eharrold44

Yep. Thinning the putty allows you to smooth it into tighter spaces. I pretty much always go that route. It will shrink big time, though, so let it fully cure and then go back over it with further applications if necessary.

There's nothing wrong at all with a back-to-basics OOB build-up of a classic kit. Helps you to remember what drew you to modeling in the first place. There's something oddly comforting about old kits molded in color. It's almost as if the kit is saying, "Paint me, don't paint me. I'm cool either way." Kits with huge parts counts and PE frets come across as demanding snobs by comparison. "Is that a perfect FS match? If not, don't bother. I can't stomach your bourgeois taste in colors." Yes, I'm assigning personality traits and voices to plastic. Anyway... The paint work looks great

Bumpy bump! Still looking for these items.

Sharp looking parts, casting looks nearly flawless to my eyes.

International shipment. Busiest month of the year for mail. That is all.

Impressive looking kit for the price. The jet nozzle is one of the better stock nozzles I've seen. It depicts the iris arrangement of the individual blades nicely, and the detailing on the inside is a nice touch.

I did find a decent build of a Lindberg P-6E floating around: Rochester, NY IPMS The shape doesn't look bad, though I'm not all that familiar with the plane. I could see that kit turning into something really nice with some added rigging and detailing. I'm not sure if I'd take it on with the Classic Airframes kit already on the market, but at $10 you probably can't go wrong.

Post-war? Seems like that's most common description for early jets and late variants of WWII props.

Things I like- -You can build accurate Midway birds right out of the box. Including the twin mount is a big plus. -The guns look great! Add some ammo belts and they'll look fantastic. -Panel lines are much more accurate than the Monogram's. The old kit's fuselage panel lines were just plain wrong for the most part. -The Mk 13 will probably be a huge improvement. -Cockpit includes raised cockpit details that were either omitted or simplified in the Monogram kit. Things I don't like- -Panel lines are overdone, most of the pictures I've seen of TBDs seem to show much tighter gaps betwee

The kit looks nice. The wheel wells could use some detailing, and I'm sure it'll benefit from resin engines, but the stock kit engines are good for what they are. It's tough to tell without a close-up picture, but they seem to look a little better than the typical slab-o'-cylinders you often find in kits where the engines aren't that visible once the kit's assembled. If you wanted to you could probably just paint them up, maybe add some ignition wiring, call it a day, and have a very nice pair of engines. I do like most of Revell's new releases, but I hope the quality control improves wit

Just looking at the box art alone, most of their aircraft kits are unworkable if you're talking about building even a halfway accurate model. The shapes are way off on pretty much all of them. I couldn't find any decent builds or sprue pics when I looked around a few months ago, so that probably tells you all you need to know. Price and nostalgia are the only selling points, really. I do have good memories of building a 1/72 Lindberg Mirage as a kid. It's not even close to looking like a real Mirage III, but I didn't know any better when I was 8.

I'm waffling, only because I already build a lot of Pacific stuff and will probably want to do something a little different around that time. I have plenty of SBDs in the stash, though, so who knows.

I'll jump in, why not? I have 2 Fishbeds in the stash, and a couple of F-5s. Could be a very interesting theme.

Aftermarket metal landing gear is the way to go if you don't mind spending a little extra, it'll look far better than the stock parts and will save you some hassle. Otherwise, just go with your original idea of inserting a pin to reinforce it. I had an F-4J with a broken pitot on the tail; I used a scriber to make some space on the inside of the pitot halves, inserted some music wire as reinforcement, hit it with some CA, and it was as good as new. As long as it can hold the weight of the bird, you should be good. Maybe try trimming a pin or a needle and using that instead of wire, if ther

Hey all, looking for a number of 1/48 scale paint masks. I'd prefer to buy them if you have any you'd be willing to part with, though I also have a few kits I'd be willing to trade. PM me for a list or any questions. I'm in the United States, ZIP code 61749, and would prefer to deal within North America. I can do PayPal or money order, PayPal preferred. Looking For: 1/48 Monogram TBD Devastator 1/48 Accurate Miniatures Yak-1 (Razorback) 1/48 AMT/Ertl P-40N and/or P-40E

Ambitious project, can't wait to see more!

Designing something so it can't be accidentally activated- an ejection seat, for example- is a good thing in most cases, but you would think that something as vital as the oxygen supply would be designed in a way that would allow a partially incapacitated pilot to engage it in an emergency. Then again, I'm not a pilot or an engineer, and who knows if the Times' account is totally accurate. Maybe someone more knowledgeable can chime in.

Skyrim memes have officially reached critical mass. :P

I was reacting to the article about F-22 corrosion posted on Page 2, not McCain.

A new weapon system with unexpected issues is fine with me, progress isn't easy. It's the arrogance of ignoring a basic engineering flaw for the sake of marginal performance gains that annoys me. Like I said before, I understand trying to get every last ounce of performance out of a jet, but risking long-term structural damage for slight gains doesn't seem like a good risk-reward situation to get yourself into. I don't want to be too reactionary here, but it's tough not to when our state-of-the-art jets and ships are corroding and our stealth drones are (Maybe, don't know the whole story ye

I've seen some gorgeous builds of this kit, should be a lot of fun!

Kinetic might be worth a shot, they've been doing some outside-the-box Navy subjects. I'd love to see them take on the Cougar or the Phantom.

This sounds like the USS Independence situation all over again. Or the USS Independence sounds like the F-22 situation all over again, however you want to look at it. Seriously, how do design flaws like this end up in high-end military hardware? It can't be ignorance. In the case of the F-22, they flat out stated that they knew of the corrosion risk. So, is it willful negligence? It's kind of sad to see multi-billion dollar projects using the same logic as a three pack a day smoker- "Eh, there's a risk, but it won't happen to ME!" Why on Earth would you find it acceptable to build a j

Very nice! The chipping and weathering really brings it to life. Also, I like the very clean-looking work on the wing rivets.

Thank you all for the information on the Vindicator, it was exactly what I needed to know. As for Olive Drab, well....you could write a college thesis on all the variations. It always helps to have more information.