Jump to content
ARC Discussion Forums
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt

Harv

Members
  • Content Count

    492
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Harv

  • Rank
    Tenax Sniffer (Open a window!)
  • Birthday 12/19/1958

Contact Methods

  • ICQ
    0
  • Yahoo
    rmharvster

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    San Diego, Calif, USA
  • Interests
    Adversaries! <br>Naval Aviation<br>1/32 Modern Jets
  1. Harv

    Top Gun/US Navy Aggressors

    ..and just to be pedantic, the Navy has "Adversary" units; "Aggressors" is an Air Force term. Harv, former VFC-13 'Fighting Saints' adversary guy
  2. Harv

    F-15C

    Huh. Didn't know Italeri made a 1/32 F-15C kit. Care to provide details?
  3. Harv

    What is this?

    "Yes and No" is correct. Being a Naval Reserve squadron under (CVWR-30 Reserve Air Wing 30)...the Pac Fleet reserve airwing, VAQ-309 were normally shore-based, but deployed on det with the entire reserve airwing (typically every-other year) aboard a carrier for a qualification period. On the off-years, CAG-30 would typically do a land-based det. I was with them the year following the above photo for a det aboard USS Nimitz in August 1990. The Axemen were flying EA-6Bs, and one of their pilots received the 'top hooker' award for the best boarding grades of the air wing for the line period. Not bad for a squadron flying and qualifying in new (to them) jets. The following year we (CAG-30) were back on land with a run through the SLATS course at NAS Fallon.
  4. Harv

    T-2 Buckeye in NAVY service.

    I know the TA-4J had a "solo harness" that was used at least in the training command to tightly connect the seat harness/buckles for the empty rear seat on solo hops, in order to avoid any loose harness/belts in the back from coming adrift in flight and causing any issues. (Since the SNA [student naval aviator] in the front seat would be powerless to do anything about it.) One of those lessons learned which was "written in blood" I'm sure. I would assume the Buckeye had a similar arrangement, but I don't know that for an absolute fact. If there was not a specific harness piece, the harness straps would need to be somehow tightly snugged-down, tucked away, or otherwise stowed in a secure position so as to avoid any loose, 'bitter ends' which Mr. Murphy would then utilize to wreak havoc upon an unsuspecting junior soloist.
  5. Harv

    CD48018 - F-15SG update

    ...So, there will no longer be a 1/32 option in the offering? Bummer. I get the marketing, but that takes me out of the 'interested & hopeful' pool...
  6. Harv

    CD48023 - T-45 Goshawk - Part 1

    Wow. These look great- Another winner for Caracal!
  7. Harv

    CD48018 - F-15SG "Singapore Eagles"

    Status on these...?
  8. Harv

    CD48018 - F-15SG "Singapore Eagles"

    This is just about the most anticipated 1/48th sheet I know of...(since I'd really like to do the SG in 1/32!) ~Looking good!
  9. Harv

    Aires 1/32 Super Hornet exhaust cans

    Steel Beach ACS resin from Sprue Bros For $12. plus shipping, this might just do it for you...
  10. Harv

    Empty seats: ideas sought!

    Doesn't this kit come with crew figures designed to fit the ejection seats?
  11. Harv

    A-4M Skyhawk underside?

    Refs say FS36495, which is, as you posted, referred-to as "Light Gray". That should be the correct match for the 'negative' markings used on the darker sides & top surfaces. As mentioned, it probably didn't 'fade' so much as get dirty. Look forward to seeing your build.
  12. Harv

    VF-111 F-4B

    Hey, Curt- can you pass that set to me? I'll swap it back to Mike along with my order for those 1/32 early block 30 wheels for my F-16N build...maybe that will light a fire- :) And I have a couple Hase F-4B/N kits in the stash. Might be able to help you out with a radome horn antenna...shoot me an email (see my sig below)
  13. Reading through all five pages of this thread, I found myself pretty much in agreement with the statements (and arguements) by GeeDub. I think his attempting to explain the feeling of 'wasted time' is perfectly valid: It isn't a lack of desire to help a fellow modeller; it is, however, determining what is important to you in terms of how you expend your limited number of hours in a day. Especially modelling time. Perhaps I missed it; but several times GeeDub suggested the poster of a question note up-front if he was posing a question in support of a Whiff build. It was not because he has animosity toward Wiffers; he's just trying to set his priorities...Much like posting the scale involved in a question. I've seen well-researched answers (that took much time & effort to supply), but were totally invalidated when it was later revealed they were responding with the details of a kit of another scale. Wasted time & effort. Back to GeeDub's example: If I knew I had *somewhere* the correct color of Joker purple, but was answering a disassociated Whiff question, I might decide after 10-15 minutes I wasn't ready to commit another hour of research to the effort. Is that selfish of me? Hey, it's MY modeling time, right? If someone wants that Viggen green for their Whiff B-17, then I *might* suggest it is 'close-to' "ivy-drab 123" instead of spending 3 hours digging out a 'perfect match'. Then, the Whiff builder can make their Mark-1, Mod-0 eyeball determination if it looks right to them. (Since pleasing yourself is the goal as stated earlier). That Whiff question on Late-model F-14s & AMRAAM launchers? As a NavAir guy, I'd say use common sense. In the case of the F/A-18, the AMRAAM basically replaced the Sparrow, using the same launcher. Since the AMRAAM is smaller in diameter & lighter, there should be no restrictions for similar swap-out on a Whiff F-14D(+). You (Mr. Whif builder) decide if that statement works for your build. Everything accurate except the BuNo because it is a composite due to lack of refs for a single airframe? Sure; but as has been stated what is accurate on May 9 1972 may not be so on May 10 1972 for the same airframe. Build it as accurate as makes you happy; but remember some guys want a higher level of accuracy than others. (Anyone who has read through GeeDub's build threads KNOWS he's not content with things 'just because that's how it came in the box')...he is passionate about accuracy to stuff I'd never touch; so I see why some of this may confuse his sensibilites. Bottom line, as Whiffers don't want to be judged by others for their choices on levels/degrees/points of accuracy (or lack thereof); neither do some willing to consider provide researched answers want to be judged for their level of time commitment to providing that answer. Or moving on. It isn't condemnation of the project- it is simply a request to allow a determination on whether to spend the time needed for a researched answer. For the record, I don't typically build Whiffs; but a appreciate the creativity and artistic effort that goes into them. Interesting discussion. In the time I took to type this, the Phantom in WWII scheme & German Lozenge Tomcat have been posted. Cool. Regarding the person claiming the Phantom load-out is unrealistic, I have an observation & response: Observation- there are jerks in all walks of life, and all aspects of our hobby. Response: "Please provide photo proof of the 'correct' load-out, or STFU!"
  14. Harv

    A-4M Skyhawk underside?

    ...Any hints, particulars? Squadron? Timeframe? BuNo? Any/all can make a difference for the proper colors.
  15. Harv

    I see another big scale CF-18 in my future

    ...That's my fear, as well...we've waited years for an OOB Early hornet, Academy finally puts it out at a much higher price point than the original releases (especially the going rate on the second-hand market), so folks will opt to pick up an earlier release (or balk at buying the new realease at all);, it will be a slow seller, and then Academy (and others holding back on similar projects [e.g. Tamiaya & F-16A/B models])will point to this as justification as to why these releases are so risky...Grrrr.
×