Jump to content

nfiler

Members
  • Content Count

    219
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by nfiler

  1. i did the artwork for the NASA S-3 a little while back. I just got off the phone with Greg at Draw decals and he will have the decals available shortly in whatever scale you might want.; http://www.drawdecal.com/ I don't think he has them up on the web site yet, but he should respond quickly to emails and has great service. Norm
  2. Apparently no one here in the US is willing to tackle Disney's VERY aggressive lawyers. Disney has a reputation of guarding their products with enthusiasm. And the small bucks made by decal manufacturers is nowhere near what would be required by Disney. Norm
  3. I am glad to see this thread staying somewhat on track and civil. In my opinion the rock thing was an insult to Gene's efforts to illustrate what he was trying to say. Since I probably am the guy that started this whole Academy tail thing, here is my take on it. Decals drawn from Photos and then placed on exact scans of both Hasegawa and Academy tails do not fit the Academy tail leading edge. VFA-83s Rams head with the circle of "tulip leaves" around the head is an excellent example. Photos show exactly where the tulip leaves (yeah, I know that is a lousy title, but it is the best I coul
  4. While my time with the 479th and the F-104C was before 1964, I would be really surprised if you ever find a photo of one with that under fuselage Sidewinder rail. It was tried twice shortly after we got our first 104s in late 1958, and due to the very negative pilot response, buried somewhere on base in deep storage. The way the missiles come off the rails with a spiral motion left the impression that it was going to hit the nose of the aircraft. Probably would not have, but the very vivid descriptions of the launch sequence by the pilots was impressive. I left the 479th in 1960, and anyth
  5. Sitting here comparing my BAC 707 Gray color chip to the FS fan deck, I would agree that FS36495 is very close. The problem is that while the color looks very close, 707 Gray is a gloss paint, and the FS chip is a flat finish. Applying a gloss coat over it may change the color some. I don't use MM paint, but comparing the 707 card with the printed chips in the ever handy Modeler's Technical Guide, I would say that the Canadian Voodoo Gray is a pretty close match. Regarding the gloss comment, while it leave the factory with a very nice gloss, before long it looks both flat and grungy. Norm
  6. Well, if you go to the Leading Edge web page http://www.lemdecal.com/ You can see that he has both that bird and the 409 Sqdn. bird listed as "coming soon". Dave is not the fastest guy in the world, but when he gets done with them they will be accurate and well documented. Norm
  7. Next time you look at that Fujimi kit, look at the dog tooth on the wing, compare it to the Hasegawa kit and you will realize it is really undersized. While neither kit is a fall together, I think the Hasegawa is better. And the wide range of versions and markings make it a winner for me. Attached is (I hope) a decent shot of the nose area to help you make up your mind which one you like better. Norm
  8. Your right in replacing the kit supplied fuel tanks. Those are really poor representations of the 300 gallon tanks. The tanks are a pretty normal tank used by a wide variety of Navy A/C. The Skyhawk, and A-1 come to mind quickly. My Pilot's flight manual for the A-7D says you can carry the tanks on stations 1, 3,6 and 8. Those stations are the same on the kit instructions. It seems that the inboard stations were a far more common place to hang tanks. As a RAG outfit, VA-174 would have very little reason to carry anything like serious bombs or missiles. VAQ-34 also flew the bird. But t
  9. Terry Forget the props. Those "Andy Gump" nacelles on the Dreamboat B-29 should be enough to keep that project in the garage for a long time. Besides the fact that your about out of shelf space. Looks like all you really need is a 1/48th C-124 for both the props and nacelles. Norm
  10. Never saw an F-100 with any kind of fuel tank on the centerline. Looking at my D/F model -1, it makes no mention of a centerline fuel system. As I remember, the practice bomb dispenser in the picture was called an MD-11. It carried six of the little blue 25 pd. practice bombs in three rows of two each. (front to back). The doors opened much like the doors on a B-24 in that they rolled up the sides. But as I remember, they were inside the outer shell when open. The practice bombs were hung from spring loaded pistons so they were pushed out of the container rather forcefully when dropped
  11. Looks like a J model to me. The A/B/C versions all had gun armament and a smaller, more pointed nose. The D had larger wing tip tanks with Folding Fin rockets in the front, and the H had the same large tanks but a pointed front end with Falcon missiles in compartments on the sides. That leaves us with the J model. Back to smaller tanks but with the larger nose with no guns. The 186th FIS (Montana Air National Guard) Flew the F-89J Scorpion from March, 1960 until converting to F-102s in July, 1966 Not many of them around still, good to see they kept one. Norm
  12. No reason to calm down. Sorry if the first message sounded harsh. Did not intend it to. I am a retired Boeing guy, and was a long time member of the MoF until a few years ago. Almost everyone who does not live here and have a close association with the Museum seems to think it is a Boeing run operation and it is not. There is a new facility being constructed at Paine Field, North of Seattle where the 747/767/777 and new 787 is built that will apparently be a Boeing owned museum. I also understand that the Paul Allen collection will be moving from a smaller airport to this facility. Nor
  13. The Museum of Flight is NOT a Boeing facility! While Boeing has been very helpful and generous over the years, the Museum is a private business. While the airport is partially named Boeing Field, It is owned by King County. The larger of the two runways is indeed Boeing Field International, the Eastern and smaller is called King County Airport. The "Red Barn" part of the Museum is the old Boeing plant one. It was donated to the Museum and moved to the site when the Museum was started. There are far more "non Boeing" aircraft in the Museum than Boeing. But since any aviation museum i
  14. I have that information for the F-104A version. It is far too big for a electronic transfer at 57Meg, but would be happy to send it to you on a disk. Need mailing info of course. Norm n.sfiler@gte.net
  15. <_< A few comments regarding the C-124 kit. I have the kit and the concerns about it being too heavy for the landing gear are probably not really an issue. As mentioned, there are indeed steel pins inside the gear struts. They are small, but there. Also, the fuselage parts are just a bit thicker than a conventional plastic kit. The wall thickness averages about 1/10th of an inch, with the wing top and bottom halves even thinner than that. The only major component that is solid resin is the vertical tail. I don't think weight is going to be much of an issue. Size will be! As ex
  16. Wow!! Somebody really does look at this stuff. And up close too. Not off topic as far as I am concerned. It is my hope that stuff like this inspres others to do something different. The Phantom you are looking at is a VMFA-212 CO's bird. I found this photo and another much poorer one in a very old Koku Fan magazine. Does make a very nice and colorful bifd. At the time I did mine there were no decals avalable for this bird. Now there are VMFA-212 decals available, but not with the fancy nose nor the right Bu Air number. As with many of my models, I usually end up doing my own decals
  17. 96 1/72nd F-4s. Have another three or four dozen in the stash waiting to be built. This has been over the last 30 years or so. Started with the terrible Airfix F-4E. At that time it was the only half decent kit around. Over the years I have trashed/replaced most of the older stuff and replaced with the various Hasegawa versions. Original goal was one representative model for each of the U. S. Navy and Marine Corps. Then I got to be one from each of the various U. S. operators. Now it is at least one from each country that flew the bird. Unfortunatley I get sidetracked with colorful ma
  18. According to the Martineer book on the Seamaster (great reference by the way) Only the first prototype was painted Sea Blue. All the others were Seaplane Gray and White. Did you kit have about a million pin holes around the forward fuselage parts? Have been working on mine off and on for a while now and generally think it is pretty good. Not a big fan of the overdone and inconsistent panel lines, but overall a very buildable kit. Looking forward to finishing mine. Now all we need is for somebody to do the very complex beaching dolly. Norm
×
×
  • Create New...