to apply them, but ... Thanks for looking.

"Best" depends on what you're looking for. My opinion of the three contenders (Airfix, Eduard and Tamiya: I discount Hasegawa on price and shallow wheel wells) is: Airfix: excellent design, let down by quality control issues: in the case of the kit I built, a hint of short-shot on a prop blade, and fit issues. Slightly "chunky" detail. But perfectly acceptable. Eduard: Finer detail, but as usual Eduard break everything down into as many parts as possible, including one or two that my ageing fingers and eyes found troublesome. Some strange design decisions, eg the tailwheel is very difficult to fit as specified inn the instructions. Good range of options in the box, often parts not used by the particular boxing eg Aeroproducts prop. Best for those who like the building process. Tamiya: A mix of block-numbers, but the simplest build and ends up as a perfectly acceptable Mustang. My kit of choice for doing a series of Ponies. My own ranking: Tamiya first, then Airfix, then Eduard. Edit: I've not mentioned the ICM one as I have never built one.

Well it's getting nearer: Hannants have it on their site for back-order, no date yet so could be next week, could be December, could be any time ... https://www.hannants.co.uk/product/TA60328 As for price, I'm guessing on a par with, or slightly more than, the Pacific boxing, but that's only speculation on my part.

Of course, even better service would be adequate quality control to ensure that short-shots didn't make it to sale in the first place. Other companies like Tamiya or Eduard seem to manage it ...

That's nicely done.

I've tried various primers over the years, but now I do exactly what you do; I use Tamiya and Mr Hobby Aqueous acrylics. I don't think omitting a primer coat has angered the modelling gods, and I make sure I clean my models well before any paint goes on them, so issues with adhesion are minimised. Quite apart from anything else, I really don't cope very well with "rattle" cans. I can't use them in the house because they tend to smell; and I end up flooding the model in some places, with no primer at all in others, and overspray on everything else within sight. If you want to prime, and feel you get better results that way, more power to your elbow, if you prefer not to that's up to you also. Room for both in the hobby.

This is also where being what some disparagingly refer to as a "grammar Nazi" pays off: quite often these scam emails are full of basic grammar and/or spelling errors, or have odd phrasing, almost as if English was not the first language of the sender. And it may well not be.

Reconnaissance makes absolute sense for the Concorde: the same high-speed (although not quite so high-speed) supersonic cruise concept as the SR-71, and less costly to operate. Perhaps delete a lot of windows and add ejection seats for the crew? Operators? 39 Sqn or 58 Sqn, being Canberra PR9 units, are plausible.

Old kits can scrub up nicely, can't they? Well done.

The key question is: does it improve on what's in the kit? Sometimes yes, particularly if it's an older kit. But with some modern kits, the detail provided in the cockpit, for example, is such that with nothing more than a bit of skillful painting it can look better than replacing it, especially with etch. And it's less work imo. Etch has another particular problem: it's two dimensional. So you either have to do some etch origami, or accept that things like throttle levers look flat, which in real life they're not. It's very true what Andy says ^^^ : "An easy update is to replace the seat, if you are happy that you can paint a resin one well. This is generally a focal.point for a model" I'll only add to that the comment that resin seats often have a moulded-on seat harness, so no need to fiddle with yet more etch. Can you tell that etch is not my favourite modelling material?

Very well executed; the scheme does look plausible.

That is superb, well done. After all the whisky, rude words, etc, you still want to do another one? That is true devotion. Chapeau!