David Hingtgen

Never seen an official explanation, but I'm guessing it's exactly the same as the intake warning triangles (also a Navy-only thing)--just that much more visible, for safety.

Well, I'd say it depends on how you equate the UN Spacy to the US Navy. As a rule, valks go with US Navy practice, rather than Air Force. And the Navy has red door edges! Even brand-new Super Hornets do. That's just how it is. Now, you will find Navy planes without them, but that's rare. I don't know if there's specific exceptions, or "incomplete repaintings for maintenance" or what, but they do exist. But like 90% of Navy planes will have the red door edges. However, I don't really recall seeing them on any valks... But then again, the VF-0 is certainly the "interim" valk, and could follow "older" practice.

Navy planes do red. The entire "well", and the backside of the brake itself. The same red they use on flaps/slats, and gear-door edges. Air Force likes white, but sometimes makes some areas grey. Chromate---ever seen that yellow-green primer in a bomb bay or wheel well, or the interior of most any freighter? That stuff. Most WWII planes used it everywhere, and was still common for many jets into the 60's. Still your standard B-52 interior color, and I bet you'll find it lots of other places too--I know there's a lot used for tanker planes.

I'm also a 1/72 guy, and would take plenty of F-14 markings. And can advise on the exact colors to print for low-vis.

Bare metal airbrake and well? Hmmn. It certainly looks neat and matches the rest of the plane (alclad is well worth the money) but I'm trying to think of any plane that has bare metal there. Will think on it a while and post back. Usually white or red or chromate, sometimes grey.

CA fogs, at least in my experience. Even though it's much less noticeable on non-clear parts, it still leaves white "deposits" on everything if you look.

Anyone have a glue that is "cleaner" than most when working through paint? (I know I know, but I'm lazy and hate scraping off paint when gluing--and on some things, like gear-doors/wells it's very hard to scrape accurately). Or in summary--is there a "paint-safe" glue? Doesn't need to be strong, it'd basically be "pitot tubes, gear doors, and antennas" glue. I'm literally sitting here waiting for the paint to dry on my SR-71 wheels, figured I might as well check MW. Words of advice: prime the whole kit if you ever build an SR-71. I'm going straight over the black plastic, but everything's taking 2-4 coats to cover. It's well worth the effort to prime the whole kit, even though 99% of the kit will be black paint over black plastic. All the little bits quickly add up.

The Testor's 1/48 is remarkably good, best Blackbird you can buy. I built one when I was like 10, took up the entire top of my dresser. HUGE. But I've considered buying one, just to keep it a few years until I move and get somewhere to display stuff for a few years. (I plan to move within a year or so, and don't want to build a bunch of nice, fragile models--saving them for when I'm "settled" and won't damage them while moving---they're a lot easier to transport when they're unbuilt! ) My current long-range modelling plan: 1:72 for the vast majority of planes, to have many many squadrons. 1:48 for one of each of the "essential" planes, the coolEST squadron of each-thus 1 F-14/15/16/18, and maybe an SR-71 and if I ever get the skill/money to build it, the $210 1/48 YF-23, by far the best YF-23 model there is.

Sorry, canopies are closed. You have NO idea how bad the canopies are on this kit. I spent a day sanding them down, just so they'd fit. And they still don't, but they're glued and sanded in place as best I can. Probably the worst-fitting parts I've ever encountered, ever. It is designed so that it's possible to open them, but there's NO detail--simply the backside of the canopy--no decking, no struts to open them, etc. It is not something I'd want to show. Anyways--as I said, this is just a "quick" build. My next SR-71 (haven't decided whether to do Monogram again or Hasegawa--it's an OLD Hase kit, nothing compared to current releases) will have a more detailed cockpit (button by button will be painted right, rather than the "they're all white" like the one I did above), open canopies, etc. And it will be #964 "my" SR-71. (For I have a photo of me standing in front of it when I was 9). And I'll also take a Hase kit and make it into an M-12, one of the drone-launching ones, #940. (There are no drone-launching SR-71's, they were modified A-12's) This one will probably be decaled as #955. (The one with the Skunk on the tail)

The red for the headrests didn't go so well--brand-new paint, thus NO evaporation had occured, so it was thinner than I expected! Runs... But anyways, I wasn't going to retouch anything in the cockpit, since a dry-fit showed only the side consoles were visible when the canopies are on. Size reference: the whole cockpit tub is a bit shorter than my thumb, and slightly wider. My current (on hold) big project is my USS Iowa, I'm do "quick" kits right now just to have a sense of accomplishment. And it's still raining too often to airbrush much, so I'm reverting back to spray-cans---thus SR-71 and Blue Angels, since black and BA blue come in cans. Nothing with a complex paint scheme or details/weathering until the weather is nicer.

Even if we're putting a mostly black cockpit into a black plane with a closed black canopy with small windows, we modelers just HAVE to detail the cockpit!

SR-71's operate in afterburner continuously--almost no other plane does. It doesn't get THAT much hotter than a normal plane, but an F-15 will only be in 'burner for minutes at a time, not hours. That's the main difference. And thus, no metal can withstand it. So the afterburner section of an SR-71 is pure bright white ceramic. (that gets a lot of people, and they think the painting instructions are wrong calling for bright white engines) It does "bake" a bit, so unless it's brand-new it won't be *pure* white. I just looked at some dinner bowls (seriously) and went with 36495 light grey--lightest grey I had, and next to the BLACK of the rest of the plane, it looks pretty darn white inside. The nozzles themselves are burnt titanium, and I almost always go with plain steel for titanium, unless it's an exterior skin panel--steel and titanium look nigh-identical when "burnt". The kit is the 80's Monogram kit (there are no GOOD SR-71 kits--you can either have good detail/fit but overall quite inaccurate shape--Hasegawa, or standard Monogram--but a very good overall shape---I went with shape). And no kit has good decals, and there haven't been aftermarket decals in years. Basically, you can't make a GOOD SR-71 without a LOT of work, and custom decals--so I'm just throwing this together in like a week, just to have a Blackbird on the shelf. (Sorry for the thread hijacking, but this doesn't warrant a new thread). Anyways, the nozzles are utterly featureless inside, and the the afterburner duct is half as long as it should be---and I didn't feel like scratchbuilding the whole interior of the nozzle/duct/burner/flaps. So I just "adapted" the paint scheme as best I could. Also, since the plastic is black, rather than post-shading, I just painted the nozzles with steel, always brushing in the same direction---thus the black plastic shows through a bit, and I have the appearance of streaking. (Hard to detail and impossible to wash or drybrush when you have nothing but an utterly smooth interior--there should be obvious nozzle segments inside, but it's just not worth it on a kit that'll end up being at best a "C"---so I just lazily streaked the interior). For the afterburners/duct/ring/bypassdoors themselves (one big molded piece---thanks Monogram) it's 36495, with a bit of drybrushed steel, and I actually had to go with a gundam marker to blacken in the hollows between the rings (molded solid in the kit). SR-71 engines are so big, they're an inch across even in 1/72, so you've got to do something, even a kit with as un-detailed engines in this. And with the white interior, you can really see into them. Anyways, here's the burners, with and without nozzles. I might later airbrush a really thin brown mixture in, for some more "baking". Might try chalk to really streak the exhaust nozzle interior.

You know, *once* I did get a truly perfect cut. Happened on my PG Wing Zero. But anyways---I too (after learning my lesson early on) cut away from the part--but many sprues have only like a 2mmlong "thin connecting section" between the piece, and the heavy main sprue and so you can't get too far away from the piece---and nippers that don't meet well tend to tear the plastic, rather than slice, and it's enough that it sometimes tears into the part itself. (Hard to describe). And if you go like 5mm away from the part itself, you're always into the main part of the sprue, which is very thick and hard to cut. Basically--I was just wondering if high priced ones offered any significant improvements. Apparently not.

I *love* those afterburners. I just painted my SR-71's burners last night, but you can't really do much on a Blackbird, being ceramic white and all--no metal paint there! (Though I did drybrush some steel, for that "blasted porcelain" look) Anyways---the white paint helps a LOT IMHO. You can't really tell it's overall grey without out it. Yes, it's Tomcat-esque (and the pureness of the white makes the grey look warm, rather than cool, IMHO---even more Tomcat-esque). However, with that white nose, it instantly reminded me of the standard Su-24 scheme. (one of my fave Russian schemes) See here: (Bad pic, but all the good ones are 150K plus--but this shows the pale grey w/white nose well enough)

Every VO mech directly parodies another more famous anime character, not always mecha though. I can never remember what the Apharmd's are though... From what I can quickly remember: Temjin: Gundam obviously Specineff: EVA-05 Fei-Yen: Sailor Moon Angelan: Belldandy Cypher: nothing specific IIRC, besides being a variable fighter. Pretty sure if you google the subject you'll find a definitive list.

If you read/click all the links, you'll see that test-firings of ones even 33 years old still performed to full specs. Old, but still working fine. Rocket motors sure need periodic replacement, but at this point it's purely for environmental reasons, not degradation. Next thing you know, they'll want to re-engine every Sidewinder and Sparrow and Phoenix... (AMRAAM's have less visible smoke, and if it LOOKS clean, people think it is clean)

Go for it. Then I'll make a nice long illustrated "F-14 variants" guide to put up here (along with kit reviews/comments) so everyone can make an accurate Shin's F-14, or whatever F-14 they may want in whatever scale they want. (I do this often, but usually for airliners, not fighters--but I do know my F-14's) Yeesh, not only did Hase release the totally wrong type of F-14 for Shin, they did it with their older raised-line mold.

Hmmn, plesantly surprised to see so many VO fans here. I use (in order) Fei-Yen Kn (I own no less than 7 different Fei-Yen models/toys, they out-number my valks), Angelan, Temjin, and Cypher. A while back I was so strapped for cash I had to sell my DC twin-sticks. Also, everything I read (from people who actually KNEW what VO was, not some catering-to-the-masses mag) basically said VO:OM was ruined for the US release, so I passed on it. I will not play a slow Fei-Yen. So I'm pretty much a VO:OT (JP) player, and still waiting for a nice good sequel. (Only current system I can play imports on is my GC, though I am considering a JP PS2 if I find one cheap) Yeesh, 6AM, should have gone to bed hours ago...

I'm guessing he means when the wings are swept ALL the way back, the high-speed mode. Effectively folded, in that they take up very little space that way. Minor semantics issue.

Neutral grey plus a little purple? That's pretty *darn* close to Dark Ghost Grey. FS36320. Heck, that's basically the original WWII formula that it came from. 1 part white, 1 part black, and a touch of the new (1943 compared to 1941) "purple-blue" pigment. (You can make ALL WWII camo colors from black, white, and 1 of the 3 possible pigments---never more than 3 ingredients)

Sorry, just finished college a few months ago. If only Iowa taught aeronautics.....

Ok, I'm up to about my 3rd set of sprue nippers, having spent 8 to 17 bucks each for various brands, and none have been quite good enough, IMHO. (latest pair is the sharpest ever, but most mis-aligned) They're always mis-aligned by *this* much, thus making a truly flush cut impossible. I have read that the $30 ones from Tamiya are quite good, and am wondering if anyone has them. Or any other recommendations for ones that are very precisely aligned. And narrow would be good too, "bent" ones don't help much, they're still simply too big to fit between the main sprue "stalk" and the part many times. Also would like recommendations on the newer bent-tweezer-style nippers, and if they are sharp and precise enough to make them superior to a "careful X-acto". ::edit:: Title got cutoff somehow, should read "Willing to spend $$$$$ if they're good"

Yeah, but when good guys and bad guys fly the same plane (Desert Storm, Iraqi and French F1's) being able to get an optical image (vs IR) can sure help. Even if it only adds 1 more mile to the "positive ID" range. TISEO came about on late F-4E's I think, never read much about it. Got my F-4 book out at the moment, so might as well see what it says. ::reads:: Introduced on Block 48 F-4E's, which is also the block that introduced manuevering slats. Closed-circuit TV, multiple magnifications for target ident/acquire. Yup, looks like it's the predecessor to the F-14's TCS. Especially considering they're both made by Northrop.

You know, I keep thinking "F-14's have a nice high-magnification camera, just for long-range BVR identification of bogies". It's very simple, so why aren't we putting it in more planes? I read they can identify most any plane at 10 miles, many larger fighters at 20 miles, and 747's at 70 miles. A nice zoom-lens solves a LOT of ROE problems for fighters.

No, I'm saying that the Revell F-14D is inaccurate enough, that that is what it would be like (using a Hase w/F-16 engines). It'd be like every other inaccurate attempt at a GE-engined F-14. If you want an F-14 with GE engines (like Shin's), a Hasegawa B or D is the only way to go, period. (Though I do plan to graft on the back end of a Hase D onto a Fujimi A to make a "Fujigawa" F-14B--don't know if it'll work, but I'm sure going to try) If you want Shin's F-14, you have two options if you want the "major external features" to be accurate: 1. Take an F-14D, but use an F-14A/B cockpit/seats. 2. Take an F-14B, but remove the ECM bumps from under the wing gloves, and add the F-14D's dual chinpod under the nose. Other late F-14 features are basically squadron or aircraft-specific, like the ECM bumps on the glove shoulder, and dorsal antenna configuration. (B's and D's tend to have a noticeably larger, more triangular forward dorsal antenna, just behind the cockpit) The "shoulder" ECM bumps are very common, but not guaranteed. (They are often listed as a B vs D thing, but it's untrue, I've personally checked at airshows)