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. :)

Pilot Officer Prune

Members
  • Content count

    54
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

220 Excellent

About Pilot Officer Prune

  • Rank
    New Member
  • Birthday 31/10/46

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://www.lincolnmodelclub.co.uk
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Lincoln, UK

Recent Profile Visitors

1,794 profile views
  1. Building the Yak 28 Firebar ( Bobcat )- vague instructions

    Are you sure it's a Brewer? As far as I know, only the Firebar has been released thus far. I confess that I omitted the parts you mention from my Firebar build, and I installed the undercarriage legs as the instructions suggested, although I left off the wheels until much later. Ian
  2. Airfix Buccaneer S.Mk.2, 1/48

    Thanks for the inspiration, Sean. I'm in the clamping/gluing,scraping/filling/sanding cycle with mine at the moment. You've given me strength to carry on!
  3. 1/48 Sukhoi Su-11 "Fishpot"

    I have always been fascinated by those strange Soviet aircraft, that appeared only as blurred images in the days of my youth. I have recently been intrigued by Spencer Pollard's explanation of how he approaches natural metal finishes. I therefore decided to 'give it a go'. This is Trumpeter's 1/48th Sukhoi Su-11 "Fishpot". It's OOB, except for some stencilling on the 'Anab' missiles, masking tape belts, and a bit of 'creative gizmology' under the canopy. It took eight days, start to finish, devoting a couple of hours a day. Is it accurate? I don 't know - and, to be honest, I don't really care. It looks like I hoped it would. TLAR! Enjoy!
  4. This is the Tan Model kit, built strictly OOB - no aftermarket, no scratch-building, no detailing. Heck, I even used the kit decals! All in all, a much more pleasant experience than I had anticipated. Such minor glitches as I encountered were of my doing - the kit is lovely. Enjoy . . . Keep bashing the plastic!
  5. Post war 10" 1/72 scale RAF/RN Serial decals query

    Just a tip - if you,re using Word, or any other DTP/WP program, each 'point' in print size equates to 1/72 of an inch. Thus, 10 pt lettering will give you 10" serials in 1/72 scale (and 15 pt will give you 10" serials in 1/48). Suitable fonts are downloadable here. HTH
  6. It must be a Lincolnshire thing! Mine also arrived this morning, hassle- and extra charge- free, and looking every bit as good as I hoped. I predict an imminent orgy of Alclad!
  7. "For want of a nail . . ."

    In 1946, the Air Ministry and the Admiralty issued the specifications F.44/46 and N.40/46 for a twin-engined, two-seat long range fighter. De Havilland responded with their de Havilland 110, and Gloster with their GA.5. The RAF expressed an interest in the de Havilland project, and a number of prototypes were ordered. The Navy rejected both proposals, and opted for an enhanced Sea Venom. Gloster lobbied successfully, and prototypes of their tailed delta design were also ordered, even though the de Havilland design seemed more promising. By 1951, the dH 110 was well into its test programme, regularly flying supersonically, while the GA.5 (Javelin) was plagued by flutter and other aerodynamic problems. Then, at the Farnborough Air Show on 6th September 1952, the dH 110 prototype WG236 broke up in transonic flight, with the engines and forward fuselage ploughing into the crowd, killing the crew and 29 spectators, and severely injuring more than 60 others. The RAF switched its attentions to the Javelin, and four years later, the Navy accepted a navalised dH 110 as the Sea Vixen. But what if . . . If John Derry had flown his display without incident, the Air Ministry’s choice may well have alighted on the de Havilland design. It was aerodynamically superior to the Javelin, which was thick-winged and draggy, with inadequate pitch control and engines buried so deeply in the fuselage that power losses in the intakes and exhausts emasculated them. The Vixen, on the other hand, was aerodynamically cleaner, with a relatively thin wing, and offered potential advantages in range, speed and acceleration. It was also cleared for use of the Firestreak and Red Top Missile much earlier than was the Javelin. If the RAF had gone with the Vixen, by 1970 they might have ended up with this: de Havilland Vixen F(AW).5, 11 Sqn, RAF, Geilenkirchen, 1970. Enjoy! Ian
  8. RAF Sabre F4

    Kiwi Resin (http://www.kiwiresin.com) do a F-86A conversion with the requisite wing mods, and it's entirely possible that Dave (Lockhead) would consider letting you buy just the wing parts. Apart from the increasingly rare Cutting Edge set, there used to be one from Scobiedo Productions, but I haven't seen it for ages. You can use the wings from Revell/Monogram's F-86D, but be warned that the sweep angles don't match! Good Luck! Ian
  9. Here is the recent Airfix 1/48th Meteor F.8 in target-towing colours, as seen at RAF Sylt in the late '50's. Decals are from the excellent Xtradecal sheet, and paint from Colourcoats, Humbrol and Mr Paint. It's a lovely kit to build, but beware of a very fragile windscreen (you may notice the crack in mine). I have a replacement ordered, but it's currently unavailable. Thanks for looking, Ian
  10. A sadly retrograde step, I fear. Once again, this site seems to strive to be less than it might be . . .
  11. So, I read the books, trawl the web, look at the photographs, gather and print the necessary decals, and start the model. It goes quite smoothly (with one noticeable masking glitch), and at last it's finished. And as I'm admiring my handiwork, I get a chatty email from a friend who is modelling the same aeroplane, and who refers me to the photo below : Now I'm sure that I had already seen that picture, but I had completely missed the oversize fuselage roundel! So now I have a dilemma, which I think I'll deal with by 'sleeping on it' for a while, after which I may choose to 'revise' the rear fuselage. In the meantime, here is my (not terribly accurate) model of L7005, the most successful Defiant of all Thanks for looking, Ian
  12. Kits of Spitfire marks in 1/48

    Just such a spreadsheet is in preparation, via the Spitfire SIG of IPMS/UK. I had hoped to have it complete and online by this year's SMW, but life - in the form of a lengthy illness - got in the way. I'll post on here when it finally sees the light of day. Ian (Spitfire SIG Leader)
  13. Here is the venerable Eduard 1/48th Tempest V, converted to a Tempest Mk.II, using Airwaves' equally ancient resin conversion and AlleyCat's rear fuselage correction. I also added SAC's metal u/c legs, to overcome the Eduard kit's inherent wobbles, and Barracuda's excellent resin wheels. Paint by Tamiya and decals by Model Alliance. This model was started nearly twenty years ago - I bought the Mk.II conversion from ED Models on the way home from an IPMS AGM at Ladywood (and now I'm showing my age!) - but I dragged it out of the oubliette beneath my bench and 'cracked on'! It's a 16 Sqn machine, based at Fassberg in 1947, and the model should be appearing in the RAF Germany SIG display at this year's shows. Enjoy . . .
  14. Mosquito B.XVI

    Assuming that you're working in 1/48th, Freightdog have this sheet on offer at the moment. http://www.freightdogmodels.co.uk/images/FSD48006X.jpg
  15. New 1/48th Airfix Hurricane

    Troy Smith wrote . . . ". . . and one I keep seeing, the roundels are too far outboard. the centre of the roundel is 80 inches inboard from the wingtip according to the Ducimus Camo diagram. As the roundel is 49", the edge should be 55.5" from tip. In 1/48th this is near as dammit 30mm, or just align on aileron and panel line. " I retrieved the Hurricane from its shelf, where it awaits weathering and antenna wire, and did some measuring. The centres of the upper roundels are, as accurately as I can measure, one and five eighths of an inch from the tip, which equates to 78" full size, so my error was to place them just about a millimetre too far outboard. I'll live with that! Ian
×