Jump to content

spruecutter96

Gold Member
  • Posts

    3,583
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by spruecutter96

  1. Ochre? Corn? Wheat? Or (maybe) something a little more habit-forming..... Chris.
  2. You believe correctly, my friend. IIRC, only the Zvezda 1/48th kit reproduces the slanting fuselage configuration. Not wanting to be a smart-bottom, but the Trumpeter kit is 1/35th (not 1/32). Cheers. Chris.
  3. The video is indeed about some parts of RAF Spadeadam. I'd recommend playing the "Mission to an abandoned military aircraft graveyard" video. The Hind section is about 19:25 in to the video. Interesting to see that the helicopter is securely locked up, presumably to deter souvenir-hunters. Most of the other aircraft on site look like they've been stripped of anything that can be removed. Unfortunately, it doesn't look like the vid gives you any clues as to the colour of the upper surface of the rotors. Cheers. Chris.
  4. Hi, cherisy. That Northern name rings a bell, but my memory of the video is super-hazy. I was a bit sad to see the Hind leave the Duxford Conservation hangar, but it was pretty obvious they had no plans to do it up (too many other projects to get to, I guess). Good luck in discovering the right colours for the tops of the rotors. As you might well be aware, when the Soviets used the Hind in Afghanistan, the locals nicknamed it "The Devil's Chariot". The stories about what the Afghans would do to captured Hind crewmen are extremely unpleasant. The locals had very good reason to hate and fear the Russian gunships. Cheers. Chris.
  5. There used to be four Hinds in the UK. Now, as far as I know, it's down to three. Duxford's Mi-24 went to a museum in Texas, several years ago. The Midland Air Museum one is still on display, if looking a little "weather-worn" nowadays (not the museum's fault - they receive no money from any official-body to help their considerable preservation-efforts). If I remember correctly, the rotor-blades are stored on a pallet, behind the gunship. Obviously, there's the WSM example (easily the best-preserved one) and the troop-doors are left part-open (no admittance to the public, though, unless they have them fully-open on open-cockpit evenings). And the fourth is sitting on a radar-testing range up T'North and looking a bit sorry for itself (there's a Youtube video looking around the site, but this area is NOT officially open-to-the-public). It's very remote and in an MOD, restricted-access area. In watching the YT video, you get the impression that the chopper has been largely forgotten about. If you can find a copy of it, I would highly recommend the Wings & Wheels Publication book on the Hind. Full-colour photos of any part of the Hind you could want (and lots more, besides). Last time I saw a copy advertised, it was some serious Dollar. Very possibly out-of-print now. There's also a recent, follow-up volume by W&W Pubs, called something like "Late Model Hinds" - also well worth getting your hands on. Failing both of those, the AK Interactive Hind "magazine" is a great reference-source and a lot cheaper than the W&W books. It contains build-articles on 1/48th and 1/35th models, IIRC. Of course, if any folks know of any other Russian rotary-wing hardware hidden in the back of a dusty UK hangar, please let us know.... Cheers. Chris.
  6. It was cliched, but none of us can say "well, that never happened..." No-one knows. I can understand folks getting annoyed at this scene. At least an American production acknowledges that the British played a part in the war, even if it gives the impression it was a very small part. What mention did the British get in "Saving Private Ryan"? One very brief mention, saying that Monty was no where near as good as his legend suggested. Thanks a bunch, Hollywood scriptwriters! I think we all have a much better appreciation of the history of that tragic time. Cheers. Chris.
  7. As good as CGI has got after 25 years of development, I still think a lot of it looks pretty false and unrealistic. A good case in point? Most Marvel or DC superhero movies. Some of the shots look a little ridiculous, even given their "fantastic" situations. Have you ever noticed how many details on people seem to completely disappear in CGI fight-scenes. Folds in clothing? Nuances like different skin-tones, hair-details, smaller items? All that seems to just fly out of the window when the scrapping starts.... I appreciate it's a very old example, but have you ever looked at the agent who jumps onto the car-bonnet in the highway chase in Matrix 2? He looks AWFUL. What a good point of comparison? The first "Alien" movie. Made in 1979, on a budget of around $15 Million (which was considered on the high side then - oh, how times have changed!). With a few, minor exceptions, the Alien SFX shots work very well and are believable. Want to know why? Because they were real models, reflecting real light, in real studios. For my money, CGI is a pretty poor substitute for the "real" thing. Still, opinions, eh? Chris.
  8. I couldn't tell you why, but I'm leaning towards Mongolian. I am no expert, having said that. Chris.
  9. Good or bad? Well, this is the best we are ever likely to get, folks. I can't see Hollywood making another series based around WW2 bombing-missions, not after this one. It needed the clout and track-record of Spielberg and Hanks to get this one made. If a director of Peter Jackson's financial-repute couldn't get the money together for a re-make of the Dambusters, then another series looks very uncertain. The fact is that WW2 series are very much targeted at the older generations. For the modern "Yooth", the war happened WAY too long ago to be of any relevance in their lives (the latest made-up feud between utterly vacuous, fame-hungry "stars"..... well that's a very different matter, of course). Dear Lord, am I sounding like my Dad now? I'm looking forward to watching the series, but I ain't expecting Shakespeare In The Clouds . Cheers. Chris.
  10. Very much agreeing with you, Pete in Lincs. When I first bought the Tamiya saw, I thought it was huge. Then I tried it out. Despite it's size, it produces the finest, cleanest, most accurate cut in plastic and resin I've ever seen. It's a GREAT bit of kit and - I would say - a must-have item. Fifteen squids looks like a bit of a bargain, compared with a lot of the Far Eastern tools you see now. Cheers. Chris.
  11. Trumpeter make one in 1/32nd. I believe they're getting fairly rare now, but you see them on E-Bay from time to time. Cheers. Chris.
  12. I'm going to an airshow in Warwickshire at the end of May and an early-bird ticket has just cost me about £2 more than it would cost to attend the NEC event (not including the £5.00 discount for advanced car-park booking). From where I'm sitting, I think the airshow will offer more "bang for my buck". Other users mileage may vary.... Cheers. Chris.
  13. As much as I want to support any new model-show, in our current economic climate, the parking-fees and admission charge are likely to just kill this show. Maybe the model railway-enthusiast side of things will save the day. We'll know soon enough. Cheers. Chris.
  14. If I'm reading this right, I think the captions are swapped around. The top image is definitely the better of the two pictures. Cheers. Chris.
  15. Have to agree with Texan Tomcat, above. This is Telford level parking and admission-costs and I very much doubt it will have even a quarter of the level of model-making relevance as SMW. I have a feeling that I won't be going. Chris.
  16. Is that Greta Thundberg? Only kiddin'..... The painting is very effective, particularly the facial flesh-tones. Thank for sharing with us. Chris.
  17. You're a MUCH braver man than I, John. Good luck in your build. Didn't someone nick-name this the "Hopeless Diamond"? My memory on the project is more than a little hazy. Chris.
  18. It's not 50 years old yet, but in my very humble opinion, they should keep the A-10 for as long as they can. I've read that the US Air-Force brass HATES the airframe and is very keen to retire it. The troops on the ground couldn't care less about the F-35's sophistication - they want an aircraft that can hang around for a long time and ruin their adversary's entire day. Chris.
  19. Your average journo wouldn't know a Sea King if it landed on their head! Unfortunately, we're living in an age where many news-stories are written by clueless journalists, who spend five minutes researching on Wikipedia and then author some very inaccurate articles, riddled with obvious (to us, anyway) mistakes. Having said that, from what I've seen of many AI-generated "news" articles, having a human-generated version is MUCH better, warts and all. Cheers. Chris.
  20. That's true.... up to a point. In Vietnam, the early Sidewinders and Sparrows proved VERY unreliable - often either failing to fire or completely losing their target-lock after launch. Also, the 'Nam made it very obvious that dog-fighters really needed a good gun (hence the F-4E). The technology has moved on hugely since then. Now, if your main radar can see your adversary - in theory, at least - you can engage him at tens of miles and might never have to go toe-to-toe. I believe that true dog-fighting is now considered a "last resort" measure, but the skills still have to be taught to a high degree. I was reading about the Allied air-forces kills in the Second Gulf War a while ago. For a large number of reasons, turn-and-burn fights were the exception, rather than the rule. Cheers. Chris.
×
×
  • Create New...