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. :)

Scott Hemsley

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

82 Good

About Scott Hemsley

  • Rank
    Established Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    SW Ontario, Canada
  • Interests
    1/72 WW2 and post-war RCAF

Recent Profile Visitors

1,203 profile views
  1. Scott Hemsley

    Spitfire Mk. XVI

    I assume they mean a Spitfire FR.XIV (Fighter Recon) as opposed to a plain ol' Spitfire Mk.XIV. Usually the 'low back variant of the Mk. XIV with provisions for a side mounted camera on each side behind the cockpit, fwd of the roundel … but usually only one was carried at any one time. Employed by 2nd TAF, as was mentioned. It's not the best illustration, I know, but these two (both Fujimi 1/72) represent a 402 Sqn. (RCAF) Spitfire Mk. XIV and a 414 Sqn. (RCAF) Spitfire FR.XIV. Scott
  2. PM inbound, thank you! Scott
  3. Alan... Now that is interesting … on both counts. Unfortunately, even if I don't chase after the DC's for the Sunderland, I'll certainly need them for the Catalina and quite possibly both the Liberator GR.V and VI, if nothing else than just to 'busy' up the bombays. The Academy kit's don't exactly contain a wealth of detail in there. Getting back to the Sunderland, though … I was curious what the wings looked like with the bomb racks stowed and now I know. I wonder if the kit even supplies the option to close the Bomb Truck tracks (say that 5 times fast) or if I'll have to make my own from some plastic sheet (easy enough). I'll take a look on the instructions later. Thanks! Scott
  4. Thanks for the 'heads-up' regarding the Sunderland's depth bombs, but as I (at this point) intend to display the model with the bombs stored internally and the doors closed - basically as one would see it 'land-locked', I'm not really too concerned. However, OTOH, since I'll probably be getting a few for other a/c (notably the Catalina & Liberator x2) on the to-do list, I may very well add the Sunderland's requirements to that list and display it accordingly. I take it that they still used the same Universal bomb racks as per kit? As I mentioned to a friend, the actual build may be a-ways off (at least until I get some additional display space), , but that doesn't prevent me from acquiring what I need and having it join it's contemporaries in the stash. In the meantime, I'm absorbing all the great information and advice I'm getting from this thread. Thanks, guys! Scott
  5. Allan … again your post is very informative. In terms of the upper turret, I think it's all there - within the "X 'd" items. There are a number of parts on the "F". "J" and "CP" sprues that seem to be good candidates for upper turret parts, but until I get the plastic in hand, I won't know for sure. Going solely by a 2D sketch can be misleading at best. When it comes to the interior, I sincerely doubt much will be seen anyway, short of a cutaway … once things are closed up. Today, I spent some time looking into the Italeri Mk.III and the more I looked into it, the less impressed I was and more convinced that I'll be using the SHH kit as a basis for the Mk.IIIa, particularly since I discovered 4 Aeroclub Pegasus engine and cowlings (resin and white metal) in with my Airfix Sunderland (I forgot about those), so the idea of backdating the SH kit seems more feasible. However, you raised a valid point that unfortunately won't be resolved until I get the kit in hand and can physically dry-fit the Aeroclub engines to the kit nacelles … are they compatible?. Scott
  6. Thanks!, Admiral Puff! After checking the sprue layout out (an' I don't exactly consider myself a Sunderland expert). I can see it has many of the Mk.III options that I would require, but not others - notably the Pegasus option. I'm not even sure that I can see any vacant space where any Pegasus engine parts may have been. What I do see, however, is a lot of 'X'd" parts on the sprue layout. There are a total of 4 upper fuselage sections . I can identify the 'open waist' positions of the Mk.I, along with a 2nd similar one. Not sure of the difference from the sketch alone. There is also the same upper fuselage section that features the open fairing for the upper turret of a Mk.III as ell as the a section with the turret faired-over (used in the Mk.V assembly). I also see parts scattered throughout the sprues that suggest the various turrets and armament used on the earlier Sunderland (ie: nose and upper turret) … and yes, you do have the beam guns included for the Mk.V. . It does have two different sections for a 'step', though, I assume the "X'd" one is for a Mk.I and the other one which is called for in the instructions ... would also apply to a Mk.III.. Looking further, there's a very complete looking interior. Judging by the number of assembly steps dedicated to the interior in the instructions … if it doesn't lend itself to a cut-away OOTB, it's a pretty good start for the detailers in the crowd. Getting back to the 'do not use' items ...you do have the earlier ASW fuselage antenna and the weapons bay doors, have both the 2 and 3 porthole options . As I've said … everything but the Pegasus option. Since this project's waited this long to get done, maybe I can wait a little while longer for a possible 'dedicated' Mk.IIIa release from SH - like Stew had suggested … or maybe I'll just cannibalize the "Pegasus engines/props" from one of my Airfix kits (somehow I ended up with 2.5 Sunderland kit in the stash) and re-work them as necessary to make them look a part of the SH tooling. If you're planning on acquiring this kit, I recommend that you visit the Special Hobby home page and check out the downloadable instructions. If you don't have the opportunity to inspect the kit at a LHS prior to buying it checking out the instructions prior to ordering it, is the next best thing. Scott
  7. Wow, gentlemen … thanks for all your replies I should've been more clear, but the Sunderland I want to do is actually a Mk.IIIa … so using the Italeri Mk.III as a start point (as Admiral Puff wonders) would actually be more work incorporating the changes between a Mk.III and a Mk.IIIa. It would be no different than using the Airfix kit as a start point, and make no mistake … I've seen some real inspirational online builds using that old kit. I seem to recall that when it was first announced, presumably when it was intended as a Special Hobby/Italeri collaboration and the CAD images and initial pre-production sprue shots were revealed, the feeling was that it was to be a Mk.III/Mk.V release under both labels. Having all the required parts for both on the sprue, made a Mk.IIIa an easy option. The question now is, are those parts still included on the 'production 'sprues? It wouldn't be the first time a company has left a lot of options as fodder for the parts box and didn't mention their existence in the instructions .If the sprues were tooled before the split between the partners, it's conceivable everything's still there rather than undergo the expense to alter the sprue layout/contents and if SH or Italeri decided to release a dedicated Mk.IIIa, it would then be a simple matter to alter the instructions … right? I have to single Alan out, though … for the detailed post he put up. Whether the parts required for a Mk.IIIa are still included on the Mk.V sprues, or not, his information - especially re the differences on the engines .. is very useful. FWIW, the one I'm planning to do is actually covered on the Aviaeology sheet for RCAF Sunderland. It's a Mk.IIIa from 423 Squadron (RCAF). On Sept. 11/44, flown by F/OJ.N. Farren and crew, they made the last U-boat kill for the squadron. The decal sheet depicts the aircraft (s/n ML825) with the codes "AB*D" , which is correct for that time period. In '43, the squadron carried a "3" as a unit code, rather than "AB". Again, thanks everyone for your input. Scott
  8. Now that Special Hobby's Sunderland V is a reality, I can turn my attention to a project I've had in mind for some time. I want to builds a (late) Sunderland Mk.iiI and after following SH's initial announcement, CAD images and sprue shots, it was clear that this Sunderland V kit was much closer than the Airfix Mk.III, as a starting point, to the subject of my proposed build. Therefore, I've two questions to put to the Sunderland experts here that would go along way in determining if I should go with the new kit or stay with the older Airfix kit and what looks like could be a long drawn-out build... i) I know the Sunderland V engines (same as on the PBY, correct?) are much different from the Sunderland Mk.III (Bristol-Pegasus XVIII), but can anyone furnish comparison photos of the cowlings./props I can probably either rob some poor kit in the stash or get AM Pegasus, but can I just tweek the cowls or is there a major change between the two? I'm aware of the small intake on the top 'lip' of the Sunderland V cowling. OR.... would it be easier to drill out the Airfix cowls for the AM Pegasus and hope they can be made to fit the Special Hobby kit? ii) Without extreme nit-picking, is there other external changes between the two versions that I should be aware of? One area that concerns me is the 'step. Everything seen for the Sunderland V kit thus far has shown the 'step' to be a separate piece. Does the 'step' on a Mk.III differ from a Mk.V, or would this possibly be only to facilitate tooling? Scott
  9. One also has to ask the question, are we just talking OOTB or something that can easily be corrected by x-kitting or aftermarket … combined with some basic modelling skills, a little research and an application of some TLC? At one time, I looked to the Heller kit for all 4 RCAF Sabres I planned (Sabre 2/4/5 and 6) and then when the Airfix came out, my 4 Heller kits were regulated to 'parts status' for Airfix Sabres. While I admit that it has issues OOTB (like every other 72nd Sabre), I feel that with good references (like Larry Milberry's book on the Canadair Sabre - to name one) and a few parts taken from the Heller Sabre and/or Pavla to replace the more questionable kit parts., the vast majority of issues can be corrected. The TLC and some research comes in dealing with the remaining issues - like correcting the location of the drop tanks, or in the case of the hard-edge 6-3 wing, relocation of the wing fences and drilling out the 3 fuselage vents their locations only hinted at by scribed lines.. Of course, the final kit choice and/or the amount of accuracy one desires (along with the amount of effort one is willing to put into the construction of the model), is always up to the individual. Scott
  10. Just an FYI … but according to the OOP publication "CF-101 VooDoo; Canadian profile" by Robert McIntyre … the longer streamlined tanks seen in the OP's photograph are "450 gallon streamlined tanks' while the shorter, fatter tanks seen in most ,if not all F-101 kits, were 'short (large diameter) 450 gallon supersonic drop tanks'. Unfortunately, the publication in question, gave no dimension details or photos as the RCAF didn't fit them to their aircraft - just some unscaled (none mentioned) fit-the book-format, 2-page line drawings, that showed both style of tanks... As for modelling this particular style of tank, just from the photos presented above, I think that the Monogram F-84 tank (fins removed) with a slightly blunter nose would be your best option, and in the absence of any dimension data … eye-ball the length, etc. on the kit compared to photos.. Scott
  11. The photo of the Belgium CF-100 Mk.5 shown in your link, doesn't sport the 250 Gal. tip tanks the OP is referring to. What it does show is a target drogue that is considerably lighter than the tip tanks or the rocket pods. Also of interest, it shows the two underwing hardpoints that mounted the chaff pods. If a Mk.5 is photographed with the tip tanks fitted, it's without the 30" wing extensions fitted. The extensions themselves or the point where they joined the wing proper, weren't stressed for the kinds of load the tanks would need. Scott
  12. The CF-100 Mk.5 was rarely fitted with tip tanks, but it was possible. However … the 30" wing extensions needed to be removed first. In essence, it now flew with the shorter Mk.4 wing. The wing extensions couldn't handle the load of the tip tanks. Antti_K posted a photo of a CF-100 Mk.5 as it appeared in the 60's flying with either the EW unit or later after it became 414 (EW) Sqn. All the CF-100's at this time were either Mk.5C or Mk.5D and none featured the wing extensions that the Mk.5 flew with in it's ADC (Air Defence Command) days in the 50's. Scott
  13. Mark. a bit of advice here, if you haven't noticed already. The clear lens in the kit is molded to the curvature of the kit/airframe. So a little TLC and it'll fit beautifully. Scott
  14. Just to set a few things straight, it's 415 Sqn. that has the Swordfish in their crest, 405 Sqn. crest has a stylized eagle's head with a maple sprig, in it's beak. 405 Sqn. started out attached to 4 Grp (Apr. '41 -Oct. '42), then was attached to Coastal Command (18 Grp.) from Oct. '42 to Feb. '43. They joined 6 Grp. in Mar. '43 and remained there until Apr. '43, when they moved over to 8 Grp. (Pathfinders), remaining there until Mar. '45. Squadron code was 'LQ'. As for operating the Halifax, they only flew the Halifax Mk.II from Apr.o Sep. '43. From there, they transitioned to the Lancaster Mk.I/III (Aug.'43 - May '45) and then the Lancaster Mk.X (not on ops) May-June '45). 415 Sqn. only flew with Coastal Command and through their wartime service, their sqn. codes were GX, NH and finally GU. They flew the Halifax Mk.III/VII (coded "GU") July '44 - Jun. '45. Of the Halifax flown, only 6 were Mk.VII and they were on strength from March to May '45. I noted in a previous post, a "?" behind 427 Sqn. They were indeed, in 6 Grp. … from Jan. '43 to Aug.45 … then with 1 Grp. Aug.45 to Jan. '46. Squadron codes were "ZL". In terms of the Halifax, they flew the Mk.V from May '43 to Feb. '44, and the Mk.III from Jan. '44 to Mar.'45. They next flew the Lancaster MK.I/III from Mar. '54 to May '46. FWIW, the other 6 Grp. squadrons include: (all flew a Halifax variant at one point) 408 Sqn. … sqn codes "EQ". Flew Halifax Mk.II (Dec. '42 to Oct'43. Halifax Mk.III/VII (Sep. '44 to May ''45) with Lancaster Mk.II's filing in the gap (Oct. '43 to Sep. '44). 419 Sqn. … sqn. codes "VR" Flew the Halifax Mk.II (Nov. '42 to Apr. '44), then the Lancaster Mk.X Mar. '44 to Sep. '45. 420 Sqn. … sqn/ codes "PT". Flew the Halifax Mk.III (Dec. '43 to May '45). … just as an aside, according to a member of the wartime groundcrew, the Halifax's were equipped with the Preston-Green ventral turret, rather than H2S. 424 Sqn. … sqn codes "QB". Flew Halifax Mk.III (Dec. '43 to Jan. '45) with the Lancaster Mk.I/III taking them up to Oct. '45. 425 Sqn. … sqn codes "KW". Flew Halifax Mk.III (Dec. '43 to May '45), then they fkew the Lancaster Mk.X (May to Sep. '45) not on ops. 426 Sqn. … sqn codes "OW". Flew Halifax MkIII (Apr to Jun. '44) and the Mk.VII (Jun. '44 to May '45) During 'the period from Dec. '44 to Jun. '54, they also has 5 Mk.III's. From Jul. to Dec. '45 they flew the Liberator C.Mk.VI and VIII in a transport role. 428 Sqn. … sqn codes "NA". Flew Halifax Mk.V (Jun. '43 to Jan. '44), Mk.II (Nov. '43 to Jun. '44) and the Lancaster Mk.X took them up to Sep. '45 429 Sqn. … sqn codes ":AL". Flew Halifax Mk.II (Aug. '43 to Jan. '44) and the Mk.V (Nov '43 to Mar.'44).They also flew the Mk.III (Mar. '44 to Mar. '45) with the Lancaster Mk.I/III taking them to Mar. '46. 431 Sqn. … sqn codes "SE". Their Halifax caree saw them fly the Mk.V (Jul. '43 to Apr. '44) and the Mk.III (Mar. to Oct. '44).Again they finished on Lancaster Mk.X's in Sep.'45.. 432 Sqn. … sq1n codes "QO".Halifax Mk.III (Feb. to Jul. '44) and the Mk.VII (Jul. '44 to May '45). 433 Sqn. … sqn codes "BM". Halifax Mk.III (Nov'43 to Jan. '45) and the Lancaster Mk.I/III to Oct. '45. 434 Sqn. … sqn codes "WL). Halifax Mk.V (Jan. '43 to May '44) and the Mk.III May to Dec. '44, finishing ops on the Lancaster Mk.X in Sep. '45.. The above information is taken from the publication: RCAF Squadrons and Aircraft (S. Kostenuk/J. Griffin) As you can see, there's lot's of possibilities for RCAF Halifax. Scott
  15. As the OP was inquiring about the Canadair Sabre 2, in particular, I felt the need to point out that the speed break wells were decidedly more cluttered than the illustrated F-86A in Sabrejet's previous post.. If the admin allows feels it won't infringe any copyright issues … I could scan 3 photos of Sabre 2's that show the interior of the speed break wells, from Larry Millberry's book on the Canadair Sabre (OOP??) and post them. They clearly show that they were decidedly more cluttered than a F-86A - more like Sabrejet's photos of the F-86E/F. For those that have copies of the book, the photos I'm referring to are on Pgs. 44, 67 and 113. Unlike the F-86A, the Canadair Sabre 2 had the same all-flying tailplanes of the later Sabres/F-86's, which may explain (I'm no airframe tech) the additional clutter compared to the F-86A. Scott
  • Create New...