Jump to content
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. :)

Dave Swindell

Gold Member
  • Content count

    1,011
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

451 Excellent

About Dave Swindell

  • Rank
    Very Obsessed Member

Contact Methods

  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Cumbria

Recent Profile Visitors

2,896 profile views
  1. Seventy Second Scale Modeller magazine??

    48SM & 72SM merged to become Aircraft Modeller International - AMI, not SAM. Neil Robinson moved to take over as editor at SAM, AMI was edited by Ian Hartup who had previously assisted Neil with 48SM and 72SM.
  2. KP/AZ central discussion, questions & answers

    Yes, far too small to be an operational practicality.
  3. CMS Colombo Express - 1/700 by Revell

    There's a bit more to it than just weight distribution & balance. I know @elmarriachi has just placed the container blocks in position, but the stacks towards the front of the ship are too high, there are various rules governing line of sight from the bridge, stack them too high at the front and you can't see anything for miles in front. Viewed from the side the container stacks will slope down from the bridge deck towards the bow. The kit container blocks depict the maximum number of containers, the stacks can be lower than these but never higher. Container loading and destination port can affect stowage position, gantry cranes can't work adjacent stacks, only alternate stacks, so to maximise efficiency and number of working cranes alternate stacks will be loaded/discharged in port A and the stacks inbetween will be loaded/discharged in port B. Between ports it's quite common to see empty bays with fully loaded stacks in between. There's lots of other considerations, eg loaded Reefer containers have to be adjacent to a reefer power outlet on board, and dangerous goods cargos have to be segregated, but most of these you wouldn't be able to tell looking at the real ship, let alone a 1:700 model. The biggest improvement for a realistic looking deck cargo stack would be painting the containers to represent the numerous different carriers and lease company container liveries. There's loads of photo's on line of the ship to see whose containers were carried. White Ensign did some decals for a few company containers.
  4. KP/AZ central discussion, questions & answers

    Oooh yes please! Probably the only extant British Experimental that hasn't been kitted in any form?
  5. Vosper MTB 234 -1/72

    Nicely done Andrew, interesting way of displaying it with the bow coming off the sea base!
  6. Mosquito B.IV March 1943 radio / navigation equipment

    On the same site there's this photo of DZ313, looks like on an air test prior to delivery. Rear clear wingtip lights can be seen, as well as the double aerial lead to the port tailplane and the fin.
  7. Mosquito B.IV March 1943 radio / navigation equipment

    Nice find Elger. I'd agree with you on the lights, if you zoom in on the stbd wingtip of "G" the closest, you can make out the panel and fasteners in the position of the rear facing wingtip light - either the original painted over or replacement cover, also painted.
  8. Photobucket fix

    Still working for me.....
  9. IPMS UK / Scale Model World email contact?

    That's what I suspected, hopefully to be resolved shortly...
  10. No Expert on the Merlin, but looks like a good job to me! Majority vote?
  11. IPMS UK / Scale Model World email contact?

    Advice from the IPMS Uk Webmaster is to use President/TAS/UKLO/etc@ipmsuk.org instead of the @ipmsuk.co.uk address for urgent matters until this issue is resolved.
  12. All the Hurricane questions you want to ask here

    I'd say different colour - possibly primer or fresh paint.
  13. IPMS UK / Scale Model World email contact?

    Not just the mail server, http://www.ipmsuk.co.uk/is reported as down for everyone.
  14. Mosquito B.IV March 1943 radio / navigation equipment

    There's not many photo's of 139 Sqn Mosquito's whilst they were with 2 Group at Marham. Transfer from 2 Group to 8 Group was on 31st May 43, the squadron then moved to Wyton on 4th July 43. Both this photo:- and the photo at the head of this page show a line up of 139 Sqn Mosquitos at Marham, I think they are actually the same lineup, and the date is quoted as 12th March 43. As they have the external strengthening strake on the stbd aft fuselage introduced at the end of 42, this date is feasible. The closest aircraft is XD*G, and as per the above link the serial is quoted as DZ421, but DZ421 is also atributed to G-Bar, so this may in fact be an earlier G for which DZ421 was a replacement. Note the DF loop inside the aft canopy, I wouldn't expect this to be retained if G was fitted. All have the aerial mast and appear to have twin aerials to fin and port tailplane, so I would say R.1155 / T.1154 setup. The other photo I've found appears in the Aeroplane Icons Mosquito bookazine page 66 and shows DZ464 XD*C and, I think, XD*M. I can't find this photo on the net, but it was taken before May 21st 43 (when DZ464 was lost) and most likely after the above photo's as the grass appears to be much longer (ie it's growing, so late April/May 43. Neither aircraft has the aerial mast, and I can't make out any whip aerial (but the resolution could be not good enough for it to show) so these two aircraft most likely didn't have R.1155 / T.1154 and may have had Gee. The Berlin raid on the 20/21 April was given the go-ahead due to a full moon and clear skies to assist navigation and target identification ( Mosquito Bomber/Fighter-Bomber Units 1942-45; Bowman, M. W., page 21 has a short account of the raid by Charles Patterson, one of the pilots, there's also the photo of XD*C on p 18), this would suggest they weren't using Gee. I've not found any photo's of DZ386 XD-H and there's no reference to one on the Mossie.org production list On balance I think it more likely that DZ386 had R.1155 / T.1154 and a D/F loop rather than having been converted for Gee when it crashed. DZ386 was the first air to air Mosquito bomber loss of the war. A few links you may or may not be aware of:- Short history of 139(Jamaica) sqn Mosquito era A bit about Lothar Linke who shot DZ386 down W/C Shand & P/O Handley's final resting place
  15. Mosquito B.IV March 1943 radio / navigation equipment

    Elger, I've been checking various Mosquito books for 139 Sqn photo's - After forming up with the Mosquitio's photos show the aerial mast with twin aerials to the fin and port tailplane, this would tally with R.1155 / T.1154 setup. Later photos around May 43 (if dated correctly) don't show the aerial mast, removal of this would be indicative of fitting Gee. The Gee aerial would be a large whip aerial in the same place as the aerial mast, or on the rear canopy, or internally in the rear fuselage. The photos show DZ serial aircraft, which suggest the change was made on squadron some time prior to May 43. If you've got a photo of the aircraft you want to model without the aerial mast I'd say it's most likely to have been fitted with Gee. For a Gee setup you'll need a type 62 indicating unit behind the pilot, and angled towards the navigator, and a type R1355 Receiver on the port side of the rear shelf as shown here. Both R.1155 / T.1154 would have been removed to fit this, and most likely replaced with TR1133/TR1143 radio in the rear fuselage with a control box in the cockpit below the pilot's throttle box as per this NF 30. Other kit possibly fitted would be IFF, Air Position Indicator and Monica This drawing shows a common Gee/IFF setup. ARI 5083 is Gee, ABKI is IFF mk III.
×