erik_g

Just give in, Anders.. resistance is futile. The Tammycat is simple enough that even you can build it without issues, I promise ;-)

IMHO the HB kit (which I enjoyed building, and thought was quite OK) looks like a toy next to the Tamiya kit. The latter is far more complex, but also more accurate and well fitting. I haven´t finished my Tamiya kit yet, but dry fitting the fuselage parts ad the seams are hardly visible. The parts just fits. The wing mechanism is screwed in place and feels very solid, and the wing glove fits like.. well, a glove around the wings. This in stark contrast to the loose fitting wings on the HB kit. Also, the wings can be left off until after painting (or indefinitely) as they slide on to short "win

I was tempted to pick this kit up at a recent modelling contest, but saner thoughts prevailed and I got the Tamiya Tomcat instead. But some insanity still lingers since I did have a close encounter of the B-52nd kind earlier this year.. I can tell you that rain water that falls on the big wing tend to run outwards to the wing tip, and having the hand on the tip of the wing will lead the rain water along the arm in to your recently dry body... but that is a small price to pay for a stupid selfie with the BUFF.

I don´t know what they used on the Oregon Eagle, but in most cases they use paint, and in other cases, like the Czech Gripen jobs, they use printed vinyl decals. A few years ago the Polish AF painted one of their vipers in a stunning Tiger pattern for the NATO Tiger meet, held in Norway at that time. Unfortunately the paint did not stick too well to the underlying coating, so when the aircraft arrived, the paint was almost entirely gone. https://theaviationist.com/2013/06/21/ntm-f-16-lose-paint/ My best bet is that the paint does indeed chip, but I also believe that the paint job will be l

I believe the greenish tint is due to a colour filter placed into the wind screen to make the HUD more readable (it reflects green so that the green HUD symbology is seen more clearly). If my memory serves me right it´s only tinted on the Tomcats that used the windscreen itself as a HUD combiner glass. Versions that used a separate HUD glass does not seem to have a tinted windscreen since the filter is already built in to the HUD combiner glass..

Looks fairly decent, Janne. Not bad for a beginner. Some day you might even be as skilled as me. Here´s a closeup of a 1/144 Viper I did earlier..

It´s because it's like a very exclusive wine. It is not for everybody, but a select few who know how to appreciate it. It´s not for Average Joe looking for something to att britfix and humbrol to. ;-)

If the kit manufacturers customers were limited to the bunch of people that hang around on internet forums like (but not limited to) this one, they would have to file for bankruptcy pretty soon. For a manufacturer like Tamiya we consist of just a tiny percentage of the entire market. That is why Tamiya, Trumpeter, Hobby Boss et al could not care less of our opinions regarding the kits. (and it is why manufacturers who DO care instantly get a large following of fanboys. (like myself) A nice box art is still more important for total sales, than endorsement from ARC-goers. I actually find that r

Regarding the nlg on the Mig-31. I only attached the Y-brace and the bottom part so far, and I did not glue them in to their mounting holes, so I have the parts retracted into the nlg bay. I am not finished yet, so I don´t know if this is the best solution, but at least the nlg parts are safe from being torn off. But I agree that it is nice to be able to put the gear in last. I guess it is a thing that has to be weighed against sturdiness of attachment points and accuracy. /E

In Sweden judging historical accuracy is not allowed, so there are no penalties for adding JDAMs to a Gulf War aircraft or building a kit that is filled with basic errors. As long as the kit is skillfully built it is OK. But when we´re talking about recreating bent wings, sloppy paint job and stuff like that we know exist in real life. How do we as modellers recreate that without having it look like we´re the ones that lack the basic modelling skill to get the wings to sit straight or the paint to not run or bleed? And how would I, as a judge, know that the wing on your Hornet is crooked and a

I noticed the same thing when I got my kit yesterday. But I believe it is par for the course nowadays. Eduard is not the first company that has been taking some shortcuts when it comes to research. On the bright side, I got it from Alfa Hobby at a discounted price. Just under 500 SEK (ca €50) for a nice Hasegawa kit and some resin and PE extras is not bad at all. I´ll order the other PE-set for the Swedish version I was planning on building and use the included PE on a later build. Does the Danish Hasegawa-Draken contain the hook? It´s included in resin in the Eduard kit.

Nice legs!

Ok, I will stay tuned. I am in the process of modelling a tank, that uses a lot of boolean modifiers for holes through wheels and such. I thought applying the boolean modifiers would give me more control during the unwrapping and texturing.

I do not doubt Gabor, and I do trust him more than I trust this photo I took at RIAT three years ago. But it does look like the intakes are painted in an off-white colour. Maybe it just looks like it, or maybe the colour of the intakes differ with user or version? I am in no way an expert on the Fulcrum.

Oh, I didn't know that, but it makes sense. After all, the US possesses those kinds of amphibious assault ships. Sweden does not. Maybe the stand is an american invention initially. I think I will have to ask around :-)

I am sure you will walk us through the process, but will you apply all the mesh modifiers, especially the booleans before UV-mapping? I imagine it might be difficult to do it right if not.

I don't think the US boats have it, just some of the swedish ones. It's only needed if you plan on parking the boat in a dry dock very often. The swedish boats managed without for 20 years..

That structure is a stand, so that the boat can be safely parked inside the dry dock in an amphibious assault ship. It was developed to be used in conjunction with a Rotterdam class Amphibious Assault Ship during Operation Atalanta outside the coast of Somalia. You can see it in action here: (abt 2.30 in).By the way, here is another CB90 I shot in the archipelago of Gothenburg a few years ago: A versatile little boat.. If I was rich, I´d buy one.

I´ve been thinking, for many years, of doing something similar, a Stridsbåt in 1/72 based on the same paper model. But now that you´re doing such a nice job of it I guess I can wait a while longer.. Here are some pics of Swedish Combat Boats during last years Baltops Exercise.

At least the errors aren't unfixable. Well, the fairing behind the canopy might be a bit tricky perhaps. The Tarangus kit might be more correct shapewise, but screams out for extra detailing, and comes with no loadout whatsoever. It's also more expensive.

Those Czech "paintjobs" (decals really afaik) are really nice. Too bad that the SwAF believes that the aircraft will spontaneously ignite if they do something similar.

I for one, will be buying the AMK kit, provided that they have the flaps and stuff separate, which I expect they will. This because I am planning on building a Tomcat with all the stuff hanging out. I could of course just build the HB one that I have, but I have already built one of those, and having built the Mig-31 from AMK I have really high expectations on their Cat. I would love to sink my teeth in to the Tamiya Tomcat as well, but Tamiya kit are ridiculously expensive here in Sweden. I expect it to cost > €100. If AMK delivers what they delivered in the Mig-31, their kit will be jus

I have no idea what the deal between that woman and the unit was. But unless you specifically mention it in a contract, the copyright of a work stays with the creator, even if you sell a copy of it, or the right to use it to some one else. It can´t be much different from the aircraft manufacturers who sue model companies for making unlicensed kits out of their aircraft.

I thought you was asking which one was correct, and I mean that they both are, since it is variable. But what is correct on the ground I can´t say for sure, since I am in no way a BONE expert. But until we get one to answer I dare a semi-educated guess. A quick google turned up images of slightly closed nozzles, so I guess the nozzle does on the B-1 as on many other combat aircraft, change when the hydraulic (or rather fueldraulic) pressure changes after shutdown. I for one will use the Barracuda nozzles on mine. I have them and I have the eduard set. Rather than go insane I take the easy wa

I believe thw difference in inner diameter is due to the barracuda nozzles being partially contracted while the eduard PE-nozzles and the ones in your photos look like they are fully opened.