David Hingtgen

Told you, it's all about the purple. Just enough to change the shade, without making you think "purple" at all. But it's in there, and you end up with the perfect shade. Look at the very darkest bits of hair in the upper left pic, and you should be able to tell it's there. It's not so much as an overall purple, more of a "the shadowed areas have a purplish tint" PS, Sam----that eye looks perfect to me.

Hey, now you can make her hair slightly lavender! PS--while her eye color varies a LOT, straight red never looks good. Go with either pinky-red, or brownish-red.

1. It's a heck of a lot harder to load! 99% of your standard bomb/missile lifts, etc wouldn't work. A few guys can easily hoist an AMRAAM up onto an underwing pylon, takes a lot more to get one up and over the wing. Physical reason, rather than aerodynamic. Also, you can't "drop" anything from an overwing pylon. No bombs, period. No Sparrows, Phoenixes, or HARM's either. Only rail-fired missiles would work, which pretty much limits it to Sidewinders or AMRAAM's. That's probably the single best thing about AMRAAM---can be rail-fired or dropped. Only missile I can think of that can do both (Matra Magic possibly?). If you want more missiles, just use twin-launchers. (I want to do a Hornet with 2 twin AMRAAM launchers, but nobody makes that part in 1/72 scale--might do 1/48 just to have it, because it looks SOOOOO cool). Usually, aircraft weapon amounts are weight-limited, not "number of pylons" limited. 2. The airflow on the upper surface is generally more important than the lower surface. A minor reason, but everything helps.

That's different. Prop planes use the propwash to increase the effectiveness of the wings. Much like blown flaps. But a simple pylon, with say a missile on it, (like the Jaguar) only disturbs the flow. Even with the engine itself above the wings, the *prop* on a plane like that is still in FRONT of the wings. Designing an aircraft to purposely use the propwash is rather different than just sticking a pylon in the way. Any plane that uses propwash usually depends on it for both lift and control. The VFW-614 is that little Fokker airliner with engines over the wings.

Heh heh--compendium says: "Maximum of twelve standard Raytheon Bifors AIM-200A AMRAAM 2" So it's AMRAAM 2, not Super AMRAAM. Good call! Though "SAMRAAM" sounds kind of neat. Sigh, pretty soon they'll be making the USHARAHAAM or something...

I haven't seen much of Mac 0, don't know what the VF-0 weapons are. Question--if they don't look like AMRAAM's, why do you call them Super AMRAAM's? Is that simply the closest looking real-life missile? The newest AMRAAM is the AIM-120C, the "clipped wing" version for the F-22, but to make life easier (imagine that from the military) all planes can (and do) use that version. It's about all you see nowadays---A's were pretty much only prototypes, B's were the first common in-service ones, and they switched to making C's as soon as they could, and that's rapidly being sent out.

That rocked. YF-23! Anyone else notice these F-14's had a different scheme than the previous ones? These are in Jolly Rogers 60th Ann. colors. Everything but the skull. The older ones were in NSAWC colors. These should have been B's, really hard to see the differences in like 240x resolution! Thankfully, we also see F-15 and F-16's, so "the big four" are all represented. And I only saw one Flanker.

Whoops, had a brain malfunction. It's the PACIFIC fleet decals I want. Sorry.

Couldn't you use regular AMRAAM's? I mean, Even after 40 years the Sparrow looks exactly the same, and it took just as long for the Sidewinder to become anything more than "slightly reshaped canards". I bet even 20 years from now, AMRAAM's will look nigh-identical to the "new" AIM-120C. New missiles are rare, and take forever to develop. There's still lots of planes out there using AIM-9L's and AIM-7M's, which was the standard 1980's loadout...

Yeah, 45 of the 50 will be Flankers. Anyways--off to go get the new trailer! On a 28K dialup, so it might be a while...

Those prices are significantly better than retail. You can easily pay 50 to 55 for a 1/48 Hase. (They've actually gone down in price--they used to retail for 60 to 62). If anyone plans to use other decals on the kit, I'd pay $$$ for the Atlantic fleet decal sheet. (Or if you want to make another squadron, I just want the VF-111 decals--there's like 4 decal options on that sheet).

Hmmn. I'm not TOO familiar with the Revell. I believe it has only a D cockpit, which is wrong for Shin's. AFAIK, it's the only D kit that does not include an A cockpit, too. And the back end's wrong for both Shin's and a D. Basically, Revell F-ed up big time with that mold. They made separate parts for the gun vents, and the back ends, so as to allow accurate models of any F-14. However, the included the "A" back ends in the "D" kits. And no, they did not include "D" back ends in the "A" kits. There are no 1/48 "D" back ends from Revell. All in all--it all depends on how accurate you want. 90% of all F-14B/D "things", be they paintings, toys, diecast models, or plastic kits, are nothing more than an "A" with new nozzles. And 90% of people are ok with that, since the nozzles are the most obvious difference. However, to accomodate new engines and new nozzles, the entire back end of the plane was re-shaped. Not REALLY obvious, but anyone who knows the difference can spot it instantly. (Large, square fairings vs small oval ones, and smooth vs plated ducts) Only the Hase kits have this new back end. Fujimi made a VERY accurate model of an F-14B/D test plane, which really wasn't either. But it did exist in real life. And THAT is what Shin's is--a one-off. Unlike any real F-14B or D, but just like a Fujimi kit. (This is annoying to modelers, since the other 99.9% of F-14B's and D's in the world don't match the Fuji kit, and thus it takes some work to make a real D from a Fuji--but not much work at all to make Shin's) That's probably a much longer answer than you were looking for. Basically: No, you'd have the wrong cockpit and back end, which are the main 2 things that differentiate the F-14A/B/D. But there's no way in 1/48 to make an accurate Shin's, though a Hase would be quite a bit closer. Revell's F-14D isn't really anything--can't make an A, B, or D from it. It's got half the parts of a D and half the parts of an A. And though you can USUALLY make a B with parts like that, you can't with the Revell.

All the Hase and Fuji F-14's have raised instrument detail, good enough for me. (Just started the Fuji cockpit last night--only came out "ok"--that'll teach me to try to drybrush at 3AM! ) I glue the canopy shut a lot of the time--it's usually only raised if it won't fit closed very well. (Also, an open canopy requires a nice line where the fuselage exterior paint meets the black cockpit sill paint---I hate masking right-angles, the paint is almost certain to bleed somewhere) The Hase photoetch panels are SO fine, I'm thinking they might be beyond my drybrushing ability. (They're like .00001 inches above the surface) That'd be ironic, being forced to use decals because it's TOO fine! Neova--get that Hase 1/48 F-14D. Those are rare, and a wealth of good parts. (You'll have lots of "A" parts left over when you build a Hase D) PS--to everybody, a LOT of Hase F-14's in both 1/72 and 1/48 have shown up on Ebay lately. More than in the past 6 months. If you want one, now's the time to buy. I mean, there's no F-14 B's or D's in my entire state at the moment (I've checked). There's almost no B's or D's at the major online stores, either. B's are rarer than D's. But you can ALWAYS build a perfect B from a D kit. PPS---if people want to use Hase instead of Fuji, I'll include directions for that too, though it'll only be "really close", as Hase doesn't make the fuselage nibs/burner duct you need. Actually, it'd basically be "Build a B, and add in the dual chinpod". We are basically using an error in the Fuji model, that Shin's CGI model also has. The Hase is actually "too accurate" to make a perfect Shin's. PPPS---Since all Fuji F-14A+/B/D kits include those burner ducts, I have quite the pile of spares! But trust me, they will NOT fit a Hase (I've tried).

Testor's orange tube: stringy. Evil stuff, IMHO. Certainly slow and strong, but leaves strings everywhere, even a brand new tube. Tenax--evaporates FAST. It's like acetone that way. Freaks me out, honestly. It's like "evaporates so fast you can't smell it" but you know there's SOMETHING in it, because it affects your nose somewhat like CA... But many people swear by it. I'm currently investigating the thinner "normal glues". BTW--I mainly use the Testor's liquid in the black plastic bottle, and I think wm_cheng does too.

I'm still learning too! (it never ends). Just learned some stuff about Bombcats a few days ago. It's one of the reasons I never try TOO hard for cockpit details, especially spending 30 bucks on a resin one---there's SO many variations, you could easily put a less-accurate one in (even if it is more detailed). There is no ""standard F-14B" cockpit for instance. It's practically squadron-by-squadron, and often plane-by-plane. Yeah, you might think Bu. #'s 161619 and 161620 would have the same cockpit, being built next to each other at the same time in the factory, but they don't..... F-14B's all have generally similar cockpits, but surely not identical. And they may or may not be identical to any particular F-14A. And may or may not incorporate some F-14D things. There's many A's with better cockpits than B's. D's are all pretty similar though, since there's so few of them, and they simply haven't had enough time to get changed much. Or in summary---don't spend 50 hours and 50 dollars on the cockpit, unless you've got a photo of *THAT* plane, there's probably something wrong with it anyways.

In addition to what Aztek said (which makes a lot of sense to me), it could be that the "extra" 3 spots are rarely used, and/or non-swivelling (assume the little notches allow access to the pivot mechanism and indicate ones which can swivel--thus those 2 are the ones we always see used). Plenty of planes have rarely-used spots---I think I've seen 1 pic ever of an F-15 with the outboard pylons attached. (They've been permanently disabled by now).

Well, I'm going to do it anyways as I know at least one person wants it, but basically: the more people that show interest, the more comprehensive (and the more pics) I'll do. Due to the fact that Shin's F-14 is 99% identical to a Fujimi F-14D, it's not too hard to make an accurate model of his plane from that kit. However---I do not plan to build Shin's! I'm building Fujimi F-14A's and D's at the moment, and have already taken quite a few "hints and tips" pics. I can only show about 80% of what needs to be done, and can only describe what needs to be done for the rest. (AFAIK, only the rare F-14D prototype release includes the instructions for what you need to do, the other F-14D releases simply include the parts) A large part of it will be how to raise the flaps and slats, so as to have working swing-wings. PS--it should also be a good primer on how to build/paint any F-14 kit, especially a Fujimi. PPS--I'm not wm_cheng, don't expect amazing pics of an amazing model. PPPS---this is the kit I'll be referencing, as it's the only Fuji F-14D currently easy to acquire (and don't bother looking anywhere but HLJ, not a single store in the USA has it AFAIK): http://www.hlj.com/scripts/hljpage.cgi?FUJ28010

Good R-M airplane kits: New-mold 1/72 F-16, any variant. (You'll probably find the F-16 MLU there). New-mold 1/48 F-15E. New release 1/72 Su-27. Just look for copyright dates, nothing older than 2000 is "new".

1. New Revell 1/48 F-15E is the one and only model with the right CFT's. 1 big pylon inboard, 3 little ones outboard. Has intake-mounted LANTIRN pods, too. It's got EVERYTHING, afaik. Bulged gear doors, wide-angle HUD, etc. http://www.f-15estrikeeagle.com/reviews/mo...5511/review.htm This release doesn't have many weapons---there's many different releases! http://www.f-15estrikeeagle.com/reviews/mo.../jon/review.htm A different one, with some LGB's. 2. All of the good F-14's want wings forward, flaps down. It's a little easier to put the Hase flaps up than a Fuji's. (Actually, the Hase wings are easier to build regardless, it's one of the places a Hase is flat-out better than a Fuji) I've never tried building any F-14 gear up, don't know how it'd go.

Exactly. The upper wing surface is more important, aerodynamically. That's why engines and weapons are generally underslung, not overslung. If you want to see a plane with its engines mounted above the wing, see the VFW-614.

If it's not to late, Rei's hair has a distinctly lavender hue. Add in some purple. Or maybe do the highlights with it. 99% of Rei's get their hair painted with purely a white+blue paint mix, and it always looks SLIGHTLY off. Gotta add just a HINT of purple in it, if you really want it to match. David Hingtgen, purplish-blue-haired anime chick enthusiast.

What, half the people here have 1/48 VF-1's, but no 1/48 F-14/15/16/18's? Anyways--forgot to mention, the new Revell-Monogram 1/48 F-15E is by far the most (read: only) accurate F-15E out there. Heck, one of the best F-15's period. It's one of those "I can't believe they actually made something really good". I might snag one, because there are NO F-15E's anywhere even close to accurate in 1/72, and no aftermarket parts to make them so. Might as well have a single nice big one, if I can't do a few small ones. The F-15E is a consistent "they totally F'ed up the basic, major differences between it and a D, even though there's 150,000 pics of the thing online covering it panel by panel, rivet by rivet". Can't believe I forgot it--don't have one myself, but have seen nothing but rave reviews. Good fit, recessed lines, FULL bombload, nice decals, best exhaust nozzles (many people buy them just for the nozzles to put on other F-15 kits), and quite cheap as large 1/48 jets go.

Better than adding stuff to the top of the wings.

Oh man, I love all the Fw190 underwing gun options. You could equip 190's with just about any number and size of armament you wanted.

It looks like EVERY test-jet. PS---wm_cheng would do a better job, especially on the airbrake.