Jump to content

tony.t

Members
  • Content Count

    601
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by tony.t

  1. Agree 100% *********** Kit looks very good. Currently building fighting the 1/32 Trumpeter, so the 1/48 Ammo MiG will be a delight afterwards. Tony
  2. My hope too. I'd rather Tamiya produced a J or hardwing E/EJ, but next year will tell whether we get another variant or if another boxing is just something that in a decade will be a dream in the mists of time. My other hope is with the 1/32 Red Pills Models venture, which also apparently will kick off with an F-4B. My two Tamiya 1/32 F-4C/Ds are enough for the timebeing. Tony
  3. So you can fill them with glow-in-the-dark paint? I'm inclined to sand them down a bit and use decals I'm hoping Aires Quickboost does a set of antennae. Tony
  4. That's the best boxing for an accurate FGA.9 or export Mk.58. It has the slightly more detailed cockpit wall from the F.6 boxing as well as the corrected, constant chord, ailerons. (The original FGA.9 release had tapered ailerons.) It hasn't been available in Europe for a few years but hopefully Revell will repop the kit, maybe with more exotic markings like Jonathon Whaley's Miss Demeanour with the snazzy meteor rainbow and starred scheme? The panel detail is akin to the real thing and not suited to those who like filling troughs with gunge. If I could buy a second new exam
  5. Nothing personal Gene. If you like the Z-M kit, great. The Meng looks better to me, if a little rougher and omitting some essential features like the belly strap (but I'm really waiting to see what Red Pills Models does in 1/32 scale). I'm building the Meng F-4G next year as a stocking filler and it will need some work, including the strap and stabilator doubler plates, sourcing a long ALQ-184 pod etc. Happy Holidays Tony
  6. The Z-M canopy profile, especially in plan view, is so off that it spoils the whole model. The Meng kit looks a bit rougher in some regards (but the real plane was too!) and to my eye, at least, looks much more accurate in shape. I honestly believe that a thoughtfully made Meng will yield a way more accurate result than the Z-M, even though the latter is probably slicker for an airliner type finish. Essentially, we're lucky to have two such good kits to choose from: the last new F-4G came out 37, nearly 38, years ago! Tony
  7. Meng have modelled the ab initio slatted wing with the thicker lower torque box skin and its noticeable lip or step along its rear edge. A vinyl strap should fix things satisfactorily if it's not included in the kit's etched metal fret. Sorry, but the almost parallel canopy profile of the Z-M is utterly horrible. Crisp detail isn't going to fix that, ever. The Meng is looking a whole lot more like an F-4G and the Standard ARM is particularly cool. Shame there are no Shrikes or ALQ-184, but those are available elsewhere. Tony
  8. I'm liking the look of the Meng way more than the Z-M. The canopy looks to be correctly bowed in the middle in plan view, even though the windshield might be a fraction too wide. Thanks for posting the pic Solo. This one's getting my money. Curious to know if any other variants will follow, e.g. Israeli F-4E with refuelling probe. Tony
  9. Good to hear that you're on the mend Chris. I'm definitely up for the Su-27 canopy correction set so hope you can work out how to deal with the UK tax system. I believe Jeffrey of Hypersonic models in Japan has worked it all out. Best Tony
  10. Agree, and the Reid Air Publications operational Clark Field PN markings are a must for me. However, Caracal, which has released a string of early scheme sheets might cover the testbeds as they wouldn't take up much space: 697254 with the international orange and spook insignia, and 69-263 when it wore GA codes around 1977 (WW by the time the first true deliveries took place in April 1978 — though Caracal would need to redo the 35th TFW insignia for the latter, which was wider and squatter than the usual back-stabber design drawn for the F-105G sheet, which would be fine for '263).
  11. While committed to the box top Hill Gray II offering of 232/YGBSM from the Southern Watch era, I am curious what the other two markings options are. A Standard ARM indicates at least one from the period 1978-1985, i.e. SEA, wrap-around SEA or European 1, and a Clark Field jet would be nice for a change — although the prototype SEA scheme with international orange tail and wingtips (69-7254, first flown in December 1975) would be cool, especially if it featured the Weasel Spook insignia on the intake cheeks. I can't believe that the Meng F-4G would be a one-shot deal: there's
  12. I noticed that too and wondered if we're supposed to fill them in with glow-in-the-dark paint? The terms emery paper & elbow grease spring to mind. It's looking like a great kit. Just wondering what the other two markings will be? Looking forward to this more and more, Tony
  13. There should be one low band antenna on each side of the fin (vertical stabiliser). The arrowhead-shaped doubler plates, like the missing belly strap, would be well-served by a pre-cut vinyl or etch set. (Might be in the kit?) I'm liking this kit a lot. The windshield looks a little fat in the computer renderings — we'll have to see the actual plastic — but the canopy looks to correctly bow out laterally in the middle. Definitely buying one. Need to source a long ALQ-184 ECM pod from Wolfpack, and need to know if the kit has inlets (and not blanked off like the ancient
  14. You'll want the different Navy Aero 5 or later LAU-118) launcher. The LAU-34 is completely different and was used by USAF F-4C/G Wild Weasels. Tony
  15. The ICM MiG-25RBF Elint version is the closest to the RBS SLAR version. Different nose panel arrangement but very similar. The missiles & pylons would have to come from the ICM MiG-25BM boxing if you have to have them. HTH, Tony
  16. Wingtip RHAWS should be angled out at 45⁰, not fwd-facing, if memory serves me right. Cut the end off, file the lump back and at 45⁰, then glue the tiny teacakes on at that angle. The fwd fuselage and parallel canopy sides haven't been corrected. Gives the Z-M canopy a MiG-23U look. I really hope that Tamiya follows up its B with a J and E/EJ, and Zoukei go up to 1/32 with all the fixes. Tony
  17. Yes, I'd buy a set too. Faves are the 5th Spitten Kittens at Minot, ND, and 318th Green Dragons at McChord, WA. Tony
  18. I recall there being Blue Angels cockpit parts included in the 1/32 Black Box F/A-18A backdate set for the Academy F/A-18C. Or some of them, like the gubbins on the coaming. Tony
  19. There are often good deals on the Su-9U Maiden at around £22. There probably is sufficient commonality on sprues C and D to get what you need for the Su-11 Fishpot. You could even make resin copies, or kindly ask someone who does, and have two great kits. Tony
  20. The ResKit cockpit module and supplied clear parts, in particular, correct the freaky Booby Hoss windshield parts. That the ResKit canopy differs a bit from the Academy clear part is, IMHO, a complete red herring. The ResKit parts, once installed and painted, will look totally right. Tony
  21. No they didn't. They had an omnidirectional antennae and a UHF offset to the right side of the fuselage spine. The Arnie configuration in your link is for F-4Es and RF-4Cs. Hth rather than hinders Tony
  22. Unfortunately I have to be negative for clarity: there is such a dearth of Cold War era Soviet jet subjects coming out that we could put all of them, including multiple scales, in one thread. (And trying to shepherd cats is a bit pointless anyway.) If Eduard do the design and tooling for "Thursday" (whatever that really means) editions of the MiG-21F-13 and -21UM then, surely, there is a higher probability of 1/72 scale editions emerging — eventually? I'm also quite certain my own wishing for more 1/48 versions of the venerable Fishbed is not going to alter Eduard's plans one tiny
  23. Given that you've already posted an email extract in which Eduard say "72nd scale is a side production [for us]" and that you have dismissed SH kits as not worth a penny, there isn't anything left to discuss apart from what Eduard might do with the so-called "Thursday" Fishbeds, which are the ones that are selling. I buy all my favourite aircraft subjects in every available double-digit scale, so I am interested in what Eduard are doing with the MiGs regardless of scale. Sadly, we do not see Cold War Soviet jet subjects coming out in vast, uncontained numbers such that we constantl
  24. Really? SH Mirage F.1, Super Mystère are inferior to the old Zvevda? Have you started mixing Xmas cocktails a bit early this year? Looking forward to the SH 1/72 Mirage III/5 too but I do love the Eduard "Thursday" Fishbed kits — just wish they'd get on with the F-13 and Uchebny and seriously reconsider upscaling all of them to 1/32 ("Saturday night out"?). That and retooling the lower wing parts to facilitate opened airbrake compartments. Tony
  25. So, ETA is now December or January? Okay, I'll stock up the Xmas drinks caddy soon and buy my Revell in the New Year. Tony
×
×
  • Create New...