Jump to content

Steve McArthur

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Steve McArthur

  1. That's why it smells like BS to me that Ferris sued the Navy over it. I didn't assume you made it up, I think you are repeating a rumor you heard once that isn't true. You presented a controversial story with no evidence. I'm just saying, back it up and show some evidence. If there was a lawsuit there should be a paper trail and at least a mention of it in one of the many, many sites that talk about US Navy experiments with Ferris camouflage patterns.
  2. Got a link for that? It smells like BS to me.
  3. The model kits are licensed by the aircraft manufacturer as a trademarked products. This was a change to US law about 15 years ago. Prior to that products developed with US tax dollars like military projects could not be trademarked. This is the fine print on a Tamiya F-16 box top.
  4. I think the simple fix will be to wait for aftermarket or a lot more carving. Yay!! more aftermarket needed for a "Gold" kit. To me it looks like Kinetic plans to reuse tail extensions parts for the A & C models and to make it work screwed with the cross sections. It may work for the C but compromises the shape of the A tails. The basic A and ADF tail bases should have a more trapezoid cross section all the way to the aft end and Kinetic made the rear too square to line up with the tail extension. The A tail extensions should have more taper at the forward end where the C is m
  5. So I got bored and did some math. Red numbers are defined by the drawing @habu2 included. I used the coordinates for the MAC location to determine the leading edge sweep, then use that to calculate the leading edge Fuselage Station of the tip chord. Using the MAC and Tip chords I calculate the locations of the trailing edge and then calculate the trailing edge sweep at both of these points. All the numbers worked out consistent with the drawing and gave consistent answers for the trailing edge sweep at both the MAC and tip locations. One thin
  6. According to Scalemates it was originally released in 2018. I have no idea about the quality, I only build 1/48.
  7. I've never seen any F-16 referred to a Block 52 "Advanced" outside of some model box tops. Additionally, I don't think the "Plus" was ever official nomenclature, but just a way to differentiate early vs late production Block 50/52. With upgrade programs the differences are even more meaningless. The "Tape" version and corresponding hardware upgrades are more important, as this defines the actual capabilities. You can have a USAF Block 50 built in 1991 upgraded to the latest Tape version that is technically a more capable aircraft than a Polish D+ as delivered. If you
  8. It was announced back in September of 2021, but then an invasion occurred in ModelSvit's home country which may have delayed progress somewhat.
  9. Start simple or start fun? I would not start a newbie off with a mixed media kit. I'd look for the best fitting cheap kit I could find. Something that he won't be fighting with due to lousy fit and poor engineering. Personally I'd look for something like a Tamiya 1/48 P-51D.
  10. Or if you don't want to mess with research and modifying kit parts: $6.49 @ https://spruebrothers.com/qbt48240-1-48-quickboost-f-16-falcon-block-5-10-floating-elevator-48240/
  11. I've been doing this for a few years and I can count on one hand how many times I actually get asked for ID. Most people that take your card don't even think to look at the signature.
  12. I use a Badger hose and a quick release fitting on my regulator. My local hobby shop had the Badger adapter to go from the hose to 1/4" pipe thread. At Home Depot I was able to get a pipe thread quick release that fit the Badger adapter and my regulator.
  13. Here's an old thread on CO2 tanks. There are a few threads on here, but the search engine sucks. Cost will vary quite a bit. New vs used is the biggest cost driver. I've seen used tanks for as low as $10. If you go used the tank better have a current hydrostatic test or you will not be able to get it filled. It was around $40 the last time I needed mine tested, but it took a couple weeks to get it back.
  14. Steve McArthur


    Forgot about it in what sense? Did it change? There's always been a big dorsal blade antenna on the first generation Marine Harriers. Photo dated 1976 over at Airliners.net
  15. Steve McArthur


    The only other change I haven't seen mentioned in this thread is that the camera in the port side nose was deleted on the C model. The refueling probe could be fitted to the AV-8A but just wasn't commonly seen until the later years when most had been converted to C's. The slime lights look like they were introduced as a modification independent of the C conversion. All C's will have slime lights, but A's could as well depending on the time frame. The earliest photo I've got with slime lights on an A is 1980.
  16. I have 3 sets bought for different reasons and detail isn't one of them. The ones I have are no better detailed than the kit parts and if anything the detail is worse because the white metal needs more clean up and just is not a good medium for capturing fine detail. Added strength is the primary reason to use them and there are only a handful of 1/48th scale aircraft where there is an issue with the stock plastic landing gear being strong enough to support the weight of the completed model. I honestly don't get the need for them on the majority of kits where SAC has made replacements sets
  17. PM me an email address and I can send you some photos of an AS332C I spent several months with. It was in civilian use was a very stripped down basic model. The only "extra" on this one was that port side had a VIP airstair instead of the sliding cargo door. The Super Puma has the same basic fuel system as the Puma: 5 tanks in the floor. There are options for additional tanks in the floor, sponsons and cabin, but the helicopter I worked on had none beyond the basic 5.
  18. I haven't built one since right after Desert Storm so I'm a little hazy on specifics. The only detail that comes to mind is removing the blocky squarish antenna under the nose and tail. These antennas were in the process of being removed throughout fleet at that time. Most planes had been updated by Desert Storm, so it would help to check photos of the plane your were doing. Otherwise the Monogram kit is a Desert Storm aircraft.Armament is another issue: The stuff in the kit isn't really useful. I'm not sure what the bombs are supposed to be they aren't shaped like anything I've ever seen
  19. The Revell kit isn't that bad, but it's based on prototypes with skimpy details about equal to the Tamiya A-10. I don't think it had the chaff/flare buckets under the wingtips. The Monogram is much better detailed and at least represented an'80s operational aircraft OOB. I've seen a Revell kit built up as a Desert Storm aircraft and it's doable, but does require some scratchbuilding skills.
  20. Trojansamurai is correct. Prior to the merger of Revell and Monogram each had their own mold of the A-10 with the Monogram being the superior of the two. Since the merger the Monogram mold has been the only one used.
  21. I have the Hasegawa Argentinian B/C boxing. It's has errors if you are trying to build this version, and IMO not worth the premium it seems to carry. Hasegawa includes a resin dorsal antenna fairing that is incorrect in shape for either version. It's sort of in between the 2 different versions. Condor Decals has the correct antennas.
  22. To preface this, I've never bought the Hobbycraft kit, nor do I intend to. The canopy looks squashed and the detail is lacking compared to the Hasegawa kit. With the Hasegawa family being one of the best 1:48 model series I've seen I can't see a reason anyone would buy the Hobbycraft kit. If you are having trouble finding a A-4B, MAW-Decals makes a resin conversion for the A-4C that seems to be more available. The conversion provides a new nose and instrument panel for about $5.
  23. Block 20 is an oddball. The block number is chronologically out of sequence, so don't think of it a coming between block 15 and 25. Even though it looks like an A/B with the skinny vertical fin base and is referred to as a F-16A/B model, it's closer to Block 52. Production began after Block 50/52s were rolling down the assembly line, so it uses the same wing and aft fuselage structure as a Block 50/52. This was probably a cheaper solution for Lockheed than to go back to an earlier structural design. The cockpit and avionics are closest to the European MLU planes. They should also be NSI
  24. I have no definitive source, but I would guess black ones were prototypes and an initial production batch with the cream/white ones being full production run units.
  • Create New...