John B (Sc)
-
Posts
1,070 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Events
Profiles
Forums
Media Demo
Posts posted by John B (Sc)
-
-
33 minutes ago, Adam Poultney said:
old moulds were damaged beyond repair it had to be a new tool
When/how did that happen?
-
2 hours ago, sniperUK said:
You can't do a grey over white early Mk.2 from the kit, the early ones didn't have the bulged faring to reduce the noise between the front fuselage and the intakes, when these were retrofitted to the early ones at Sydenham they were the painted into the overall EDSG scheme.
Thanks sniperUK. Hadn't checked to see what the detail was there; that said, it's not a huge task to remove that unless it has been done in some odd way. It was q surprisingly simple mod to change the airflow at that point.
I imagine the next debate will be what is needed to produce a satisfactory SAAF Buccaneer Mk50 ! Very nice colour scheme. I don't think they used the rocket assist much; I believe it was removed quite early on, Not sure about the larger slipper tanks, and there will be lots of fun for some people sorting out the later weapons fits.
John B
-
5 hours ago, Adam Poultney said:
Four very similar grey schemes and a £72 price tag.... I'll pass on this one.
If it were an S1 then I would be tempted, maybe even at that price, but as it is, not for me.
A good point; though since I recall seeing three of these schemes for real I like them. Shame that at least one of the EDSG over white preceding schemes is not included - they were really nice. I remember my serious spotter friends discussing where the demarcation lines were on different machines.
A Mk1 would be nice; do you suppose anyone will produce a conversion kit?
-
3 minutes ago, janneman36 said:
When you have ‘‘em that will be quite understandable….the price is pretty steep but I would love an S2B in the future !
It also gives me the time to save a little hard cash to buy one
I am lucky enough to have a couple 'in stock'. I have built several of the old mould, which I found excellent once you found a way past the awkwardness of some of the basic construction. Once completed, they really look the part; hefty solid machines, just as the real aircraft were. This does look nice, but maybe not sufficiently improved to warrant that price for me. Quite likely you will find a few of the older moulds being sold on for tempting prices.
I made one of the new 1/72 kits, having previously made both the earlier mouldings. Good, with lots more detail but hard to build really well, with very tight clearances and some difficulties.
-
1
-
-
Very nice I'm sure, but at that price I shall stick with my existing kits !
-
2
-
-
On 1/4/2022 at 1:55 AM, SAT69 said:
I know this statement is probably blasphemy to you folks across the pond, so the Atlantic Ocean is my friend at the moment, but I much prefer the Hurricane over the Spitfire, so this new release appeals to me a lot. Before you start hurling stones, give me a head start to find a cave to hide in. No cave? I'll find a big flat rock to hide under. We have lots of those in Central Texas.
I'm with you SAT69. I like the Spitfire, especially the later variants but the Hurricane has always had an appeal.
The father of a good friend and flying buddy flew in the Battle of Britain and on throughout the war. He flew Hurricanes, then later all sorts of other machines including the (later) Spitfires. He felt the Hurricane was the better aircraft for new tyro pilots with very few hours - he hadn't even fired the guns before arriving on his first Squadron.
Easy to fly, reassuringly solid, tough, manoeuvrable and a steady gun platform were his main thoughts. Plus easy & stable to land when you are all shaky and scared, possibly in a damaged aircraft. He felt the Spitfire , like the 109, needed more care in handling. especially on landing and his view was that the early Spits were harder to fight, not as steady for gunnery. Greta once you had the hang of them! He also like the ease of repair of the Hurricane. Main dislikes for both Hurricane and Spitfire -the unprotected fuel tank right in front of the cockpit.
He later commanded a Spitfire squadron, so wasn't biased against the Spit. Fascinating man; I wish I'd asked him more.
-
3
-
-
Interesting. So Airfix now have a Spitfire Mk 1a, Mk V and Mk IX in 1:24th. Quite a line up; presumably that completes their likely Spitfre output (please!), though I agree with wellsprop, a Seafire would be nice, to display wings folded.
Maybe I need to get my old Mark 1a and the Mk V built...
-
4 hours ago, patjb said:
Sounds like Leslie Philips in the "Navy Lark" , a history lesson!
"Left hand down a bit, Mr Pertwee."
-
4
-
-
On 1/6/2022 at 2:02 PM, Des said:
Don't know if this should be a continuation of the saga or if it should be the first page in a new one.
January 2022 issues of MAM and SAMI were in my local newsagent today , would not like to say for certain without wasting some of my life going back through old issues but some of the content seemed familiar but then again there is only so often you can cover an Su-27 , A-7 or whatever without raising memories of what has gone before somewhere or other.
What did catch my eye was the Editorial in SAMI from 'The Team' which struck me in being a bit Soviet-era selective historical in style with its claims of past glorious achievements and promises of bumper tractor production to come.
It will be interesting to hear from the more expert amongst us, over the next few months, if articles are being recycled, or believably 'tweaked' for re-use. What a shame if that happens; a once good magazine.
-
1
-
-
Indeed. I recall the F104s being shiny and new and then the F-5s and RF-5s. God grief, where have the years gone? Just whizzed by !
-
1
-
-
On 1/1/2022 at 10:38 PM, Dominic McEvoy said:
Evening @junglierating. Yup, still modelling and have now inherited a lot of kits 'n' stuff from him. I think I'm going to need a bigger study!
Hello Dominic.
Like many of us, I was very sorry to hear of your father's death; he was a really lovely man to listen to. Glad you intend to carry on modelling, especially with all the reference materials you must have ! Welcome to this madhouse.
-
3
-
1
-
-
There are some fascinating bits and pieces around the edges of that hangar, including what look like two extraordinarily long slender wings, trestled up. Maybe high altitude reconnaissance power sailplane prototypes or similar?
John B
-
15 hours ago, Mike said:
Does that smack of fraud to anyone else? That seems deliberate and considered to me
If it is not it must be very close to it ! Very dubious behaviour and likely to rebound on them. A great shame, because that was once a good, worthwhile magazine.
-
2
-
-
Interesting discussion. The Siskin tail is unusually complex; I wonder why the designer didn't do a Cub style screwjack just on the horizontal tail? (There must have been some interesting loads on the pivot - additional twist load because of the rudder. )
The tailplane surfaces on most fabric covered light aeroplanes that I am aware of are essentially fairly flat plates, bevelled at front and rear. Simple and cheaper to build. Some may be tapered - having thinner trailing edges than leading, mostly for structural reason s- the LE needs more strength for attachment points and to absorb deflection loads.
As was said earlier, even without a specifically aerofoil shape, they act as aerofoils under any deflection of airflow. I can't say I have noticed much pillowing or hollowing/dishing of fabric surfaces on deflection. Admittedly that has mostly been when looking at ailerons and wings rather than tail surfaces, which I'd only look at occasionally on a glance back - they do often vibrate quite a lot in flight, even when well braced ! Wing surfaces, even under reasonable aerobatic loads only show minor pillowing at most, in my experience. Different fabrics and different aircraft do show different effects though. Depends on the materials and the tautening process I suppose.
Incidentally, I don't think metal skinned light aircraft such as the Cessna 150 or Piper Cherokee have anything fancy as tailplane aerofoil sections either - it's a long time since I looked at one carefully, but I think they are also more or less rounded plate type cross-sections, for ease of manufacture. (*Correction: the Cessna 172 does have aerofoil shaped tail feathers - and I recall the Rallye I used to fly also had aerofoil tail contours)
Some lighter machines such as modern sailplanes may have fully aerofoil tail surfaces, for efficiency. Easy enough to do in fibreglass moulding.
-
1
-
-
As James said, the Zvezda kit is better by a large margin. In addition to what James said, it has good internal detailing as well, if you want to model with doors open,
I like the old Airfix kit, which is still OK with a bit of work for a 'standoff scale' model. If I was to do another Hercules, the Zvezda kit would be my clear choice, despite the cost.
John B
-
1
-
-
Impressive! Well done the boys ...
-
It was to house some additional avionics equipment - the Venom fuselage was fairly tight on space. Not sure precisely what, shall check further. Clearly not vital for flight, since some ex-Swiss machines have had earlier style noses re-fitted I think. Though modern miniaturisation might explain that.
-
I too recall as a youngster building the P1127, and later modifying one to be an attempt at a Kestrel, I was really pleased with my Tripartite Squadron roundels. Pity I didn't take photos - I bet they were pitiful.
I even painted one up as a Harrier-to-be in camouflage - and was so delighted when Airfix produced their first GR1.
-
1
-
-
Hmm - impressive Paul. What happened to that one I wonder.
(Especially apposite for us because after weeks of unsuitable weather we finally got a chance to test fly (Permit renewal) our Champ today. From a slightly soggy but acceptable grass strip. Oh boy, the mud splashes on landing, all over the tail and under the wings! Needed several buckets of water.)
-
Mike McEvoy
in Chat
Blast. Just read this, and like several others I had been reading his Tailpiece in the last SAM earlier today. A nice guy.
Seahawk - I agree with your comments, as another anonymous face in the crowd. One of the true gentlemen of our hobby.
John B
-
Thanks exdraken. Wasn't aware of that.
-
Impressive order and whee, another scheme to use, eventually.
'exdraken' - you mention 'KH is no longer' - ??? Which company is that ? Not Kinetic I hope.
-
1
-
-
Wow! Most impressive and from a 'different time' ! Gutsy flying indeed, and noticeably slow at the start of the 'flare' to level flight, given the deck angle. I wonder where that was- it looks like a grass strip, not a tarmac/concrete runway in sight. The white 'vehicle' early in the sequence made me wonder if it was a gliding site.
Someone must know the story !
Thanks for posting it up.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, Pete in Lincs said:
Mention was made of 51 Sqn Nimrods operating to the West of the fleet.
I seem to recall there was also some very quiet talk afterwards amongst the Kipper Fleet boys which suggested some recce operations went on by maritime Nimrods supported by tanker Victors down towards South Georgia (Possibly one Victor also took part in the recce element) and at least one sweep near to the Argentine coast checking for elements of their surface fleet - presumably the 25 de Mayo.
All kept very secret - if true, which I suspect it was, impressively brave work by all involved, Unarmed Nimrods at fairly low level, deliberately seeking. An extraordinarily dangerous game, - more so than the much hyped Vulcan efforts. From what I know of Kipper fleet folk, they would have done it and kept strictly schtumm. The close relationship between the Maritime force and the Navy always intrigued me.
-
1
-
Airfix 1/48 Buccaneer S.2 for 2022!
in The Rumourmonger
Posted · Edited by John B (Sc)
Thanks for the information about the old moulds. That description of no longer being viable because of increasingly high moulding reject rates - which is effectively what is being said - makes engineering and economic sense. It also suggest that older 'stashed' copies of the original mould are more valuable, since being earlier pressings they are less likely to have suffered those failures.
Like RichG, I still have one of the accidental 'two kits in one box' cases, as well as several other early pressings. I still intend to build an SAAF example, remembering having seen them at Lossiemouth.
As Beermonster1958 says , the question of aftermarket items is very much optional. I am old enough to recall and to have attempted some of the ideas of Alan Hall and others. Do it yourself. Some things, like intake and exhaust blanks, are easy to make. - a waste, for this frugal Scot - to buy. Wheels and cockpit details are easily enough improved with some careful filling, filing and painting/shading. Colour scheme details I used to enjoy hand painting, with great care, at least to my standards.
The thing is, I realise that most of my models end up being viewed from several feet away, only occasionally inspected in detail. So 'stand-off scale' works well ; a common idea in radio control flying, which some of you will recognise. Heck, some of my models are still displayed hanging up from ceilings. (Just like in some museums!)
So aftermarket mostly isn't vital, though it slightly disappoints me when I read of the speed with which some folk throw away the moulded items in favour of new 'extras', sometimes described as 'essential' ! That's a matter for each individual; that is the fun of modelling.
For me aftermarket is used rarely, for the few cases where I really want close detail for later inspection. Things like wing folding mechanism details can be interesting and useful. Occasionally the learning from examining the aftermarket detail has helped me with some later scratch building, to define what can and cannot be seen and hence what really matters for the model...