Jump to content

Jeff

Members
  • Content Count

    181
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Jeff

  1. Well, *** is wrong with trumpeter? I mean from the first pic it looks wrong already and the length, *** is that? I was going to buy their Mig-23 but the square (read lego) intakes just doesn't look right to me. I am also interested in their 1:48 SU-24... but I mean ... how the F did they screwed up again and again, making things worst than the last one? Even I have loads of money I can't just buy their kit like this ... too many major errors, and I am not a rivet counter. Looks like I have to stick with the Su-24 streem kit (which I know is beyond my skills to build plus I don't have the
  2. Hi, I have a streem 1:72 SU-24M. It is unwrapped but remains un-built. The only part that it is missing is one of the tiny side ventilation scopes on the rear of the fuselage, near the vertical fin and horizontal stabilizer. Since I have no time to build models as I am switching to a new job, I am willing to give this kit away to cover my lose as much as possible. PM me with the bid price (includes shipment from Hong Kong) if anyone is interested.
  3. Well, you guys be the judge! Anyways, I will go back to the LHS and check out the academy kit.
  4. Now, some more pics. Sorry, I didn't use the flash so the photos are taken in high ISO and appears to be grainy.
  5. Yes, that's what I thought too... the recessed lines are exaggerate in most of our models. If you look at aircraft pictures, you really can't see the panel lines, unless it's a very dirty jet with faded out paint, like some of the Russian aircraft.
  6. Well, the photos does really make the raised panel lines look bad. You have to see the kit in person to judge for yourself.
  7. Yes, the raise panel llines look worst since the photos have more contrast with the use of my camera's flash.
  8. Nope, I just got the kit a few hours so I am just too lazy to examine the kit. Anyways, here are a couple of shots of the upper and bottom fuselage which most people are concerned with:
  9. Dear all, I just bought the hasegawa kit. From the looks of the kit, the raise panel lines wasn't that bad, maybe the photos made it look worst. Anyways, I got the one without the photo-etch parts thus the lowered price.
  10. Dear all, The Hasegawa 1:48 F/A-22 Raptor (PT45) was just out in Hong Kong, and I have a hard to choose in between the Hasegawa or Academy, given the price of both kits are almost the same (UML is running some steep discounts on the new Hasegawa raptor, i think is $380 HKD, same as the Academy). How bad is the Hasegawa in terms of the raise panel lines? Can I just use sanding to make it less pronounced? Thanks, Jeffrey
  11. I wish they should come up with the Mig-23MLD version...which has a better stance on the ground instead of tail down nose up...
  12. I think the canopy looks alright to me, kinda of slightly longish. However, is Trumpeter going to release the MLD version which is the ultimate version of the Mig-23?
  13. Vladmir, Your Zvezda 1:144 787 looks very nice. Similar to your work on the Zvezda 1:144 Tu-154m, may I know how can you achieve the crisp panel-lines effect with the grey color wash? This is because I know both Zvezda kits have somewhat shallow panel lines. To achive the crispy effect, did you re-engrave the panel lines? or did you use very thin paint? Thanks so much, Jeffrey
  14. In the case of AIR-2A with 1.5 KT warhead, I found from unofficial, non-secret sources that the effective blast radius is 300 meters. So, it is not good enough to take out or disable the AEW-type target if the missile is off by 1-5 kms. Maybe that's the main reason it was not study further both by NATO and USSR (?) ...
  15. The only reason I can think of why long range nuclear tipped missile was not further develop is because of their limited blast radius to disable the target. A high explosive warhead will do the same trick. BUT, I can naively shows a "modified" Mig-31 can carry 2 missiles, each SARH missile carries a 100 kg nuclear warhead. From Wikipedia, the R-33 is equipped with a HE warhead weighting 47.5 kg. The Mig-31 usually carries 4 x R-33. So, it's possible to replace 4 R-33s with 2 "air-to-air nuclear tipped missiles" carrying ~100 kg nuclear warhead. I believe this will be enough to disable a
  16. Wow, I just imagine a scenario and wonder the what and if's, and speak it out for sharing.. and ask some questions why it's not been done especially in the former Soviet Union. However, it seems this could let me to severe consequences ... and I may be the target by some authorities...now I am in trouble. :unsure:
  17. Hi Jay Chladek, Your SR-71 looks very nice!! Cheers, Jeffrey
  18. I think it's for the recent release of hasegawa 1:72 SR-71.. which I want to ask... is it the best kit for the SR-71? For the "ICHI BAN" SR-71, is it black or gray? (I haven't seen a gray blackbird...)
  19. By the way, does anyone know the effective blast radius of the nuclear tipped missile such as AIM-26 Falcon, AIR-2 and the AIM-47? Yes yes, i know now we have proof of concept for the KS-172 and R-37 very long range missile but during the cold war, USSR did not have the technology to make a long range active radar missile with size that is feasible to be carried by the largest fighter. Thanks.
  20. Yes, after cold war, you don't want to risk a fallout. However, I don't know if during Cold War years the USSR even study this method of taking down an Awacs type aircraft. For example, the E-2 hawkeye is a major obstacle for Soviet bombers such as Tu-22M3 to get close enough to target the carrier, since the F-14s will be notified by the E-2. Even the F-14 is on CAP, you can have escorting Mig-31 using the R-33s to faceoff the F-14s while the 'special' Mig-31 will launch its nuclear tipped AAM at the E-2. Just a thought. :P
  21. Well, I am not very familiar with HARM, but I think the HARM missile requires the target to emit constant radiation such as turning on the powerful radar. If AWACs detected it is locked, would it turn off its radar and the HARM will lose its lock? For the Russians that still heavily depend on SARH missiles, a nuclear tipped missile would decrease the time that the aircraft has to paint the target, due to it's large explosive radius(?). This is even more important to take down an AWACs-type aircraft from long-range. Imagine a scenario in which a Mig-31 aircraft armed with nuclear tipped mis
  22. Dear all, I wonder besides the AIM-47 Falcon, is there any nuclear tipped air-to-air missile? I think nuclear AAMs is useful against AWACS, large formation of bombers and fighters since you don't need a precise target solution to destroy your enemy especially in BVR engagement. I was also very surprised Russia did not research into this area of nuclear tipped AAMs since it would nullify any BVR capabilities of the Western fighters. Can someone enlighten me? Thanks, Jeffrey
×
×
  • Create New...