seawinder

Thanks for the responses. BT, I had already found those pics as well as the ones at seatejectcolor.com. Mingwin, that is indeed a great thread. I had tried the search function, but hadn't found it or any other threads. Turns out I needed to use the advance search function and go by thread titles. I'll know better next time. Cheers, Pip

I'm more of a prop guy, so my repertoire of ejection seat colors is a bit limited. I'd much appreciate knowing what paints you jet guys use for an MB Mk. H-7 as found on an F-4E. I know the basic color scheme, but need specifics about cushions, belts, nylon covers, etc. TIA, Pip

Can you be more specific about your difficulties and what you're trying to achieve? What kind of airbrush are you using?

Hi Hal. I was under the impression that was more an issue with the 1/32 kit and had been fixed in the 1/48 kit. Pip

Your question is a bit like asking what I should have for supper, chicken or beef. What is your scale of preference, or does scale really not matter even though you're contemplating multiple builds? What do you value more, buildability or accuracy? If the latter, you might want to check out Brett Green's review of the Trumpeter kit at HyperScale -- http://www.hyperscale.com/2010/reviews/kits/trumpeter02288reviewbg_1.htm --in which he notes a number of fairly significant shape/dimension issues. In terms of accuracy, the Eduard 1/48 kit seems to come off quite well if not perfect. Two points

That may be okay for fighters, but I think not for bombers.

According to my research, RLM 66 is correct for the He 111 and undoubtedly for the Ju 188 as well. Cheers.

...never mind.

I agree that the markings were changed to U.S. Air Force and buzz numbers added, but I don't think the tail markings are the same as the "normal" TAC logo as seen in this photo: The bolt (if that's what it is) is at a different angle, doesn't appear to be yellow, and I don't see the badge superimposed.

While cruising on my boat last week, I came across an old copy of Richard Bach's first book, "Stranger to the Ground," which recounts his experiences flying an F-84F in Europe during the early 1960s as part of the 7108th TFW. It inspired me to consider replicating his plane, 52-6409, when I getting around to building one. I found this photo of the 7108th: There appears to be some sort of decoration on the vertical tails (lightning bolt?), but the photo is too small to make it out clearly. Does anyone have information and/or a better quality picture? Thanks! Pip

Where are you located? If you're in the USA and can either PM or email me your mailing address, I've probably got some leftovers to spare. Pip

... which I noted in my post. Still think the surrounds in the photos are blue, maybe overpainted.

FWIW, the photos look to me more like blue than red. There's a photo of another Corsair higher up with red surround; it's a lot lighter (of course the type of film -- ortho or pan -- could give different appearances). Is it possible that at one point the surrounds were red, but were overpainted in blue later? Cheers, Pip

I'm using Gunze Mr. Color acrylic lacquers for the 70/71 paint job on an He 111. They compare well to the Merrick chips. The 71 is slightly lighter, but a very good match for hue. Cheers, Pip

The D&S assessment: "Although it is still marketed today, this old kit lacks detailing, has a number of very noticeable inaccuracies, and it falls short of every other 1/48th scale Thunderbolt that is presently available. We cannot recommend any issue to the scale modeler." Unfortunately, the author doesn't get at all specific about the "noticeable inaccuracies." Cheers, Pip

...but not the enamels. Linden Hill only stocks the aqueous acrylics and the acrylic lacquers. FWIW, I've been using the acrylic lacquers on a couple of VVS subjects and like them very much. Rather like the Mr. Color line. I'm really happy to find a way to get the enamels in the USA; I've ordered a bunch of the modern Soviet colors for a MiG-21 SMT down the line. Cheers, Pip

That's very good news. Any idea from what source(s) it will be available for purchase? Cheers, Pip

Well, the A-5 I built had everything closed. It was somewhat of a PITA, but I'm quite pleased with the result. Actually, as I recall, the most aggravating section of the build was the engine mounts. I struggled with them unsuccessfully for some time before I realized that they were basically unnecessary since the the engine was such a tight fit in the cowling.

Are there significantly different build issues between the Eduard D and A kits? FWIW, I found the A-5 kit buildable, if not particularly user friendly. Cheers, Pip

Don't you mean parallel?

I've got several other projects, including an Airfix Mk.22, to finish before I tackle the Eduard IX. I'm sort of thinking of it like a really nice bottle of wine that I'm forcing myself not to drink to soon.

Agreed, and I am one and have no present intention of building a Tamiya IX for that reason. Still, Juan put forward the Eduard IX as the best one in any scale. I'm quite ready to agree that it's the best IX in 1/48, even though I haven't yet opened the box that finally arrived at my house a few days ago. Still, if one were looking for the quintessentially detailed and engineered IX without consideration of scale, the Tamiya masterpiece would be a strong contender, don't you think? Cheers, Pip

You don't think the Tamiya 1/32 kits deserve a spot on the dais?

Pretty sure it's an E cockpit. Apparently ProModeler took the old Revel mold and added improved cockpit and wheel well parts. The kit still has its share of problems, notably an over-sized rudder and incorrectly angled windscreen.

"They have trouble with a simple RAF roundel. Makes me wonder about the rest of the research." I think that's snide, but I'm not sure it's actually insinuating anything. I wonder if it might not have been a bit of dry humor. Nevertheless, people (over)react, accusations fly, and now the molehill is a mountain. Pip