nfiler

Members
  • Content count

    202
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About nfiler

  • Rank
    Tenax Sniffer (Open a window!)

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Interests
    1/72nd Modern U. S. Military and Firebombers.

Recent Profile Visitors

5,413 profile views
  1. And will add that 906 was originally a 434th (Red) bird. When the 476th was established it became one of their birds and sported the slightly metallic Blue trim. All the markings were removed in Spain during the winter of '59-60 when TAC headquarter mandated removal of all individual markings and added the TAC emblem and lightning bolts.
  2. Don't know anything about the G models, they were after my time at George, But I can tell you that the anti glare panels on all the 479th birds were Green. Norm Filer
  3. Considering no one has ever seen the kit yet, how is one to answer this? The only other kit of the B-45 in 72nd is the terrible Much Twice thingy. Even a lame effort by Valom would be better than that. Norm
  4. I was in the 479th from 1956-1960. The first two years with F-100Cs. We transitioned to the F-104C starting in Oct. '58 and were the only TAC outfit to fly that bird. While the AIM-9 center line pylon was capable of carrying two missiles,it was NOT USED. It was tried only once and not used again. When we deployed to Spain to fly air defense the belly pylons were not even included in the fly away kits. Until Viet Nam, the only thing the center line pylon was used for was nuclear shapes (Mk 28) and the practice bomb dispenser. The 479th did not have a nuclear mission assigned so we did not actually carry live nukes. In Spain, where we flew air defense during the day and in good weather only, we flew with AIM- 9Bs on the tip and no pylons on either the wing or fuselage. We also flew a lot of training missions during that time. Usually they were flown with tanks on both the wing tips and pylons. The refueling boom was almost always installed.
  5. Red FS11136 Gunze 327 White FS17875 Gunze 316 Blue FS15044 Gunze 326
  6. Tony, If the bond between the paper and images has been broken, it won't make any difference what you do with them. The only solution is to rebond with something in the way of a clear coat. The advantage of the Microscale Clear Decal coating is it is quick, easy to apply and dries almost instantly. Yes, I think Dave (Leading Edge) was aware of the problem. I also am pretty sure he solved it with later products. But I don't think anybody but him knows which are good and which are not.
  7. Over the years, I have had several problems like this with Dave's decals. The problem is uneven expansion/contraction between the paper and ink.This often results in fracturing of the images on the paper. The solution is really pretty simple. Just overcoat the decals with a couple coats of Microscale liquid decal film. Of course this means you now have to trim around each item, but the decal thickness will be minimal. The Microscale liquid decal film is alcohol based and you can literally slop it on, smooth it out a bit with a broad brush and it will dry flawlessly in about two minutes. Great stuff! This is not unique to Dave's stuff. Older decals that have been around for a while and maybe were exposed to a range of humidity and temperatures often have this happen. Norm
  8. Probably the 440th FIS. I say probably because those markings were also applied to the 496th and 526th FIS also. The Yellow markings were apparently removed in 1956. They were an USAFE organization in Germany.
  9. I think this whole spark proof fan thing is highly overrated. A while back I actually loaded my air brush with lacquer thinner, held my mini butane torch in front of the air brush at about 18 inches and started spraying. The only thing that happened is a eventually blew the torch out. I suspect the amount of spraying you would need to do in a very small space would gas you long before it blew up. Spray cans put out a lot more paint than our modeling air brushes, but I doubt if explosion is as much of an issue as the exposure to all those fumes. I think even just an ordinary fan placed near an open window is better than nothing.
  10. Flaps and gear doors on the Mustang are hydraulic. To prevent over pressuring the system due to solar heating that could damage seals, the hydraulic release handle on the lower right hand side of the instrument sub panel (behind the stick) was pulled after shut down. As the label sez, this released pressure in the system and as a result the gear bay doors and flaps would slowly bleed down.This could also occur if the a/c had a leaky hydraulic system. As someone mentioned, the B-29/B-50/C/KC-97 all had electric motors that drove a jack screw to raise and lower the flaps. Thus no bleed down. They had to be raised or lowered intentionally.
  11. Chris, No, it would not be at all common. Flaps increase lift, allowing quicker take offs and slower approach speeds. Once on the ground on landing, that increased lift works against you by keeping the weight off the wheels, thus not allowing the brakes to work their thing. They also tend to get dinged up by rocks and stuff thrown up into the flaps. So the flaps are usually raised on roll out and left retracted on shut down. With big birds they also are a great head cracker if in the lowered position. On airplanes like the Mustang, with hydraulic flaps they tended to bleed down.
  12. Why not go for something a lot more colorful. The 479th had some great markings prior to the TAC edict to remove everything in the winter of 1959-60.
  13. Well, the issues with the kit really don't change no matter what version of the Minicraft kit your dealing with. Props wing issues, front of engines, lack of cockpit etc. are common to all the kits.
  14. Kingoalie, Be glad to. The attached photos should show the differences between the kit and the real bird. I did not do a prop comparison drawing, but the differences are pretty obvious to me. The kit blades are just rectangles while the real prop has curves on both the leading and trailing edges. That is fixable with reshaping (16 times!!??). The unfixable part is the base of the blade is too far out from the spinner . http://smg.photobucket.com/user/nfiler/media/C-130 Tail comparison_zpsnbn38u8x.jpg.html?sort=3&o=1 http://smg.photobucket.com/user/nfiler/media/C-130 Prop_zpswfldub8r.jpg.html?sort=3&o=0
  15. Well, I am a bit late to this conversation, but here is my opinion. The props are poor. The engines are terrible The wings lack the proper dihedral on the underside. Absolutely no attempt at any cockpit. The vertical tail is not accurate. It is grossly overpriced. Fit is poor almost everywhere. The A Model kit is a little better, but not by a whole lot. Sure would be nice to see a decent kit of the Herky in this scale.