Jump to content

Peter Lloyd

Gold Member
  • Posts

    775
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Peter Lloyd

  1. How do you get your panel lines so uniform and perfect? Do you use a wash, or a pencil.... or magic?
  2. A very big thanks for a comprehensive set of answers, and fast! For clarification I'd like to finish my model in SEA scheme: growing up in the time I did, and as my father was still in RAAF air traffic control when the early F-111s arrived, that's what looks 'right' to me. I built (well, more lashed-up) the RV Aircraft Mirage III-0 for a recent group build, my collection's first supersonic jet, so there's the inspiration. I'd rather wait than kitbash, especially extending wings and other more major surgery, because 1. It's Hasegawa and the kit going together easily is part of the fun, saving energy for the short-run kit pain and 2. I don't want to take risks with a kit that will probably cost me a day's pay and 3. If I were to make a major effort, Murphy's Model and Hobbies would announce that the F-111C is due for imminent release!
  3. I find I hanker for a 1/72 RAAF F-111C. My understanding is this version had wider span wings which were unique to this mark. As Hasegawa, being Hasegawa, don't want to sell the C model their mould cutters so lovingly worked on, is there any possibility of using the D/F recently released by Hobby 2000?
  4. Can't remember the exact source for this, must be one of my Yefim Gordon books. It's a (famous) story by Yakovlev, brought before Stalin in late 1942. On Stalin's desk are pieces of Yak fighters, whose leading edges have shed the glued-on cloth that apparently covered the wood. Stalin informs Yakovlev that 'only our country's mist bitter enemies could have brought about this situation'. Yakovlev heeds the message and the pragmatic, if paranoid, dictator allows him to 'fix' the production line issues (which are related to lack of supplies of needed chemicals, and the obvious need to get fighters finished and to the front line. Gordon's books also detail the troubled situation with Lavochkin's LaGG-3s, which are never able to produce their design performance due to poor quality. This is reported in some detail by investigations, but in the end it seems to come down to the skills and experience of the workers. And this is the key: in 1941-42, virtually every aeroplane production line worker in the world was pretty new at their job. Most planes were coming out of very new factories, with enormous pressure to hit production targets. Clearly, there were so many very different sets of conditions applying, across the world. Another favourite book of mine, The Relentless Offensive, details Arthur Harris's constant efforts to get Halifaxes improved and bombers generally fitted with effective defensive weapons. In a memorable letter and in light of the Yakovlev story above, he urged Churchill to consider the persistent refusal/inability of Handley Page to improve the quality of Halifaxes, noting that Stalin would have those responsible for such sabotage shot.
  5. Fast progress. Indeed this is a kit that has been in a dozen boxes, Hobbyboss is a nicer basis for a MiG-3, and better in shape, but the cockpit is solid so there's that to fix. Although not very well remembered, after the disastrous start of the campaign in Russia for the VVS, the MiG was one of the few fast, modern aircraft available in any numbers to help out the Polikarpovs.
  6. Your exams are over? Well, nobody hits a deadline with zero to spare like a student! Good to see this old kit come together.
  7. I used Gunze Aqueous paints as usual, Extra Dark Sea Grey and Olive Drab with a little extra 'green' added. The decals are easy to use, strong and thin, they move quickly off the backing paper in warm water. The demarkation of the white was very slightly off, you can see this on the roundels. It is however opaque. The colours are not really quite right and look 'inky'. I used Micro Set on application, followed by Mirco Sol, which the decals ignored. Ray's photo above makes it abundantly clear that I chose the wrong underside fairing. I choose to believe that I now have a spare that I can use in the future on a better build of the flying wedge. I will tone down the underside weathering as well. It's getting close now. I have no idea why the canopy fogged as you see. These images should show the good and the bad fairly well. Still a few bits to add and some painting. This is the most modern aircraft in my collection: until a few years ago I didn't even have anything with swept wings, my original self-imposed theme was 'up to 1945', and I stuck to that for about 60 models. In the last few years I did several straight wing jets, then a MiG-15 and Yak-25 snuck in, now all my principles are gone. Still, the Mirage is a truly beautiful plane and I well remember them streaking over Sydney in my childhood, at which time my father was an air traffic controller at Richmond and Williamtown. I'll take some good photos and add them to the gallery. A very big thanks to anyone who looks in and those who organised and helped make this group build another success. It really helps me stay focussed and get the model to completion.
  8. Nice work. I made the UM Marder III and was happy with the kit, this one looks at least as good.
  9. Nice! I bought one from King Kit a couple of months ago for about 20 UK squids. Golden age of internet second hand dealing, those noughties.
  10. I was trying to gain support for an SE5a STGB, but it sort of got lost in the changeover to the Bunfight! system. Although the Fokkers are among my least favourite Great War machines, I'm in for the sake of supporting modelling interest in this conflict, whose hobby representation seems so far short of its interest to historians and readers. I'll probably do a DVII.
  11. MiG-17 in 1/72. I'm along, just to get some less-conventional stuff into STGBs.
  12. Hi Enzo. I just added a topic to the Bunfight! section. It occurs to me I may have misunderstood how it works. Please erase and accept my apologies. -Peter

  13. . Alright you, just as it says. Did I go for a 'biplanes GB'? 'Wood, canvas and wire'? Nor even, 'Great War'? No. No compromise. You've had your fun with your Spitfires and Messerschmitts and Mustangs. It's time for you personally to step up, do something a bit difficult, and do honour to the greatest aircraft* of that war we prefer to forget. The fast, simple, effective, workmanlike, SE5a. Be courageous. Embrace the challenge. Sign on. (* in my opinion)
  14. I had the idea this kit and the RV Aircraft Mirage were related... I am building the RV Aircraft model at the moment. This kit has much, much more detail. It may be taken for granted the maker has a lot more skill, too. Thanks for showing this.
  15. My workbench is an utter abomination, defying all efforts at imposing order. Being in the middle of about a dozen builds, I can't move anything for fear it will be lost forever. But why there is a bomb from a Blenheim I finished a year ago, and wheels from a P-47 that went to the cabinet in October... um, well... it's either some sore of personality disorder, or my limited modelmaking time can't be wasted on tidying.
  16. For some masochistic reason I think Britmodeller deserves a single type GB from that 'other' war... Camel or Fokker Tripe would have been a little more popular, but I reckon if I can get the concept sold, I should go all the way and try to have the mighty Folland machine the feature. I hope your efforts here inspire some others as they have me.
  17. What a great result. I had the 'DS' tracks on a Dragon Churchill break when curved. I'm not sure if a dip in hot water at some stage might help the tracks accept their fate?
  18. Alan I'd suggest any primer that is dark-coloured. The pigments are finer and you have less chance of blocking up the mesh.
  19. Great progress mate. Looks like Sydney Camm just nicked the cowling and exhaust layout off a Focke-Wulf! Does anybody know the providence of PM Models' kits?
  20. Hi Rob. I had been trying to get interest in an SE5a Group Build without success, and my initial intention was to build Roderick Dallas's machine for this Group Build, then follow with Little's. My Mirage has probably consumed too much time, however. So, I will be enjoying your build. I have used a few rigging materials with varying success: invisible mending thread ('fishing line'), nitenol wire (very thin, stiff, springy wire) and stretchy rubber rigging line. The wire is probably the easiest in my experience: you drill a hole at each end (before assembly!), cut the wire to length (starting a bit long and trimming down), and just poke it in the holes. Rubbery stretch line was the best looking but it's an absolute pain... basically impossible to thread through the holes because it's like pushing rope. I did successfully rig a biplane with the monofilament mending thread: anchor one end with super glue, thread the other through the hole at the other end, gently weight, and add a drop of super glue. Roughening up the thread with sandpaper to help the glue grip was a good move. Whatever method you use, I wish you very good luck. The Triplane is not too bad for rigging.
  21. What a beautiful and fast build. I have tried the Blu-Tac method a couple of times, but I am always left with sticky stuff on the model surface and 'oil marks'. Your engine was a work of art. Well done al around!
  22. My model got a coat of Mr Surfacer 1000, and some sanding around the joint between the cockpit/fuselage front, and the wing/fuselage assembly. It all fits pretty well, considering, and not much detail was lost. Having a separate part for the fuselage spine means almost all the seams could be filled with Mr Surfacer and lightly sanded. I used Gunze Aqueous Extra Dark Sea Grey for the first coat: Something I have noticed looking at photos of Mirages is the 'two step' nose cone I mentioned earlier is not always obvious. I wonder if some, especially later aircraft received a new cone with a slightly different contour?
×
×
  • Create New...