Welcome to Britmodeller.com

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.

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. :)

  • Announcements

    • Mike

      PhotoBucket are no longer permitting 3rd party hosting   01/07/17

      As most of you are now painfully aware, Photobucket (PB) are stopping/have stopped allowing their members to link their accumulated years of photos into forums and the like, which they call 3rd party linking.  You can give them a non-refundable $399 a year to allow links, but I doubt that many will be rushing to take them up on that offer.  If you've previously paid them for the Pro account, it looks like you've got until your renewal to find another place to host your files, but you too will be subject to this ban unless you fork over a lot of cash.   PB seem to be making a concerted move to another type of customer, having been the butt of much displeasure over the years of a constantly worsening user interface, sloth and advertising pop-ups, with the result that they clearly don't give a hoot about the free members anymore.  If you don't have web space included in your internet package, you need to start looking for another photo host, but choose carefully, as some may follow suit and ditch their "free" members at some point.  The lesson there is keep local backups on your hard drive of everything you upload, so you can walk away if the same thing happens.   There's a thread on the subject here, so please use that to curse them, look for solutions or generall grouse about their mental capacity.   Not a nice situation for the forum users that hosted all their photos there, and there will now be a host of useless threads that relied heavily on photos from PB, but as there's not much we can do other than petition for a more equitable solution, I suggest we make the best of what we have and move on.  One thing is for certain.  It won't win them any friends, but they may not care at this point.    Mike.

Antti_K

Members
  • Content count

    286
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

474 Excellent

About Antti_K

  • Rank
    Established Member
  • Birthday

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Finland

Recent Profile Visitors

657 profile views
  1. Hello Lawzer! A Very Nice Hurricane you have there. More points for you finishing it in Winter War markings. Usually modellers choose the Continuation War scheme. A very nice detail are the gun ports; my grand father told me that at the beginning the covers were always painted with camouflage colours and later on with red dioxide paint or what ever paint was at hand. To my eye the model has a little too much of weathering. At first they operated at Lake Pyhajarvi in south western Finland. The runways were ice and snow covered (a frozen lake). When they moved to Turku (old Artukainen airport) they operated on concrete runways. We still have one Hurricane here in Finland in it's original paintwork. It seems that originally the landing gear bays were aluminium coloured as was the pilot's seat and cockpit framework. Best Regards, Antti
  2. Wait a minute, wait a minute... I think either David Gledhill or Ian Black (both former RAF Phantom Navigators) discussed this in their Phantom books. All I have to do is to find that chapter. But there was a certain sequence if no alternative manual selections were made. Best Regards, Antti
  3. Fantastic stuff John! Thank you for sharing My copy of the FG.1 Aircrew Manual has only five parts (the fifth being cockpit illustrations) but no part six. So those illustrations you posted must come from another source. A Weapons Manual of some sort perhaps? I don't have the performance manual either but I do have that for the F-4J and F-4E. It would be really interesting to see the AN/APG-59 (radar) and AWG-10 (fire control system) manuals. I guess they are still kept in a vault... Best Regards, Antti
  4. Troy, I must have been something like six years old also when we visited the museum with my grand father (late 1970s). I didn't even notice the Me 163 as I was so exited to see a real Me 262 (I was a big fan then and still am). At least there was a ladder of some sort to climb and see the Me 262 cockpit. Best Regards, Antti
  5. Nice pictures John and Scimitar! I have been thinking about buying a boat and now I have found it Got to get one of these. It seems that using pictures from both FG.1 and FGR.2 Aircrew Manuals one can get the harness spot on. Am I right that AL 13 was the last FG.1 manual revision? My copy is also revised to that status. John, do you happen to have Flight Reference Cards for the British Phantom? Best Regards, Antti
  6. Hello Chris, at least all published drawings give the three gray camouflage. The outer wings are Barley Gray (or BS 626 Camouflage Gray as it is called) and inner wings BS 637 MSG. Studying the photos don't show any difference at all; at least I can't see it. My "Big" F-4J is also almost ready for the paint shop. As I have a soft spot for all RAF aircraft the idea of a F-4J(UK) is very tempting. Which decals and stencils are you going to use on yours? Best Regards, Antti
  7. Hello Pip! I've been studying this particular photo as well. Some PR.XIXs had "small" auxiliary tanks in the wings; between undercarriage bay and aileron (filler port is missing from the Airfix kit). Those red stencils you are asking about may have been octane rating and capacity markings for these tanks. The filler ports for the "main" wing tanks are located near the wing tip and there actually were red stencils about octane rating and capacity. These two markings look too similar to be just co-incidence. Some notes about PR.XIX stencils: - they varied; studying the photos suggests that at least two different "official marking guides" were used during the years - detailed photos gives you the best idea what to use and where to place it - colours used were yellow, red and black I guess you are using Kitworld's stencils for your build. I used them for mine and they are not the most accurate ones I'm unafraid. Many items necessary for Mk. XIV and PR.XIX are missing, like all markings concerning the intercoolant or gear box oil level check. Then there are many that are just wrong, like the fuel markings (100/130 Gallons!) or the engine oil filer markings. You might find some useful details in here: Best Regards, Antti
  8. Great photos John! Thank You for sharing Best Regards, Antti
  9. Hello all, just flipped through the pages of NATOPS F-4J Air Crew Manual. According to the manual no gun pod is carried/allowed in the centerline pylon. Tests of course are a different story. An interesting note about catapulted take-offs also caught my eye. It is prohibited to use external fuel during launch because the acceleration can cause fuel to vent into the fuselage fuel cells at a rate the ventilation system can't cope with creating a partial vacuum in the external tanks. I guess this goes for the FG.1 as well. Compare F-4J and FG.1 launches on Youtube; for well known reasons launches from Ark Royal are some what more "aggressive". Best Regards, Antti
  10. Interesting details on the "Frame 1" in Jonathan's post, like: - the Corogard around windshield, canopies and fixed middle part windows - the narrow DSG paint strip along the leading edge of the inner vari-ramp (painting instructions says it should be red) - Mk. 5 ejection seats - the black out curtain in observer's canopy - the small non-slip patch on top of the port intake this is a very good clip. I got plenty of detail info out of it. Best Regards, Antti
  11. Stop Press! Dennis, don't remove the radar control "joy stick" (or the radar set) just insert the stick (and pedals if that's possible). Radar control stick locates in the right hand lower corner of the observer's instrument panel. Best Regards, Antti
  12. Hello again Dennis, one detail came into my mind. You are modelling XT864 which was a Block 32 aircraft and fitted with dual flight controls. Luckily Hasegawa provides the stick for the rear seat as well! Best Regards, Antti
  13. Dennis, I've seen photos where some Phantoms are parked on deck with their nose gears fully extended. At the same time there was also few FG.1s visible with their nose gears in the "normal" position. Check 892 Squadron's web page as I think that's where I saw the photos. Why this was done I don't know. Possibly it had something to do with the FG.1's Nose Gear Emergency Shrinkage System; that caused some trouble to Aircraft Artificers and they had to run complicated maintenance tasks and tests. Or then just some "Top Brass" was visiting the ship and yes; FG.1 looks very dramatic with nose up! I also checked the FG.1 Aircrew Manual and found out that: - Catapulted take-offs are allowed only with full centerline and under wing tanks - no asymmetrical external load is allowed if rolling moment it causes exceeds 70.000 lbs. - if launch bridle arresting system is in-operational only Lupus flare packs are allowed in inboard stations (2 and 8) Flipping the pages didn't give any direct answer whether you can use fuel from external tanks during take-off or not. Using internal fuel only makes sense to me: this is the way with aircraft I'm more familiar with (Hawk, MiG-21, SAAB Draken...). Best Regards, Antti
  14. Hello Dennis, if you have parts for the slotted wing in your spares box (or a friendly fellow modeller donates them for you) then of course the job will be a lot easier. I was also wondering what to do with the flaps and finally it was an easy decision to leave them in the closed position. You can still use the extended nose gear leg. You can make the model look more interesting with the ailerons: leave one in nearly neutral position and the other fully down. Many photos show that seldom both ailerons were fully down after engine shut down. By the way I would suggest that you use the kit's original re-heat cans. I bought resin parts for my model and they don't look right; they miss the conical part totally. Best Regards, Antti
  15. Hello Dennis. I built XT861 "003" out of Hasegawa's kit. My chosen time frame was Ark Royal's 1971 cruise. Some notes I made during research: - the kit is an FG.1 (check the location of Door 62 to see it yourself) - originally FG.1s were painted with a colour closer to Dark Sea Grey than Extra Dark Sea Grey (actually all McDonald documents mention Dark Sea Grey) and Insignia White - Dark Sea Grey faded very quickly and white looked more like cream; check photos and compare roundel white with under surfaces white - the original factory "Painting Guide" for FG.1 is available online - if you put the crew in and use the extended nose gear then you should also open the flaps (leading edge and trailing edge) - at times RN Phantoms were parked on deck with nose gear extended - the most common fit during 1971 was centerline tank and inboard pylons. Many photos show bombs or rocket pods but no missiles - first RWR unit was mounted during 1974 - wing tanks and centerline tanks were originally white but they got re-painted with EDSG starting early 1970s - the underwing serials were re-positioned whenever the aircraft was re-painted; they were moved further inward You can find pictures of my "North Sea GT Sports Model" here on Britmodeller. Hope this helps, even a bit Antti