David Hingtgen

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.

Hase 1/48 F-16's cost 1/3 as much as their F-14/18's. Buy away---the Hase 1/48 F-16 is the best F-16 you can buy, period. Fits great, quite accurate. And can easily be had for 20-25 bucks. Be sure to try to snag an F-16CJ Block 50 or thereabouts, to have enough parts to build what you want. What exact type are you looking for? Hase 1/48 F-18: Horrendously expensive. Supposed to be pretty nice, never bought one myself. Monogram F-18, while raised-line, isn't bad, shape/accuracy-wise. Fit's not that great, but then NO F-18 kit has really good fit, except the Academy 1/32 F-18. (Next best-fitting F-18 has got to be the new Hase F-18E/F). Note: Monogram F-18's have been permanently modified into F-18C's, whereas Hase ones still allow you to build an A from a C kit. (or even a CF-18--there's really only one mold for the 1/48 Hase F-18 kit afaik, the decals included will determine what parts the instruction sheet has you use--but your basic Hase F-18 includes parts for everything from a Blue Angels A to the latest nigh-attack C---which could explain the price) 1/48 F-14: Hasegawa. Amazing accuracy, not that great of fit. Many people talk about the new Academy, but I can't comment on it. There's a big thread about it here though: http://www.aircraftresourcecenter.com/foru...t=ST&f=3&t=9803 PS---run, run far away from the Italeri 1/48 F-14's. Trust me. 1/48 F-15: Again, Hase. LOTS of people like the Academy, but the shape is just off around the engines and nose. Surprising note: The Monogram 1/48 F-15 is the most well-shaped F-15 ever, of any scale. The shape is just spot-on. Fit's actually decent, too. But it is a 20-year-old Monogram kit, with all that entails. F-4--can't comment on in 1/48. Harrier II--only 2 real options in 1/48, a 25-year old Monogram, or a "brand new mold this month" Hase. Guess which is better. I'm more of a 1/72 guy. (I can talk ALL about 1/72 jets) (My *long* term plans are basically many 1/72 to have lots of squadrons represented for each type (and not spend 100 hours on each model), and 1 or 2 1/48 of each type for detailed, large models of my absolute favorite squadrons---and probably 1 1/32 for each of the "big 4" (14/15/16/18) for my personal fave aircraft) PS--my thoughts overall: Hase's are well worth the money, there are few exceptions (and basically only in 1/72, Hase utterly rules 1/48). There's almost no such thing as a "cheap, sparsely detailed, but basically accurate and good-fitting kit". I wish there was. There's only "bad, cheap, inaccurate, horribly-fitting" and "expensive, accurate, well-fitting, and has 500 parts to display every possible panel and bay open with 4 flap options and 3 nose gears and a 35-step manual".

I was last in Atlanta in '96. Only in and around the airport (though a 36 hour layoever), but heard drawls everywhere. 2004's notably different? Wow. (I agree with the whole "TV influence" thing---eventually everyone will dress and talk the same, and listen to the same music, etc)

That'd be because a huge number of dubs are done in Canada with Canadian actors. PS--I must say the only time I've spent in Western Iowa is when driving through it to Omaha. Don't know what the "local language" is. I'm from Des Moines, now in Iowa City. Parents from NE Iowa. BTW---how often is "warsh" encountered over there? I can't think of any other instance where there's but a single word that instantly differentiates where you're from. PPS--Chicago has a very subtle accent. It's one of those "you can only hear it if they're doing it on purpose to prove it exists". Unless it's the word "Chicago" itself, where it's rather obvious. But far most other words, very hard to pick up. Didn't hear it at all much until college, since we get a lot of people from there. PPPS--that reminds me---"oinge" (orange). No idea where this is from, I've only encountered it with like 3 people, but all Iowans, who don't say "warsh".

Anywhere around you that sells Floquil paint? Model train paint. The stuff dries THIN, HARD, and FAST. You'll want "engine black". Blackest of the blacks. (When dealing with locomotives, we are PICKY about shades of black--they make about 4 of them). It's very flat, and self-levels more than just about any other paint. Polly Scale is the acryl equivalent and is usually easier to find nowadays. (Floquil is pretty "strong" stuff, may eat some plastics, though I've never ever had a problem) Tamiya paint is also generally a good brand for hand-brushing. Clearcoats---I always spray them. You're not looking for a smooth gloss finish here. Unless you're doing model cars, I rarely see a need to get an ultra-smooth gloss coat.

Actually, it's easy to match the gloss. Because black is black, and only the final coat really affects gloss. Ever sprayed gloss clear over "magic" tape? It'll become as clear as the gloss scotch tape, despite being "frosted". So anyways---I have painted many a locomotive roof, and the basic technique/idea is thus: Semi-gloss black roof, of a unique paint that's impossible to match. Just a little more flat than semi-gloss, but far more shiny than even the "shiniest" flat paint. (There's flat black, and REALLY flat black paints). So I usually get my ultra-flat black (since it's thin and dries very smooth) and paint the spot that needs it. Then I mask off the whole section of the roof, and paint it semi-gloss black. Now the whole roof section has the same sheen, and thus looks identical. Because it doesn't matter if you had 4 or 5 different blacks underneath, the final clear coat determines how the black will look. So if you really want a match, paint the spot on the tail with whatever black you like, then spray the WHOLE black part of the tail with whatever clear-coat would be closest to the original. Then both the original and touch-up black paints, though different, will have the same final clearcoat over them, and they should be match. Of course, always test a technique. But I spent a while trying every black paint on Earth trying to touch up some locomotives "sheen-wise", and found out that absolutely nothing else matters besides the clear coat. PS--MM black varies quite a bit depending on enamel vs acryl. Acryl is more like *very* dark blue. Looks black as night when dry, but when next to an enamel black, will be visibly "less black".

About the *only* good thing about Iowa is its lack of accent. Our news reporters and radio DJ's etc are in high demand due to the lack of a noticeable accent. We lose a lot of our local news reporters to major cities like Seattle, Phoenix, etc. Note: rural Iowans have an accent, and we mock them 24/7. It's amazing that someone can grow up 20 miles away from you, and talk completely differently. Iowa doesn't have a west/east split or anything, it's urban/rural, regardless of geographical location. Of course, we mock Minnesotans too.

Gundam markers and the like tend to be either DARK brown, or DARK blue. Not truly black. Much like "black" towels, etc. Won't quite match if it's a rather visible spot. You'll never notice on any other color that they're not BLACK, but on true black paint it'll become apparent. Anyways--black is black, if it's true black. It's the SHEEN that matters far more. (I found this out repainting locomotives). Ultra-flat, flat, sorta semi-gloss, semi-gloss, gloss, and "mirror-gloss" will all look different, even if the same "color". I paint my model submarines flat black, then use various clear coats to get multiple shades, even though there's only 1 single paint actually on it. In summary--black is black, it's how shiny it is that matters--it's everything. "Darker" black is "shinier" black.

Tamiya Cons: First place never goes to *best* model, it goes to *most visually impressive model*--specifically, the one that'll looks best in Tamiya ads. Thus, a good high-vis Jolly Rogers F-14 will always beat a wonderful low-vis Red Rippers F-14, etc. Sure, it has to be quite good to win, but it also has to be "inherently cool". And thus, battleships and carriers almost always win for ships, no matter how amazingly you might superdetail a tugboat. Anyways---small scale F-14? I just posted a lot about the Fuji and Hase at http://www.macrossworld.com/mwf/index.php?showtopic=7598 Heh heh--another "fit" fan (like me--nothing ruins a detailed model for me like poor fit--and it simply is more obvious in 1/72). Probably go for the Fuji in that case. Check ebay, they show up for 10-15 bucks MISB, vs $30 retail. BTW---the largest 1/72 F-14 decal maker by far is CAM: http://www.camdecals.com/main.asp?camaction=decals They also make a lot of good 1/32 and 1/48.