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. :)


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 10/10/2019 in all areas

  1. 9 points
    Here is the last of my builds, the Gloster Meteor F Mk IV. Not the prettiest of planes, it was developed from the wartime Meteor F Mk III which was itself an improved version of the Meteor F Mk I, the RAF's first operational jet fighter. The Mk I was powered by a production version of the Power Jets/Whittle engine and was slower than many contemporary piston engined fighters, so after a short run was replaced by the Mk III with more powerful engines. Even then the Meteor was barely faster than the Tempest and Spitfire XIV, However jet engine development gathered pace rapidly and the post war Mk IV was nearly 100 mph faster. Unfortunately this over-stressed the already suspect wing, so after a few had been produced the wing was clipped to relieve the stress. The Frog kit was an easy enough build and the only modification I made was to graft on more accurate engine intakes from an Xtrakit ex MPM Meteor F8 kit, replace the pitot tube, and add a whip aerial. For those of you who have been following my various builds, as suggested in one of my notorious rants I have photographed the Meteor on top of my ruddy garden wall that was built concurrent with this GB and became a topic of such interest that it also ended up in the gallery, together with my "Hairy Hooligans". Still waiting for some dry weather to paint it! I would like to thank the organisers of this build for their hard work and support, together with all who have participated, either building kits or by making informative and encouraging comments. This is my first GB and it has been an interesting and amusing experience. See you around, or as we say in Yorkhire - "Ah'll sithee". Pete
  2. 6 points
    A man died today when he fell into a large vat of coffee at a local factory. His wife told reporters that he did not suffer, it was instant.
  3. 6 points
    Copper nitrate: Policemans shift pay. Acoustic: What a Scottish farmer uses to control his cattle.
  4. 5 points
    I want to keep the bird rather clean - but still wanted to practice some weathering. I thought the extra fuel tanks would make good candidate for some weathering. I painted silver first, clear coat on top. Then a layer of Vallejo chipping medium and painted black on top. I filled the paintbrush with some thinner and blasted some parts of the tanks with it, agitated it some more with a brush and then blasted some air at very close distance to 'peel' the paint of. Repeated until I was happy with the result. This was the end result: On to the decals, which had took a turn for the worse, some of them looked like this: I did not made them smooth out 100% - but luckily I got most of it out with Micro Sol. Decaling on the way! It looks happy! Decals are done.
  5. 5 points
    In my humble opinion - absolutely and totally not. Aircraft generally do not have dark lines where the panels meet. Surfaces are relatively smooth and panels are close butted, overlapped or whatever to reduce any gaps. Panel washes on aircraft models are most unrealistic, and a modelling fashion accessory. But each to his own. If you want to emphasise something that at say 1/72 or 1/48 scale should hardly be seen, go ahead, it's your model.
  6. 5 points
    Why? Heinkel certainly didn’t apply a panel line wash when they built the real aeroplane, the panels of which would either be lapped, or butted together if they met over a major structural member or a doubler plate. In the first case you’d see a shadow which, obviously, would vary with lighting conditions rather than appearing as a permanent fixture (as a wash is) and in the second any gap on the full sized aeroplane would be narrower than the panel line on your model. Most ‘219s didn’t survive long enough to accumulate vast quantities of crud and grot so, apart from exhaust staining, gun blast residues and mud or dirty water thrown up from contaminated runway or taxiway surfaces they’d be reasonably clean. I know it’s a museum exhibit but have a look at any images you can find of the only surviving ‘219 in America and see how conspicuous the panel joints are. I also know that it’s your model, but I’d suggest that “less is more” and that any wash is a slightly darkened (or lightened for black areas) mix of the base camouflage colour and not applied to every panel line, stick to those where grot can be seen to accumulate or frequently-removed access panels.
  7. 4 points
    Hello Friends! Revell Spit Mk-IIa in 1/32. .......I should have started here with Spit...... Made new propeller blades and spinner, as ROTOL. Enjoy watching.
  8. 4 points
    I've just been reading RAF Flying Review for September 1958 which was given to me by a friend. Some great articles and the job vacancies for Policemen in Nyasaland etc took me back a bit but what caught my eye were the old model aircraft adverts. I obviously know Airfix and Revell and remember Eagle models but the others didn't ring a bell, anyone know more about Busch or Lincoln/Hawk? Anyway I took a few snaps for your reminiscences. If this is in the wrong forum I trust the mods will move, although I guessed this was the most appropriate.
  9. 4 points
    You can put any sane rational stable person into a van and a large percentage turn out to be suicidel nuts....
  10. 4 points
    Hello folks I am quite happy that Airfix released an FAA Bucc' first as the Royal Navy had it first. I have been waiting for 40 years for a state of the art 1/72 scale FAA kit to appear. Gooney Fan
  11. 4 points
    Zap a Gap is indeed a brand of CA. They have all manner of formulations including accelerator and debonder. I'd be VERY careful with E6000. I used it once to glue some nose weight in place and it melted the fuselage--lots of filling followed lots of cussing. As @Corsairfoxfourunclenoted, CA is not a good choice for gluing plastic parts to each other. Leave that stuff for PE or other materials. My goto glue for plastic is Tamiya Thin. The first and most important thing when bonding parts is to dry fit and make sure you have perfectly mating parts. A sheet of glass with abrasive paper grit-side up will give you a good tool to ensure true mating surfaces, especially for large parts. Rigid sanding blocks can help on the male side when alignment pins are present. Do this work carefully so you don't remove too much material. When gluing parts with Tamiya Thin, mate the parts first and then apply the glue with the applicator. Hold the part until the glue evaporates and sets. DO NOT touch the joint until you're sure the glue is dry. It sets quickly so only a little patience is needed. For a large part, start at one end and work your way around the part. Before moving to the next section, hold the parts until the joint sets. If you still have any gaps despite your best efforts, it's best to fill through gaps with plastic. Thin Evergreen strips work well for this. Cut a suitably sized strip to length, push into the gap, apply Tamiya Thin, and let it dry. Once it's dry you can trim any excess plastic still standing proud. Surface gaps can be filled with your favorite filler. I like Tamiya Fine Putty. You might prefer something else, like a water soluble putty. A trick to using putty is to use its solvent to eliminate excess putty instead of sanding it down, which risks damaging surface detail. I use Mr Thinner as a solvent for Tamiya putty. Dip a cotton bud in the the solvent and rub the excess putty with the swab. It will take some swabbing, but the excess putty will eventually come off. Be careful when you see it start to come off and you may not need any final sanding. If you do sand, use masking tape to protect areas not to be sanded. HTH -- dnl
  12. 4 points
    And she’s done fellas - hurrah! I’ll upload some shots to the gallery
  13. 3 points
    Thanks John, appreciate the comments. They are really fiddly but I agree they do look good in the end. Have to admit I didn't think about threading when the buckles were on the fret More photos of progress. She will be getting a flat coat tonight and apart from the cowling, exhausts and canopy were done!
  14. 3 points
    Looking good! Pactra and Polly Scale, eh? I didn't know you were an archaeologist too! Cheers, Bill
  15. 3 points
    Have you started modelling scenery out of mashed potato yet though?
  16. 3 points
    Fuselage together and the wings are on. The builds gone together perfectly so far other than a bit of a lack of locating tabs for the fuselage halfs. Maybe I was too rushed in my approach but definately felt like Eduard could have done better here, I ended up with a small step on nearly all the joins. Cleaned up with some sanding and Mr Surfacer. One area that did fit exceptionally well was the main wing to the fuselage near perfect join. And the cockpit instrument panel and coaming are a perfect fit, not even going to bother with any cement.
  17. 3 points
    My technique varies depending on the type of seam. If it's a simple, well-engineered styrene kit I'll use Tamiya extra thin, and squeeze a bead of liquid plastic out as I go along, then sand it back, polishing it to a shine to spot any blemishes. If it's resin or a short-run kit with obvious gaps and/or twist/distortion I'll use super glue that I apply along the slightly open fuselage parts with the tip/edge of a #11 scalpel blade, going round the join in sections to avoid getting crossed up and creating a reet mess. Sometimes I'll use CA as a filler if there's no detail to obliterate next to the seam, especially if it's a resin kit. With styrene, I'm more likely to use Tamiya Basic putty, smearing it on thinly with a metal modelling tool. Again, I polish the finished article back to shiny to test how it looks, checking it at different angles for finish. Sometimes I'll wipe a little CA over the Tamiya putty or any surface that will absorb a bit of paint, and give a slightly different look and texture, polishing it smooth once cured, When I've got a nice natural seam such as at the wing root, I'll use the aforementioned Vallejo Masilla Plastica water soluble putty with the fine applicator. Squirt it carefully into the line and wipe it away with a finger or cotton bud, being careful not to use water until it has firmed up, as this will induce slump in the finish on occasion. Any excess putty can be scraped out of panel lines with a cocktail stick or scribing tool. It's also good for harmonising panel lines and join lines that are too deep compared to the others. That's all starting to sound a little familiar to me, and I suspect I've written all this out before
  18. 3 points
  19. 3 points
    If it helps you - there are far superior Brass parts out there for you - for my money , you are actually looking at Mushroom Vents - and you can get one part machined ones from Alliance Modelworks and if you want to make your life easier - https://store.spruebrothers.com/product_p/amwnw35077.htm show what I am talking about Alliance Modelworks do several types - I have used them before , on HMS Repulse and they worked a treat , the sample you show is NOT a Bollard give you an idea what they are like when fitted - see below if you want to see what Bollards are like - https://www.ebay.co.uk/i/273875115455?chn=ps&norover=1&mkevt=1&mkrid=710-134428-41853-0&mkcid=2&itemid=273875115455&targetid=800003223996&device=c&mktype=pla&googleloc=&poi=&campaignid=1505503898&mkgroupid=59698560202&rlsatarget=pla-800003223996&abcId=1139606&merchantid=6995734&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIrpvD1tiR5QIVDEPTCh0J1ws4EAQYBCABEgLChfD_BwE
  20. 3 points
    Morning folks,the RAF titles for the fuselage arrived today thanks to Paul.To get away from the standard airliner look I've filled the rear bank of windows as on the Endeavour the rear fuselage houses the communication,ECM and some classified equipment. Picture update tomorrow.Chris's superb VC-10 build will give you an idea of the planned scheme. https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235008243-raf-vc10-roden-conversion/
  21. 3 points
    Not much to report but some progress . . . . The engine went together well and it was a case of eliminating the joint seams . . . Windows totally disappeared following a touch of Mr Surfacer, just need to re-instate some rivet detail. I cut the existing tail turret position off as it was just to narrow . . . . Undercarriage in the process of being painted The main wings are glued together but I am considering altering the wing tips to give them a better shape appearance . . . . Thanks for looking in Ian
  22. 3 points
    I’m not sure quite what is happening here but it seems that @perdu is somehow involved. AW
  23. 3 points
    As someone with a scientific education and a deep interest in history I enjoy books where a fair degree of analytical thought is needed to appreciate them. The Battle of Britain in the Modern Age, 1965–2020 is one of them. I have included (in italics) a few excerpts from the book for the purposes of illustration and review. Garry Campion is an academic historian whose books offer a different perspective on the Battle of Britain, based upon research and writing about propaganda, but also the way in which the Battle has evolved as a major event in British history since 1940. Whilst there has been a significant historical focus upon the day-to-day air battles, aircraft, losses, pilots and commanders, there has been less attention to how the narrative of the Battle. as it is understood today, evolved through both official and popular efforts to commemorate it. He argues that the initial postwar narrative was conducted by the British government British wartime propaganda projected national exceptionalism through its resilience (Dunkirk, the Battle of Britain, the Blitz, ‘backs to the wall’, ‘Britain alone}’; armed forces (especially the Few); aircraft (the Spitfire and Lancaster continue to be celebrated); and technology (particularly radar, and from 1974 when it was first revealed, the Enigma codebreaking at Bletchley Park). It was also about fighting and prevailing in a ‘good fight’, where moral ambiguity was not a factor. but after about 1965 the government stepped back (to emphasise the contribution of “The Many” rather than “The Few”) and private industry has taken up the cause, through many ways but notably movies – this period has witnessed the release of several films focused on aspects of Britain’s finest hour in 1940: Dunkirk (July 2017); Darkest Hour (January 2018); Spitfire (July 2018); and Hurricane (September 2018). One of the most interesting aspects of the book is the contention that events of 1940 still influence today. One may agree or disagree with him but he brings a clear light to the events and consequences. Whilst other nations are proud of and celebrate their war records—for instance the United States, Poland, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand—few nations remain so wedded to this as part of their sense of national identity, and certainly to the extent that it arguably influences decisions about future economic and political relationships. (I think if he looked at postwar Australian foreign policy more he may delete Australia from that list and decide it was more like Britain). Without taking sides he gives a rational view of the current divide of thinking about British foreign policy. Because Britain did not suffer to the extent that many countries and peoples did, many of its citizens do not consider that close EU integration is essential to national security; evidently, continental Europeans take a different view, not least in France, Germany, and the many nations which suffered under Nazi, or later Soviet, occupation. David Cameron’s disagreements in 2010 with the EU were to a degree framed by a perception of British exceptionalism in 1940, European leaders agreeing cautiously that the British are in fact different and should be treated as such. It is arguable that Britain’s decision to leave the EU in 2016 was also framed—certainly for older generations— by a nostalgic wish to return to an earlier, more glorious past, savouring a national identity and sense of unity generated by the Second World War. One consequence has been a generational divide between those on the one hand who see their future as part of the wider EU, and for whom the Battle and Second World War are distant historical events; and on the other, those who believe that the clock can be reset to the 1940s and 1950s, and certainly to a time before Britain joined the EEC in 1973. It is an interesting, thought-provoking and well argued book.
  24. 2 points
    Now I can't verify this, as SWMBO read it online, but according to what she read, a bunch from the anti meat offshoot were caught having their lunch in....... wait for it......Mcdonalds!! IF, it's true, there's a slight whiff of hypocrisy there. John.
  25. 2 points
    Too true. My niece started to make a bat out of paper mache, with a Metal pipe running through it. Hate to think what trouble that would cause. Matt
  26. 2 points
    Eye Shadow sponges - £1 for 100 from China... ...perfect for cleaning up pin washes - honestly
  27. 2 points
    Thanks Adam! Yes, just one at Monino, resurrected from a Siberian bog in the 80s i think..
  28. 2 points
    Bomb bay. What they used to call Mumbai. Represent. A dislike of salesmen.
  29. 2 points
    Hi Tony, Just got my old Emily down and had a look at it. Given my skills or lack thereof when I built it in around 1970, the fuselage joint is not that bad. Yes the wing sits a mil or so low and I should have adjusted the tabs/slots, and the horizontal tail to fuselage joint needed easing a bit but if I were to build it today it should be possible to make it fit pretty well with only a small amount of filler. I can only assume that the one you have got is either from a worn or bad mould, or has distorted with age. I had to do a fair bit of tweaking on the Shackleton as well as neither the wings not the stabs wanted to fit - either the tabs were too big or the slots too small (or both) and the fuselage was distorted. I am not clear if it was actually moulded by Frog, or more probably by Hasegawa and then re-boxed. If the latter mine could be from a mould that was about 3 years old and yours could be when it was up to 4 years older I suppose, assuming Frog cancelled the sales agreement in around 1974. Incidentally the new Hasegawa release is a H8K1 or Type 2 Model 11 - the earlier version. The 2019 release is the normal version of the Model 11 and the 2018 is the "VIP Transport" version which presumably means it is the first prototype which ended up as a transport - all the other "proper" transports were H8K2-L according to Francillon. The Model 12 had more powerful engines in modified nacelles and a modified tail, with some minor armament changes compared with the Model 11 apparently. Pete
  30. 2 points
    Actually, that isn't really a big issue, as the nose wheel on the F9F could caster 180 degrees while being spotted on deck, and there are photos that show this. BTW @Sturmovik, von Werra's 109 is my favorite early E scheme- thanks for doing it- can't wait to see the finished product! Mike
  31. 2 points
    Dave, Ian, we need that groan icon NOW!
  32. 2 points
    Realy interesting choice. there is a very handy review of the decal sheet here http://scalemodels.ru/articles/6726-obzor-1-72-Authentic-Decals-P-40-In-The-Russian-sky.html In Russian, but has the photos the P-40's the decals are of. the little winged logo under the tailplane is a PARM unit, a VVS repair unit, repaired, so repainted. The speculation is grey AMT-11 over blue AMT-7, which seem reasonable. Hope of interest?
  33. 2 points
    Completely agree Tony, I have one of these in the Stash, which I was going to build if @jean hadn't kept pestering me about wanting to build it himself ! I didn't realise it had so many build / quality issues, To be fair as this was a reboxed Hasegawa kit, I think Frog are guilt free on this one. I am keeping all my fingers crossed for a successful Emily build, I really wanted one of these to turn up in this GB, so I'm delighted you are trying to bring this one to the party. I'm willing to overlook the incorrect colour of Tractor under the circumstances Cheers Pat
  34. 1 point
    Hi Pals, a new model, this time it is a Stug IV Sdkfz.167 to 1/35 scale, from Italeri, which started in the WIP section, but which changed and was built to participate in the GB of PzIV of the forum and which ends today (if I'm not wrong). At first I was only going to make the kit, but seeing the GB works, I decided to give a base to the vehicle, and since it gave me time, there are a series of photos with the whole set. The kit has been somewhat complicated, because the fit is not good in fundamental pieces, and also added elements of PE, so I complicate more. In spite of everything it has served me to try and refine some skill, and the result is not all bad, I confess that I like how it was, although it can always be improved ... The base has been quite experimental, because it is the first one that I am serious about. I had components that I have accumulated over time in case they served me some day, and more or less "homemade" products, for the rest of the work. After trying enough, I was lucky with what I had, because there was no time to try anything else. I include a link for those interested, to the WIP section of the GB PZIv, and perhaps to the Dioramas / vignettes section. Thank you very much for watching and commenting as always. Cheers mates. Vehicule pics... Some pics in detail and closer... With the base... My apologies to anyone who thinks there are too many photos .... Cheers mates.
  35. 1 point
    They wouldn't have gone to the time and expense of scanning an aircraft they had no intention of releasing as a kit. But, if I were Airfix, I would do the Manchester before the Lincoln.
  36. 1 point
    Many thanks for that latest comment. I agree with your conclusions that at this late date it will be impossible to conclude who should be given credit for the shoot down. When you have three or four pilots contributing to this 'kill', who deserves credit? As far as doing a model of a Korean War Sea Fury involved in that historic engagement, a modeler appears to have a choice as to the markings and they wouldn't be wrong!
  37. 1 point
    Thx Dave, will have a longer look at them if I do get them I'll do a before and after with a small review maybe, thx again.
  38. 1 point
    Would love to go see it one day. Makes you wonder just how many aircraft from the eastern front are out there waiting to be discovered
  39. 1 point
  40. 1 point
    They were pretty good, they carrier film around the serial no"s was oversized but they went on easily
  41. 1 point
    The brace in the last picture leaves me wanting to emulate it. Lovely finish for such an iconic plane. Top work.
  42. 1 point
    Congratulations!!! Great work. I like the general weathering... it's perfect!
  43. 1 point
  44. 1 point
    I got it as a birthday present (in English) and I thought - yuck, Stephen Fry %$#&!. However it is a brilliant read, beautifully written, researched and crafted.
  45. 1 point
    I love collections and this one is superb! I'm afraid though that my favourite Spit is missing - a Spitfie Mk VIII. But that's made up for by the lovely early marks!
  46. 1 point
    You are absolutely right of course Mike and Kevin, thank you. But before we get carried away finding all the other preceding piston-engined vs jet-engined victories (we could add Arado 234 to the list...), I was quoting from a book written by a Royal Navy historian - who may have had a slightly more narrow view of the history of aerial warfare! The source is the nearest I've yet seen to an 'official' version of the events surrounding the shooting down of a MiG by Sea Furies that Brian was seeking (the excerpt from the 802 Sqn diary and Lieutenant Carmichael's own description). What I found interesting were the differences and inconsistencies between these accounts. A bit more Google searching reveals other articles on the subject, Paul Beaver's account and a very interesting article by Rowland White about the dog-fight and Brian Ellis' version of events. In the article by Paul Beaver there's a photo of 'Brian 'Schmoo' Ellis' Sea Fury'. This would have been taken after the MiG downing and after the black and white i/d stripes were removed from the wings and fuselage. You can see the fresh sky paint under the wings where they've been painted out, and that the ailerons were not painted (as Fundecals correctly portray in their instructions). And (I probably shouldn't have spotted this as it will cost me money) the port wheel is block treaded and the starboard diamond treaded. And (I'm sorry about this) some more 'Official' recognition of Brian Ellis' part in shooting down the MiG. This is from Navy News (published by the MOD) dated November 2017: 'In August 1952 a formation of RN Sea Furies and Fireflies was ‘bounced’ over Korea by Soviet-built MiG-15 jets. In the ensuing, very rapid, dogfight, one of the North Korean jets was shot down after 20mm cannon shells ripped into it. It’s the Fleet Air Arm’s sole ‘kill’ of an enemy jet by a propeller-driven fighter, justly celebrated and, for 65 years, attributed to flight leader Lt Peter ‘Hoagy’ Carmichael. But more than six decades later, credit for the kill is increasingly being attributed to then Sub Lt Brian ‘Smoo’ Ellis, who also engaged the MiG in the frantic encounter. Now aged 86 and one of the few surviving Naval aviators of Korean War vintage, he joined author, pilot and aviation historian Paul Beaver for a day’s celebration of the Sea Fury, during which he recounted what he remembered of the MiG encounter, before guests were treated to a display by the Sea Fury and Lt Cdr Götke. “I think ‘awesome’ is the word that comes to me,” he said as he got up close with the legendary British fighter once more. “What a privilege it was to spend your days flying these aircraft.”' Not definitive recognition (credit for the kill is increasingly being attributed to then Sub Lt Brian ‘Smoo’ Ellis) but its great that he finally is getting due credit. Can there ever be a conclusion? I doubt it. A quarter each would be OK as the 802 Sqn diarist said at the time. Cheers,
  47. 1 point
    I started the work on engne bay. The kit give engine bay separeted from chassis and the junction with chassis is really worst I "welded" the engine bay and i started to rebuilt the spar that was all wrong in the model (just notched the chassis) To fit the absorber, i opned the top mount sunspesion to have right access on ammo screw FInally i try a first check for the inside clearence between chassis and and engine.
  48. 1 point
    The last federal government(Harper) in Canada had his fingers in the Post trying to take it apart. Lots of regions and neighborhoods lost their door to door delivery. Also not a fan of the current Trudeau gov't but at least they kept the remaining door to door. It was only a matter of time before former Harper would have dismantled the post office. He was also getting the majority of Canadians to become anti union. of course some union people who moved up the chain became corrupt which doesn't help. Provincially, Canada is becoming more anti union. Fight for the workers, don't let this Rico guy have his way although it might be to late already.
  49. 1 point
    ok I have dropped the ball a bit with this one as the Hind build has taken over, but I haven't forgotten about this one just yet. I just saw this on evilBay, pretty much all the same stuff I've used before, not cheap though. https://www.ebay.com/itm/1-48-SU-22-17M3-MODEL-UPDATE-COCKPIT-KEDGE-DECAL-ETCHED-CUTTING-EDGE/223696659169?hash=item34155c22e1:g:LlgAAOSwY8tdm-MO That said the Cutting Edge External set alone is nearly with that, super rare, plus the Eduard model is also very hard to find and expensive. ...and no I'm not buying it, still have this one an another to build first.
  50. 1 point
    Hello everyone... For good or bad this ones painted now. Questions, comments, or thoughts ? I now know i will need to replace my needle on this at some point in the near future. While painting things i noticed the spray was going off to one side more than the other. Every time i clean this and rebuild it the spray stays angled. However it will change due to the needle being moved when cleaned. Another thing Ive discovered is that Ammo by Mig paints need more pressure to spray. Regardless of thinning it needs about 18-20 psi. Normally i spray between 10-14 psi with most other paints. But this stuff coming out of the bottle has a rubbery consistency. Again this is before i even spray, or add water. Im thinking maybe it's a bad batch because my last couple of sets from them work like a charm and they're two years old. It also feels rubbery on the kits after drying so who knows ? Dennis
  • Create New...