Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Basilisk last won the day on November 1 2015

Basilisk had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

3,379 Excellent


About Basilisk

  • Rank
    Obsessed with RIVETS

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

2,234 profile views
  1. Boy what have I done Let me say that we are all individuals and are entitled to our opinions and what I presented here is just how I see it. But I enjoyed reading all your comments. The colour pictures in the comparison are all taken by myself and NOT dragged of the web And red arrows do help in pointing to issues. Thanks Ray to point this out - it helps looking more closely through the instructions. But I am not sure if using PE is the best way to go. At least Eduard gives us a choice as rescribing these lines is not a big deal. So how would you
  2. Correct, and yes it can be taken from the Airfix kit or the new tool Tamiya kit, but as Eduard has several BOB decal options, it is an omission and should be there considering all the other option they provide. Here are some clearer pictures. It is maybe not as bad as on the Tamiya kit, but it is not as it should be. Maybe a small issue for most, but it bugs me seeing a Mk.IX stile nose shape on the Mk.I. Fortunately it shouldn't be too difficult to correct. Another comparison of the Mk.I from the Imperial War Museum London with a Mk.I
  3. In this post linked previously, gingerbob had this to say in regards to the early hand pumped hydraulic undercarriage selector: While my original interpretation was NOT that the hand pump was replaced around April '40, the fact that the manual was not updated until then implies (to me) that it wouldn't have been much before that. (That would put the serial somewhere, very roughly, around P9440 (or, about 600 Spits built), but don't put any faith in that estimate.) In regards to the fuselage without the fuel tank armor, Eduard's representation lacks the additional panel
  4. I had a closer look and compared the kit with the Tamiya and Airfix offering. Scale wise there is basically no difference between the three in length and wing span and the nose shape looks much better than the Tamiya version. Looks to me this kit is the new leader of early version Spitfires in 1/48 scale as it offers lots of alternative parts to build all the Mk.Is It is also the first kit containing the metal seat and it can be built with and without leather covering on the seat back. But It is surprising that with all the alternative parts on offer the kit only comes with the ear
  5. I will certainly use chipping fluid again in the future as it can be very effective. Finished the painting and detailing of the cockpit. And a test assembly. The IP is from Yahu and the rest is mostly from the kit. But I decided to not use all the PE parts and go with the plastic version as it gives more of a 3D effect. Also built the HWG harness which is a bit fiddly in 1/48 scale. But I found keeping the PE parts on the fret when attaching the harness keeps the assembly more manageable. And here the finished harness compared to
  6. Nice progress Pat and a great cockpit you made. Your painting steps look like a lot of extra work. What is the reason you don't paint the whole upper surfaces brown first and then add the green camouflage? Why didn't you use metal tubes on the rear of the radiator like you did on the intake side? Just looks a bit too clunky. I used Albion tubes on my build as they stay straight. Cheers, Peter
  7. Thanks Mark for this great info and I did find your mentioned post on Britmodeller which makes interesting reading. Also many thanks to point out the smaller Q which is indeed noticeable smaller than the Squadron code! As I won't use the decals for this build as I prefer to paint the markings with masks (as I did on my 75th anniversary BOB build) I hope I have no problem to represent the correctly sized Q Looks much better than decals I think. That is if I actually manage to finish the build and my track record is miserable in this regards
  8. You are a interfering busybody - Just kidding For whatever reason, I had the end of November in my mind, so you are correct in pointing out that this aircraft is just outside the BOB period Unfortunately most BOB Spitfire have not very interesting marking options compared to Spitfire prior the BOB and even after. But not all is lost as I found something a bit unusual on the excellent f√ľndecals on early Spitfires. So I now build R6623 from 64 Squadron flown by Flight Sergeant Jack Mann, RAF Kenley 12 of August 1940 This is what f√ľndecals has t
  9. Indeed, and I guess more of the Eduard kit build will show up in this GB. I did notice that Eduard only has the hand pumped hydraulic undercarriage selector in the kit when preparing the parts and I too intend to use the spare from the Tamiya kit. Also the rivets on the wing leading panels can do with some filler as on the real Spitfire. I wouldn't be surprised I come across some other issues during the build. Cheers, Peter
  10. Basilisk

    Hawker Typhoon

    Unfortunately there isn't a perfect 1/72 Typhoon kit and the Academy kit has lots of issues. I have a comparison build on the Airfix and Brengun kit HERE As mentioned in my build, here is the list of the kits shortcomings. Brengun: - No Fishplates - Radiator Air Filter location looking odd - Cockpit vents on the large side - Representation of engine panel fasteners too large - Many panel lines need to be re-scribed - No navigation lights Airfix: - Wings too thin - Fit not the best - Cockpit vents too small - Representation
  11. Yes this is the rear main spar on your picture and the front spar is indeed in the same relative location as you can see here. This is how I added the two spares to my build of the RS Model build. Cheers, Peter
  12. When opening my Eduard Spitfire Mk.I kit which I received today, I just have to get it built and there is no better place than doing it in this GB But I will build it as a Mk.IIa as the blunt spinner and Rotol propeller are in the kit and I only have to make the small bulge for the Coffman starter. Now there aren't too many pictures of Mk.IIs during the Battle of Britain. But one scheme I always wanted to do is the mount flown by Flight Lieutenant Charles Green, Commanding Officer 421 Flight out of RAF Hawkinge, Kent during November 1940. I will NOT build this Spitfire
  13. Nice tidy work Pat. Thick trailing edges are unfortunately a "hallmark" of most new tool Airfix kits. A scraper definitely works better for larger areas than a scalpel, but you have to burnish an edge to the scraper with a burnisher (or you can use a screwdriver shaft) With a burnished hook on the scraper you get nice shavings. I make my own scrapers to different shapes as I find the carpenter scraper a bit too large. Another way to deal with the ailerons is to cut them in half. They are so thick that it is easy to do and this will preserves the casting detail on both si
  14. Nice start Paul. Yes it should over the wheel well (later marks had larger ones for the canons). Cheers, Peter
  15. This is my first Eduard 109E build as well and I looked through some builds on the web which does help in knowing the pitfalls. I made a start on this build getting the cockpit together. First a coat of black primer, followed by silver, chipping fluids and RLM 02. It was the first time I used chipping fluids so I tried it first in the wheel wells. Even though I used lacquer paint, the chipping worked reasonable well. And the cockpit after chipping. The chipping may looks a bit heavy handed, but after applying washes, filters and some weathering, I
  • Create New...