gunfighter366

OK haven't been on in awhile. Been building but this just said it needed my two cents. Enough with the fighters already they've been done by everybody. I wont something new that will sale so they mite do it. B-25 B,C D, kit. Just about all the allies used it and was in service to 1965.

Like the song says fools rush in, so here I go. After reading all the post over again I do believe we've got derailed to a point. Like I said earlier I don't worry about some flaws in a kit. That doesn't mean I don't try to fix them or that I don't wont someone to tell me about them. What get's to me is people who start finding things wrong even before the kit is out. Like with the wings on the new Kingfisher kit. Or some who berating a kit saying it's not worth having, and there have been some who have done this. Now before everybody goes flying off the handle or start jumping up and down what I'm talking about is when someone starts stating that the shape of so and so seems to be off. Please!! I've read some where it was started that the curve of the leaning edge of the wing looks wrong at the wing root. This from looking at pics of test shots. Now if you can tell that the wings look three feet to long or it has a 4 bladed prop when it should be three , fine lets know. But if you find that the wing is a scale half inch short forget it. It's not that I don't wont to know about flaws, I do just not the perceived ones by some so called expert or some one telling me don't waste your time on this or that. It's my time to waste if I so choose. Therefore I would like to hear from people like Juggernut on flaws that can be fixed and what he did to do it. That's how we all learn, from each other. I think what a lot of people are tried of is someone trash talking a kit just because they don't like it . Leave it to the rest of us to decide for ourselves . I hope I haven't upset anyone, I feel Ron was right to start with. It's just that sometimes we read things the wrong way or take it wrong sometimes. No one's out to put someone else down, at least I hope not. Gunfighter

THANK YOU RON! I for one have not liked all the negativity about new kits. I didn't post anything here because I haven't been on this sight for that long. I'm fairly new here so was waiting to see if one of the older members would say something. That being said I love all the new kits coming out. I for one don't go looking for something wrong with a new kit first thing as it seems some do. Let' s not try to run off the new manufactures as fast as we can. So they have a few flaws !! When's the last time you had a 1/32 scale Kingfisher, B-25, B-17, F-105, F-100 ? I for one love them flaws and all. Now if you have to complain about something being wrong with a kit, I have the one issue no one has ever said anything about being it old or new. What about the fact that the skin of the aircraft is 6 to 8 scale inch's thick on all kits. Talk about a flaw! Come on guys it's a model if you don't like it don't buy it, go carve yourself one out of wood. Gunfighter, happy modeling

I ran across a picture of VF17's planes on a carrier passing through the canal. It's B/W but it appears the planes are not in three tone and the star and bar on the side have a surround of either red or light blue, but the ones on the bottom of the wings don't. Any body have answers to this or ideas? It would make for a different paint job. gunfighter366

My best guess is your ruler's wrong, so throw it out! IT"S JUST A MODEL of a plane that was never built in the first place. Enjoy the model for what it is and the enjoyment you get from building it. Gunfighter366

In the pic of NAS Miami I see some F3F's in the background, and possibly a few Helldivers. Both of those would be great in 32 scale. The only F3F is the old Monogram kit which is toy like and No one has done the Helldiver. Ether the Bi or the beast from WW11. gunfighter366

I know where your coming from on the weathering. I can do one model and everything looks great, just what I was shooting for. The next time it turns into a total mess and in up sanding it off and starting over. Understand compleatly. Looking great keep going. gunfighter366

I hear you Juggernut. But my problem is I have'nt figured out how to use that stuff yet. Of coruse that's my problem with computors we don't always see eye to eye. Maybe somebody could give lessens. gunfighter366

OK I lost track of this build awhile back. But after going through it and spending a couple of hours drooling over the pics, I haven't figured out how to express what I think in words just yet. To call it a work of art would be an understatement! It goes far beyond that. Work if this stature should be on display somewhere when it's finished so everybody can see it. Not just modelers Outstanding, Amazeing! Tomasz gunfighter366

Looking great so far. I'd go heavy on the weathering and fading the paint, particularly the tan, as our planes were put through the mill and took a beating. We didn't worry what they looked like, only if they could fly. gunfighter366

OK so there seems to be a lack of info on the 104C center pylon. Does anyone have the dimensions and pics of the new one in the F-104C kit from Italeri? That way I can build one and use it. Seems no one will know the difference. They must be close and info on the net is nill. Thanks gunfighter366

Well my question is what happened to Revell? They use to be one of the main leaders in the market. How they are getting to be more like Hasagawa in mainly releaseing older kits with out any reworking, just new decals. Remember when Has would add new decals and call it nose art and jack the price up? Well their still doing it. There are so many planes that have never been done in 1/32, like the two Helldivers. Come on Revell it's time to lead not follow. Gunfighter

Thanks, you see what I'm looking for. The pylon seems to be longer and the sway braces mount to the fuselage. Hopefully someone will have info. gunfighter366

Looking for photos or drawing of the centerline pylon as used on the F-104C. Only pics I've found are in detail& scale and are useless. It was diffient from the ones used on the G's, as it had swaybrace points up on the side of the fuselage. Can anyone help? Gunfighter366

Thanks Juggernut you were right on target. Had an idea it was one but never could find a solid answer. Walt