nfiler

I don't agree! I think it was two damn good teams just taking advantage of mistakes and beating on each other. If you look at the stats I suspect both sides will be pretty much the same. The thing that was a big indicator early for me was that knowing Rodgers was not going to be very mobile, Seattle still could not get to him consistently. If fact hardly at all. That told me it was going to be a tough game for Seattle. That "miracle finish" term is overused, but in this case maybe appropriate. The Hawks will have to do better to win the next one.

I wonder if this isn't one of those horse and cart things. I think it is very likely that when the technology got to the point where "standardized" fonts came into existence, many were nothing more than copies of what painters had been doing by hand for a long while. As to whether they shape of the characters is an exact match of what was painted on the side of the war time bird, of course it isn't going to be perfect match. Kinda like horseshoes, Close is good enough.

RichardL Why would I compare to the color chips rather than the Fed Std. 3X5 card? Industry Standard specified by contract is the card. I spent almost thirty years dealing with this stuff and compliance to Govt. Contracts. The fan deck is a nice quick way to determine what a color looks like, but is not acceptable to meet any requirement for color correctness. And the daylight balanced light works just fine. To be sure I did take it outside and check the two colors against the cards. They still match.

I am not sure what you guys are looking at but I just compared the two Gunze Mr. Color colors to the fed Std. Color cards and they are both dead on using a daylight balance Ott Light. If you're intent is to play around with "scale color" then maybe the FS matches don't matter anyway. '

Erick Great Idea, but have you really considered the size of the market for this? Put your personal interests aside and look at this from a business point. There is a reason helicopter models are not top sellers. The interest/market is not very big. The smaller the order quantity for most decal printers makes the per item cost pretty pricey. And every one that does not sell just puts you farther into the financial hole that makes the next item more difficult. Another thought is almost all the really great artwork Flygirl is putting on Navy stuff includes gradients and transparencies that are

Isn't a C-54M nothing more than a C-54E with the interior stripped out to haul coal during the Berlin Airlift? My source sez there were thirty eight E models done that way. Other than the radome on the nose that Gene noted, I can't see much difference in any of the C-54s. Of course that excludes the Merlin powered and the weird Carvairs. The photos posted with the Revell release info. show The unique window setup VC-54D for the Sacred Cow Roosevelt/Truman bird. That would make it more like a commercial DC-4 as it did not have the big cargo doors. I guess that would have some interest for so

Isn't a C-54M nothing more than a C-54E with the interior stripped out to haul coal during the Berlin Airlift? My source sez there were thirty eight E models done that way. Other than the radome on the nose that Gene noted, I can't see much difference in any of the C-54s. Of course that excludes the Merlin powered and the weird Carvairs. The photos posted with the Revell release info. show The unique window setup VC-54D for the Sacred Cow Roosevelt/Truman bird. That would make it more like a commercial DC-4 as it did not have the big cargo doors. I guess that would have some interest for so

Well, that old statement about: Sometimes it is better to keep your mouth shut and let people suspect you are stupid, than to open it and prove them right.

I am not Greg, but I do some of his artwork so maybe can shed a little light on it. The fluorescent colors used would not be possible to reproduce on the printer used for Draw Decals. Since they are crudely done usually, I would think they could be hand painted on the model. Norm

I doubt if it existed. Of the 130 B-17H.TB-17H and SB-17Gs ordered, only around 12 were ever built/modified. A search of images in the various books on the B-17 series covers almost all of them. The photo posted in this thread suggests in has the Red Arctic markings but I don't see that at all. I can't find a s/n list for the SB-17s so don't even know if the s/n is correct for an SB-17, but suspect not. Norm

I dunno about the banks, but I thought nobody needed money any more. All you need today is plastic (Credit Card) and PayPal. Darn banks have been screwing us for too long. About time they quit.

Great choice! But if you go to the Hannant's web site, search on "future releases" and select Special Hobby" as the manufacturer, the list is long, and some items have been there for a long while. I would like several of this subject, but I refuse to hold my breath for a quick release date. And I will not be selling my RVHP conversions or the antique Monogram kits any time soon.

Ben, Neither of those shots really show that panel very accurately in my opinion. The first one, an early 434th A model, makes that panel look much different than the surrounding area. Like the in spar area of the F-86D that started this whole thing, it is an milled none removable structural part of the airframe. While the surface is different than the surrounding area, it sure was not that different. The second shot, is of course the highly polished bird in the Air Force Museum. That milled surface does not polish, and that is very evident. they may very well have painted it to preserve it.

The in-spar skin panels are nothing more than machined aluminum plate. They are just dull aluminum. The bird had a "wet" wing. That means that a significant part of the area between the front and rear spar was all a fuel cell. That means that there are not a lot of ribs for strength. That strength is provided by thick machined plate upper and lower skins. That machining leaves the surface dull. It is not rough, but it sure isn't shiny either.

This is another example of why I don't post my photos any more. The top photo is mine. Somebody stripped off my name and probably posted it somewhere on the web. As a modeler and photographer I really like trying to help, but I have seen this happen too many times. To me it is just plain dishonest to remove the credit from a photo and post it without permission. I know I am peeing into the wind. Apparently the internet is totally uncontrollable about this, but a lot of guys like me with personal photo files have stopped helping by posting photos. We all loose because of it.

I vote with Jennings. In the first photo, the light colored bird in the center appears to have been stripped of all paint/primer on all the metal surfaces. The outer wing panels and rudder are fabric covered and can not be stripped. Thus the GSB left intact. The light Gull Gray over White was still something like five or six years in the future. And "pulled from storage" does not mean they were stored in Florida where they were being refurbed. Probably stored in Kansas or Arizona, then made airworthy or shipped to Florida for the rebuild.

You guys are complaining about the decals in old kits! Those two kits have got to be at least ten years old. Granted, the decals were not good, but go out and buy a current release and you will find some of the best decals around in those. I recently completed a couple of the newer 72nd Hasegawa kits and they have fine decals. One of them had a vinyl-like material for the decals that was in every way a normal looking decal, but was more flexible and thin. The Whites are indeed White and they are very thin and require little or no setting solutions at all. If you have been buying Hasegawa kits

I have almost all the Hasagawa 72nd Phatnoms and KA-9 is the good second generation kit. I do not understand the reference to a third generation. After the first kinda crappy Haseagawa Phantom kit, all have been the mix and match many comman parts kits. The total range now runs pretty close to 100 different versions. The KA-9 kit has both the fat wing and the the early skinny wing. All but the last 11 Marine RF-4Bs were the skinny wing. The decals provided allow you to choose between one fat wing bird and two skinny winged birds. It is an excellent kit, but you have to pay very close attent

Wait a minute. I thought the "native language" of Canada was French!! What has English got to do with anything. ;)

That should be real easy. Go to the Draw Decals web site and contact Greg (Draw Decals head honcho). If Mike Egan has finished the artwork and Greg has that artwork, he will print you a set or as many as you want. Norm

Tony, That is exactly what I was trying to say. Standard drop tanks had an integral pylon. All other pylons were capable of mounting tanks or bombs. Those pylons stayed on the wing when the tanks were dropped. Norm

You guys are looking for a simple yes or no answer. It ain't that simple. I am not that familiar with the F-86, but suspect it is the same as the F-100 I am familiar with. Every pylon/station was wired and plumbed for tanks. The primary tank location (just outboard of the wheel well) was located just a bit outboard of the ordnance pylon mounting. On the F-100, the 275 Gal. tanks came with the pylon attached permanently. they jettisoned with pylon attached of course. All the other stations were wired to drop whatever they were carrying as initiated by the pilot. If there was a tank on that py

Well, as the ad clearly states, Boeing was the target, not a participant in the ad. The Seattle Chamber of Commerce was the organization responsible for the ad. While is clearly is an Oops, I suspect that the majority of the readers of the Seattle Times never caught the error.

And where was that theory presented? The P-8 mission, as with the P-3 before it was always intended to be a low level patrol mission. It gets to the patrol area at higher altitude, and does it much quicker than the P-3. But you can't look at ships and find subs up there. The presence of the weapons bay, pylons and sonobuoys makes the mission pretty clear.

Well sitting here looking at the kit, here are a few facts. * It can be built with or without the landing gear. Parts are there to blank off the wheel wells. * There are blanking plates to fill all the holes where the turrets are if you want to build it without those turrets. * It does have both three and four blade props. But it does NOT have the late -5 cuffed four blade prop. * It has both the large airfoil shaped radome and the smaller bullet shaped one. * It does NOT have both the -3 (smaller) and the later -5 engine cowlings. Only the later -5 cowlings. * The interior has a very we