Jump to content
ARC Discussion Forums

Superheat

Members
  • Content Count

    531
  • Joined

  • Last visited

2 Followers

About Superheat

  • Rank
    Step away from the computer!

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Lower Slower Delaware - for now

Recent Profile Visitors

8,996 profile views
  1. In his book, "Escape from Laos", Dengler mentions only bombs but doesn't specify what sort or how many. You will find his recounting of the mission on Skyraider.org here: http://skyraider.org/skyassn/dengler/dengler.htm At the bottom of that page is a link to photos supplied by Dengler which ought to give some guidance. I'd go with the mixed load of WWII types toward the bottom. HTH, Tom
  2. Gents, Not too long after the release of the Kitty Hawk F-101A-C kit I had occasion to visit the Air Force Museum and photographed their RF-101C and F-101B intakes. Here is a composite profile and oblique comparison of the left intakes of those two aircraft for anyone who might still be in the dark about the differences between them, They are substantial and quite noticeable. To me, putting F-101B intakes on an A-C variant, is akin to removing the gun fairing from an F-4E kit, replacing it with the C_D chin dome and calling that kit an F-4C or D. HTH, Tom
  3. It is black, Vitaly. I would note that the Sidewinder depicted in the profile is totally wrong.That appears to be an AIM-9E, a USAF version not used by the Navy. It should be an AIM-9D/G.
  4. Actually, they are not always DGG, they can be LGG or black or not there at all. And all those variations might exist in the same squadron. They were generally locally applied, so it was up to the individual squadron what color they were. Differences would occur because during turnarounds between cruises, aircraft transferred out and others came in, often from other squadrons, and if the walkways were already there, they generally remained, regardless of color. It is a classic case of check for photos of the aircraft you want to do, or aircraft from that squadron in the same timeframe. Vitaly, in the example you inquired about, a VA-83 CAG aircraft, the walkway is black, so if that is the aircraft you wish to do, go with black , which was the most common color of the walkways in VA-83. Whatever color you go with, they are non-skid, so they have a rough texture to them, definitel NOT gloss. Cheers, Tom
  5. If you can edit the topic title, put a ? at the end. That would make everything clear.
  6. Gents, HobbyEasy now shows a release date of March 10th, and seems to still be taking pre-orders: http://www.hobbyeasy.com/en/data/tare0bal4idjzfrztyrj.html Cheers, Tom
  7. Whew!!!!! Thanks for checking in, Rex. Glad to know it is just computer woes andthat you are OK. I look forward to seeing you back on line, my friend. Cheers, Tom
  8. Has anyone heard from or about Rex? He has not been on these forums since November 3rd, and I have not seen him elsewhere either. I have tried PM'ing him, but no response. There have been a lot of topics to which I would have expected him to respond and, obviously, he has not. I miss his input, and I am getting worried. Hope someone knows something. Cheers, Tom
  9. Uwe, The Crusaders are VF-33 F8U-1E's (F-8B after 1962), which dates the photo to the Aug 1961-Feb 1962 cruise, the only one 33 made in that version. As Paul pointed out, their next cruise was on the Big E in the F-8E. The -1E/B had the same radar (and cockpit) as the -2/C, but no ventral fins and no A/B cooling scoops. Can't see the wheels, but most likely all early types, ie spoked nose wheel and ribbed mains, but possibly some had the familiar late disc mains. Cool photo, where did you find it? Cheers, Tom PS: I should note that the Cutting Edge C conversion isn't very accurate. The Muroc Models version, though not perfect, is much better.
  10. In figure modelling, XXmm is (or is supposed to be) a standard, not a scale. That standard sets the height of a standing figure from the soles of the feet to the eye-line, thus very intentionally leaving out any headgear. So a 200mm figure should be 200mm from the soles of the feet to the to its eyes, and that should be the case whether the figure represents David or Goliath. The standard has been bent over the years, largely I think, because modern figure makers (and modellers) are largely ignorant of the standard, so one often sees reference to "XXmm scale". In this case, I think Trumpeter is using 200mm as a standard length, not a scale, and that each kit will be scaled to have a length of 200mm (or so). It is rather akin to the historic "box scale" used by Revell, where kits were scaled so that they would fit in one of their standard boxes. If it is a standard length, I doubt it will find wide acceptance. A Japanese company, NIchimo, I think, tried it with 30 cm ship models, and it didn't work for them. Another possibility is that they mean 200th scale (since those kits appear on the same box as some 144th kits). Time will tell, I guess, though with Trumpeter that could be a LONG time! Cheers, Tom
  11. Hi Tracy, Probably a day late and a dollar (or ten) short, but what about adding the silver (and maybe a bit of white) to clear coats and layer that up until you get the effect you want. Or reverse it: a silver base and add white to clear for the overcoats, like the "candy" coats on cars. Or go look at nail polishes - can't imagine there isn't a pearlescent white nail polish that would fill the bill. Look forward to seeing your result, whichever way you go. Cheers, Tom
  12. Superheat

    F-8D

    Gents, First off, the F-8D was an E with a small nose, or perhaps better stated the other way: the E is a D with the big nose to accommodate the larger APQ-94 radar. The only other differences between the two is that the E had wing stations, the D did not, and the 150xxx E's were built with the hump, which the D and 149xxx E's did not have. The D cockpit is identical to the E with two exceptions: the radar scope for the APQ-83 was similar to, but not the same, as the one in the C; and the station selector on the weapons sub-panel on the D did not have wing stations(not something to worry about in 48th scale) . I would post a photo of the APQ-83 radar scope, but PB is not uploading for me at the moment So to get from an E to a D, the biggest part of the conversion is the nose, and as others have pointed out, the Muroc C Cconversion, though not perfect, will get that for you, and it has a nice C instrument panel, which is close enough to a D in 48th. Unfortunately, it does not have a good replacement F5 seat, so you are stuck wit the kit seat, but it is a decent replica of the F5, though very basic. There is also, or was, anyway, the Cutting Edge C conversion, but I do not recommend it, as it does not accurately depict the early nose. HTH, Tom
  13. Hi Stefan, As built, all Crusaders had green wing bays, but Interior Green, aka Chromate Green, not Zinc Chromate which is a very light yellow-green. Since there were numerous fluid lines - hydraulic, oil and fuel - running through the bay, and since they all looked the same on the green paint, the green bays were over-painted with white, which showed the red hydraulic fluid very well. This over-paint with white was probably done during PAR (repaint) cycles, as there still some green bays around when I got to the airplane in 1967. The rebuild versions - H, J, K, L, and RF-8G - were stripped to bare metal and their wing bays were solid white (the over-painted ones were thin and patchy in spots). For the options in the kit, all F-8E's, it could be either, it is impossible to say for sure without a photo of the particular aircraft that shows enough of the wing bay to see the colo, but I suspect that all the kit marking options would be white. What you might consider doing is paint the bay (and the underside of the wing) with the interior green, then give it an overspray with white, not bothering to get complete coverage so that the green shows through in spots. Here is a photo of a French Crusader's wing bay which was over-painted white. The underlying green is visible in spots and note the forward bulkhead. I should also note that it is difficult to see into the wing bay on the actual aircraft, and more so on a model so don't get to carried away. HTH, Tom
×
×
  • Create New...