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

      Ongoing DDoS Attack causing Forum Slowness   26/04/17

      In case you have missed the announcement, the reason that the forum has been slow at times since the minor version update the other day is due to a Denial of Service attack, brute force attack on our email, and judging by the lag with our FTP response, that too.  If you're feeling like you're experiencing a glitch in the Matrix, you're not wrong.  This is the same MO as the attack in September 2016 that occurred when we transitioned to the new version 4 of the software.  We're currently working with US and UK cyber-crime departments, who specialise in this sort of thing, and we're hopeful that we'll be able to track them down this time by using the accumulated evidence already held.    We are pretty certain that it's a continuation of the same attack last year, only at a reduced intensity to deter people from using the site "because it's terribly slow", rather than taking it down completely, and we're also sure of the motivations of those responsible.  Spite.   Please bear with us in the interim, and wish us luck in dealing with these.... "people".

Olivier de St Raph

Members
  • Content count

    1,188
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Olivier de St Raph last won the day on January 27

Olivier de St Raph had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

2,106 Excellent

1 Follower

About Olivier de St Raph

  • Rank
    Very Obsessed Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    St Raphaël, France

Recent Profile Visitors

418 profile views
  1. Dear Hannes, I suppose you talk about these bolts (3 up and 2 down) on this enlargement of Drawing 2: On this other enlargement (photo 2), we can see the 3 ones, as they are on Drawing 2 (I made them) but the 2 other ones are much closer. I always refer preferently to photos when possible, so I will add these 2 ones (that I had not seen and added before). But the most important for me is to scratchbuild the construction on top of the 3 up. The kit gives a very simple version of this construction, I have removed it, and now, I have to make it... Thanks again for the quality of your observations. Another observation I did on these enlargements: 16B in the kit has the same thickness on all its lenght (2,9 mm). The Drawing 2 suggested that it was thicker in its back part, getting thinner and thinner... This seems to be confirmed by the enlargement of photo 2, even if the wheel in front does not help to be sure. What do you think?
  2. As I was making a new dry fit assembly engine in place (on my new supports), I saw the engine was still too height, the bonnets touching the up cooling pipes. I have been looking on Drawing 2, and I have noticed that the vertical pipes, that I had ever increased, were still too long. The vertical tubes, initially nearly 7 mm, are now not more than 4,5 mm, and they look like on Drawing 2. It is nearly good, but the engine is still a bit too height/ radiator case: That's why I will remove a bit of the inferior part of the engine by sanding and it should be really good (black marker): Notice the crankcase frankly protruding under the underbody... P.S: Hannes, too tired now, I will check what you said in your last post tomorrow...
  3. Here are the bolts I had added, following what my eyes saw on the different photos: ... but you are right, Hannes, the Drawing 1 brings here a bit more informations. I admit I did not think to have a look at this doc, that, to be honest, was even not present in my "library". Bravo for your good eyes!
  4. Your point is quite right, indeed, dear Hannes. I did them but you can't see them on these top view photos. You'll see them on next one... We can see them too on photos 1, 2, 3, 9...
  5. The different steps of my new scratchbuild cross rods support of the engine:
  6. Dear Nick, I am so angry about these barbarians, not human, no heart... Hope we shall overcome of terrorism, this cancer... Thanks for your kind comments about my wheels camber.
  7. I agree with you, Roy, personally, I would not draw too many conclusions from that drawing.
  8. You have a lot of humour, Robin, besides being a great modeler!
  9. A lot of pro work yesterday and today, just read your comments about the parts 141 and 143 (x2)D parts. I must say it is for me very difficult to have any certainty on that point. On some docs, they seem to be black (photos 1B, drawing 3), on some others, they seem to be bare metal (photos 1A, 1AA, 4B, 9). But on most of them, 141D is black but 143D are metal (photos 2, 3, 7, 28, drawing 7, model 2) and that will be my choice. I really think the "stars" were not black, why should 141 and 143 have the same color? Have another look at all our docs and I think you'll agree with me. That was anyway the solution chosen by the modeler who built the "master model" (I know, it does not mean so much...) Finally, I decided to full scratchbuild my cross rods support of the engine. The reasons? - the rods were too short for my build - as I said above, the notches imho did not exist, and a much better attachment solution was suggested on the "master model" (very good on that precise point imho). I began early this morning, without having time to post. Here is my first step. I still have to make the U attachment and the mounting lugs instead of the notches... N.B: I used the 04 nuts provided in the kit. Much too big nearly everywhere (I ordered some on RB motion, thanks again Robin), they are OK here! More as soon as possible... P.S: I still have not read all new posts, you were very inspired, today, chaps! It is incredible (and good) to see, while we are at p. 124 (!), that this thread is still very lively!
  10. 100% OK, the engine becomes too "heavy" with them... When you don't know, choose the most esthetic solution, it's my philosophy
  11. Nothing to add, that's exactly the answer I would have done. In fact, you have to decide. As you know, I decided not to add the tubes (we have many debates and made many research about that) but I think pity we will never have any certainty on that point.
  12. Very nice and subtle effect indeed, Robin!
  13. Dear Robin, it would be a pity to chase you out of town and of this thread! That said, I think the "vertical rod" 15B is cambered too, and not vertical, as you suggest in your drawing. The photos 12 and 21 show imho that it is parallel to 139D. That's why I chose the 4A bending option... But the most important is to camber the wheels...
  14. First of all, I want to express here my solidarity again with the British people, struck again by an awful attempt at Manchester. Difficult to come-back to our subject in such circumstances, but life goes on, this life terrorists hate, this life we do love... Dear Nick, as an answer, these 2 photos showing how I get my cambered wheels: I made a cut at the red arrow level, and put a drop of cyano in the cut. Dry fit assembly: the camber may seem excessive, but take in consideration that the weight of my model, xeighted down by the presence of the driver in resin: P.S: Thanks Hannes for the hints about the Mef spark plugs.
  15. I take advantage of changing my cross rods to improve that part of the kit. Imho, these notches do not exist. The attachment of these rods is one of the best things on the "master model" exposed at Centro Storico - wrong in many aspects furthermore - and that's why I made photos of them. I will inspire myself of that construction for mine, but I am not sure for the metal color. On the photo 3, the attachment seems to be metal, but on the other ones, it seems to be black... Enlargements of the attachment on the C.S 806 build: no notch, but a mounting bracket. Much better than the kit's "solution":