Camus272

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

Well, NFWS is gone, but doesn't Topgun remain as a course within NAWDC?

The difference with the F-16 is that the newer model had better performance in the same airframe. Now, the Blues will have somewhat reduced performance with a significantly different size in the airframe. I'm sure (as I've seen stated) that they would very much prefer to keep the legacy model. But, you're right that maintenance issues will soon necessitate a change. At least we have a few more years. After this summer's show, I was wondering if that was the last time I would see a legacy F-18.

The plan now is to transition at the end of the 2021 season.

No, I don't know of one, and I assume from my own research that there isn't one. I've been thinking about it though. I have some schedules from the late 80s/ early 90s, and years from this century should be on the internet. I'd be happy to put a page together, if anyone has any Thunderbirds / Blue Angels schedules (most likely in print), I could work on adding them together.

Back in the 80s I built 1/48, 1/72, and 1/32 equally (and so my displays were a bit mismatched). When I returned to the hobby around 2000, I put some thought into scale. I wanted to keep everything the same If I could, to make everything comparable. 1/32 was clearly out because of space and availability. Between the other two, I don't really like the look of 1/72 - shape is usually a bit off, especially with things like missiles- and given the wider range of available kits and decals in 1/48, as well as the better detail I went with that. So far there is only one subject that hasn't been

Exactly, the Star Wars story films are obviously done much better than this whole sequel trilogy. I think it was a really good film, and I never had any thought that I wasn't watching Han Solo. I couldn't find much to criticize, there are two or three small things, but not necessarily worth nitpicking. Regarding Lando, one critique I've heard was that it was a little too close, - the actor was playing Billy Dee Williams playing Lando. In any case, I think it worked. Well, I don't think the story is over yet. The actors are signed on for three films. Who knows after

Spray can? There isn't likely to be a close match. Being the newest official color, three or four minor paint companies have begun making 36170 , but it isn't widely available.

Well, it had been about 11 years - when the F-14 started its career by flying over Vietnam. The last twenty years of combat has had no real expectation of air to air combat (although DACT and the aggressor community are going strong). I suppose North Korea could once again be posed as the threat, but really a war movie would be a a massive fiction, whereas during the Cold War the possibility of a CBG getting into air combat was more of a likely event (and the film was meant to show the real possibilities that naval aviators faced everyday). Any kind of rogue enemy as a threat could easily ma

IIn that case then the photo is really overexposed, which could be why I've seen the green referenced as 34258. I wish we could get some more photos.

Disappointing. But I'm not convinced 30140 is the right color anyway. It's too dark and a brown not tan. Looks like I'll put this one off for a while, I still have to do the other three splinters anyway.