Harv
-
Content Count
492 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Calendar
Posts posted by Harv
-
-
And Italeri kit?... <_</> any comment for this kit?
Huh. Didn't know Italeri made a 1/32 F-15C kit. Care to provide details?
-
Andre,
Yes and no.
From 1989, a USNR VAQ-309, "The Axemen", EA-6A onboard the USS Enterprise with two AERO-1D's, a ALQ-167 ECM pod and an ALQ-76/99 pod on the centerline position. Taken by the DoN media during CVWR-30 work ups in the summer of 1989.
"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.
-
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.
-
Change of plans - I decided to modify my planned F-15SG sheet and add two options for F-15SGs currently training stateside with 428th FS at Mountain Home. Both the squadron commander's jet (05-0005) and a line jet (05-0007) will be included, in addition to two Singapore-based examples. The profiles below are just drafts, some details, crew names etc. are missing but they should give you an idea.
I think the sheet will be more appealing with the 428th FS option. This also means that I had to drop my plans to have bonus markings in 1/72 and 1/32 on the sheet. But don't worry, I will release this in 1/72 as well.
This is scheduled to be a January release as I mentioned earlier; with some luck I should be able to release it on time.
...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...
-
Wow. These look great- Another winner for Caracal!
-
Status on these...?
-
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!
-
...I have heard the stock pit isn't terrible as long as you update the the back seat to the current configuration.
Steel Beach ACS resin from Sprue Bros
For $12. plus shipping, this might just do it for you...
-
Doesn't this kit come with crew figures designed to fit the ejection seats?
-
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.
-
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)
-
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!"
-
...Any hints, particulars? Squadron? Timeframe? BuNo? Any/all can make a difference for the proper colors.
-
I am thinking this release will be expensive.....
Emil
...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.
-
Build it and present the finished effort it to your friend. You get the joy of assembly; he gets the resin back with no work involved! :)
-
Optical illusion, it's the leading edge of the stab you see.
The ladder most likely wasn't deployed at launch, it could have been due to the launch, or a G induced maneuver, or just a buffet with the worn out latch as described.
Curt
Ah, I see it now that I'm looking at the pic with a decent monitor instead of a small, dim, lo-rez laptop screen. Concur the ladder probably dropped down as you suggested - was trying to add 1 + 1 when my eyes were lying to me.. :) Guess that's why they call it 'photo interpretation'. Moving on...
-
...Sorry if someone mentioned it, and I missed it...but, is the tailhook still safety-pinned with the RBF-tag flapping in the breeze, or do my eyes deceive me? Along with the extended boarding ladder, what happened at the final check before launch?
-
Alhtough (as mentioned) Hasegawa has released the 1/48 Mono/Rev F-5E & F kits under their label (as they have done with many other Mono/Rev kits for their own domestic market), the featured model is indeed the 1/32 Hasegawa offering. The giveaway (other than the scale to the hand - also already mentioned) is the slot inside the intakes, with which anyone having built the 1/32 Tiger II is familiar.
-
Also includes Japanese-style helmets for the flight crew, vice the HGU-55 (IIRC) in the F-15C boxing. Concur that $70 is a pretty good price, though-
-
Kursad- Just saw this post (don't get to ARC much these days)... As a by-choice 1/32 builder, I'd welcome the 'bonus' multi-scale approach, even if for only 1 aircraft with a 'full compliment' of 48 & 72 left over. I concur with your thought that 'standard' stencils are available in tons of AM decals in 48th, so using that room to provide for the other two major scales opens this subject up to a LOT more modellers. Bring 'em on in all 3!
-
11bee, on 11 April 2012 - 01:25 PM, said:
I think that many folks in the West tend to sell them a bit short, especially their state of preparedness. My guess is that they were probably at the top of their game by the mid-80's.
:D, Yes John, I've reckoned for years that we've been selling them short and we're in big part still selling them short. But then again that's just my opinion.
,Ross.
You gents are welcome to your opinions. As a member of the intelligence community during a good chunk of the cold war years, I can assure you the DoD took the Warsaw Pact countries VERY seriously. Do you know what it took to divert $ from the DoD budget start ACM training during the Viet Nam war? Trust me, no one who 'was there' and had access thought the Soviets and/or their satellite states were ill-prepared or incapable. We were betting our lives on it.
-
Well, as the OP has not come back to clarify what he really wants to do with the kit, and there are numerous threads regarding modifications that need to be made to these big Tamiya Eagles to make them accurate (depending upon which version is desired), there is no point in delving into the particulars here.
Wild Bill, if you would care to elaborate on what you intend to do with your 'holy grail' of a kit, then you can see there are knowledgeable folks here willing to point you in the right direction...but there are so many variables, that can't really be done until you narrow down for us what you are really looking to do.
-
...The Tamiya J is a non mod Eagle and JASDF birds are now modified with new IP extra antennas and a multitude of small duffs the MA book will point out. aires do a super cockpit.
Enjoy!
Not quite true. The original Tamiya F-15C kit has the pre-MSIP IP; the -J kit has an updated IP with an additional MFD on the left side (mostly weapons/stores management, I think...?) Anyway, all these Tamiya kits are a dozen or more years old now, so there have certainly been system mods that would impact various antennae, instruments, etc. on the real jets that are not reflected in the kit moldings. None have the tracking gear for a helmet mounted sighting system, yet some of the -JASDF F-15s are so equipped. It is always best to find current (or contemporary) pictures of the specific airframe in question if accuracy to that degree (airframe/timeframe) is desired. Concur that there are some outstanding reference books to make that job easier.
-
Unless I missed it, you didn't indicate which version you want to build. Just a heads up that the -J version has the two mass balances on the top of the vertical stabs. The US F-15C has the larger-diameter TEWS unit on the top of the port stab, so if you want to build a US Eagle, you will need to scratch the TEWS (really, not that tough), or trade with someone who has an -E or -C kit, and wants to build a -J or other export version with the same configuration. Of course, if you're building your kit as a -J, you're good-to-go.
Top Gun/US Navy Aggressors
in Jet Modeling
Posted · Edited by Harv
..and just to be pedantic, the Navy has "Adversary" units; "Aggressors" is an Air Force term.
Harv, former VFC-13 'Fighting Saints' adversary guy