Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About bushande

  • Rank
    Step away from the computer!

Recent Profile Visitors

7,171 profile views
  1. 31s for the Bravo are fine, however GBU-38s ONLY for F-14Deltas, actually only for VF-31 and -213 in 2005. They received clearance just before the last '05 / 06 cruise. VF-101 GBU-38 clearance only for test AFAIK.
  2. AKAN has a ready to use paintset: https://www.lindenhillimports.com/store/p966/AKAN46760.html#/
  3. No, I haven't misspelled - it's really "weekly door" (ref just GW8345s post just above mine. He also makes reference to it recommending to sand of the oil drains). It's not the professional terminology by Grumman but a common reference by the maintainers. There are different access panels on the F-14s engine nacelles and according to how often you would open them for inspections/maintenance etc. the maintainers would call them "daily doors", "weekly doors", "monthly doors". The smaller panel with the round fire access panel on it and the little cooling vent has a slightly different l
  4. Well, I would go with the Delta variant as a base for a conversion into a Bravo. Mainly because of the slight differences in the layout of the weekly doors. TF-30 engined birds needed a slightly different weekly door. As far as I can reckon, the Tamiya Alpha kits do not contain a suitable part for a weekly door that suits the nacelles for GE-110 equipped versions. Or you just sand off the details there and rescribe it.
  5. The Hasegawa Kit (and btw. also the Tamiya Kit) is correct in depicting that "double bubble". The plans might be somewhat exegerrated but the kit itself has it actually rather correct. A little background: Originally ROHR was the supplier to Grumman for some of the F-14s main fuselage parts such as the intakes etc. including the canopy. The original glass was one flat bow but it was found that the RIO and the seat needed more space and that there was some risk upon ejection so the rear canopy was further bulged out as of block 75 with ammendmends to earlier units later on. ROHR later had
  6. No! The reinforcement was not present as of production on any F-14D, even the last production Tomcat 164604 had no reinforcement until her end. It was done to the airframes as fatique set in. hence you need to look at your serial and the time you want to build it. During the nineties you wouldn't see much of the stiffeners. as time progressed into the early 2000's the likelyhood of the reinforcement on a certain airframe would grow.
  7. Hmmm ... I wonder why no one so far has given the obvious a chance? It's 50 years of Tomcats and let's face is, whether we like it or not, the big fighter is still flying! ... just not for the US sadly. I know it sucks, especially for all buddies in the US and yes I know it's always a delicate issue sadly but hey politics - shmolitics! While they don't sport any fancy squadron insignia, their dresses look awesome too. If I had the time to commit, I would do one of those neat - still active after 50 whoppin' years - Persian cats. Heck, 160299 - the first Persian Tomcat, is still flying after al
  8. Thats awesome news Arnaud! That will certainly make me go for another order with you. Great stuff.
  9. Good grief! Though I haven't posted here I have been continuously watching this thread now for quite a while (as many others have as well I guess). Have I been quite fascinated with the work until about page three so far, the work portrayed here on page four just blows my mind. I always thought I was anal about shape issues and the work necessary to get it fixed but this here is just absolutely crazy. Amazing work and an admirable effort put in the old gal. One can really see that it is a labor of love for you. I wonder what you would do to "fix" the Enterprise-D?! (I confess that
  10. Sorry for my late reply. Thanks for the effort of clearing the images habu. I wouldn't have noticed. Much appreciated. @Sernak: As said, life has it at the moment that I can only very sporadicly access the forum. I have to check my ressources for 115. I'll need a little time for that until I get back home. I have about 70 original slides all just on first cruise VF-1 birds. It might take a while. @ Andrew: Which image do you mean? The one of NK-110 with the oversized red cheat stripe with black outlines or the B/W image of NK-101 with the VF-1 roundel insig
  11. Yeah but that has nothing to do with the design and the plane itself. That is just timing and politics. You don't see all that many F-22 either and also not getting the "love" it would deserve by the USAF (one of the reasons why there is an F-15EX at all?!), the F-117 has not lasted that long either and the only reason those other "cool" jets are still around seems to be affordability, simplicity of the system itself, that the envisioned replacements are not produced in sufficient numbers or are not coming along quickly enough or still show teething problems that leads decision makers to cling
  12. Sorry that it took a while. Life has me caught up in a lot of stuff at the moment without much time for the hobby or to sort out images out of the mess I call an archive but here are at least some refs that give proof that 158979 had the ENTERPRISE designation twice on her at some point .... [img]https://up.picr.de/40820076mm.jpg[/img] [img]https://up.picr.de/40820075oj.jpg[/img] I have a ton of images of the early VF-1 birds showcasing all the funny design variations they did at some point, however I just don't have the time to sort them all out, sorry. One I
  13. It's not the IRGC that flies them, it's the IRIAF. That's a huge difference there. Those two services despice each other like a pest and the IRIAF hates having to lend some of their Tomcats to the IRGC guys .... As rarely as this happens though.
  14. Bonjour de 'allemagne Arnaud. Those Exhausts and Engines are a much needed and excellent addition to the 1/48 Eurofighter. It has been a hazzle in the past for me to do that and your sets make it a lot easier. Finally the kink of the nozzle feathers is in teh right direction. If I may suggest: One of the very prominent shortcomings of the albeit very shape accurate but only little detailed Revel Eurofighter is the canopy frame. It is not only that the canopy is positione a little to far rear but more importantly the canopy frame is far more complex than what the kits are giving us.
  • Create New...