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.

Work In Progress

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,029 Excellent

About Work In Progress

  • Rank
    Very Obsessed Member
  • Birthday

Contact Methods

  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Location
    Sometimes Yorkshire, sometimes Cambridgeshire

Recent Profile Visitors

4,509 profile views
  1. Yes, that decal should not appear on the SD-X version. The UP-W decal option was never intended to represent the aeroplane in 1940. It's an accurate decal sheet for the aeroplane as it is regularly seen in the skies over the UK today. The other decal option supplied in the kit is intended to be the ww2 option. That's why the combat box top artwork is for the other option. But yes, they messed up by failing to differentiate the stencils for the two different periods
  2. I can assure you it's always been called AVGAS here in the UK too.
  3. Er, not trying to be awkward, and I mean this as helpfully as I can, but rather than tack a new highly specfic question like this onto number of old threads, in one case an irrelevant one, it is much better all round to simply start a new thread of your own asking the question. I note that you've had an answer on the Hornet Moth thread but if you need more please start a new thread. There's no extra charge, honest...
  4. It was possible for the Blenheim to carry a .303 machine gun outboard of the nacelle. But I have only ever seen reliable reference to it being in the port wing.
  5. Some years ago I combined the Falcon vac-form XII conversion with a Hasegawa / Gartex Vc (itself a limited edition of the Hase Vb kit with some C wing conversion parts). It went together very well and I wtill have it on the shelf.
  6. They are many and varied. Here are some good ones, assuming you want RAF ones https://www.hannants.co.uk/product/AOD720071 https://www.hannants.co.uk/product/AOD720072M https://www.hannants.co.uk/product/X72117 https://www.hannants.co.uk/product/X72222 https://www.hannants.co.uk/product/X72225 Couple of slightly more exotic ones here if you don;t mind cobbling up a tropical filter or adapting a Mark II one from somewhere https://www.hannants.co.uk/product/X72225 https://www.hannants.co.uk/product/X72229
  7. Somewhat off topic here, but to back up the estimable Captain Brown's testimony, it has been done quite a few times as a radio controlled model and always seems to surprise people by flying well. I might hve a go at it for indoor rubber powered free flight scale some time.
  8. Nope. The XII has a lower thrustline and the prop diameter is smaller than than of the IX to maintain ground clearance with the tail up.
  9. Yes, the Robertson & Scarborough book remains a valuable aid in detailing the kit.
  10. It's a lot more accurate than the recent Revell offering.
  11. There's a 322 Squadron XIVc on this sheet: https://www.hannants.co.uk/product/FV32006
  12. Did you miss the 2015 Airfix Beaufighter? It's lovely. The Lysander, Battle, Anson and Welington could usefully be done anew. On the subject of the original post, when I want to build a kit that first appeared more than a decade ago, I generally try to find an early example unless I know the tooling has been corrected or improved in some other way. Of course if the kit is still available the modern decals are far superior to the sheets produced in the 1960s and 1970s, but most of us will be able to use aftermarket decals anyway.
  13. Yes, it is a deceptive aeroplane like that. The Spitfire looks subtle, not a straight line on it, and the Hurricane in comparison looks a simple and straightforward old donkey. But it isn't simple at all, once you get into the detail.
  14. That's true if you can live with the difficult to fix "washboard" misrepresentation of the fabric-covered rear fuselage on the Hasegawa one. But different thinsg bother different people. Have a look at a few builds online, and if it doesn't bother you, then the Hasegawa is the kit for you. Otherwise go with the old Airfix kit. (this one) http://kingkit.co.uk/plastic-model-kit-airfix-1-72-02067-hawker-hurricane-mki-1202.html but definitely not this one http://kingkit.co.uk/plastic-model-kit-airfix-1-72-02042-hawker-hurricane-mki-iib-15581.html
  15. Not sure exactly what you mean there, but there is no way the Allison Mustang fuselage is as deep as the Merlin Mustang fuselage in the cockpit area (with the exception of the few Roll-Royce Merlin proof-of-concept conversions)