Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Snowbird3a

  • Rank
    Commander of the obvious
  • Birthday 02/10/1960

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Comox, BC
  • Interests
    Flying and building Airplanes, modelling Aerobatic teams and Canadian aircraft. Welsh corgis

Recent Profile Visitors

12,854 profile views
  1. yes, the P-51 kit or the F-6A kit involves less converting. Depends on what the OP has on hand or availability of other kits. Tony
  2. the P-51A has a wide 'bulged' carb air scoop while the Mustang Mk1 has the narrow straight sided carb air scoop. Other differences include; P-51A has port wing landing light only the Mk1 had a landing light in each wing; the Mk1 had a gun camera opening outer leading edge of port wing; ; different openings in the wings for the different armament; the Mk1 did not have the three ID lights under the stbd wing; the ventral air scoop was fixed on the P51A and the Mk1 had hinged doors front and back . not usually modelled, but the Mk1 had little backward facing scoops just behind and abo
  3. I tried using Microscale Liquid Decal Film on old Leading Edge decals. Tried two coats. No such success so the decals went into the bin. YMMV Tony
  4. check your FB messages 🙂 Tony
  5. Disclaimer; not a SeaKing expert here; But'........... well, accurate here is a relative term. Yes, you can build a SH-3D from the old Airfix kit but be prepared for some horrible fit issues with the cockpit glass. Any other SeaKing kit (except the Lindberg) is way better in all respects to the ancient Airfix offering. The best researched decals I have seen for 'Old 66' is the 2010 release by Apollo Decals; it covers the choppers gradual livery changes from Apollo 8,10,11 & 12. But if your concerned with accuracy, you won't be using the old Airfix kit, right. 🙂 🙂
  6. the canopy frame is out-to-lunch horrible, landing gear is way too thin, gun bay is ill fitting, horizontal stabilizer shape is off; to add to previous comments but nobody will mistake it for a Sopwith Camel Tony
  7. Well, I wouldn’t go that far, the Airfix kit’s shape is waaaaaaay more accurate than the Monogram’s Tony
  8. What makes the situation more frustrating is that Airfix enlisted the help of a Sabre Mk4 expert, then ultimately ignored him, his work, and advice. They did do a 3D scan of a Sabre but of a Norwegian F-86F machine, similar in many respects but enough differences to be noticed.
  9. https://uk.airfix.com/community/blog-and-news/workbench/raf-sabre-a-stopgap-stunner Call me underwhelmed, even disappointed; from what I can see from the build photos, this is NOT better than the HasAcademy Sabres. Yes, the nose landing gear has a proper curved shape instead of the angled mess of the Hasegawa or Academy versions, but, there are several disappointing features glaringly obvious. The wing pylons are too far outboard for this version of Sabre, the speedbrake arms looking thin just as the 1/72 versions are, the wing fences appear to be massive 2x12 pieces of
  10. .......and I was about to give you the link.......just got home and was away from the computer for a day 🙂
  11. From Flightline Engineering; a detail set for the Cf-100 Mk5D with cockpit, landing gear and assorted ECM antenna; major happiness here. Cheers, Tony
  12. yes, even early F-86F-1s received the 6-3 wing. Check your pics carefully and go with photo confirmation which wing it had. (or ask here)
  13. The Hasegawa and the Academy kits are equal in buildability for a Korean Sabre, keeping in mind that they only depict a F-86F that has the 6-3 wing installed. The Hasegawa kit also comes in a F-86F-40 box that does not represent a Korean era Sabre. Tony
  • Create New...