Bobo1953

hi everybody. i'm in a terrible mess, so i address my mayday to the most knowledgeable and friendly of the communities. i am trying to model a particular meng 1/72 f-102, a keflavik black knights, that instead of adc gray was clean aluminum. note: not the usual glossy alu like tamiya tf-17; a darker shade of bare metal. to be short, after a test shooting on a previously tamiya gray-primed cardboard, i confidently choose model master acryl 4677 semi-gloss aluminum. it looked quite right. point is that once the plane was painted, if you watch from a distance the look is perfe

hi flyboy. to me the metal rods solution looks really tricky. you would drill those fine holes that must be aligned on two surfaces...it sends shivers down my spine and make my stomach twitch... i honestly suggest to use cyanoacrylate glue, a medium or even hi thickness one. the thick cyanoacrylate cures more slowly and allows time to position correctly the piece. you sure must have a firm hand while you keep the parts strongly pushed to each other because cyanoacrylate doesn't like shaky matchings...it simply doesn't stick. you will have the seam lines protruding and

hi lancer. let me state beforehand that i never used future in the airbrush. nevertheless, given the characteristics of the future it should be rather odd to have a "pebbly" suface as , as stated in the previous post by foxmulder, the substance's most outstanding characteristic is that of being self-leveling. i'm not quite shure about what happened to your airbrushing future...i would need a very sharp picture. and alll in all better wait for the advice of someone who knws better. personally, i would avoid shooting more future at the risk of getting a very thick coatin

thanks a lot, drifterdon...it's my darling by now... have a great day. best ciaos. bobo.

thanks, l.d., but it's the guy who doesn't sell overseas... anyway, i'm gonna check... ciao. bobo.

hello gals and guys! (bah...but where are the gals who i insist saluting?...incurable tombeur de femmes...) here we are with something that really thrilled me and made me fall in love with: the shawnee. actualy it's the first time i fall in love with a chopper...but this one, well it's special with that f.s. 28913 topping! i thank all the people who helped me solving the problem of red and arctic colors for good. i wound up using the lifecolor ua 22 "fluo red", a matt paint which is rated by the producer himself as "approximate" to f.s.38913, but which eventually in a direc

hello gals and guys! (bah...but where are the gals who i insist saluting?...incurable tombeur de femmes...) here we are with something that really thrilled me and made me fall in love with: the shawnee. actualy it's the first time i fall in love with a chopper...but this one, well it's special with that f.s. 28913 topping! i thank all the people who helped me solving the problem of red and arctic colors for good. i wound up using the lifecolor ua 22 "fluo red", a matt paint which is rated by the producer himself as "approximate" to f.s.38913, but which eventually in a direc

hi genry. thank you for the input but the revell kit is the A version, with a different tail boom. by the way, it has disappeared too... best ciaos, and happy modeling! bobo.

yeeaaahhh, bruce. this guy doesn't even answer to questions about shipping. i mean that you contact the seller, click the subject "shipping" and get kicked back to the previous page. paranoid! -thanks to gw8345! ciao. bobo.

hello guys and gals... looks like a curse: it seems that i'm always in search of unavailable stuff... well, this time it's an ITALERI 1/72 H-19 B (item no.1206), andi can't find anywhere even on the net. there's all kinds of helos, but the chickasaw seems to have been kicked out of history, and i'm exhausted... is there anybody who has one such a kit who would sell or exchange with some from my stash? thanks in advance. best ciaos, and happy modeling. bobo.

hello guys and gals... looks like a curse: it seems that i'm always in search of unavailable stuff... well, this time it's an ITALERI 1/72 H-19 B (item no.1206), andi can't find anywhere even on the net. there's all kinds of helos, but the chickasaw seems to have been kicked out of history, and i'm exhausted... is there anybody who has one such a kit who would sell or exchange with some from my stash? thanks in advance. best ciaos, and happy modeling. bobo.

sorry, tank, but i can't catch what you mean to say. "...all the newer (60's) blades that were not wood would be a different color, that way if you had both types of rotor blades you get the correct type for your bird." please clear out how having both types (what types?) of rotor blades you can get etc... perhaps there's something idiomatic that escapes my english, but i really can't understand... thanks. bobo.

hi ray! thank you so much for all the pain you took in assembling infos and pics. i believe that the answer is definitive, after the picture taken from above, and all the more so also reading the manual provided by "tank" a while ago at this link: http://www.daveplattmodels.com/Links/US Military Markings/USAF & USN Markings MIL-M-25047C.pdf pages 8 and 11 are revealing, and the paper is for sure of general interest even though the dispositions were not followed by the book... so: up= insigna white (that is greysh as compared to pure white...), down: flat black.

hi tank, many t(h)anks!!! i believe that on page 8 everything is very well and clearly stated: in our case, the upper face is to be F.S 17875 (duller than pure white, actually) while underside should be an anti-glare flat black F.S. 37038. on pg. 11 i find an answer about the colors which must alternate on the outer blade tips, and as i thought, italeri was wrong when it called for yellow a stripe on yellow tip, rather unuseful, whilst it is light green F.S. 14187. all in all a very interesting document to read for general knowledge... again, and again to all arc people,

hi everybody. perhaps nobody in the know has seen my post or no one has an answer or hypothesis to submit, but as fast the matter of the white upper rotor blades received an exhaustive answer, as my not much later post where i was asking if the blades have to be white upper sides and black undersides or all-white, seems to be dragging. i am stuck in my building process as i am at the stage when i must paint the rotor blades...so HELP ME PLEASE! thanks a lot. best ciaos, and happy modeling! bobo.

afterthought: hey guys! blades top, white with metal leading edges and partly yellow, partly green/yellow/red colored tips. ...but the bottom IS BLACK, right? thanks. bobo.

most dear ray -rotorwash- and rob -mig. sorry for the delay but we're on different sides of the pond. i have no words to say thanks to both of you. -ray, the book must be beautiful, but it's really expensive here. i will take for good your words and the pic you posted. thank you very, very much. -rob, thank you so much for the precise reference: it means that -for once- italeri was having no strange trip while compilating those instructions which, now, i will follow by the book. it's great to be part of such an horde of experts, and i wish that in my little measure i cou

hi guys and gals. i'm here again with one of my favorite obsessions: colors. i'm building italeri's 1/72 h-21 in s.a.r. arctic livery. instructions call, specifically on the u.s.a.f. arctic rescue chopper, for white rotor blades, probably, but it's not clear, with F.S. 37200 gun metal leading edges, and as for the tips, one each green, red and yellow. rather odd... now, i made a in depth search on the web and did find some army shawnees that actually have without any doubt the upper surface of the blades white. as for the usaf, i saw many shades, som

hi dekon. thank you very much for your comment. ciao. bobo.

thank you darren!!!

hello guys & gals! i tried to reproduce tom patton's mig-killing ad-h, but i'm sure that there are many imprecisions. for instance, the stencils below the cowling and on the pylons should have been in black, but on the supesrcale decals set wthey were in red. but it's not superscale fault. the set was intended for the va-176, but not expressely for patton's a/c. as all the great people who paticipated in the discussion -i hope- will appreciate, the gear doors rims have been duly painted red. as for the stores, i eventully decided for an all-antipersonnel setup, with nape, sna

hello guys & gals! once again i do a trasgression posting improperly my new creature here, but i will do also on the display case. i tried to reproduce tom patton's mig-killing ad-h, but i'm sure that there are many imprecisions. for instance, the stencils below the cowling and on the pylons should have been in black, but on the supesrcale decals set wthey were in red. but it's not superscale fault. the set was intended for the va-176, but not expressely for patton's a/c. as all the great people who paticipated in the discussion -i hope- will appreciate, the gear doors rims

yeah, murph, two movies...but why those movies on the tomcat instead than on another aircraft? i was born back in the tubes era, always been an avio fan, but actualy geoff's observation puts on focus a period, in which the f-14 was really pushed to the attention of the general public, not only aviation buffs. as such, i remember images, magazines, tv, the news, the papers...well everything seemed to have been imbued with tomcats. and i live in italy, can imagine in the u.s.! sure, it was an outstanding aircraft, had the swing-wing, was powerful, potently armed and actually

Andrew, let me express my highest appreciation for your job. As you know i passed through those dire straits a little more than a month ago and i know all the challenges that are to be met to get a decent model from this kit. Btw, how did you manage the cockpit and fuselage halves fitting? Your one-oh-wonder is much more than that, rather say superlative, also because it's not based on shiny or extravagant markings but on the though, real and business-meaning appearance of a first-line a/c. How came that you decided for an unarmed aircraft? Revell's action feature too tricky? ;-

Well. This is one of the most outstanding clips i ever watched!!!!. I mean, never saw such a detailed sequence on fusing a bomb!!! Thanks very much, shion! Going to the question, well, i believe that you have two options at the least: 1) tactical "nape and snake". Generally speaking, c.a.s. missions below dmz with a mix of napalm and mk 82 snake eyes. 2) strategical -or so to say- mk 82/84 normal and extended fuse, plus snake eye, for sam suppression and "strategical" targets like bridges, pol, marshaling yards etc. in indian territory. Schematic, but i believe near t