This site uses cookies! Learn More

This site uses cookies!

You can find a list of those cookies here: mysite.com/cookies

By continuing to use this site, you agree to allow us to store cookies on your computer. :)

Antti_K

Members
  • Content count

    233
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

401 Excellent

About Antti_K

  • Rank
    Established Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Finland

Recent Profile Visitors

524 profile views
  1. Matchbox Javelin? ... More and more interested ... Best Regards, Antti
  2. Hello cherisy! Looking at the photos of the kit (I don't have the kit) it looks that is a FAW.9/9R. This means that You need to: - remove the "bullet fairings" from the wing leading edges - remove the protruding gun muzzles - fill/sand the leading edges straight between outer gun and pitot tube (FAW.8 was the first with "kinked" leading edge) - fill the four wing pylon holes (unless You are modelling a trial aircraft with missiles) - drill holes for guns - discard the long air intake scoops on top of the fuselage (Re-heat cooling intakes) - re-scribe the details on Port intake side (Ground connection) - make new aerials for "Violet Picture", "FI.5", "Rebecca"and communications - build a new rear fuselage with non Re-heated engines Hope these help for a start. Enjoy the build as Javelin is a very cool aircraft Best Regards, Antti
  3. Ouch! That's sad. I think that 30-35 years ago the photography books still gave you the theory in depth. Today people get easily bored if they need to study a few formulas or look at a page without pictures. I bought Langford's excellent books a couple of years ago from a book shop in Uppsala, Sweden. Then there is some very good theory books published by the U.S. Navy and they are also available online. Then of course I still have my study books about aerial photography (written by former 543 Squadron navigators and photographers). BR, Antti
  4. Indeed; we kept all our films for aerial recce or survey work in a freezer at -18 centigrades. One day before the mission the film was moved to a fridge.Then the film containers were wrapped in a chamois and placed in a bag to keep them cool. I still keep my films for SLR photography in a freezer / fridge. It is also important to process an exposed film as soon as possible. Otherwise it is necessary to put it back to the freezer, but you can only buy some days that way. Looking back I remember my grandparents who had one roll in the camera for years; they didn't want to waste that precious film. As it was Agfa colour negative film the prints were always completely red BR, Antti
  5. A very interesting topic! Filters were (and are) used for two primary reasons: 1. To minimize the effect of Haze (those tiny particles in the air which are smaller than air molecules and reflect "back scattered light" causing too bluish picture). In these cases the filter should be yellow. 2. To correct colours for printing. For example if you want to show a very dark sky with white clouds then you should use a deep red filter with panchromatic B+W film. Third reason is anti-vignetting but I don't know if this has been used in "consumer" cameras. The only times I have used an anti-vignetting filter is during aerial reconnaissance and survey missions. I would firstly try to recognize what film type was used. Take a look at the RAF Roundel; if the red center portion looks darker in the photo than the blue ring then the picture was taken using orthochrome film. Another hint are the camouflage colours; they look almost the same when photographed wit orthochrome film. If the blue and red look similar then panchromatic film without filter was used. One thing to remember when taking pictures with a DSLR: digital camera has a different sensitivity than film. You need to use a UV filter with digital cameras but not with film. Reason: films are not sensitive to UV light. This means that a digital B+W photo will look different in any case when compared to film. It is also useless to scan photos from books and then "tune" them using Photoshop or Lightroom. Fun it may very well be but not "scientific". Best Regards, Antti
  6. Hello all, according to the book "Vulcan 607" every possible trick was tried to minimize fuel spray during disconnect as it blurred the view. Different ideas were tried and finally Vortex generators were found to be the most satisfactory solution (not perfect however). Fuel still spilled on the windscreen. Best Regards, Antti
  7. Indeed it was ZE350. She also had the "old" style, more pointed antenna fairing on the fin trailing edge and no reinforcement plates on fin sides. But did ZE350 have the wing reinforcement straps? I have seen only one photo and that is not good enough to be sure... Best Regards, Antti
  8. Well, I will join You as I have my 1/32 Tamiya F-4J Phantom on the bench and lots and lots of stencils and panel numbers for her! You bring the blankets and I'll bring tea and cookies BR, Antti
  9. Simon, when the model is complete You will see that it was worth the effort. Have fun BR, Antti
  10. Hello MilneBay, this is directly from the text book! I was wondering if this is the only explanation for different colours as Boundary Layer on a laminar flow wing is something like 0,3 mm thick and only in the lowest portion theoretically there is a zero air flow. That's why I'm open to all theories - re-paint, partially polished, damp surfaces... Best Regards, Antti
  11. Hello gingerbob, I agree and disagree with You I agree that it is impossible to confirm let's say which colour -RLM 02 or RLM 76- is painted on a certain aircraft. I disagree in this case as we are trying to identify a deep red colour; red and blue appear in exact shades of grey on photos when we can find out the film and filter combination. Of course a greater accuracy will be achieved if we have more than one photo. Best Regards, Antti
  12. Good points Jure! And when we understand Black and White photography we can make better than just educated guesses. Many online photos are out of this process as they may have been scanned from poor quality prints, re-sized several times and possibly photoshopped. It is quite easy to tell from B+W photos which film and filter combination was used. When this is done it is quite easy to confirm the colours. Gamble's book contains excellent prints from the originals, I guess I can spend a little more time with this Best Regards, Antti
  13. Thank You Vadim and Welcome Aboard (after all this is a naval fighter)! Best Regards, Antti
  14. Hello Si, Thank You I have been busy with the intakes. I've spent more time with them than many models. The cockpit is also ...."interesting". Luckily it is nearly complete. However it won't be an exact replica of any of the Phantom types; It is a cross between an F-4D and F-4B (Front) and F-4J and F-4S (Rear). I didn't want to use resin cockpits. As mentioned I use(d) some properly scaled factory drawings. I compared the diameter of the re-heat on the drawing with the information available on a General Electric brochure of the J79 engine and they are a perfect match. Revell kit parts have the "Turkey Feathers" that in turn match these references exactly. So I will use the Revell re-heaters with resin "interiors". An update is coming soon. Best Regards, Antti
  15. Hello Simon382, You can find the "NAVAIR 01-245FDB-2-1.2" manual in the Internet. It contains full stencils for F-4B and F-4J as well as some generic material information. You can check the stencils one by one together with Panel Numbers. Very useful document indeed. Best Regards, Antti