Camus272

It was the commander of the 57th Fighter Wing - "Blend'r" - who opened up the submissions to the public. He didn't choose the winner though, we voted for it on Facebook. There were a few pretty awful schemes that luckily didn't make it too far. I'm looking forward to doing a walk-around of the Digital Ghost scheme in a few weeks.

I've been wondering this for 20 years. It's not the Vietnam scheme. Although, I think I've seen one diagram (without paint numbers) that's different than the rest of that standard schemes, so I'm not sure if there is possibly another one. MM had already come out for the colors for the Strategic scheme, so I'm sure they knew what the B-52 colors actually were. Since these paints have now been discontinued, I guess it doesn't really matter, but I've wondered - who's been buying them for the last two decades?

I haven't received my order yet. I was starting to wonder about the shipping status (not that I'm in a hurry, I just like to know there aren't any problems). Raymond - is it possible to give us an update since there is no tracking information? Thanks.

Looking at my current in-progress table, my problem is usually: 1. Something doesn't fit (go to put a canopy on closed and it won't fit) 2. Something went wrong (removing masking tape to find the canopy cracked -which is going to take some in-depth surgery) 3. I've either lost a part/ decal or 4.I made a significant mistake in accuracy (forgetting a part or something wrong for the block, etc - more surgery) The biggest problem is life. In March I started a group build, but as the semester came to end I spent six weeks just thinking about class. Now, I'm

The F-35 gets another mission with a new (old )squadron, as the 65th is being reactivated for aggressor duty. It will be interesting to see if they can get away with anything different for the paint scheme.

I'm still waiting on my two-seaters, but it seems then that they went a little cheaper on the new kit as far as decal and weapons, even with the increased price. I wouldn't have minded NASA decals for the white version, but I'll have to piece that scheme together myself.

They are on the sprue with the Mk 82's - part #5s.

The Revell kit also has the outboard pylon with the original ALQ pod. I believe the Hasegawa F-15E has outboard pylons too - they ended up on my build anyway. It was originally tested with the AIM-120 and the AGM-88. But, the new pylon may be different. It has been depicted with AIM-120s or AIM-9s.

Yeah, I'm not excited about future Blue Angels shows. From what I've read about the new routines so far, nothing is going to be better. It will be a shorter show, with less inverted flying. I don't think the larger airframes are going to help either. The legacy Hornets just look more like a high performance sports car.

The Navy recently got rid of their last fleet F-18C squadron. That leaves just aggressors and the Blue Angels (for three more seasons) as the last legacy Navy Hornets.

Nevermind

Having got most of it together (and testing some Have Glass colors), I realized a few things: 1. I now have three directions I want to go with this build, (an added danger of a what-if). 2. After putting the tail, I realized the F-16XL had a problem with chaff and flare launchers - they are covered by the Amraams. So the F-16EX (as I label it) is going to have the extended tail to make some room for them (which required some cutting, casting and insertion of the new part). Yes, 1/48. With the two-seater released this week I may end up doing

And, it begins . . .

I'm planning on regular pylons for PGMs, but now you've got me thinking, with the development of JDAMs and SDBs advancing the effectiveness of free-fall munitions, I wonder if the individual bomb racks would have become a thing again. I'm not sure if I can afford to source that much ordnance though.

Looks like I'll start an updated, 21st century F-16XL. I have no idea what the designation would have been: F-16E block 52? 62? Whatever it is, we'll see how it would look if active in the current Air Force, using the Skunk Models 1/48 kit. I probably should have finished something first- but what's one more ongoing project? (I'll add photos tomorrow)

[disregard]

Interesting, it looks like they just took the sprue out of an F-16 kit - it seems that the 501 pylons are in the F-16 block 20 kit, so that may have all the parts.

I believe the 501 pylons are only in the Revell kit. I think the easiest way is to use a Hasegawa F-16A and add the Revell parts (that's how I went did it). I would save the Tamiya kit for a later airframe build. Just to add an answer to your question: the accurate tail is definitely only in the Revell or Kinetic kits.

Yeah, as an aviation photographer, I can say that tracking and focusing on something like an F4U (or the Blue Angels) is much, much easier than a tactically painted F-16 or F-18 demo. Thunderbirds white is kind of an odd case, as it can blend with the clouds, or can be easily visible, but reflecting so much light that no details are easily detected.

I don't recall that they ever had free shipping. They've had some cheaper surface options, but that's as good as it gets.

Mixing has been the case in a number of aggressor schemes, where the resulting color has no FS number, or 5% darker, etc (and sometimes the result was not intended). I don't believe that paint has to legally match a pre-determined color.

Between 4 and 10 F-22s are damaged. That's going to hurt.

This is true of all airshows. Since 2011 things have been declining (although not as bad as 2013 when there were no teams and 2014 when no static displays were allowed at civilian shows). Things have been getting better, but they aren't the same - the F-18 demo was only at 3 or 4 shows this year. Just last weekend, the F-22 demo cancelled because of "operational requirements." Even at shows like Nellis, which as a kind of Air Force "home" show has been immense, it's not quite the same. They don't usually get the F-18 demo anymore, and they don't have the single AF demos that used to compli

The Russians have tried that. The first time I found about that was flying Fighters Anthology and as I was closing in on the rear of a Sukhoi fighter I was blown out of the sky. An interesting idea, and if the Russians had a pressing need to make it work, could be useful.

Because there wasn't the need (or budget) for it. The Cold War was over, and large forces of carrier-attacking aircraft have not been anticipated. The F-14 was largely designed around the AIM-54 long range missile, a weapon whose role has not been filled with a replacement either, but eventually outlived its mission anyway. The SH was conceived as a stop gap to keep the carrier decks capable until the Navy could get a fifth-generation fighter. From what I hear from Hornet pilots (And engineers from PAX River), the prominent deficiency in the Super Hornet is the under-powered engine which the