Jump to content

Massimo Tessitori

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Massimo Tessitori

  1. I suggest to look to photos of real planes with the livery and age of the model that we are representing. To paint a model taking another model as reference is not a good idea. Besides one has to distinguish the lines of the openable panels, as the engine cowling or maintenance hatches, from those of riveted panels that were fixed.
  2. If I remember well, the size of the T-62 of Tamiya is excessive, so it could be that some more links are required.
  3. My impression about the wingtips is that the lower face is bent upwards, this would justify that the far wingtip looks cutten in perspective.
  4. I wonder if the possibility of refitting a gunner's position was previded before building. Or maybe it was preserved from the twoseater prototype.
  5. Interesting. The rear opening is curved in the same way.
  6. Serial what? Il-2s built before the war had transparent rear canopy and one piece armorglass behind the pilot, later ones had metallic one and armour with two windows behind the pilot. I don't know the exact day when they changed.
  7. Very interesting. It should be a plane built in the first half of 1941. But the rounded vane behind it is from the factory or made for a conversion to twoseater? Regards Massimo
  8. Probably. But it could explain the paper or fabric sheet taped on the side as a censure for photographic purposes. An alternative explanation for what seems the head of a blonde woman could be a Guards mark, that should have a similar look and seems more likely.
  9. Thank you all. Now I've collected some books to deepen the differences between the variants. I will credit Alex Ruchkovsky for having shared his researches on the Soviet conversions of A-20G to add a navigator cabin. Regards Massimo
  10. Massimo Tessitori


    I think that now we have a sufficient consensus on the unreliability of the profile of Hobbyvista.
  11. Massimo Tessitori


    Hi all, unfortunately I haven't made deep researches on Yaks and I don't remember to have seen this photo. Maybe I could ask Mr. Ruchkovsky or Misos.
  12. Hi, thank you, I pass to another question. I would know what were the visual differences between the Boston III and the A-20C. The cut of the glazing should be the same, is there another way to distinguish them? Thanks for any suggestion. Massimo
  13. Hi, I don't think. The one high on the fuselage, close to the wingroot, is partly covered by the prop blade and the profile of this is sharp, so it could be a defect of the plane but not of the photo. Just, I think that the place is very hidden for an artistic painting. Good suggestion, I see that Ruchkovsky has worked on this sheet, I'll contact him. Regards Massimo
  14. Looks a good idea. They have some resemblance to two of the actresses, but I don't know if they were the main female characters. The square thing could be some fabric thing taped to the plane over the painting. Strangely it is not visible in another photo, but it is real without doubt. This could be put by Soviets. the ones on the nose and cowling appear in more than one photo. The doubt can be on the supposed women. Good, this is much clearer than the article in Russian.
  15. Hi all, Tapani is working on profiles of Soviet A-20, and now he is facing photos of a plane with the U.S. slogan 'We dood it' and many paintings that was delivered to SU. I've asked to Andrey Averin, that answered that this is a gift from Richard Red Skelton - an American comedian and actor, best known for his radio and TV shows of the period 1937-1971; in particular, for "The Red Skelton Show". He added four links: http://ava.org.ru/bap/1gm.htm# https://bellabs.ru/51/Photos/1GMTAP_WeDoodIt-01.html https://bellabs.ru/51/Additions/Article_Pravda-277.html https://ok.ru/nashiioni/topic/63553187897416 Now, this photo shows a lot of strange marks, probably of American origin. Increasing the contrast, I think to see: a light 32, an horizontal line and an angled one on the oval on the nose; the painting of a sort of painting and a dark-skinned woman behind it, and her legs and skirt under the painting; close to it, the head of a blonde woman; a round with a sort of clover inside a circle. Could these be marks of fuel, oil firms, or any sort of mark of a firm or association? Can anyone recognize any of the marks? Regards Massimo
  16. Excellent images, thank you very much. The inside would be simple to scratchbuilt, except for all those bolts fixing the plates to the frame that would be a nightmare. I am still wondering if scratchbuilding the inside ignoring them, maybe adding only the most visible ones, or introduce some type of fabric cover on the upper hatch,
  17. Hi, for what I've seen, the inside details are limited to one seat for the driver and, on some cars, a second one aside it, and two big parallel boxes aside the rear access that were probably useful as footsteps for the man in the turret. I suppose that there have to be some ammunitions on the turret sides, and a frame to rivet the plates. On photos, one often sees a tool located hrizontally outside, on the rear big box over the wheel, that is missing in the kit. Unfortunately the kit that I received was badly damaged and bent by mailing, so I had to repair and glue the turret to give shape to it before making refinements inside. Besides, there was a large gap between the horseshoe side turret and its lower plate, so I suspect that the inside will be not fine. Thank you for your suggestions. Massimo
  18. Hi all, I'm building this kit and I've (unconsiderately) choosen the late version with the antitank gun and the Lewis mount on the turret. The problem is that this version has a large opening atop the turret, without any door to close it. Besides the internal detail is absent and not even known (I didn't manage to find any image of the inside of the turret, at least). So, I have a large opening, a void interior and the pieces of the turret are fortemost mounted. I've considered to make a figure to coverr a bit the inside, but the work is diofficult due both to the poor pieces I have and the strange position to assume due to the machine gun. I wonder, wasn't there a way to close the top opening to protect it from rain and sun? A small curtain, maybe? There are two trasversal trips, on the front and on the rear of the hatch, that seems just as the guides of a curtain. Is there any information on such thing? Thank you for any help Massimo
  19. Hi all, I'm not expert of Pe-3. but I think to see protruding barrels and oval windows on the photos of this archive, and the narrow glazing under the nose. Pe-301 seems the most feasible from the Zvezda kit. Massimo
  20. I remember to have read, in an old Russian review, that the rear fuselage of the Mk-9 of ICM is 5 mm too long, while the same part of the Mk IX Hasegawa is 5 mm too short. I've never checked the thing, but eventually I have a still unbuilt ICM to look at.
  21. I remember to have examined the MiG-27 of Zvezda many years ago, without building it. I thought that the size and sections of the fuselage and the main landing gear were much more accurate than the ones of Hasegawa and its clone of Academy. Apart for the general roughness, I found three problems: the worst one is some error of the angulation of the nose/windshield profile that are too on the same line; the change of angulaion should be more evident, but it's difficult to ake a correction without a longer windshield; there is a step on the front fuselage sides that should extend on the side frames of the canopy; on the model, it stops behind the canopy; Hasegawa, Academy and Airfix floggers are accurate in reproducing it while the KP lacks of this; the air intake of the 27 of Zvezda had a straight profile as the 23, it should be convex on its sides; I think that the piece could be bent in some way; the main pylon under the wingroot is the type of MiG-23, the 27 should have a different one; this can be easily scratchbuilt. It could be that the back is low in the area between the air intakes and the rear of canopy, at least the MiG-23 of Zvezda looked so.
  22. The Po-2 preserved in Chkalow museum has a beautiful cream and dark blue livery that could be original. Some photos are available on the web.
  23. Some informations can be obtained from a comparison to the background colors. The lighter shade of the vehicle appears lighter than the shade of the ground, it suggests that it could be identified with the lightest between possible camouflage colors. The contrast to the darker shadow is even stronger of what expected from the table, so it wasn't hidden by sand or dust.
  24. Hi Antti, thank you for the note. The wing looks an hard work. Regards Massimo
  25. Hi Aleksandr, good to have your news. Best regards Massimo
  • Create New...