Modelmkr

Easily corrected. With some carefull surgery, you could remove the prop and spinner (if you used the polycap, easily removed) and replace with the Ultracast prop and spinner. That would be all that is needed to represent an accurate P-51K. As to the main thrust of this thread, I'll wait to see these in plastic. Even the Tamiya P-51D has some minor issues that could be improved upon. It is "possible" HB could do this right (CAD drawings aside), but I'm doubtful. The Corsair also "could" be an improvement over the Hasegawa kit... still doubtful. The P-40E seems a bit redundant in the face of

No, actually it doesn't. That boxing has the cuffed Hamilton Standard prop blades (A2) and the uncuffed, square tipped Hamilton Standard blades (E19). The instuctions erroneously identify the E19 parts as Aeroproducts prop blades. Proper Aeroproducts blades (and spinner) can be got here Also, the P-51K did not (to my knowledge) take part in the Korean War.

Uhhh, don't think so. They did a P-51D, P-51B, F-51D, and a Mustang MkIII... but no P-51K that I'm aware of. Hasegawa released a couple P-51K boxings; was that what you were thinking of?

Wow... I'm sure there's a pill for this kind of insanity ;)

Is it your intention to not bother with the engine at all or do you want to display the enginge seperately? If the latter, you can always buy the required engine only sprues (HLJ, Rainbow 10) and use the minimum structure needed to close up the kit nose and prop.

Or, since Academy provides both rubber and plastic wheels in thier 1/32 Hornet kits, you could always use the plastic ones...

See here, post #470. 50/50 mix of Gunze Sangyo H25 Sky Blue and H46 Emerald Green. or In the Testors Auto lacquer paint line (3oz spray can), their "Tropical Turquoise" is pretty much a dead on match to the PE colour. See here, post #9. HTH.

Did you read the instructions? Just askin'...

I'm sure there are better pictures out there, but this may be of some help.

Try here Click on the images in the "color" description. HTH.

Here are the original three articles: Part I Part II Part III HTH.

CMK currently make a set. Designed to fit the Hasegawa kits.

Don't have the kit, but this may be of some help.

If I may, Boxing includes three schemes: 1) "Little Miss Mischief", B-17G-35-VE, 324th Bomb Sqn, 91st BG, Bassingbourn, England, 1944. This is the a/c made from two damaged birds, nmf front and od tail. 2) "Good Deal", B-17G-35-BO, 815th Bomb Sqn, 483rd BG, Tortorella, Italy, Jan. 1945. OD over NG, blue cowl rings, red rudder (box cover art). 3) "False Courage", B-17G-65-VE, 7th Bomb Sqn, 34th BG, Mendelsham, 1945. Overall nmf, red tail.

Modeling is a style of art in my opinion. Everyone will eventually develop their own style. I can usually go to my local model show and pick out who did what kit based on their style and be correct most of the time. My point (and I do have one :) ) is that they are your models and you should develop a style you like. If adding rivets to add interest pleases you, go for it, if you subscribe to trying to capture as much realism in scale as possible then Jennings' style has definate merit. In the end, do what pleases you. I have seen both styles and, if done right, both can be visually appeal

No, but 1/32 boxings of the Trumpeter P-38 and 1/32 Trumpeter and Hasegawa P-47 have the 165gal tanks. You might be able to arm twist someone out of a set if they aren't going to use them. Plus the Dragon kit has the rocket stubs and rockets... same tactic. No display, just a control panel on the right side cockpit wall and a hooded red lamp on top of the left side IP coaming. Most Iwo Mustangs appear to have been fitted with the AN/APS-13 (-25NA and later is a given, I think), but some were -20NA builds, so not so sure about them. Best bet is to research the particular bird you are going t

Depends... what are you looking for/ what scale?

I wish! I have two of the recent release 1/48 Hasegawa F-4S Phantoms and these came only with the multi part canopies. I wasn't looking to do a major job in the cockpit, just want to concentrate on the externals and colour scheme and just close up the canopy with a one piece, but alas, none was provided.

I'm not sure of all the errors in the Monogram kit, but the Hobbyboss kit does repeat the nose shape error in that it is a straight sided cone shape where it should be a slight curve. I believe the ventral fin is either the wrong shape or thickness as well, not too sure about any others. HTH

Testors Acryl Pale Green FS34227, has been used to good effect for this. Some may argue it is not "accurate", but generally colours faded, wore, got dirty, came from different paint batches, etc. So getting an exact match is somewhat fruitless. Get something close, like above, add perhaps a touch of grey or white to fade, and by the time you add a wash and weather it will look good.

I've got the same question on the P-51 SIG. Many views, but no replies yet. Seems to be a bit of a mystery.

Yup, I've seen that same info. and more. Now you see my puzzlement over HJGB wearing MC*O

I guess I was not clear in my question. I do know HJGB had the MC*I codes, that is not in dispute. What I wanted to know is if it ever wore MC*O codes, ie: photographic evidence of such. The markings on the sheet are the very early style. See here Thanks.

I am THOROUGHLY confused :huh: Did Ilfrey's P-51D HJGB ever wear the codes MC*O (his P-38 codes) or did his P-51D-5NA, 44-13761 always (and only) have codes MC*I? I keep getting conflicting info on this. I have on the way, Cutting Edge's 1/32 sheet for my Tamiya Mustang, but I am not sure that this aircraft ever wore the MC*O codes as shown on the sheet and other sources I've read state that the 20th FG Mustangs had invasion stripes painted on them immediately when they arrived in theatre. None of this rings true on the CE sheet, so which is it? Also, did HJGB initially have a filetless t

It won't be $75 at Lucky Model...