Work In Progress

Agreed. I build large scale free-flight and RC models of anything up to 12 feet span, but they can be disassembled and boxed up in the garage roof when not in use. I still don't have room in the house for a non-flying 1/48 B-29 or Lancaster, let alone 1/32. I don't have the shelf or cabinet space. And if it doesn't fly, its only purpose is to sit on a shelf or in a display case.

Here you go http://www.tigerhobbies.co.uk/Decals-1:48-for-B29-Washingtons-in-RAF-Service-ACD48002?search=ACD

The only Middle Eastern air forces using the Spitfire 22 were those opposing Israel: Syria and Egypt.

And was, at the time, too unreliable for use. Post-war a lot of Beryl experience and learning went into the Sapphire, but by that time airframes vastly superior to the 262 were available.

It's not the *same* mariket interest - it is a second-division type in the public consciousness compared to the P-51, 109 , core Spitfire marks, P-47, 190, Zero etc. But it also served in Germany, and the US market has always liked the Sea Fury because it likes all the top-of-range big piston fighters, especially those with high profile post war racing careers. Same way that the UK market has always had an interest in the Bearcat and Tigercat. Second-division types in terms of global fame are still highly viable as model kits, if done well.

Possibly because while the slipstream works in the same sense on both sides, the spanwise flow (the origin of the tip vortices) is handed. The spanwise flow drifts the air inboard as it passes front-to-rear across the upper surface of the wing, outboard on the lower surface. So the two forces may counteract each other on the port wing, and complement each other on the starboard wing. Spanwise flow is not huge on a high aspect ratio straight wing in the cruise but there still is a bit.

Nothing wrong with doing the actual fund-raising in a month but you do have to push it during that time. When I am involved in raising similar amounts for short film-making we have a multi-media campaign across all forms of old and new media which starts at least a month before the opening of fund raising, and gets pushed on all the major platforms and relevant websites every single day wth updates, "did you know", interviews, pics, etc.

For a non-aerobatic aeroplane, that is definitely a lot of oil on the tail. Of course they were predominantly flown and maintained by people who had minimal experience by commercial standards, and sometimes treated the engines badly. And mechanics usually had more operationally important things to do after a mission than chase down oil leaks. As long as it carried enough oil for the duration of the flight it would do. Post war, the P&W R-1830 has always been exceptionally dependable, as has its big brother the R-2800, and both can be made pretty leak-tight especially if flown regularly. The oil _consumption_ of a big radial though (that which passes through rather than leaking out of the system) is always significant. But that doesnt lead to liquid oil all over the tail.

That has a long shot given that there are apparently ony 17 people in the world who want one enough to pay $55NZ for it (about £30, which seems very reasonable to me). However, I'm not sure how well they promoted the kickstarter. This is literally the first I've heard of it on any of my social media places, whether for mdelling or full size aviation, and I am a highly appropriate target audience for such a kit.

Yep, dull red is the default for Lancasters in WW2 night bomber service. It is what was ordered by the customer to be applied at the factory for the roundels and serials, and what squadrons were ordered (and had paint stock to provide) to add the squadron codes at unit level. It's also what the primary photo evidence portrays, and therefore what in all good conscience you have to assume unless you have a specific and convincing piece of evidence that a non-standard paint job was produced for some reason on a psrticular aircraft that you wish to model.

Great pics. I agree the opening shots of the IIc look seriously badly modelled! I don;t think I'd dare reproduce that, even though it's historically accurate. The prop leading edge paint erosion on the Hurricane and Spitfire XIV is a superb example of what happens when you fly into rain, so not technically chipping from stones and other debris (which is usually chord-wise scratches and gouges on the rear faces of blades).

Yes, the almost brick red colour is right for WW2 service, certainly not a bright Post Office kind of red. Post war the BBMF was prone to making its markings a bit more vivid, though these days they pay much more attention to authenticity than they did in the '70s and '80s. See also this video, a decent view of the red of the markings around 2.10

Yes, the Airfix kit sheet for the 1970s Lancaster gave you the oriiginal Mike Squared, ED888, and the option of the BBMF aircraft PA474 when it wore those markings. I believe the origin of the raised 2 after the individual aircraft letter M was to denote it being a replacement for the original Lancaster with that squadron code. This was not normal practice. Airfix brought out al all-new Lancaster a few years ago with completely different decal options, so there's no chance of a factory replacement sheet. All the ones for that kit in my possession are fairly rough, it was not a great era for Airfix kit decals. If I wanted to make either ED888 or PA474 in the Mike Squared markings I would use mostly decals from standard Xtradecal generic sheets.

No, it isn't. That's an E armament with a .5 Browning muzzle. The original positer is building a IXc, so the machine guns are .303 Browning.

??? In that pic the fuselage is clearly only taped together, not glued together