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.

dahut

Members
  • Content count

    1,953
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2 Neutral

About dahut

  • Rank
    Pedaling like mad!
  • Birthday 05/06/57

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Interests
    Marmite<br />Cat Stevens<br />"Godzilla," by Blue Oyster Cult<br />Tea<br />WWII, Cold War aircraft and armor. <br />Bicycles

Recent Profile Visitors

3,042 profile views
  1. You are completely right - it is certainly easier to omit them. Actually, I think your explanation is probably on the mark... the makers simply do not want to be arsed with them.
  2. duplicate
  3. If they are prominent and deployed as often as not, then yes. Okay, the Me-262 slats could be locked closed... but they could also just as readily be open depending on the moment in time you are depicting. Im no Mustang expert, but if it was common to see the flaps deployed on the ground then, yeah, the option should be included. Particularly in the big money, high detail kits of today. Thats not a stretch.
  4. Well sure. Just think of the immense and even immeasurable detail kits are treated to today. Omitting the slats because they might be too complex isn't much of a dodge. ESCI was doing detail in 1/72, 25 years ago, that is still impressive. But we can't have slats on a new tool 1/48 Me-262? I'm late coming to this party; the details and nuances of the Me-262 are new to me. I don't own four distinct tomes on the thing, and have really only been aware of it. Microscopic detail on the matter has never been part of my repertoire. So this slat business was a revelation. So imagine my surprise to learn how prominent these slats were on the real thing, and that no one has ever gotten them right or offered them as an option in a kit box. I called it a BIG error in the beginning and was chided for using hyperbole. I'm thinking now I wasn't far off.
  5. From what I can tell, Jennings, the Me-262 slats were counterbalanced and spring loaded. They would handily fall into the open position on the ground, barring any reason not to. But they could also be rather easily pushed back into retracted position by attendant ground crew and locked there. Im guessing as part of pre-flight routine, they were opened and allowed to function normally, i.e., automatically. This explains the videos Ive seen of the fully restored model and the deployed slats during pre-flight run-up. Its also why I asked here, among the cognoscenti. On a personal note, I remain mystified how a kit maker would overlook this feature, even with all the fine explanations. It is almost too prominent to miss, IMHO.
  6. Alright, well... it's not a BIG error in that case. From the few things I knew, it appeared that way. Locks for the slats seemed the most likely thing. I was a little surprised the first time I did see it, to think the slats would remain deployed on the ground. Glad that's sorted. Thanks all.
  7. Well thats a nice bit of news....
  8. I was recently intrigued to note the Me-262 was "slats down" when on the ground. With further research, it is obvious - it used automatic slats, which retracted only when the plane reached sufficient airspeed. Coming late to this realization, Im surprised to learn that even the mighty Tamiya ME-262 does not include these prominent dropped slats. Ditto for the newer Hobby Boss kit and the cranky Dragon Schwalbe left them off, as well. It looks like buying resin correction parts, scratch building or simply overlooking this feature are my options. Does that about sum it up?
  9. Something Ive done with satin finishes is to polish it. Using a T-shirt or fine poly material, I simply rubbed the flat or satin finish down to a sleeker surface. You might want to give that a try.
  10. Id have to concur that "rusty" is the appropriate color.
  11. I thought it was interesting that TinTin's tank carried the full complement of engineering tools: shovel, axe, sledgehammer and pickaxe. I didnt see a cable cutter, but certainly TinTin would not leave that out of his kit. I was also piqued to see the rotating antenna atop the searchlight thingie on the turret.
  12. Great job on a great kit.
  13. Some very nice paint work, right there. Such effort in the tiny 1/72 scale always pleases me.
  14. And I forgot to add what a great job you've done of finishing that model. Sorry.... Nice work. But I wonder if the color list isn't askew... "Xtracrylix XA1207 RLM75 Grau Violett Xtracrylix XA1208 RLM76 Lichtblau Underside Revell Aqua 36149 Hellblau" A quick search of the Net offers this information: "There were two official camouflage schemes specified for the Me 262. 1. The first, or 'early scheme,' utilized the then standard colors of 74/75/76, or Grey green/grey violet/light blue. 2. The "late-war" Me 262 camouflage scheme issued on 26 September 1944, which featured a revised splinter pattern in the late-war colors of 81/82/76, or Brown violet/bright green/light blue. Your Schwalbe appears to be painted in the early scheme, gray violet on the top, and sky blue ("hellblau") on the bottom. But the other top color appears to be the appropriate greenish color, and does not look much like "lichtblau" (light blue). Am I missing something?