Jennings

Simply divide by the scale. 12' divided by 48 gives you 0.25'. If you can do that math, 0.25' is the same as 3" (1/4 of a foot). It's just simple math, no scale calculator, slide rule, chicken bones, or special alignment of the planets required. J

Yeah. And Britney Spears is a little flakey... J

I'm not sure why you can't see the runway orientation numbers on that pic, but they should be there. Look at Google Earth for examples of the big squared style of runway numbers as specified by ICAO for runways worldwide. There are some good pics of Washington Dulles I know... J

One thing I haven't seen anyone mention is the fact that the Academy kits all suffer (at least all that I've seen and owned) from strange warped wings when viewed from the front. Sort of arched I guess. I've never seen one built that didn't come out that way. Someone was saying elsewhere that there were apparently some issues with the size (width?) of the aft fuselage on the Academy kits as well. That said, they look like B-24s, but I like what I've seen of the Hasegawa kit, and when I can get one for a reasonable price, I'll grab one to make an early PB4Y-1 out of it. J

No. There were really only three cowling variations. Early cowl flaps with upper lip intake, early cowl flaps without upper lip intake, and later F4F-4 style. The kit's matches none of them. Also, I was just re-fondling tonight. The diameter of the cowl lip opening on the HB kit is considerably smaller than that on the Tamiya kit, and the side profile view is thus much more tapered. I'm not sure which is correct (it was the same engine in there after all), but I tend to believe Tamiya more than I believe HB/Trumpeter, given Trumpeter's very spotty (being generous) record for accuracy. J

Get yourself some sheet styrene of the right thickness, slice away with a #11 blade, smooth the edges with a sanding stick, glue to the fuselage. It should take about 15 minutes total. No resin, no PE, no muss, no fuss required. There's almost nothing that could be easier to scratch up than three blade antennas... J

Was just fondling the kit tonight and comparing it to refs. Turns out HB totally hosed the -3 cowling. On the real one, the two cowl flaps (on each side) are situated more or less at 9:30 and 2:30. The kit's are too small and are situated more at like 10:30 and 1:30. There is also a prominent cowl join line with over-center cam latches that are quite visible that's totally missing. So which enterprising resin manufacturer will be first with an accurate -3 cowling?? J

Definitely High Speed Silver, probably weathered by the strong African sun to a mousey grey. They were definitely out of service before the Asegai roundels came into use in the 1960s. J

PHOTOS PLEASE!!!?!?!?!?! I just got an F4F-3 for around $24 (about 16 Euros) J

I just got the HB F4F-3 in the mail today, and I can confirm it's a REALLY nice kit! It does have shell ejection chutes. I'd imagine they put the drop tanks on the common parts sprue because it was the best place to put them. Plenty of Hasegawa and Tamiya kits has "parts not for use" in them for exactly that reason. Aside from having some nasty raised (garden hose sized) piano hinges here and there, and some slightly overdone fabric effects (both easily remedied), this is a gorgeous kit. Better in some ways that Tamiya's. While I know real Wildcats had dome headed rivets and lapped skin

So does anyone know when we're likely to see the Frescos on the shelf?? J

Hi guys, I've obviously come to this thread very late - but your Badger looks fantastic!! The kit is basically 'okay' to start with, but requires (as you know) a LOT of work to make a decent model out of it. One thing that nobody (except me) seems to have taken notice of however. Trumpeter *TOTALLY* screwed up the windscreen/canopy. On the real Tu-16 the windshield panels from the side have an almost dog-like (or shark-like) appearance, giving the airplane a very aggressive looking 'face'. Trumpeter's looks like it's a tired old man with drooping eyes. I'm attaching a JPEG showing the

They didn't? I'm confused then. J

Halle-friggin-leujah! A new 1/48 MiG-17 family!!!!!! Onward McDuff! The Sea Fury looks fair to middlin, but the rivets REALLY, really, really have to go Trumpeter. Sea Furies are as smooth as a baby's butt. :D J

Regardless of duplication of old numbers or not, I'm ecstatic that it's not going to end up being a "KC-767". Finally, a microscopic spec of common sense prevails in the five-sided-booby hatch on the Potomac. J

You can pretty clearly see the lighter color under the wing of the two distant airplanes in the original print... I'm satisfied that it was the same top and bottom. J

Except that VN-9 wasn't doing nav training. This was "heavy" (ie: heavier than an SNJ) transition for carrier-bound pilots. Given the fairly widespread use of yellow wing panels on various trainers, I'm more inclined to agree with yellow. I've never seen green on an instrument trainer that was in any pattern but stripes on the wings and fuselage, while there are lots of instances of yellow inner wing panels like this (even on things like PBYs). J

"Avoid flying into London at all costs" - does that include the US $178 round trip fare I got from Dulles to Heathrow? The tax was more than the ticket, so even with the PITA factor of dealing with the perpetually under construction Heathrow, I think it's worth it Almost fell off the chair when I saw United for $178! J

The good news about relatively under-documented things is that nobody is going to be able to prove you wrong :D J

I've never heard of black w/ interior green floors, but I suppose it's possible. I'd have thought overall black. Can't imagine a troop at a depot would care if there was a D or an N after the designation though. J

The Hasegawa B-17G represents a pretty late production B-17 IIRC. It has the non-framed waist windows that are staggered, the Cheyenne tail turret, and no radio compartment gun (again IIRC - it's been a long time since I looked at it). I bought my first copy in the mid-1970s, so it's at least that old (back when the state of the art was models carved from basalt using crude bronze chisels) :P Still a very good B-17 despite it's (insert dramatic music) RAISED PANEL LINES!!... J

The HC Sea Fury FB.11 (note, it's not a 2, it's a 10+1) wasn't state of the art in 1988 (for some reason people seem to think the ''state of the art" in plastic kits was vastly different 30 years ago than it is today - and it wasn't). It was a POS then and it's a POS now. True, the basic overall shape is that of a Sea Fury, but it has problems from stem to stern. That said, it *can* be built into a masterpiece. Many years ago PP Aeroparts did a magnificent resin & PE set for it. I believe that's still available from Flightpath in the UK, and is ABSOLUTELY necessary to do the kit just

Update, 6:00 p.m., Tuesday, 30 October - David spoke with his dad (I'd emailed him about the buzz over this). His dad thinks the wings were yellow and the rudder white. Keeping in mind that this is a memory of an octogenarian dating from 62 years ago... I think yellow wing panels are the most likely from a 'makes sense to me' standpoint. Most GSB airplanes had white lettering, although yellow was possible. Here's my interpretation based on what dad said this evening. I can just make out a lighter color under the wings of the two distant airplanes, so I've included that (makes sense, no?)

But imagine if they'd put this kind of research, design, and tooling effort into an *accurate* (as in, measured from a real 1/1 airplane) Spitfire IXc... Sigh.. J

Are you talking about an overall green airplane?? If so, what's your thought process?? I've never seen a Navy airplane in green, unless it was a USAAF type in OD/NG. Well, the Electra in "Dive Bomber" was green, but then that's the same movie that had a radial engined PT-22 in it Elaborate! J