mawz

Note that at least some of the CF-104 boxings have the bulged front gear doors (which are in fact inaccurate for the CF-104), I got caught out by that on the CF-104 I built from the Hasegawa kit.

Note the Indians do still operate Harriers and are a likely force for the RAN to operate with on a regular basis.

And there's progress. Cockpit & intake painted, instrument panel painted & decalled, fuselage & main wing assembled and there's a coat of paint on the lower wing. Hasegawa F-8E 1/72 by mawz_models, on Flickr

And an actual update Italieri F-18C by mawz_models, on Flickr You can't really see it, but the searchlight has been added and I've cut off the extra antennae of the C. The fit at the forward/main fuselage join is horrid though, that's going to make for a lot of work. This kit reminds me all too much of the Testors F/A-18 in 1/48 (in fact it looks like the same kit scaled down).

Sounds awesome. Plenty of interesting options, I'd be up for that.

Hasegawa might if their 1/72 Sea Flanker sells well (I know I'm getting the 1/72 version even though I'm not a Jet guy for the most part). There's been some info coming out of Hasegawa that they may start doing more modern Russian stuff since that's what the youth market in Japan is into.

Basic mods are to shorten the fuselage and reshape the engine nacelles, the S-2F is fairly different from the RCN's S2F-1's (S-2A's)

I can't speak to the Humbro Acrylics, but I've used the MM ones. 1. An adventure. Get ready for clogging, running and all sorts of other problems. I purely HATE spraying MM Acryl paints and they hate me too. 2. Yes, MM Acryl can have adhesion issues too. Primer's probably a good idea. 3. The real pity is the colours are GREAT. They've got the colours you want for just about any subject, especially anything which flew and was painted in FS colours. If only they sprayed worth a damn.

I'm in for this build with a positively ancient Minicraft/Hasegawa boxing of the Hasegawa F-8E in 1/72. Markings are for VF-111 in the classic Light Gull Grey over white scheme. Hasegawa F-8E 1/72 by mawz_models, on Flickr

I'm late to the party, but joining up anyways. Going to be building Italieri's F/A-18C in 1/72 with CF-188A markings. I'm hoping to use a set of Leading Edge markings, but the fit on the kit looks rough, so I'll use the kit decals if the build doesn't work out well. Italieri F/A-18C 1/72 by mawz_models, on Flickr

My only quibble here would be 'lighter armament', while the F8F-1 in 4x.50 form is definitely lighter armed than a Hellcat, in 4x20mm form it was actually much better armed for air-to-air or strafing than even the mixed-armament F6F's (2x20mm, 4x50mm) and the F8F-2 was normally equipped with the 4x20mm armament. In terms of bombload the F8F was a lightweight as you note.

Note the F4U-1 is also much faster than a Hellcat despite being just about the same size, weight & horsepower(later, faster Corsairs did gain HP over the Hellcat, but the Corsair was still a good 45MPH faster at the same power rating). The big improvements over the Hellcat in both the Corsair and the Bearcat are in terms of drag, both are much cleaner designs than the Hellcat, mostly in terms of frontal area where the Hellcat is simply a pig. The Bearcat is even better than the Corsair in terms of frontal area, but the Corsair got a more powerful engine in later versions which evened thing

Wikipedia for once has good references on that issue, with the test flying of the captured Fw190 by Bob Hall happening around the same time as the start of design work on the G58 (which would become the F8F). It also indicates that the G58 design began in 1943 with prototypes ordered in November of that year. Unlike the captured Zero influencing the F6F design (ridiculous considering the XF6F-1 flew in 1941, long before that Zero was captured), the Fw190 influence is significantly more believable and is visible in the cowl & exhaust designs of both the F8F and Sea Fury (Note that the cowl

The primary influence on the F8F was the much tighter cowling and the exhaust configuration (The Fw190A/F, F8F and Sea Fury all have very similar exhaust configurations), the tight cowling was the primary innovation of the Fw190 design and it made for superior aerodynamics which is one major reason why the F8F was so much faster than the F6F. The F8F was already in early design stages when the US finally got its mitts on a Fw190A to inspect. Size-wise it's very unlikely as the F8F's size, while very close to the Fw190 in overall dimensions, was more influenced by the F4F and the size of Escort

It wasn't the fastest prop plane in stock form although it was the fastest US Navy single-engine prop plane (note the Corsair was very similar in speed though, some listings have the F8F as slower than the Corsair, others as faster). The Hawker Sea Fury for example was marginally faster (listed top speed of 460mph vs 455 for the F8F-2) as was the twin-engine F7F (also with a listed top speed of 460mph) and the P-51H was almost 30mph faster (and also wasn't used in Korea). The F8F was the fastest climbing single-engine propeller aircraft (it held the world record for climb to altitude for 10 ye

While CA (Crazy Glue) definitely works better than tube glue, I'd second the recommendation to use liquid cement for most model building. CA degrades over time and you may end up with self-disassembling models in a few years if you use CA for assembling the main sections of the model. Liquid Cement welds the plastic itself rather than relying on the bond strength of the glue. Keep the CA around though, sometimes you do need it, especially when working with Resin or PE parts which cannot be glued with liquid cement. I use the Tamiya liquid cement myself, it's good and available anywhere you ca

The SWS models are all Zoukeimura molds.

It's actually based off some research the British did in the 1950's, it's a good solution to G reduction for the TSR-2MS's flight profile in the series but unsuitable for general ACM.

Don't forget the Marines, VMF-214 dates back to 1942

I've got 4 boxes right now. 1. 1/72 spares 2. 1/48 & 1/32 spares 3. Ordnance 4. Decals At some point I'll likely expand and add organization, but I don't have that large an amount of spares as of yet with only 15 completed kits in the last 3 years.

Ignore that, I was mistaken. The older RoG boxing has JT973, the current boxing has JT997 (and incorrectly identifies 168 Squadron as being RCAF, it's a RAF squadron number of course). I have the current boxing and am good to go for an RAF bird. Much better sheet on the current boxing BTW, the older sheet (which I'd dug up images of) is very basic and partially incorrect (It has Navy and RY3 markings as well, incorrect for JT973 as that was an RAF airframe seconded to the RCAF, not a USN airframe). The current sheet is far more extensive.

The RoG decals in my boxing are for JT973, complete with nose art.

Other 'way round really, they're a pretty hot ship for a trainer and cheap in comparison to something of WW2 vintage. A LOT cheaper than even the cheapest P-51 for sure. I happen to know several T-28 owners as my Dad has a demilitarized Fennec.

Anybody know of R3Y decals? The RoG boxing only provides one set for the R3Y option and it's a semi-bogus RCAF option (The aircraft did exist in those markings but requires serious scratchbuilding or a unique update set to represent as it had a bunch of stuff hanging off for icing research). I've got one half-built right now and I'd like to finish it in something other than generic markings.

There's a very big difference between Trademark and Copyright. Copyright protects an entire work or text and is subject to limitations on the protection (Fair Use for example) and is international in scope via the Berne Convention. Trademark protects a logo, slogan, name or combination thereof with much more stringent protections (there is no Trademark equivalent of Fair Use) but much higher requirements to maintain protection (You MUST always enforce Trademarks or lose them, Copyright may be selectively enforced at the holders discretion). Trademarks are NOT international and must be register