Juggernut

Make sure to check out Ryan Toews tweak list for the A6M2 if you're so inclined (https://www.largescaleplanes.com/articles/article.php?aid=3339). There are some ambiguities and incorrect color references in the Tamiya instructions that Ryan straightens out. Also, know that all the aircraft that took place on the Pearl Harbor operation were built by Mitsubishi. The Nakajima built A6M2's apparently hadn't been deployed to the fleet before it sailed on November 26, 1941. This information will come into play when you're building and painting the cockpit and the overall exterior of the aircraft. It is a great kit but watch out for the retractable landing gear. I will recommend you do not operate them any more than is absolutely required during your build. They're very easy to break and a real pain to fix. You can get aftermarket wheel wells and such to eliminate this problem but I didn't bother with that and just installed them at the end of the build in the down position. There's also some great reference builds in this forum. I can't remember names at the moment but if you search for zero, you can probably find most of them.

Not that I'm aware of. You can convert is but why, other than there were some improvements to the F kit...you'd spend more time trying to find the correct windscreen and canopy for the G than were you to source a Hasegawa 109G-2 or G-4 kit and correct it. Throw an aftermarket spinner at the G kit and you've taken care of one of, if not the biggest issue with the early G kits.

FYI, the Tamiya P-51D does not have retractable landing gear. You can swap out the retracted gear for extended but it’s not retractable like the zero kits are.

For my money, the Original Tamiya release beats the ZM kit, hands down with its optional parts to depict any one of three production blocks of P-51D. Granted there are some challenges to overcome with the Tamiya kit (knockout pin marks on the roof of the wheel wells) but the options outweigh the challenges. Also the instrument panel glass part in the Tamiya kit makes the instruments look like they’re at the bottom of a Coke bottle. The ZM kit provides limited to no optional parts for differing production block aircraft (the instrument panel changed drastically between early and later production aircraft...Tamiya provides both, ZM only the later version).

You don't owe that vendor anything, including explanations of what you're going to do. Just do it. The second that accusation happened, I'd ask for a refund for the balance of the unsent items and then explain the situation to the credit card company. This is a fight I believe you can win. Bring all the proof you have, to your bank, including the accusatory emails and explain what's going on. You've already made us aware of their shady business practices so it's unlikely that anyone whose read this post will patronize their business(es). Just do the exact same thing in the appropriate places on other modeling forums (don't forget Facebook if you're a member there). Tell your story to as many people as possible (if you haven't already). Bad customer service, dare I say customer abuse, shouldn't be rewarded with increased traffic (virtual though it may be). You'll probably never get the satisfaction you're looking for (the stuff you ordered) and the unfounded accusatory statements by the vendor justify the above action.

Tell your card company that you have been defrauded and ask them to cancel the transaction and issue a refund. Let them go after the merchant (which they probably won’t do) but you’ll get your money back.

I think you’re right that it’s the antenna case.

As an FYI, the guide horns on the tracks are two different heights. This is because of clearance issues around the drive sprocket. I never would've known this had I not had David Parker's book on the king tiger. There's not a huge difference in size but make sure to check that they sit correctly...you may have to resize one set of guide horns if it interferes with the tooth engagement. If it's just for show then I wouldn't even bother as the difference isn't that pronounced.

The original Hasegawa kit with the Ta152 tail.

Which is why some of us who use metal barrels, treat them with metal blackening solution rather than paint.

I don't think it does come with a wall mount. I've owned two B-25's (strafer J and the H) and never had a look inside either which is why I say I don't think it does...I may be wrong on that. I believe the wall mount gizmo came about with the B-17G kit. If you're not interested in buying a replacement Norden and if your airplane will not be crewed, you can always omit the bombsight as it was removed from the aircraft between missions. To another extent, If B-25 operations were anything like B-17 operations, then only lead and deputy lead aircraft would carry the bombsight; the rest dropped with the lead aircraft (or smoke markers). Again, I'm not familiar with B-25 operations so I just don't know.

The B-25 needs Harold's (AMS) replacement props and reduction gearcase set...badly. Engines have four sets of pushrods (housings) instead of just two. Easy fix though, just cut off the offending sets of pushrods. Those are the two most egregious errors I can remember. You'll probably want to replace the wheels/tires as well. I remember the True Details offerings were head-and-shoulders above the kit offerings. You may also want Master Details metal gun barrels for the 50's. I have no information regarding the Profilmodeller set(s). I've never used them. Depending on the detail level you want, there's Eduard PE sets for the kit. If you're only ever going to build one B-25J, you might stick with the less expensive Squadron/Signal references on the B-25. I have a few B-25 references including Warpath Across the Pacific and the Schiffer Publishing: B-25 Mitchell, The Ultimate Look. The former I think it out of print and is exclusively about the Air Apaches in the Pacific; the latter is a detailed dissection of the B-25 and is quite a hefty book. I'm not sure whether this book is still in print or not. There are undoubtedly several others, some better than others.

Most of the jug references I have are now out of production but I’ll ask what you’re looking for in such a reference? For general information and a good survey of the aircraft, the Squadron/Signal publications on the P-47 are good in my opinion. If you’re looking for a lot of details and minute differences between various models, the Aerodetail on the P-47 is a good primer but again, I’m not sure it’s still being published. Someone may know of a better reference that I’m not currently aware of or haven’t mentioned but you may have trouble acquiring it if it’s not in publication.

I think the oldest, “new tool” Japanese kit is the Ki-84 Hayate. That may be getting close to 20 but I don’t think it’s there yet. I’d have to check the database to see though. Yep, the Ki-84 was originally released in 2005, so only 15 years. All the rest are newer.

Fantastic! How on Earth did you do that mottle camouflage, freehand or loose mask? If it was freehand it must've driven you batsh*t crazy!