Quixote74

If I'm not mistaken, as implied by the suffix letters it was actually the AIM-9J that was used by the very early F-15s, quickly supplanted in the late 70s by the AIM-9L as the first "all aspect" Sidewinder (i.e. able to lock on a target from the front, not just the exhaust). The AIM-9J and later AIM-9N and P variants are virtually identical as far as modelers are concerned, so easy to mix those up!

As great as Jakub's site is as a reference source, unfortunately he doesn't clarify dates of the photos and in many cases they actually show the airframes in question well after Desert Storm (the "LZ" tailcodes, and obviously the boneyard shots of Eternal Guardian being prime examples). In 1991 she wore the 3-color "Strategic" scheme, as seen clearly here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/22790934@N07/49386130338 Because the upper green (34086) and gray (36081) faded to very similar shades, and there is relatively little green area in the scheme on the port forward fusela

Only other sources I'm aware of for the GPU-5 in 1:72 are not aftermarket, but kits: the vintage Monogram Strike Eagle (which represented 71-291, the DRF demonstrator) and Italeri's F-15E. I've never compared size/shape to the Hasegawa version so not sure if either would be an improvement for accuracy or fit to the Hasegawa F-16.

Nice Tiger Meet decals there -is that a custom set, or is there a source for those?

Note that Maestro's Oerlikon pack is only available in 1:72. Since Special Hobby did the Viggen family in both 1:72 and 1:48 (co-produced with Tarangus), it's not clear which scale you're working in. If 1:48, the only JA gunpacks I'm aware of are the ones in the SH/Tarangus or ESCI/Italeri kits.

These are commonly referred to (by modelers, at least) as "sway braces." In U.S. services there are also specific alphanumeric designations for the exact components and assemblies, so if you are looking for a specific aircraft or ordnance type that may narrow your search (and help weed out results from IKEA on Google). This seems to be a fairly complete article on the loading process, including some images: http://www.tpub.com/aviord321/148.htm

I would think at this scale, and given Fine Molds' typical joint fidelity "out of the box," that the latex paint trick that's been used in larger scales for years should make short work of any visible seams in that construction. And ultimately there's no good alternative in injection molding - certainly a vast improvement over Hasegawa's truncated funnel, or the blank plate you get in most F-16 kits at this scale.

Assuming this may be the one and only 1/72 aviator you need, Reedoak is probably the top of the line available (based on photos, I do not have any in hand). PJ Productions also does a variety of well-made resin crew figures from varied eras and nationalities: https://www.pj-production.be/en/7-figures-1-72 "Best value" I've seen by far for aftermarket crew in God's Own Scale is the Revell AG set from 2012 - about a dozen seated pilots per set, plus more standing figures. Sadly OOP but being injection molded plastic rather than the soft vinyl seen in sets from ESCI,

Sad to see this pattern repeated by Dragon/Cyber-Hobby. Several years ago they announced a late-configuration 1/700 kit of the carrier CVN-65 - which has been direly needed by ship modelers and Enterprise fans for years. They seemed to be close enough to release to show sprue shots and box art, then suddenly the release date was pushed, then pushed again, then left indefinite with no formal cancellation or other explanation. Even more frustrating, one of the related companies did release a pre-built model of the ship (supposedly die-cast, and at a ludicrous MSRP) that seems to be the only ve

That's the first I've heard of the Eagle being fitted with such a system, but it may be of interest to you & other readers of this thread that Wolfpak Decals did markings for two different test schemes for the F-4C that ran the "Yehudi light" tests at Eglin circa 1972 (which ultimately led to the countershaded Compass Ghost scheme). Unfortunately it was only offered on their 2017 "Thank You" set, but the markings themselves are pretty simple - the trickiest part to duplicate being the red diamond tail band used by the weapons test squadron at that time. http://www.m

With the above in mind, the E boxing is probably the preferred option IMHO but neither is 100% out of the box so price may be your decider. Israeli I-models don't have the Tiger Eye IRST, and at least in early service ("pre-R2") used the LANTIRN pods - or technically IIRC, the externally identical "Sharpshooter" export variant. I believe they later swapped the targeting pods for the indigenous Litening, which was probably before the dorsal antenna domes were added (so an early bird is the simplest to do w/o scratchbuilding). I's have mass balances on both fins per the K

Short answer: it depends. Generally speaking, any given air wing's composition is not fixed indefinitely: as squadrons and aircraft types are added or retired, the makeup of the air wing may change (type conversion training cycles, crisis deployment needs, and force reductions are just some contributing factors). Assuming a short enough timeframe that the same squadrons are operating the same types within the same air wing over multiple deployments, the chances of at least one of those squadrons making at least minor changes to their markings are high, but from a modeling standpoi

Well this is one of the many cases where Occam's razor applies to modeling: if the full stencils are clearly visible on the upper surfaces, it's most likely they didn't leave off *only* the ones on the underside - but odds of clear, well-lit photos of the belly showing up are pretty much nil, so you have to make an informed decision for yourself. Technically, without photos you can't say the Sparrow wells weren't painted lavender, but it's what I'd consider a safe risk 😄

A google image search for "153783 bunny" should turn up a good selection of photos, just a couple of things to keep in mind: This airframe wore (at least) two different versions of the "black bunny" scheme, with some significant detail differences in markings and airframe details. The earliest version has what I refer to as the "derp bunny" on the tail: it is clearly based on the Playboy logo, but the rabbit's head is "squashed" compared to the official version. At this point she wore the full blue/gold/white star trim, but did *not* have the DECM antennae on the "shoulders" of the

I suppose this is a "glass half empty" outlook, but from what can be seen in those sprues I see nothing but good news: - The tooling is obviously set up to allow for a full range of single and two-seat fighter and strike variants - not only the forward fuselage but also the belly plate are separate parts, allowing for the various detail differences between versions. I'm confident single and dual canopies will be provided for the respective versions as appropriate. - Stores may not include all of the latest, greatest options, but an ample range is provided in the box (something

I believe the bare-metal areas over the engine bays were consistent between all Foxbat variants (with exception of the rare multicolor camouflage scheme). Basically on the belly the metal runs from behind the main gear bays back to the exhausts. Note that the metal area also extends up the fuselage sides all the way up to the wing roots, and runs back along the horizontal panel lines (including an angled section). There is also a distinctive color change (metal type/alloy) between the area immediately forward of the engine nozzles and the rest of the metal finish. Begemot shows th

Well as far as I'm aware Fujimi has never produced a 1/72 MiG-29UB (9.51, aka "Fulcrum B") - this is the two-seat training variant. The first generation single seater is simply a MiG-29 (9.12, NATO "Fulcrum A"). Fujimi did one of the earliest kits of the 9.12, but it was based on photos taken from a significant distance and this suffered from some major shape errors. It builds very well and has a level of detail that is much better than many later, more accurate kits, but if you're unhappy with the Revell kit (also boxed by ACE and Tsukuda) you'll want to avoid Fujimi for sure.

I'd tend to rank the "new tool" Academy best value, even with its shortcomings. You can replace the dreadful exhausts with aftermarket and still have less invested than the GWH typical retails for. The later toolings of Hasegawa's Mudhen that added updated parts for a mostly accurate E (or derivatives) out of the box is also a solid choice. I have yet to see any previews, but Revell Germany has announced an all-new tooling of the F-15E in 1/72 for late 2021. If it gets the same team that did work like their F-16 family it could easily top this list (the "Son of Matchbox" quality o

Castle (93rd BW) was at that time the B-52G 'schoolhouse' so it's likely they would have operated a couple of the Harpoon-capable airframes but not with any operational mission. Castle was also the only wing at the time that operated a mix of ALCM and non-ALCM Gs, again for training. All other G units operated one or the other, with the non-ALCM units given priority for conventional missions including antiship strike with the AGM-84s. My recollection is that Loring, ME (42nd BW) and Andersen, Guam (43rd CW) were the initial operational Harpoon units, essentially an "Atlantic" and "

A lot of folks responding here seem to have been confused by the OP's term "late tail sections." There actually is only one aft fuselage/tail molding for the AMT B-52 family. It represents the late-Cold War G/H with (most of) the various Phase VI ECM mods, including the ALQ-153 warning blisters on the upper part of the vertical tail. The constant-section tail plug between the empennage and tail gun (part of Phase VI) is a separate two-part addition that can simply be omitted for earlier G/H models, but all the other "late tail" features will require mods to the plastic as @Gator52 noted.

Normally that would be true, except as I pointed out, the AIM-9 on the wingtip is known to be FS36375, so it gives a baseline for relative comparison (in the same light conditions and overexposure). Unless you think somehow the airframe is overexposed but the missile is not? Bottom line is FS36307 is nowhere near the actual color (too dark and too "warm" a gray). Saving others some time, your links above reposted in "live" format: https://www.the-northrop-f-5-enthusiast-page.info/Pictures/USAF/00881SideA.jpg https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/9/5

I'm not certain of the exact FS color, but 36307 is definitely not it (despite Armycast's suggestion). In the photo below you can see what @Jay Chladek described as the "almost white" appearance of this color, but with a wingtip AIM-9 in the "known" color of FS36375. The airframe is clearly much lighter than light ghost gray. 36307 is a darker color than 36375, as well as being a significantly "warmer" gray, often having an almost beige/tan appearance. The FCM instructions (readable on their own site) call for FS36495: http://www.fcm.eti.br/48-33 Instruction1.jpg

@Rob de Bie reading through the thread you linked, some of the posts seem to have been edited and possibly abridged. @kotey may have answered the question at the time, but if so it's not there anymore. It seems there was a "1955" version of the insignia and a "1973" (or possibly 1974) version, but I can't find any specifics on what the differences in these may be. My best guess from photos and what the Begemot 1955 instructions show is that the 1955-1973 version has a red/white border (only), while the 1973 version has a additional thin white outer border. The problem is those feat

As @achterkirch noted, correct seat for a Desert Storm-era A-7E is the Stencel, the Corsair II never had NACES fitted. With all the detail differences, you might consider picking up an Italeri A-7E kit (or similar from AMT/Esci or Ace/Tsukuda) for the detail parts. Then you should pretty well have a complete D left over to build or sell/trade. If you're having difficulty finding the Fujimi A-7E, have you considered looking for the Testors boxing? This has the Fujimi plastic, probably with better decals and instructions. They actually reboxed both the D and E kits, though I seem t

The TwoBobs sheet @kozlok mentioned actually includes three "Gamblers" F-16Cs, a squadron commander and line birds from Allied Force (1999) and Iraqi Freedom (2003). I may have an extra copy of this sheet (or at least spares of one of the options), so if you can't find it through other sources send me a PM. https://www.arcair.com/Rev1/501-600/Rev598-TwoBobs72033/00.shtm I got to see some of these birds in person at an airshow at Shaw in fall 2000, and can confirm that they wore the 2-color gray scheme at that time (36118 over 36270, no 36375).