Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Rodewaryer

  • Rank
    Glue Required

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Anyone wanting a copy of 75-0053 without 'stupid' watermarks, SMH, here's a shot taken at the same venue. That's sure an odd tail numbering method for an F-15.
  2. Every tailcode list I have doesn't show 'PB' including a Vietnam era list. Yet....This tail number seems to be 70-1275, a C-130E from Pope AFB, 317th TAW. It's shown at AMARC as of 2008. Looks like the tail number is actually the aircraft shown on a search for Pope AFB.
  3. A segment not all that well represented in the modeling world. QF models of all varieties are so often overlooked. Nice looking build.
  4. Let's not forget LY, WA, AK, IS and TY as well as some assorted sites like guard units, SL, MA, HH, JZ, WR. If we're to do this let's do it right and thoroughly.
  5. Great shot with decent building details. It might just be me, but I think that picture might be tagged...hee, hee. Bah-loody hell. Yeah, I'm kind of a picture tag bigot, I get it when it involves REAL 'art' but not on photos....but I can say it's really good example of taking oneself a bit too seriously.
  6. Lovely build on this Raven. I saw these guys daily right across the taxiway from our unit, the 55FS at Heyford, '92-'94. This was my outfit, if the cameraman turned right about 90 deg from this spot, he'd have been looking at Ravens. I just don't have any pics "I took" of them unfortunately. Again, sweet job on the model.
  7. Correct, it's F-15B 71-0291, unless there was more than one bicentennial scheme which I highly doubt. It later did duty as the prototype for the E model...as disturbing as that is considering the design team literally said "not a pound for air to ground". The A and C are the pure form of the FX concept, the others (E and EX) are from too many fingers in the pie and the reason they work so well is only due to the high standard of the original concept.
  8. Yeah, it is a bit disturbing. That blue bugs me now that you've mentioned it. I should be more like the blue here.
  9. Bloody fine job, I'd love to have a model of 71-0280 as good as this one. It's far better looking than most pics of this jet out there, the red/orange really didn't fare well in the Edwards sun. BTW, You outdid yourself on the special parts. It's fate is criminal, to be painted in the livery of a different jet, hiding its original tail number. As if this jet wasn't important enough to be represented correctly.
  10. Paul Boyer what a gorgeous build, and honestly....I like the dark pic of it better.
  11. Not at all horrible. The builder is usually the harshest critic. Looks like a very fine build to me. Had to look up that tail as SA isn't a tailflash we see very often...
  12. Slick Tankers sir! Love the use of the tail struts, a legit piece of equipment to round out the function of the display. My wife and I met at a SAC base with B-52G's and Tankers. I was weapons so only worked the BUFF's, but she was an electrician and spent time on both, so I have an interest in them even if I never worked them. She related an interesting anti-thesis story, where a gear lever snafu on a 135 led to the nose gear retracting when power was applied, oops. Tail strut not going to help with that....
  13. That is a dirty pig. So....good sample for the weathering proficient....
  14. I second that motion. I'd like to see that as well.
  • Create New...