bushande

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.

AKAN has a ready to use paintset: https://www.lindenhillimports.com/store/p966/AKAN46760.html#/

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

deleted, double post, see below ...

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.

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

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.

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

Thats awesome news Arnaud! That will certainly make me go for another order with you. Great stuff.

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

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

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

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

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.

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.

A few months ago I posted some shots of the three blue/grey F-14s I was able to catch when I had the chance to sneak into the country with a small group two years ago. Should be weathered enough I think. Here you go (about to the middle of each thread):

I am not entirely sure if this is really completely correct and I also don't necessarly think that Brian (FTD) made an error here. About ten years back I was able to talk to some of the former aircrew that served with VF-1 on the 1st F-14 cruise and also during the trials and work ups prior to the cruise and according to at least two of them 158627 did indeed go on board as NK-101 in what at that time after many changes evolved into their standard scheme until they lost the white belly after their second cruise till '77. 158627 received the shorter gun muzzle with the six grill vent too just p

Well, at least for the moment I will refrain from the kit. I confess the panel lines do really look quite excessive - rather like trenches. Not really what one would expect nowadays but hey, in the end if that was the worst problem, so be it. A few layers of primer and color and it might not turn out so bad. I still do have two old Revell Tonis and the old but nice Paragorn flaps / slats. As long as I can do with these (those few missing panel lines on the intake sides and the belly are not really a huge issue to rescribe) I just don't see any reason to pay three-digit amounts for that kit. It

Incorrect. I have old original slides that depict 158979, i.e. this very bird as NK-100 with USS ENTERPRISE on both, the vert. stabs as well as the wing gloves. It was not the only modex that had the carrier name placed on both spots. VF-1 went through a lot of design changes in the early stages before and around the first cruise. The carrier names in both places would be correct for this particular ship along other serials for the work up phase prior to the cruise. External tanks were very uncommon but there. It would have been the old versions that still had the fincaps on the bu

You'll need a TCS chinpod, the ECM bumps on the beaver tail and on each side of the intake walls and the Alphas of the latter days esspecially those late VF-154 birds of 2003 you are interest in definitely had a PTID and FLIR controller for the RIO. Speaking of which, you may also get ahold of a LANTIRN plus respective pylon if you want to strap A/G loads on your bird (which would be more realistic thatn pure A/A combos for that squadron in that time). hence you may also try and get the BRU-93 racks for the Phoenix pallets. You already notd the NACA gun vents. A change of the wheels has occure

Thank you. Much appreciated.

Much appreciated, many thanks. Revell has the bird issued in 1/72 scale. There's a WIP and display thread of it in 1/48 here on the forum and I am currently in preparations for a 1/32 rendition.

If it is for tailart, I am pretty much "forced" to vote for this ... (after all it's mine .... with a boatload of help from the mighty big boss up above! (thanks dad!)) If it is for tail shape nothing will beat the F-14 tail in my eyes (oh my, how I wish I could do a Tiger design for a Tomcat ... oooooooh the possibilities!)

You misunderstood the issue about the hips. It is not that they are too broad; that wouldn't be such a big issue to resolve. it is rather that they are wrongly angled and thus creating the impression of being too round and broad. The way it is, it is pretty much impossible or well let's say, very very circumstancial to at least halfway correct that issue. For me personally the hip-issue is just the major tun-off but what actually bothers me even more about the kit by now are the way too fat LEX areas above the intakes. In Manuel J.'s Flickr gallery is a nice side b side shot of his Tamiya VF-2

many thanks once again. Much appreciated. I'm still in preparation for the 1/32 iteration.