Calling this one done! I really wasn’t kidding about the light weathering. I dug and dug to find good in-service “A” photos and most only showed streaking around the large RAM paste panel on the back center of the fuselage and lots of brake dust buildup, so that’s what I recreated. B’s and C’s are a different story, but I’ve got plenty of references now for B’s and C’s for when I get my hands on those - well more like whenever Tamiya decides to make a “C” variant. I doubt it’s far off.
All that’s left now is to finish up some odds and ends like the ordnance and the capture the alternate method for painting the landing gear and it’s onto writing the guidebook! Of which I’ve already updated the cover.
Thanks for following along with this build and thanks for all your kind words along the way! We’ll see what’s up next on the bench. I was planning on getting back to the 1/35th RFM M1150 ABV, but a 1/35th Meng Technical is calling my name.
In the US anyway it’s because of the user and location. A’s are only AF (landlocked), B/C’s are USMC/USN are land and sea. Look at the difference between F-15/16 and F-18’s. You will see a similar pattern.
Noice build, congrats.
I like either armor option next, but am leaning Technical.
It’s on the list! Maybe I’ll have to expand the book when I get around to making it, although having played many hours of Ace Combat growing up, I might have to do it in one of the Mobius or Strider markings.
And I’ll leave you with the funny fact that before the start of this build, I had never liked the look of the F-35.
Probably because I grew up in the late 90’s and early 2000’s when the F-22 was the end all be all, and don’t get me wrong, it still tops the list of “best looking planes” for me, but I’ve definitely come around on the F-35. Makes me think I should build a model of an F-4 Phantom and see how my opinion changes (yes, that’s right, I don’t think the Phantom is the prettiest of planes, sacreligious I know).
Thanks again for all your kind words throughout this build and I hope to see you in the next one! Cracking open the Meng Technical tomorrow night.
I’ve definitely taken a peek at it, and it does look like a good kit.
Funny you say that because I just saw the new issue of Air Modeller and Sam Dwyer’s cover build is a beauty, and gives me some inspiration. We’ll see when I get around to it, I’m starting to think the stash is getting a little daunting and I’m only 26!
And look at that! Only a few months later and Tamiya has announced they’re making a 1/48th F-35C. According to Brandon over at Squadron, it’ll be a Q4 2024 release.
Wow. Very impressive work. I am a returning modeler, and just dipping my toe into the waters of modern day modeling, including these wiz-bang 5th gen fighters. I think I have resigned myself to the fact that these modern day wonders are just as complex to model as their real counterparts. Just ordered this new guide and the masks required to pull off this “Have Glass” coating. This is very far removed from airbrushing the Spitfires and Messerschmitts of my youth.
I am building up Fat Amy, Becky, and Cindy in both 1/48 (Tamiya), and 1/32 (Trumpeter). The first thing I am doing is sanding down the uber thick ram “tapes”. I am only leaving enough of a trace to apply the RAM maskings. While this is going to be exceedingly laborious, I think it’s really the only way to model it in scale. Yes I am a long time rivet and panel line sander/filler. Even though today’s kits require much less of this, the F-35 models have tapes, which if scaled up, would probably be a 1/2 inch or 12 mm thick. I realize this is not for everyone; I am merely doing what pleases me; all sorts of ways to model.
Again, strong work; and I look forward to studying the guide.
I have several of these models, in two different scales. There are all sorts of differences as to all the little nick-nook details. I think some times these kit makers take a little bit of “artistic license” to fill in the details. Tamiya is pretty close, but Trumpeter seems to just throw in detail piping and boxes to give the appearance of a modern cockpit, without perhaps being exactly accurate. There are also many reference photos out there, and as you say, this may be why they are different, as prototype aircraft, and different blocks are gonna be different in many small details. At the end of the day, you just have to do your best to give an “impression” of the real thing; how close that is to the actual is up to you. Many people don’t care, many take pleasure in getting it as accurate as possible, even if it’s not readily visible. A perfect example is all the MB Mk16E or US 16E ejection seats I’ve seen for this aircraft. They vary widely, not only in small detail, but even basic sizes and shapes. Andrej here used the 1/48 Reskit seat, which is a thing of beauty, however, it is modeled from one reference source, where the shoulder straps are stored in a certain position. Many other photos I’ve seen, both of the seat standing alone, and installed in the cockpit show it rigged in a different way. You just have to decide which way looks the best to you. In this case, I think KASL comes as close as I’ve seen in the majority of cockpit photos.
As far as the rest of the cockpit, the details vary widely, but as a guide, I usually go with the aftermarket parts, simply because they are probably the most up-dated. So I use the aftermarket parts as my best guess, until I see the cockpit for myself. Including the instrument panels. Haven’t decided between Eduard and Quinta yet, but they will replace the kit detail.
This is definitely an added dimension for me. In the past, I tried to build detailed cockpits, with early Verlinden stuff, but this stuff today is on a whole new level. That challenges us to get as close as possible, if you so desire. Now, if I can only see Fat Amy at an airshow this summer!
I really hate those raised panels. It would have been much better if this would have been done with decals.
