That’s quite a feedback! Thanks for participating
@ Isaac – That’s a good point. Maybe the companies like to advertise a super performance in “clean” configuration, when the aircraft range is just enough to bomb the airfield perimeter. More seriously, it is interesting to see widespread use of conformal tanks on F-15s and F-16s. Most probably, a fighter performance with extra internal fuel capacity could be better than with conformal tanks, let alone “drop” tanks! Anyway, stealth is imposing a whole new set of rules…
Regarding your other post, I see that HobbyModel very much likes the many F-84 variants. The same goes with the MiG-15…
@ DavideV - Sure! I call (perhaps incorrectly) lamination to the process of separating a bit of thick paper into two bits of thin paper. You can force the separation quite easily on GPM and Halinski paper, for example. It is relatively easy and quite reliable. The printed half becomes more fragile but can be curved more tightly, which is useful for the tips.
@ DeltaPike – good joke
I guess that, at the time, the takeoff and landing speeds were increasing steadily. With a lot of power, such as in the F-104, the takeoff run might be relatively small. With the F-84, well…
@ Longbow – thanks for the very entertaining information. Yes, cold and windy job!!! If I got it well, you did fly in an F-84? Wow!
I added a couple of paper rolls in each bomb, to ease assembly. The tail roll is simply cylindrical and works as an inside tab. The front roll is suitably shaped, as HobbyModel choose the slices method to model the nose. In this case, I’d prefer the nose to be modeled in the cone method, with some joints disguised by the color scheme. But that's how life is...