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

      Switched Identities   18/06/17

      If you are still having problems logging in and remaining under your own username following the DDoS attack last week, you need to log off, clear your browser's cache, and restart your browser to ensure you clear all the old files from your temporary area.  Then you should be sorted.


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by pheonix

  1. I tend to agree that worrying about 15 or 16 holes in the bomb cover is not that important because it is very doubtful whether anyone would notice (or know). Well I would write that wouldn't I because I did not bother to change that on mine! I put the bombs on the ground under the bomb cells as though they were placed there ready to load. They would have been brought on small wooden stretchers or sleds: I have not seen any photos of carts being used, but that does not mean that they were not used on some airfields. I suspect that a little modeller's license would not go amiss..... What you have done so far is very good indeed - remember to get the internal details properly aligned before you assemble the fuselage, especially the fuel tanks or the structure will not be square. P
  2. Wonderful bit of scratch building there. Getting that ring the correct diameter and round is a real test of skill - especially when you have so little tolerance to work with. P
  3. I have completed this build - the log is in the work in progress if anyone who has not seen it before is interested. The original aircraft sat on the 4 wheels under the fuselage nacelle: mine, despite putting a large amount of lead weight in the nacelle, decided to sit on its rear after I had fitted the horizontal tail stabilizers. So I had to initiate Plan B which involved making a simple base and using superglue to change the models attitude: it will not sit on its tail again for a long time. Gabriel Voisin established the Appareils d'Aviation Les Freres Voisin in 1905 and worked for a short time with L. Bleriot and later with H. Farman to improve designs for early aircraft. In January 1908 H. Farman flew a Voisin design on a 1km closed circuit and won a significant prize for doing so. In 1912 he designed what was to become with some modifications and a 130hp Salmson-Canton-Unne engine, the Voisin III. These early machines were designated LA but on later production aircraft the engine was raised to improve the thrust and these were designated LAS. The type entered service with the French armed forces in 1914 just before the outbreak of war, but due to a shortage of suitable designs the British also ordered them for the RFC and the RNAS. The first machines were bought form France and entered service with the RFC in February 1915. 50 were ordered from companies in Britain and these were largely supplied to the RNAS where they operated in the Agean, Basra in Iraq, and in East Africa where they were used against the forces of von Lettow-Vorbeck. Other countries which operated the type included Russia (which also built them under licence), Belgium, Italy, Romania and one which was interned in Switzerland. The type was so successful that it remained in service until the end of the war, although in the later years it was used for night bombing only. The model represents an aircraft from No 2 Wing, Imbros, (a dried salt lake bed), RNAS December 1915. The model is scratch built with a kit engine kindly given to me by Epeeman and modified, Eduard wire wheels at the front, and an Aeroclub Lewis gun. It is rigged with rolled 40 SWG copper wire. The booms were made from florists wire because I do not wish them to bend: on reflection I should have made 2 from plastic rod to try to reduce the weight at the rear. I put that mistake down to a learning experience. Markings were hand painted except for the serial which came from a Pegasus numerals sheet. Thanks for looking. P
  4. Sorry to interrupt a private dispute between those who generally know a great deal more about RNAS/FAA machines than I do, but the Blackburn TB (Twin Biplane) was not a torpedo bomber. It was designed to attack Zeppelin airships from above with steel darts, the idea being that the aeroplane would fly above the airship and the navigator would release the darts. The pilot sat in one fuselage, the navigator in the other 10 feet away with no means of communication except hand signals! The type was to have been fitted with 150hp Smith Static radial engines but these proved to be unreliable and so 100hp Monosoupape engines were fitted to the first prototype. 110 hp Clergets were fitted to the second without a noticeable improvement in performance. Nine were delivered to the Admiralty, 7 were deployed in 1916 at Killingholme and two kept in store. They proved to be incapable of climbing above 8000ft and were thus incapable of carrying out their proposed tasks. The type was supposed to have been able to carry three boxes of darts: to try to increase performance the Admiralty allowed this to be reduced to two but it did not make a real difference. All of the machines were broken up in late 1917. Another disaster for the Admiralty and Blackburn, who together over the years appear to have made a superb losing team. Shame about the aircrews who had to operate these and other acts of their combined folly. P
  5. If the internal details of this project are anything to go by the wheel wells should be very impressive. Very interesting thread - especially the finer details that you have managed to ferret out form various sources. P
  6. Evening All, I have form when it comes to pushers and recently I have had a severe attack of pusher withdrawal symptoms so it is time to start another one This will be a French design but I will finish it in RNAS markings. Voisin machines were very numerous during the first part of WW1 as they were employed by French, British and Italian air forces, some were sent to Russia and others were built there, so it was an important allied type. As it is a pusher it is seriously under-represented in the kit market: there is a vacuform kit by Flashback but I will try to show how to make one from scratch using plastic card and florists wire. I am going to cheat a little because I have acquired from Epeeman a spare rotary engine from a Roden kit which I will modify to represent the Salmson of the Voisin. I suppose this is the scratch builder's version of an aftermarket part. I will be using genuine aftermarket parts in the form of a set of Eduard PE wire wheels: my first experience of this medium. The plans will come from the DataFile no 135. I started by bending some 30 thou plastic card in a piece of drain pipe which had been plugged at one end. (I have to thank Stevehed for this idea). I placed the card in the pipe and held it with a wooden spoon handle while I poured in boiling water. After 10 seconds I drained out the hot water and poured in cold water. The card was then suitably bent so that I could cut out the wing blanks. I also cut out some ailerons and horizontal tail stabilisers, and a rudder. I have marked these in pencil to show where the ribs will be added in the form of 10 x 20 thou Evergreen strip. The engine looked like this: so the first change was to get rid of those awful moulded push rods and replace them with some new ones from thin copper wire. An exhaust pipe was made from plastic rod and glued to the rear of the engine: and finally an extended drive shaft also made from thick rod which had been filed to shape and glued to the front. Thanks for looking. P
  7. This is a truly impressive build - first class work on the interior and I do admire your patience in keeping going when things start to fall apart. Amazing what glue in the right place can do. I had completely forgotten about those wonderful inter-war naval types - all of them up my street as they looked so handsome in the air (if or when they got there). There are just so many of these wonderful misfits to build - I already have a cabinet half full of the weird and wonderful from WW1 and earlier, and now I have rediscovered more from a later era. Scratch building some of them in 1/72 could be a bit of a challenge but who knows, one day I might just give one a try. Thanks for reminding me of their existence. Really looking forward to this Roc being completed - another of those odd balls rarely seen. P
  8. Right I have finished this one at last. It has taken longer than I had originally thought as I have had to be away from home more frequently than usual lately, and in addition this model had some unexpected issues that I only discovered when I reached them. However all is complete now so I will run quickly through the final assemblies. The first parts to be fitted were the horizontal tail surfaces and rudder bumper: the latter was made from a small piece of wire which came from a telephone cable. Having fitted the tail surfaces the moment of truth arrived - would it be a nose sitter with all the weight that I had added or would it fall on to its tail? Well..... .... the d****d thing sat on its tail!!!!! B*****R!! Plan B had to be brought into action as I will describe later. I also added the control horns from rod and the joining unit which kept the elevators in unison - also from wire from the telephone. The rigging took longer than expected because there was rather a lot of it. Voisins had the bracing wires for the wings set on the undersides so these had to be added because otherwise the wings would look very bare. The remainder was as per any other pusher and I rigged it using a sequence that I have developed over many models: starting with the fore-aft wires between the wing struts, then the rear of the bays, front of bays, booms, tail controls, wing controls and finally undercarriage and anti-drag wires at the front. This usually means that I do not have wires getting in the way of where I want to pick up the model and thereby getting damaged. I use rolled 40 SWG copper wire and attach the ends with superglue: touching in some of the glue points finished the job. Last thing was the wheels. The main wheels had been scratched by winding a length of 20 thou rod around a paintbrush handle and immersing it in boiling water for about 10 seconds. I could then cut "tyres" according to length. The diameter of the paintbrush handle was slightly smaller than the diameter of the wheel so that the "tyre" is sprung on to the edge of the wheel disc: the latter was shaped from 60 thou card. I scribe a circle on the card with a pair of dividers and then cut the circle out roughly, finishing it with a file and glass-paper. The assembly is held with liquid cement. The front wheels were made from Eduard PE as the wheels were spoked and without covers and I have yet to try to make these individually as per the Old Man. The mudguards on the main wheels were cut form plastic card and the Lewis gun came from Aeroclub. After the wheels were glued into place and had dried I brought Plan B into action to make the model sit on its nose wheels. I made a simple block base from a piece of scrap hardwood that was a leftover from some book shelves, varnished it and stuck a piece of felt on to represent grass - nothing elaborate - and superglue did the rest. This one will not sit on its tail again for a long time! Tomorrow I will post more pictures of the completed model together with some of the historical background of these machines. P
  9. Thanks Deon, Terry and Matt for dropping by and leaving your kind comments. I really appreciate the kind thoughts and ideas of fellow modellers - sometimes it helps me t keep going when I hit difficult patches. P
  10. Thanks gentlemen for the very kind remarks, they are truly appreciated. No Dave you have not seen this one - perhaps I ought to bring it to a club meeting in the future. Colin: I did not buy any kits from Hubble and Freeman because for very many years (30+) I stopped modelling altogether. I came to Maidstone during that non-modelling period and when I restarted a few years ago I mainly used kits in my stash. Now I scratch build so I do not buy kits at all these days and I sold my stash last year as I felt that others would hopefully get more pleasure from them than me: they had been in the roof spaces of my various homes and I could not see my ever building them. I suspect that some have also been stored in various modellers roof spaces until....... P
  11. The Spadgent has started a build thread on this venerable but in my opinion, very good, kit. I built this some years ago after I had returned to the hobby after a 30+ year break - it was the third kit that I tried. I had built one of these when it was first released but did not have the skill or patience to do it justice then. I bought this second hand in the late 1970's so it was in dark green plastic and had no flash - just all of the ejector marks! I threw away the glazing and replaced it with clear acetate sheet and had to mould the upper wing centre section top (mine was missing and Airfix only re-released the kit after I had completed it). I hand painted the cockades, fin flashes and letter on the nose. The serial is from transfers as are the lift here markings. I also built the kit in a completely different sequence to the instructions because I knew that the wing joints are very tricky and care and dry runs are needed if that particular operation is to be successful. This represents a machine from an RNAS unit in early 1918 and was used for day bombing. It is worth remembering that at the time this kit was released it was one of the best quality kits on the market, which shows just how far our hobby has come in the intervening years. There are three other photos on The Spadgent's build thread page. The model is rigged with clear monofilament thread - it nearly drove me bonkers as it was almost impossible to see!. It required drilling lots of holes, (the holes provided by Airfix in the wings are a bit of a joke), and there were some other issues which I had to deal with. There is a build thread for this on Airfix Tribute Forum and an article on Modelling Madness if anyone is interested. I added the ladders and other bits just to give it a bit more interest. I know that the tail dolly is a work of fiction on Airfix's part but I could not find suitable photos/drawings at the time to scratch a proper one. In all an interesting build and one that I had long wanted to complete. It was also one of the last kits that I built as I found two completely forgotten, incomplete conversions in my roof when I was building this and looking for something else.... and so I completed them and continued with other conversions which I had also long wanted to make, and now I scratch build. P
  12. This is coming on well. I agree with Stever219 about colours - I sometimes wonder about those in our fraternity who argue about minute variations in shades and hues..... colours vary for a huge number of reasons, many of which we know little or nothing about. Paint it a close to the colour that you think that it is and let others worry whether you have it right or not. At the moment this is turning into a really good model - I am just waiting to see how you get on with the rigging, and am wishing you all the best for the process. Just remember that it will be fine - eventually! P
  13. A very nice rendering of this interesting type. The colour scheme looks fine to me and apart from a few specialists who would know where the faults are? As you write - a good addition to the cabinet. P
  14. Excellent. An exceptional build and a wonderful dio. Thanks for the background story - all too tragic as they often are. P
  15. Thanks for the kind remarks about my model. Those ladders were scratch built - I decided to add them as in most photos of 0/400' on the ground they are there. P
  16. OOB or not anything with a spare wing and fan is more fun than a grey jet fighter. Provides more challenges too. Not seen this kit before so will be following with interest. Will it be WW1or post war markings? P
  17. This is a wonderful piece of scratch building. The shapes you have achieved are really excellent and the finish is first class. P
  18. I have only just found this - I had seen your earlier thread on the engines which are absolutely first class and mini-masterpieces in their own right. The fuselages are also coming on really well - very interesting indeed to see how you tackled them. I was interested to read your comment that some scratch builders make components as though they are building a kit: I seem to follow that method although I have never really thought about it in that way. I also build things as I go along as you do too. Either way what you write about having the nerve and the rest will follow is in my opinion very true. There are many on this and other forums who add super scratch built detail to their models and play with PE: any of them could build from scratch if they really wanted too. I remember well my fears when I took the plunge, only to find that it was not nearly so hard as I had imagined. And it has the advantage that if it does not work the first time there is always the opportunity for another attempt. P
  19. Wow Dave that looks really fantastic. In spite of the problems that you had with delicate parts, this has turned into another of your gems. I hope to see this soon at a club meeting - I want to look more closely at those scuff marks on the fabric and ask how you did them because they are very good. P
  20. I have just found theis: - shows how far behind I am! I wrote a build thread for this on Airfix Tribute Forum a few years ago under the handle Stevef - it was the third model I attempted after returning to the hobby after a 30+year break. There are some issues with the kit - in particular I found that the tail needed some attention as the fuselage holes were in the wrong place for the struts. I sanded down the ribs completely. The fuselage need to be assembled carefully and in stages - although you cannot see the fuel tanks they are essential as they help provide essential support and help keep the structure square. I was not helped by having the upper part of the centre section of the upper wing missing so I had to mould one! The engines were fun to mount too - read how I did it as i cannot remember the details now. The rigging is not really bad as this model is so large you can get to it. Except the tail that is, which I rigged during construction. I assembled the wings in stages and certainly not as per the instructions because otherwise the rigging is almost impossible - again see my blog. This actually builds intto a good model if you have the patience - so take your time and you will be well rewarded. Here are some pics odf mine - an RNAS machine from early 1918. All markings were hand painted except for the "lift here" markings because the transfers from my kit were too old and were past use. I rigged this with clear thread - and it nearly drove me mad as I could not see the d********d stuff! P
  21. This really is an interesting thread for what is being uncovered in terms of aircraft history. I knew of the target tugs but not of those on floats. Amazing what a hobby can turn up! I also have a soft spot for the Skua/Roc - not least because they were so ugly. And I do not suffer from Stockholm syndrome either. P
  22. I am posting these pictures following a request for them and information on the build in the WW1 aircraft section of this site. I am also including pictures of the scratch built Beardmore engine as this has featured as part of the discussion. There is a full build log for this model on Airfix Tribute Forum under conversion corner, and ww1aircraftmodels.com in the under construction section if anyone is interested. I have also included some notes on the type for those modellers who are not familiar with this aircraft. In the build logs referred to I used wings from the old Veeday BE 2c. This kit is a rare bird these days and anyway Airfix have now produced a first class model of this type and I would recommend it as the starting point for this conversion as the outer wing panels of the FE 2b and the BE 2c were the same. However the FE 2b had a greater span so I would either make new centre panels from card (as on my original conversion), or use pieces cut from a second Airfix BE 2c kit. The Lewis machine gun, wheels, struts and propellor could all be taken from the Aifix kit. The remaining parts would have to be scratch built as per the build log, unless that is you can find an Aeroclub Beardmore engine - another rare item these days. The FE 2b was designed and built at the Royal Aircraft Factory in 1915 in response to a request from the War Office for a "gun carrier" for armed reconniassance, escort and pursuit. The prototype flew in March 1915 buty problems in supplying engines meant that the first order for 12 machines was not completed until the autumn of that year. Later the type was only supplied slowly because of the shortage of engines. However it quickly proved to be superior to the Fokker monoplanes that were causing heavy casualties among the BE 2c reconnaissance squadrons, and the type helped to achieve air superiority (with the DH 2 and Nieuport 11) for the Allies during the summer of 1916. Even after the introduction of the early Albatros fighters in September 1916 the type could hold its own in the hands of a good crew: von Richtofen was famously hit by a bullet from his own side when he was involved in a dogfight with these machines, and German pilots Schaefer and Ulmer were shot down by gunners in this type. The problem for the RFC was that by 1917 the type was obsolete but was kept in service as an escort because there were no suitable replacements. After it had been withdrawn from daylight sorties it continued to be used as a night bomber until the end of the war. Early FE 2b's had a complicated oleo tricycle undercarriage: this was modified in the filed to a simpler V and later replaced on production machines by an even simpler V. The type was deployed against Zeppelins in the UK but its slow rate of climb and poor ceiling made it unsuitable in this role. In all over 2000 of the type were built and it served in a wide variety of roles. It has had a bad press in the past from those who looked at it from the comfort of armchairs and noted the high losses suffered in 1917 when the type should have been withdrawn. In reality it was a good design for its time being strong, relatively easy to fly, and able to compete well against contemporary types: its rapid obsolescence reflected the pressures of war, not the deficiencies of the design itself or the crews who operated it. I built the engine using card, rod and stretched sprue and based it on drawings in DataFile No 147 and photographs of the engine from Viling's WNW build on this site and the WNW website. I apologise for the small images but hopefully they will be useful to others. This is the engine from the right side: This is the engine from the left side: These photos show the engine installed in the nacelle before I put the top wing on to the model. All markings except the serial were hand painted and the model is rigged with 40 SWG rolled copper wire. It represents an early machine operated by 11 Squadron RFC at Isel-le-Hameau in September 1916. P
  23. Thanks all for the kind remarks. This was one of my earlier attempts after my return to modelling so there are some elements which I would tackle slightly differently today iof I were to do this again. We live and learn (well I hope that I do!) Meatbox: there is a Formaplane vacuform kit but it is probably getting a bit rare now and besides you may not like vacuforms (I do not). Stevehed has written an excellent build log for it on this site and Airfix Tribute Forum. P
  24. That will be an interesting addition to the build. I have been thinking of scratch building one of those recently - not the floatplane though. P
  25. From what I can see that s a super Spad! Looking forward to the RFI photos. P