Jump to content

AMStreet

Members
  • Posts

    112
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    UK

Recent Profile Visitors

745 profile views

AMStreet's Achievements

New Member

New Member (2/9)

23

Reputation

  1. Thanks, I had not realised that the Mickey ships were sent from the US, I thought that they had been modified in theatre, though it does say in the Osprey book that 41-28832 was damaged in action, hence the removal of the front turret and that would have been done in the ETO. I have no idea if it was a Mickey ship prior to the damage though. I think that given the results from my experiments I'll stick to using Medium Sea Grey, there's no point re-inventing the wheel and as Mr. Bell says there was a variation in the colour from different suppliers and so as no-one else is likely to be aware of the subtle difference that will be good enough for me. Thanks again, I learn something new every time I come to the site. Oh, and one last thing, as Troy Smith says in his signature "...remember ..never trust a profile without a photo" and for once I do have a photo which clears up a lot of questions about this particular subject which is why I chose to model it.
  2. I have just started building my Academy Liberator and plan to finish it as 41-28832 a B-24H Mickey ship of the 459th BG. Now the shade of grey used is said to be "a colour somewhat similar to neutral grey, but slightly more blue" ( Osprey Combat Aircraft 21 B-24 Liberator Units Of The Fifteenth Airforce by Robert F Dorr). I mixed up some paint following the instructions given in "Urban's Colour Reference Charts - United States" by Urban Fredriksson & Martin Waligorski IPMS Stockholm. I then found a tin of Humbrol 165 Medium Sea Grey and compared the two with the colour chip no. 637 in my copy of BS381C 1996. To my eye they are all very close with the Humbrol colour and the BS381C chip being as described as near to Neutral Grey but bluer. Could the Fifteenth AF have got hold of some Medium Sea Grey from RAF stocks held in Italy and used that? As most a/c from the US were delivered in a bare metal finish at this time I would have thought that maybe paint for external use would not have been readily available in the US supply chain. Evidence of this may be the numerous repairs made to Olive Drab finished a/c with bare metal patches and panels. Does anyone have any thoughts on this matter? I would refer to use paint from the tin rather than have mix up a special batch as I have found it impossible to duplicate the original mixture if touch-ups are required at a later date.
  3. AMStreet

    Sopwith Dolphin

    I've not seen the CMR kit as I do not use full resin kits. They always seem to me to be totally against the spirit of these early a/c. The originals were light, almost ethereal, and resins have always seemed to be a bit lumpen. That's why if I get the chance I will go for vac-forms. They just seem to capture the essence of these fragile little aircraft better. Still, I'll take a look at the KP offering but will see if I can get hold of the Windsock monograph as I quite fancy scratch building another Great War aircraft. I haven't done one in a long time and I need the challenge.
  4. AMStreet

    Sopwith Dolphin

    Thanks, I'm glad to see that KP will be issuing a kit shortly. I will take a look when it comes out. I've been a bit wary of the plans from Windsock since I was badly bitten with the plans of the FE 8. I scratch built from the plans but when I checked the dimensions they were all over the place. I contacted Ray Rimmell and to his credit he did admit that they had had trouble with the printers and sent me some lovely amended plans free of charge. Like all plans I view them with a bit of suspicion but I will order up a copy and take a look at them. Thanks again.
  5. AMStreet

    Sopwith Dolphin

    Guys, Does anyone know of a decent set of 1/72 plans for the Dolphin? I have looked in vain for a kit but without any luck. I have in the past scratchbuilt some German a/c such as the Gotha GIV, Siemens Shuckert D lll and so on so foresee no problems with this little scout. Any replies would be gratefully received.
  6. I was struggling to rig my model of the Libramodels DH5 with some Lycra thread. It has obviously deteriorated with age and kept snapping, something I have noticed with some other previously rigged models. Instead I decided to use invisible mending thread as advised by people on several forums. The thread is nice and strong and does look the part when used. Just one problem, I had great difficulty in getting the thread in place. I tried and tried and eventually walked away in frustration. On thinking about the problem I realised that I had overlooked one aspect of invisible thread. That is it is very hard to see. Thus causing all my difficulties. I felt like Homer Simpson "Doh!". The very name should have given me a clue. In the end I solved the problem by dipping the end of the thread in some paint. That way I could see what I was doing and I am now happily rigging the model. It is sometimes true that we get so involved in a project that normal thought goes out the window but thinking about it has made me chuckle. 1/72 biplanes can be fun.
  7. AMStreet

    Struts

    Black Knight, thanks for the link. I don't log in very often so would have missed John Aero's post. It so happens that I have the requisite tools and I will give it a go. It has got to be better than my pathetic efforts.
  8. AMStreet

    Struts

    I have now just about used up all my Contrail and Strutz strutting material. Does anyone have a source of this item? I can, of course, whittle some from stretched sprue but the result is always disappointing and takes up a lot of time and effort. If anyone has the name of a supplier I would be most grateful.
  9. I unearthed my Airfix Dornier 17Z recently as I now have space on my worktable. Opening the box I was pleased to see that there appeared to be a lot of detail in the cockpit and bomb bay areas. That is when my disillusion with this kit started. Now I am by no means what one would call a star modeller, I'm a journeyman but with over fifty years with making models I feel able to take on most of what the manufacturers throw at us. I have to say that this kit is one of the most frustrating I have come across. I thought that the ICM I16 was a challenge but this one has it beat. With some kits I find that I am able to follow the designer's thoughts and understand how and why the kit was produced. Not with this one. The first thing that struck me was the way that parts were placed, seemingly at random, on the runners. Parts that were to be joined were placed on different runners with no seeming logic and in the absence of a parts map I found I had to hunt for the part on the four runners. Not fatal but annoying. I then started to fit out the cockpit. The pilots seat was a challenge but it did seem to go together and I moved on. I had invested in the Eduard cockpit set and apart from a few problems actually getting the brass to stick firmly all was well and really improved the level of detail. So all in all I was quite happy. Happy until I tried to fit it all in place. Now Airfix have used very tight tolerances in this kit, a little too tight if my experience is anything to go by. That and the tiny location points and the somewhat fragile nature of a lot of the fittings. The two seats with the wicker effect being a good example, made fitting the cockpit difficult what with the location points being hard to use and the danger of breaking the parts whilst trying to fit them. I did get it to go together eventually but I am far from satisfied and that has lessened my enthusiasm for this project. I feel that I am going through the motions and not getting the best out of what I have to hand. That is a shame. I have always liked the look of the Dornier 17 and made a Frog example many years ago which I still have. To cut a long story short I have now got to the stage of assembling the rest of the kit. There seems to be a lot of flash in the mating surfaces which requires you to be really careful in making sure that all the parts are true. They do not fit at all well if you skip this. and again shows that the tolerances would have been better if they had been a bit looser. All that said with a bit of care and some juggling I think that this kit will make into the best Dornier 17Z I have come across. The kit seems to me to try too hard. It may be that I am not up to the job but I found that the Airfix Heinkel 111 to be joy to make. Sorry there won't be any pictures at this stage. Maybe when the dust has settled and I have painted it I might be tempted to share what I managed to do with this "curate's egg" of a model.
  10. Thanks for the replies. The photo I have is the one in the Aircam book and as you say it's not that forthcoming on the details of the tailplane. The Franklin Mint model is not correct. Iit shows a dark band on the port wing and as can be seen in the photo above that's not right and some of the other colours are suspect as well. I'll keep looking in my collection and hope that I can find the photo of the other side.
  11. I am currently making an Academy 1/72 P-47 razorback. I intend to finish it as 42-27773 The Flying Abortion 1st Air Commando Group. Now I have been able to lay my hands on a port side photo of the a/c and I did have another showing more of the starboard side but I can't remember where it was or where I put it. If anyone knows of any other references to this a/c I would be most grateful as working from just one photo is often a route to disaster. In this case the internet has not been able to come up with the goods. I even overcame my antipathy and queried Google that's how desperate I am. Thanks
  12. Regarding the finish on the B26 and P47 I think that given the hard lives these a/c led a matt finish would be understandable. They were operational and the ground crew would have had no time to polish them up. That's one thing that I really dislike seeing on some restored a/c. A lot of hard work has gone into making them look as if they had been chromium plated and to my eye that just does not look right. The owners of course have every right to present their a/c as they wish but I think it is a big mistake. Just like some over-zealous restorer polishing the patina off of an antique. Generally that destroys the value of the item. Just a pet hate of mine, I'm sorry to say.
  13. I just spotted this on the Guardian website: Here The one that caught my eye was of the 112 Sqn Kittyhawks. Now I had always believed that the squadron codes were white but to my eye these look like medium sea grey. Enjoy
  14. Thanks for all the replies. It was as Seahawk says the blister windows that first made me think about the similarities between the two kits. Checking the few available plans I have there are some problems with the tail end of the two models but nothing that some work with a razor saw and plastic card won't fix. One problem I can't seem to get an answer to is the observer's cockpit. I have been unable to find any references to the layout of this area. Now I know that the USN did not use this but the FAA did and as I intend to make one of the models as a Tarpon I would like to know how it was fitted. Any pointers to reference material would be of great help. Thanks.
  15. Digging through my cache in search of inspiration I came across an Academy 1/72 Avenger kit. On looking at the parts a thought struck me that they looked awfully similar to those in a Frog kit which I also have. so I checked the two kits out. Apart from recessed panel lines and a few minor differences, the parts of the two kits are pretty much interchangeable. Can anyone tell me if Academy got hold of the Frog moulds after Frog went bust or are they some sort of clone?
×
×
  • Create New...