Jump to content
ARC Discussion Forums


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About nfiler

  • Rank
    Tenax Sniffer (Open a window!)

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • ICQ

Profile Information

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

Recent Profile Visitors

6,135 profile views
  1. Jabow, I had to dig out some old (very) references to figure it all out. The initial title of the T-Bird was of course TP-80C "The armament was reduced to two Browning M3 .50 caliber machine guns with 300 rounds per gun installed in the lower nose bay, with a K-14 gun sight mounted upon the instrument shroud in the front cockpit." Since almost all of the T-33s initially went to Air Training Command, the guns quickly disappeared I suspect. And when they eventually were transferred to all kinds of other duties unless there was a very specific need to reinstall the guns I suspect most never saw the guns again. At one time there were some AT-33s with guns installed, but again only two. The photo above is a very early bird. In fact is the 111th one built. If you look close there are no headrests on the seats which sez no ejection seats. Both the ejection seats and the bigger center- of- the- wing tip tanks showed up rather quickly. The T-Bird shared a common wing with the F-80 and it looks to me like F-80s converted from the bottom of the wing tip about early 1952. I suspect the T-33s would have been updated at the same time.
  2. I arrived at the T Bird world a bit late for the Korean War era, (1956). Saw a lot of them initially, and then pretty regularly for the next few years. Every Base Flight had a few. This is working from memory, so not something to nail to the wall and call fact, but every one I ever saw only had provisions for the two lower .50s. The nose of both the T-33 and F-80 probably came out of the factory identical. Why would you change it? There are a lot of photos showing T-33s with only the lower gun ports open with the other four skinned over. And there are a lot of photos with just the two lower ports open and the rest of the nose clean. But I cannot find any photos of a T Bird with all six ports open. I did find a couple photos of T-33s during the Korean war. They both had only the two lower gun ports and one was armed with the lower .50 and one was not. All the ones I saw still had the left and right ammunition cans installed, but electronics boxes all over the rest of the nose compartment. Those ammo cans was where all the "junk" got stuffed. Our fighter squadron flying F-100s did not own a two seat airplane so we used base flights T-birds when needed. None of those were armed. I kinda remember some weight in there to compensate for the removed guns and ammo cans. to maintain the center of gravity.
  3. Aw Come On!! It isn't that hard to add a couple gun ports. Or just graft on an F-80 nose and eliminate the upper guns.
  4. These are called duplex decals. Generally they have a thin tissue paper like cover sheet with light adhesive holding the decal parts to the tissue. The tissue works as a transfer paper. You locate the image with tissue backing exactly where you want to apply the decal, then apply a light application of water to the tissue backing and wait a moment and then carefully remove the back/transfer tissue. The result is a decal application WITH NO CLEAR FILM SURROUND. Nothing even in the middle of letters with free floating objects in the middle like the letter A. A really great improvement over "normal" decals, but rather difficult at first to properly locate and not always easy to do on curves like most aircraft models have. There were a few of these around for a short time in our modeling world a long time ago. Apparently, like many new and innovative ideas they were not popular and quickly disappeared. Too bad because when done right they really looked like that "painted on" look we always want without any clear film. Norm
  5. My 5 July 1967 T.O. 1-1-4S-2 lists all "Arctic Markings" as ANA 633. That would be FS28913 Fluorescent Red Orange. My 15 May 1970 (same T.O. as above) changes the "Arctic Markings" to FS22246 international Orange. I have never personally seen any official reference to Red Arctic markings. I photographed military a/c starting in the mid 1950's and looking at those slides today most that had those markings look Red, but I know from seeing them that they were either of the two listings above. Hope that is of some help. Norm
  6. The reason Boeing shut the 757 line down was because there were not enough new orders coming in to justify keeping it open. It wasn't like they just arbitrarily decided to stop production.
  7. While I would never question the interests of our esteemed World War Twice aviators, somehow painting that on the side of a Thunderbolt probably didn't happen. &^)
  8. Reference is "Combat Squadrons of the Air Force World War II" USAF Historical Division Air University Department of the Air Force, 1969. "405th Fighter" "Emblem. None" Since they were activated in late May, 1943 and inactivated in Nov. 1945 They were not around very long. They may have actually had an "unofficial" emblem, but it either was never approved or perhaps never submitted for approval. Norm
  9. Why do you need to clean them? There is nothing going into that injection mold but liquid plastic. The mold is buried in the machine, held in place firmly to resist the pressure of the injected plastic, and has water circulating inside it to keep it cool during the ongoing cycles of injected plastic, mold opening and extraction of the freshly made parts. it all happens quickly and pretty much automatically. At the rate I build a little soap and water in a bath, let them air dry and then do it again months or years later when i FINALLY actually get it started. Well, the real story is I don't wash anything. But I do use that now long gone Plastic Prep blasted thru my airbrush when I am ready to start painting. By then the parts a far dirtier than they were coming out of the box and actually do need a bath. Norm
  10. Wrong scale and sure wrong price for me, but maybe can address the weight issue. I have an A model Tradewind kit with a fiberglass fuselage and it is as thin and about the same weight as it would be if done in plastic. But anything that big in resin and fiberglass is going to be a bit heavy. The amount of weight removed from you wallet will about equal the weight of the kit!! But it sure would not equal the divorce lawyer's fees. Norm
  11. Well, in the great scheme of things, neither is of any significance I guess. And it is not an either/or situation at all. The information in the post would probably be there no matter what appears in the upper left corner of the post. But the forum is labeled as a discussion or forum. In my opinion (and yeah, I know about those) I tend to pay more attention to posts that have a name associated with them. And again "Plastic Smasher", Glue sniffer" etc. are descriptions, not names. It is just common politeness. If we were all in somebody's home sitting around talking about models, I don't think this would be as issue at all. Why is it here? And security does not count. First name only is not a step toward compromising that. Norm
  12. Seems to me like if you are not comfortable enough with what you are saying to put your name under the statement then you probably shouldn't say it. Do you use some silly "handle" when you introduce yourself? Do you not reveal your name when asked in person? All the excuses why not to do it is just that-excuses. Stating your first name only compromises what? Norm
  13. Once again, Zinc Chromate is not a paint! It is a chemical process. Zinc powder, various color pigment and clear carrier is mixed to produce a corrosion resistant surface. While almost any color pigment can be used to produce whatever color is desired, in the a/c industry it is normally a light greenish yellow or an apple yellow. At Boeing, where I spent 28 years, the yellow was applied to surfaces that would not be exposed to the outside like wing fuel cells Surfaces that would be seen like flap cavities got a second coat of the green material. The only reason for the different colors was to indicate to the Q.C. inspectors that a second coat had actually been applied. The railroad industry used a dark red zinc chromate and other industries also use different colored pigment to produce different colors. In my early years as an engineer at Boeing the material was mixed in the production area as required and the results varied considerable in color. As production increased it became a purchased item and the color was consistent. I have been retired now for more than twenty years and I have no idea at all what they do today,
  14. John, What is your point here? The book is what it is. it was published ten years ago and is still the only published reference oh the H-21 that I am aware of. What you say is all true, but there are always the could have, should have, would have stuff that happens after something is done. I found it very helpful in my drawing efforts and modeling as well. I am not saying it is perfect, obviously it is not. But at something like $18 it will allow you to know far more than not buying it.
  15. I have a copy of the book and while I would agree that it could have been better, it does cover the subject in considerable detail and the photos are generally pretty decent. The spelling errors are always a problem with self published stuff like this. Yeah, a good editor sure would have helped, but they also add to the cost and time involved. Helicopter subjects don't sell like Mustangs and 109s so cost probably was a serious consideration for the authors. If your interested in this bird, then you should have this book. Norm
  • Create New...