ElectroSoldier Posted December 24, 2018 Share Posted December 24, 2018 So the kit has been out a while now. I was wondering what peoples opinions are regarding the kits upgrade parts over the flightpath set to do the same? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Hajo L. Posted December 26, 2018 Share Posted December 26, 2018 I built a MC-130E with the flightpath set years ago. So my experience is a bit vague and long ago. I don´t remember FP issuing any DIRCM like they come with the Italeri-kit. A quick look at the sprues of the Italeri-kit gives me the impression that the ECM-systems that are mounted to the external tanks are missing. Also the duck-tail is looking different to the version that FP issues. Overall, I´d say that the Italeri-kit is worth the money, especially since you have all the stuff in one box! HAJO Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sarathi S. Posted December 26, 2018 Share Posted December 26, 2018 Considering it looks to be a rebox of the standard Italeri C-130 kit you'll run into the same pitfalls as that does, i.e. improperly sized engine nacelles, if my memory serves me correctly. Other than that, I say go for it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Hajo L. Posted December 26, 2018 Share Posted December 26, 2018 Yeah, you´ll also have to add recessed panel-lines. HAJO Quote Link to post Share on other sites
aircommando130 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 The ECM tail suite is for a MOD-90 MC-130E. MOD-90 airplanes brought in the 2 tone gray paint and helicopter refueling pods. And the chaff and flare system was upgraded to the ALE-40 system as well. Cheers...Ron Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ElectroSoldier Posted December 31, 2018 Author Share Posted December 31, 2018 Thank you aircommando. Does the kit make a fairly accurate MC-130E if i paint it grey? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
aircommando130 Posted January 1, 2019 Share Posted January 1, 2019 Yes...The MOD-90 added the H model air conditioning scoop on the right front. The wheel well AC intake was the same 64 model E. They had Dash 15 engines and the air refueling slipway door over the flight deck. They had an air data probe at the top of the tail as well. The flight deck had the flight engineer in the center seat between the pilots and dual navigator seats on the right side of the flight deck. The bunk area was removed from the MC-130E. In the cargo compartment just behind bulkhead 245 was a EWO/Radio Operator station that pretty much took up pallet position 1. The also had the high speed tail so you'll have to add the stiffener bar from behind the paratroop door up to the stabilizer. They also had ramp air deflectors and ADS arms that didn't have to be disconnected to put the ramp on the ground. The HF antennas on the Fulton airplanes didn't go from the tail to the top of the fuselage. They came off the wing and went to the fuselage and over to the horizontal stabilizer. After 1996 the Fulton system was removed and the forks removed from the nose. They were all basically 1964 C-130E cargo airplanes that were modified for the "special mission" as needed by the Air Force. Cheers...Ron Quote Link to post Share on other sites
aircommando130 Posted January 1, 2019 Share Posted January 1, 2019 If you google "Praetorian Starship" It's the history of the Combat Talon...written by Col. Jerry Thigpin (my group commander at Kadena) and it has a bunch of pictures of the airplane mods along the way. It's an online book so you can download it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ElectroSoldier Posted January 1, 2019 Author Share Posted January 1, 2019 Thanks Ron, ill check out the link Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Hajo L. Posted January 1, 2019 Share Posted January 1, 2019 ElectroSoldier, I hope you´ll do a "Work in Progress"-thread! HAJO Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ST0RM Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 When "566" was returned to the 8th SOS from Mod-90, it was in the reverse grey scheme, with a dark wavy field on top, and the light grey covering the remaining 80% of the fuselage. Opposite of what they went with. And, it didnt have the AAR pods for a while. We took it on a BLU-82 drop TDY to Utah and tore up the belly landing on gravel. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.