Gabe Pincelli

That would, in fact be my name on there! Just wait til you guys see what's coming out of the paint barn at Kingsville in a month or so! -Gabe

You're way too kind Mike! Yes Tobias, it is quite possible (and likely) that I will do a correction nose for the Italeri Hawk. It just hasn't been on the front burner lately. Perhaps I need to adjust my model-related priorities... Gabe

They both have shape issues. Just not the same issues with the same shapes. Both have screwed up noses, just in different ways. Same story with the aft fuselage. The fixes for both noses, while different are both about the same level of difficulty to fix. Italeri's is too pointed while the top of Airfix's nose doesn't have the graceful curve it should. A bit of strip styrene laminated on and blended with epoxy putty will fix either. The aft fuselage is a different story though. I've managed to correct Italeri's aft-most fuselage area, but haven't figured out how to fix the airfix. The

Gotta throw my 2 cents in. Neither kit is completely accurate in outline. Both kits suffer from mishapen noses, just in different ways. Italeri's nose is a bit more obvious than Airfix's nose issue. Both kits also have issues in the shape of the aft fuselage, again in different ways. I believe Italeri have done a pretty good job of capturing the aft fuselage shape of a very early Hawk, while Airfix have also attempted to do the early Hawk shape with the rounded off upper fuselage line, but have ended up making it just a tad too portly. Neither is accurate for a current Hawk aft fuselage.

Matt, The surface texture is the same as the other kits and the dispensers are stil covered. Unfortunately, no additional weapons. Sure would be cool to find some Hellfires to hang on it! AGM-119B's for the SH-60B would be cool too. I'd also like to see a Romeo release with all the proper parts, but that shouldn't be too hard to scratchbuild. Gabe

Matt, I don't have my camera handy, but I do have the kit right in front of me right now. What exactly would you like to know about the contents? Basically, they've done the necessary mods to the F fuselage for the port side sliding windows. They've included the windows as additional parts on the clear sprue. Personally, I think they've done a very nice job at the mods. The only other addition to the -F sprue is an external fuel tank, which is included on both the -F and the -H sprues in the kit. Other than the fuselage mods and the tank the rest of the sprue contents are identical to t

The Hasegawa kit drop tanks are a bit undersized. Dimensions taken directly from actual drop tanks were used to scale the Two Mikes drop tanks. -Gabe

Darren, I'm going. I will stop by and introduce myself. See you there! Gabe Pincelli

100 of the 146 A-4Fs got the upgrade. The "Super Fox" upgrade was actually not an adversary specific upgrade, although it was perfect for the role and many of them saw service as adversaries in addition to use by the Blue Angels. The upgrades were started in the early seventies ('73-74ish?). VA-55, VA-164, and VA-212 all deployed with Super Foxes during USS HANCOCK's final vietnam cruise in March through October 1975. Other squadrons may have taken them to war as well, but those I'm pretty sure of. Many Super Foxes saw service in Marine Corps reserve squadrons through the '80's as well a

It's the Blue Angel boarding ladder fairing. -Gabe

Hi Darren, Just a heads-up: The hump on the OA-4M was based on the later configuration used on the A-4M. The louvered vents on either side of the hump were moved one panel forward on the later M and OA-4M compared to the early M and A-4E/F/L hump. In addition to the forward part of the hump being a different shape from the single seat hump, the aft end of the canopy was flared out to blend into the hump. I don't think the plexiglass was changed at all, just the area aft of it. So, a replacement piece to graft onto the aft end of the canopy would be necessary as well. As far as which w

Hey Darren, Every TA-4J spine I ever got a look at had it. I'd actually like to see any pics you have of TA-4s without it. Until now, I would've thought they all had the vent. The TA-4J had the same engine as the A-4E and the A-4E had the vent so it isn't an F engine thing. Gabe

Are you kidding? The shawarma is about the only thing I like about this place!

Hey guys, Here is a link to a thread where I posted a list of required mods: http://www.arcforums.com/forums/air/index....&hl=goshawk It is a very extensive conversion, but not entirely impossible. At the time of the above thread, I was working on a conversion of the Airfix Hawk. I have since started over using the Italeri Hawk, which in my opinion better captures many of the subleties of the Hawk series' shape. No where near perfect, but better (in my opinion). Pookie, nicely done prototype! That Premiere kit is a dog! Feel free to ask if you have any questions about the mods.

Hi Mike Only the earliest FA-18A Hornets (Lot 7 and earlier) had rescue arrows and external canopy jettison provisions. All Hornets and Super Hornets lot 8 and later had them deleted. I'm sorry I don't have the NATOPS handy to give you a specific bureau number range. If you are looking for pics of jets that have the door, many (maybe all) Canadian Hornets had the canopy jettison panels in addition to some Australian Hornets. Many US Navy Adversary FA-18As are old enough to have the jettison doors as well, but don't always have the arrows applied. HTH, Gabe

Aw, come on Jennings. Easy on the poor little Goshawk. I do have to agree that the Skyhawk is "just plain pretty". Prettier than the Goshawk? A resounding YES. But I wouldn't say the Goshawk isn't a pretty good looking airplane too. I've spent a bit of time flying and studying both in great detail and I haven't grown tired of either of them. Gabe

Hey guys, I, for one, am very hopeful. I'd be extremely happy if it improves on Airfix's Hawk at all. I have built a few Airfix Hawks and am happy to have had it available. However, while the Airfix Hawk does look like a Hawk when built, it also has some pretty significant (I know....significant to some, but maybe not to others) shape issues. Some are easily correctable, some not. If Italeri just get the shape right with even minor improvements in detail, I'd say Italeri comes out ahead. Now I will agree that $47.00 is a bit steep, but it won't keep this Hawk addict from purchasing seve

Hey guys, Coinsidentally, I've been doing a bit of research on this very subject lately. Here's what I've come up with so far: Designation Length Diameter Capacity Aero 1C 179.36" 21.00" 150 Gal Aero 1D 201.00" 26.50" 300 Gal Aero 1E 214.00" 31.00" 400 Gal The measurements were taken from a post in another forum which was quoting figures out of the Sargent Fletcher catalog. According to that post the length measurement includes the conical fin assembly. According to these measurements, all of the available 30

According to my refs A-4A,B,C,E,L,P, and Q had free-castering nosewheels. All other versions were built with nosewheel steering. I've heard that the system was removed from some aircraft by some users, but have no verification. Also have heard that it was added to some E's along with spoilers to bring them up to F standards (Also unverified) The only for sure way to tell if a plane has it is to look for the hardware on the nose strut. Tailspin Turtle's photo shows the cable guide very clearly. The NWS motor on the starboard side of the strut was also significantly larger than the shimmy

That bump covers the canopy separation rocket motor. The reason there is no bump on the single seat jets is that the rocket motor is located in the thicker part of the canopy rail on the single seaters.

Yep. That's me coming in there last June. Nice shots! -Gabe

Hey! That's me landing in 225 at the Mather Airshow weekend before last! Nice pics Eddie! Thanks for posting. -Gabe pincelli

Hey Bob! Doing great. In case you hadn't heard, I'm down in Kingsville instructing in the T-45 again. How are things going for you? Later, Gabe

Hi Jack, My plan is to initially create the proper profile from the side by using a strip of styren down the centerline of the airplane from the wing leading edge all the way to the tip of the nose. Once I've got the side profile right, I will continue with one stip of styrene at a time side by side with the first until I get it blended up around the fudelage sides. The end result is that the fuselage cross section is deeper and more rounded on the bottom than the original hawk which is somewhat but not totally flat. AFter getting the overall shape right, I will cut out the wheelwells. As

Hi guys, Thanks for the warm welcome. Jack, Looks like you got a really good start there. The part that has slowed me down the most is figuring out how to do the new lower forward fuselage. Capturing the shape really isn't that hard, but incorprating the wheelwell with detail and engineering it so I can cast it in resin makes it a tough one. I forgot to mention the vortex generators. The T-45 has many more than the Hawk and they are spaced much closer together on the T-45. One other thing I failed to bring up is the wingtip navigation lights. They basically look like they were stuck