Jay Chladek

Considering how the Testors kit kicked my posterior when I tried to build it (even when trying to overcome the wing warp issues) I'll probably bite when I know these are out. Builds of the test shot look good enough anyway. One thing that would go a ways towards me deciding whether to buy it sooner than later would be knowing if the decal sheet had markings for all 21 jets since aftermarket for the Testors kit was limited. Sure, I have the IPMS USA KC con sheet, but while Spirit of Kansas is appealing to build, it is also the B-2 that crashed on Guam a few years back.

I am going to have to get me a couple of these me thinks. I could wait for 1/48, but display space issues have me looking more towards these smaller kits. Plus one of these will be a great compliment to me Special Hobby 1/72 F-86H (another subject never done in 1/48 styrene). Thanks for the link.

It actually got bumped to the October "Spooktacular" issue. I was told it was November, but they did one issue right before and that is where it ended up. So look for the FSM issue with an orange strip on top and a small picture of Frankenstein's monster.

That is good to know. That seemed to be the only approach they could use from what I can see.

Doubtful due to the draft angles on the parts, UNLESS Italeri rendered them on a separate sprue tree to glue onto the core parts.

That indeed illustrates it rather nice. So the top of the nose around the probe door is flat, then the two 45 degree panels on either side (with an ever so slight curve on them), followed by the sides of the nose. In Flight Refueling pictures of an A-10 from the boom operator's station can also help to illustrate the transitions from above as well.

I've got one of the earlier A-10A kits about three quarters done. While I am not doing it as a C model, Eduard's cockpit etch is practically a requirement and looks great. The other requirement for this kit is resin intakes because the kit ones with their fan detail are so bad. In my case, I chose the Quickboost QB48-173 fans and they worked perfectly. Fit of the kit is pretty decent, which says a lot given some of the complicated assemblies, especially around the nose which can be even trickier when you smash some nose weight in there. Probably the trickiest areas to assemble are the engine exhausts with trying to keep from sanding details off, yet taking care of the seams in there. Plus you have to try and make sure the exhaust cones (with a left and right split) line up properly while the top and bottom split cowls assemble over them and the separately molded engine access doors come around. But I was able to get things to work. The engine access panels at least fit together well enough when you are building them closed, but they are set up to fit aftermarket resin engines in them. Keep this in mind when adding nose weight as resin engines can make the model even MORE of a tail sitter than it already is if you plan to have open engine bays. One other area that needs some minor tweaking is the upper nose on either side of the windscreen. As I recall the A-10 has a bit of a curve to the upper nose, followed by some 45 degree flat(ish) panels on the side as the profile transitions to the sides of the nose. Italeri molded this as more of a rounded ridge rather than a flat area. So it will take a little bit of re-profiling and sanding to get it to look right. It is not a difficult fix, although admittedly I have yet to tackle that area on my model. As for my model, when done it is going to be a bird from Terminator Salvation with repair/patchwork panels from different jets (giving it something of an X-Wing from Star Wars look). I have an art book that shows some interesting contrast work intended for the planes. Ultimately the paint work wasn't really done in the movie given the planes used for the flying scenes were active duty military jets and the USAF probably didn't want to make more work for themselves, but I still want to see if I can pull one off.

Thanks guys, It is an honor. There was one thing that popped up as being slightly incorrect after the book's publication (the reason for the scrubbing of the flight of Soyuz 2, which was not due to an electrical storm, but rather because Soyuz 1 had so many problems and it was to be the primary rendezvous and docking vehicle for that mission), but that is one of the disadvantages of not being able to speak Russian or the budget to fly over and dig through their archives. I tried to do my absolute best on the research to get it as right as I could. There is another aerospace book I wish to write on lifting bodies. I am hopeful that the experience I gained on researching and writing this one will help me to get the publisher I want to write for onboard with it, but we shall see. Who would have thought writing model building articles for the local newsletter and web kit reviews all those years ago would ultimately have lead to this? But it did and so far it has been an interesting ride.

Concerning adhesion issues with MM Acryl, I solved that by thinning them with Tamiya acrylic thinner. Trust me, it works A LOT better than using the Testors acrylic thinner and it seemed to cure the adhesion issues I had with the stuff. I still prefer using the Testors enamels to the acrylics, but during the times I have needed to spray acrylics, the X-20A thinner has not let me down or caused any compatibility or adhesion issues when I have used it with Testors acryl.

There are some colors on the MM1 rack that have quietly gone bye bye as well with two of the bigger casualties being Camouflage gray and Pale Green. I expect as time goes on the color line will continue to dry up as more and more colors no longer get made. Honestly, I don't know why Rustoleum even bothered with acquisition of Testors/Pactra as they have done some very dumb things, such as the discontinuation of Floquil RR and Pactra lexan spray paint (which was a BIG money maker at the hobby shop level).

Yes, I do have some photos and illustrations in the book. Not an earth shattering number due to the format, but there should be enough in there to keep the hardware junkie interested. I tell you though, I don't know if I want to see another official portrait of a dead Russian as long as I live. ;) Yes, Vladimir Chelomei is heavily covered in this book since without Almaz, TKS and Proton, we would not have had Salyut, Mir or the ISS as the Chelomei DNA is still in use today with the Zvezda and Zarya modules. I probably paint him more as a "hero" in my text as he really had to work hard against the system to get where he did and he came up with some great innovations along the way. He was at least astute enough to recruit allies in high places to get his designs flying and yes that did rub some people the wrong way, such as Dimitry Ustinov. But at the same time too, he was considered an outsider from day one and had to fight for acceptance when the USSR as a whole was more concerned with the development of ICBMs to counter the west than scoring achievements in spaceflight. Ustinov already lost one main rocket developer (Korolev) to the siren song of spaceflight, he wasn't about to lose another. Don't get me wrong, Korolev got the Soviet space program off the ground. But the reasons for the failure of the N1 booster and the lunar program probably had more to do with Korolev's design philosophy than with his premature death. I don't know if the N1 would have worked all that well even if Korolev was around to manage it when hardware was ready to fly.

Hello everybody, I have an announcement which I hope the moderators will allow me to do. Some of you may already know, but others are unaware that I have spent the better part of the past decade working on my first space history book for University of Nebraska Press. Well, the fruits of my labors are now out. I received my copy of "Outposts on the Frontier: a Fifty Year History of Space Stations" last week and several book stores locally also got it. This week, it looks like other vendors have received copies to sell as well. So if Space history (which includes some stuff on the USAF's Manned Orbiting Laboratory) interests you, go ahead and pick up a copy. Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/Outposts-Frontier-Fifty-Year-Stations-Spaceflight/dp/0803222920 The Air Force Museum Store: http://store.airforcemuseum.com/new/outposts-on-the-frontier-a-fifty-year-history-of-space-stations-100658.html Barns and Noble https://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/outposts-on-the-frontier-jay-m-chladek/1125021035 and plenty of other vendors as well.

I have the Usborne book of Space and of Robots in my stash (two segments of the "Future" book they did) from my childhood. I look at them periodically for inspiration. One day I hope to build the British Interplanetary Society's Star Probe Daedalus in model form because of how cool the Usborne version looked. I had a feeling the Solvalou might resonate with a Brit given its over/under engine configuration reminds me an awful lot of the English Electric Lightning. I even briefly toyed with giving it an RAF paintjob before the final scheme latched itself into my brain. TTA inspired paint would be perfect for it and it builds very easily, allowing you to build it in sub-assemblies if you need to.

I have had very good luck using Tamiya acrylic thinner to thin Testors Model Master acryl paints. It is all I use and seems to do the job with no adverse effects.

I'm not sure exactly when you wish to start the build, but if you can wait until September, the November issue of Fine Scale Modeler (due to hit news stands in September) has my buildup of the 22" Eagle which I originally did for a Kalmbach SF modeling book due the month later. Unfortunately it got bumped from the book, but with it coming out a month earlier, it should aid in your cause if you intend to go with building the 22" Eagle kit. And this July we will be seeing the cargo/winch Eagle hitting store shelves. It will also be an excellent seller.