Mule

Man, I wonder if there are any Gundam models in thoes magazines By looking at thoese covers, you'd think that was the only subject there is to model.

Seeing work like this is truly an inspiration to get working on my own scratch builds and mods. Excelent work.

In my experience with acrylics, Neova is right. Windex cleans it out really well. You usually shouldn't have to totally disassemble the brush every time you use it. I usually run the Windex through, then take out the needle, wipe it off and reinsert it. That's usually it. I haven't airbrushed with enamels in quite a while just because clean up is a bit more annoying.

I hope they make a VF-11. They seem to have a license for both Mac Plus and Mac 7, so they could make both the B and C variants. They could also sell FAST packs specific to each show either with the planes or in a set containing both kinds of packs. The latter would provide incentive for us gullible schmoes to buy two VF-11 models. Maybe I should stop giving Hase ideas on how to screw us That's a nice Fire Valk. Who made it? I assume it is just a user modification of the YF-19 model?

Another thing I've seen is that some officially sanctioned models aren't accurate at all. Take the afore mentioned Boing store example. They just have some poorly cast plastic models of civilian planes that you snap the wings on. My favorite example of licensing incompetence in my possession is a Disney World Mk. VI monorail. It only came with five cars. The Mk. VI trains are fixed at 6 cars. You just can't add or remove cars. There are always 6. Nobody in these licensing departments even seems to care about the accuracy of what they license.

The 'uglyness' of the Mac-0 planes is one of the things I really liked about the series. They really look like the first generation blending of human and alien technology... functional, but not pretty.

Now if only we could find a WWII battle ship to launch it from...

Might sound silly, but the ventral lumps might be from a makeup compact. Ya know those clamshell-like things with the makeup and a mirror inside? I could be totally wrong and probably am, but it is amazing what modelers can and do use.

First off, Yamato didn't cheap out. The seam is there because the canopy bubbles out on the sides like a real canopy does. The needed to make a multipart mold to do this effect properly. It would be cheaper and easier for them to make a canopy that didn't flair, but it wouldn't look as good. Toonz is right. Sanding it off and diping it in Future is the way to go. Here are some more details: If you do sand it, go to the hobby store and get varying levels of really fine sand paper. Start rough and gradually go to the finer stuff. To finish it off, get a buffing compound. While you're doing this, it will look all foggy, but as you go, it will get better. To check to see if the fog will go away when the Future is applied, dip the canopy in water. If it is crystal clear in the water, it will be crystal clear after the Future. If not, continue with the fine sanding. To see this in action, take a look at the "How to Build Macross Model Kits" section of the forum and look for some build-ups by WM_CHEN. He illustrates this method and tons of others masterfully.

Agreed. More mechs and less magic. I was really disappointed that DD and Nora were killed by the PC mech and not Shin or Roy.

Yeah, it was the reflections that did it for me too. Tone down the reflections on the shiny parts and add some subtle imperfections and things will look much better.

Are those CG models? Really nice looking either way.

If I remember correctly, the Monster was supposed to be almost entirely plastic. The cost of metal may not have much of an effect on the final product. Of course, my memory may be incorrect.

I give you guys lots of respect. I tried making one of these a few years ago. After modeling it, I looked at all the independant parts and didn't bother to try to animate it. I really like the afore mentioned animal-like movements. Makes it seem much less like a robot.

Never mind. After reading this thread, I did a little research on comparsions between the planes. The Super Hornet just ain't all that great compared to the Tomcat. Anyone interested in starting a company with me to extensively rehab and upgrade F-14s?

No garage. I moved into Washington DC. I won't go into details, but it just made sense at the time. Looking forward to get into a real house in a year or so.

Thanks for the suggestions. Unfortunately, it may be a while before I get to apply them. My wife an I just moved to a smaller place. The most major sacrifice (for me anyway) was the hobby room.

Have to go with the VF-19A (not those crappy Mac7 19s). I was leaning toward the YF-21 for a while, but then I realized my mind tends to drift a lot during the commute. Not a good thing for a BDS controlled plane. Besides, how could I listen to NPR if I'm too busy concentraiting on flying

I saw the new Super Hornet Jolly Rogers at Boeing in St. Louis a couple months back. The black tail above was still in the painting hanger at the time. Pretty cool. As far as the Tomcats being replaced by F-22s, It couldn't happen. The Raptor just isn't built for carrier operations. The landing gear is too weak, the wings don't collapse for storage and I really doubt the frame was built to handle the stress of carrier landings. The FA-18E/F is the newest and best thing the Navy has as far as fighters go until the F-35 makes its way into service. It is sad to see the end of the F-14 era, but their time has come, and the Super Hornet is more than a worthy replacement.

I made a Hasegawa F-18E not too long ago. I used a lot of Tamiya putty in one area and found that it did some nasty things to the plastic. It made some parts really gummy and made little pits in other places. Does this problem sound familiar, or did I do something wrong?

I really like the carrier deck base that the VF-0 is sitting on.

New question for you resin casters out there: What resin do you use? I'm curious about brand, specific product and shore hardness. Price would be nice to know too, but if I know what product to look for, I can probably find that on my own.

I used Tamiya spray-can primer on a Hasegawa F/A-18E and lost no detail at all. In fact, even after the primer, a couple coats of paint and four coats of Future, all of the detail was still there. In answer to your question, I don't know if you really need to use it, but primer makes flaws stand out so you know what needs some extra attention. Also, if you are puttying anything or adding extra parts that are a different color from the base plastic, you might want to use primer over the whole model so you have a consistent base color to paint on.

This was a tough one. It was tight between the VF-9 and the VF-17. In the end the VF-9 won out. I've never seen a kit or toy of one of these. That doesn't mean they don't exist, I've just never seen one. The fighter mode is cool, and I really like the GERWALK mode too (hint hint ).

The 1/48 VF-1 did take some liberties, but stayed pretty close to the spirit of the transformation. Same with the YF-21, the VF-11, and the 1/60 VF-1 and the Bandai toys. Actually, the only real liberty the 1/48 VF-1 took was to put the swing bar inside instead of outside like Bandai and the MPCs did. That being said, this is not a VF-1. As others have said, the YF-19 (or any 19 for that matter) is much more complex. Even if Yamato could pull off a perfect transform of any sort, there would be tons of small parts. This causes 2 problems: 1) at any scale, the finished product would cost a fortune due to manufacturing costs, and 2) these tiny parts would break easily unless they are made out of die-cast metal, thus adding even more to the price. As far as looks, I agree with others that have said that the perfect transform's waist is just too skinny and the chest is too small. It makes the battroid look too fragile. The Bandai VF-19 suffers from this problem too IMO. As I said before, I'd much rather have a product that looked great in all three modes than one that has no detatchable parts.