Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Sabrejet

  • Rank
    Rivet Counter

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. No; minimal sanding and filler: CP's design in this area ensures a smooth transition.
  2. Nearing completion: vee-screen and unique side screens look perfect.
  3. We're talking about F-86E-1 or -5 (combining CP fwd fuselage and wings with Airfix aft fuselage): the Airfix kit will not give you the correct screen. An F-86E-10, -15 or early F-86F can already be done easily enough by using the Revell/Monogram F-86D wings (if you want slats open) or slicing the Airfix wing about to remove the 6-3 insert. Removing the tip extensions from an F-40 wing gives you a Sabre 6 wing.
  4. It does however leave a nice gap in 1/72: if the SH F-86H had been incorrect in only minor areas, it's unlikely we'd have had the chance of someone doing better 🙂 Swings and roundabouts!
  5. Lovely shot Bryan: the F-86H really deserves justice: thus far there hasn't been an accurate kit of it in any scale! Until recently a trustworthy profile has been elusive (in stark contrast to other F-86 and FJ Fury variants), but I now have the goods if there is a manufacturer that would fancy taking the plunge...
  6. The decals will be great: not visible (usually) in book illustrations are the correct placement, size etc of unit markings. In the case of the 4th FGp scheme, all have been identified from official period unit records. I even managed to pin down the order that made official the placement of the previous year's gunnery award on the subsequent team aircraft. Another area which is usually only verifiable from photos (not book illustrations) is the correct pilot/crew chief block text. Again it has been done for the kit example, as have all others on the decal schemes.
  7. The pre-Korean War 4th FGp gunnery meet scheme shown is one of those included in the first CP! kit release.
  8. Another source of bogus information and colours! Not a good place to go.
  9. Sometimes we can get a bit obsessed with detail and so long as you enjoyed building it, does it really matter that much? On a related subject, I have Litaki's 1/72 Orao kit in my stash: I know next-to-nothing about they type other than what I used to read in period books and magazines. It looks like a nice kit and I bought it mainly because it felt like it would be a good "rainy day" project. When it's finished I won't have a clue how accurate it is, or care. But fingers crossed I'll have enjoyed making it. That'll be a pretty good outcome I reckon.
  10. "nothing major like P-51B and D". I think we have a winner...
  11. I've done a profile comparison between the Clear Prop! F-86A and the Airfix Sabre 4, and the rear fuselage profile at the joint line is very similar. Not 100% the same but looks close enough that an Sabre 4 aft fuselage graft would allow Sabre 2 or F-86E-1/5 without too much bother. Since the Clear Prop! fuselage parts are so delicate, they wouldn't take much persuasion either. The Airfix parts do lack the finesse of the Clear Prop!, but I thought the same about the Academy/Hasegawa/Revell parts and so far my grafting of various wings onto Airfix fuselages hasn't thrown up anything
  12. 48-260 was one of three 'Stovepipe' aircraft which received different olive drab upper surface colour schemes in Korea. As presented at the Udvar-Hazy it isn't representative of its Korean War configuration (when it would have had the fibreglass intake ring, Mk.18 gunsight and intake pitot).
  13. Yes! "Interior Green", which isn't really an FS shade, but we've colour-matched it with some panels I have.
  14. Note though that on the F-86A the speed brake wells are devoid of accumulators and gauges etc. Just actuators, hoses and that's it! Conversion sets have got this wrong in the past.
  15. Yes I can confirm the rod in that area: I have a Sabre 5 seat (roughly equivalent to F-86E-10) and it has this configuration. NAA went to great lengths to ensure that its own seat went into the XP-86/P-86/F-86 series, having been initially instructed to install a standardized "Government-designed" item (the latter designated as Seat – Ejectable Type, which I assume must have been the name of a Specification, though I have no idea if such a seat was ever placed into production on other aircraft). NAA pursued a similar line when designing the aircraft drop tanks, the AAF specifying an "Air Force
  • Create New...