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. :)

Work In Progress

Members
  • Content count

    4,098
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

966 Excellent

About Work In Progress

  • Rank
    Very Obsessed Member

Contact Methods

  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Location
    Sometimes Yorkshire, sometimes Cambridgeshire

Recent Profile Visitors

4,339 profile views
  1. Good point by Garry. Can we be careful about terminology please? Temma's lines as indicated by Warhawk's second green line from the left are not denoting the position of the firewall, they are simply the rear edge of the cowl. Coming to the substance of the question of the nose structure I would note that Temma's lines may to you be "nearly in the same place", but what that means is "in a different place". The photographs in Gwart's post on the previous page -- -- clearly showed the difference in the fuselage structure ahead of the leading edge for the single-row and two-row engine variants.
  2. Thanks, super helpful!
  3. Anyone happen to know the diameter of a Swordfish prop? I've had a quick google but came up short.
  4. I have a rather nice injection-moulded Stinson Reliant: it is this one https://www.scalemates.com/kits/168675-amt-t639-stinson-reliant-sr-9 Only requires a bit of basic modelling to doll it up http://www.swannysmodels.com/Stinson.html
  5. Yes, that is a Mark V Rotol type spinner. As Troy suggests the current prop blades are most likely from Hoffman, who certainly make a lot of warbird prop blades including for Spitfires. http://www.hoffmann-prop.com/en/13/Propeller_Vintage_Aircraft
  6. Hardly the answer to the question "which 1/48 P-51B", though, is it?
  7. Yep, it's a nice idea and certainly on-topic for here.
  8. An excellent summary indeed by Bruce, definitely one for the archive
  9. Given that official factory documentation very often varies significantly from what the factories actually built, it would be even better to get some competent measurements taken direct from the surviving F4F-4 airframes, all of which are in the USA. Sadly here we only have examples of the FM-2, plus the Martlet I at Yeovilton
  10. So they did! and here it is. Somehow I have managed never to see this box before, it's a new one altogether on me. Gievn the price (at least in the UK) I think I would be going with the Revell version of the ICM kit instead, or Tamiya
  11. Very nice. I have sooo many Meteor kits, not sure why, but I can't resist them.
  12. No, I don't think so, nor any of the other Acc Min repoppers (e.g. Italeri)
  13. It sure is complicated compared to a Moth, also ENORMOUS
  14. The Vista/Revell/Airfix/SMER Fulmar? It's really pretty good. There's a nice built thread which gives a good impression here: So is the 1/72 Special Hobby one, which is better detailed though inevitably somewhat fiddlier. Sprue pics available here: https://www.model-making.eu/products/Fairey-Fulmar-N1854-Fulmar-Prototype-Story.html
  15. Yes, I have one in the loft. I preferred the unmodified Monogram predecessor. It came out in 1996. I'm not sure offhand of all the corporate ins and outs but I believe Revell Germany today is a different company from Revellogram in the nineties. There was also an Accurate Miniatures P-51B/C, which I also have in the loft, and which was pretty decent.