Jump to content


Gold Member
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by hsr

  1. Yeah. Northrop's next venture was the XP-79, where the pilot flew it laying down with a chin support. On its first flight it took off, started a turn and plunged into the ground, killing the pilot. Thanks
  2. I'm sure it will be better. One thing I forgot to mention was that the canopy fit was excellent, unlike the Sword T-38 Thanks Howard
  3. Here is my build of MPM's Northrop XP-56 Black Bullet. The XP-56 was the result of the US Army Air Forces' Request for Proposals R40C that was for a cutting edge design using cutting edge technology. It also lead to the development of the Vultee XP-54 Swoose (part sawn part goose), the Curtiss XP-55 Ascender (known to its pilots as the bottom-ender) and indirectly to the McDonnell XP-67 Moonbat. The XP-56 was basically a flying wing with a central nacelle for the pilot and pusher engine. It was originally going to used the experimental Pratt & Whitney X-1800 engine but when that was cancelled it used the Pratt & Whitney R-2800 that left it with below expectation performance. The MPM kit was for the first prototype that did not have the upper vertical tail and managed to crash before it ever flew, but it included the parts for the second prototype which did fly. I built this kit many years ago before I started keeping records of when kits were completed, but it had a terrible fall from its display shelf and had to be rebuilt. I used Fantasy Printshop Stars and bars, and yellow letters for the decals. Luckily markings were minimalist. So here it is. Enjoy
  4. Keen to see this, I have one lurking in my stock, it'll be good to see someone else explore the pitfalls, not a kit one sees built that often. No pressure mind. Steve. Done
  5. Here is my build of Wolfpack's North American T-2C Buckeye. The Buckeye was the US Navy's primary jet trainers from 1959 until 2008 when it was replaced by the Boeing T-45. The T-2C version was introduced in 1968. This is my first full kit by Wolfpack. I have previously used their wing upgrades, that I found to be excellent. This kit had generally good fit, but there were some issues, primarily with the fit of the intakes. Included with the kit was a decal sheet printed by Cartograf, that worked excellently and a canopy mask that fit perfectly. I also purchased their "update" (should be upgrade) interior kit that included very nice seats and some photo-etch. Finally I bought a 2 Bobs decal sheet printed by Microscale that was very good. The white was painted with Tamiya Fine Surface primer in a jar and airbrushed. The red was Humbrol 19 and the orange was Humbrol 18. All in all a pleasant build. Next up will the a TH-1H using the Hasegawa UH-1H kit Enjoy
  6. When are they going to make an accurate T-37?
  7. I wouldn't worry about that. They are impossible to find. In 3 years searching on Ebay I saw 3 of them and 2 of them went for over $100 US. I lucked out and got mine for 23 Euros. This it so far with the second coat of primer. It still needs a bit of sanding and polishing around the canopy. I would rank it as a top tear kit, not as good as Tamiya but pretty good. I got the Wolfpack update (really should be upgrade) kit with resin seats and some photo etch. Unlike the Sword kit the transparencies fit perfectly. I am also just starting a home remodel project (getting a fireplace put in) so that will slow me down a bit, but I should still finish it this month. Thanks Howard
  8. I ordered directly from Plus Models and mine arrived today. It looks pretty good with minimal flash and a very nice decal sheet. I ordered the wheeled version but it appears that the only difference between the 2 boxings in the cover art and the decals. The sprues appear the same. Not shown above is a small packet of resin parts that make up the engine with individual cylinders, exhaust and intake stubs. I also have the Ardpol kit and for comparison here are the 2 fuselages: Note that the Plus Model one is a bit longer. I did not measure them so I have no idea which one, if either, is correct.
  9. Test shot of sprue
  10. It really isn't that bad a kit. I thought the T-34C was much worse. Thanks
  11. my browser won't show the pictures because it says the web site in "compromise"
  12. That would have been helpful in the instruction
  13. I think I got it right, or at least close. thanks
  14. Here is my build of the Sword 1/72 Northrop T-38C Talon advanced trainer. This kit has a reputation of being hard to build and while it is probably not for the beginner I think it went together pretty well. The kit consists of 22 plastic, 19 resin, and 3 clear parts along with a color photo etch sheet. The entire interior is made up of resin parts including exquisitely cast control sticks, which unfortunately were impossible to remove from their pours without breaking them. The color photo etch was of Eduard quality and fit the resin very well. The finished cockpit fit into the fuselage perfectly. Unfortunately things went down hill from there. The 2 main issues were the canopy fit and the wings attachment. They really, really want you to pose the canopies open and have molded them that way. If you want to have them closed the fit is bad and needed a lot of filling and sanding. The wings are a butt joint to the fuselage with no indication of exactly where they go, and the instructions were were no help with vague drawings. Also while they supply you with a resin pitot tube the instruction make no mention of installing the part. I ended up using a Master brass one. For paint I used Humbrol 125 for the FS 16118 and AK Real Color ADC Grey for the FS 16473. The decals were nicely printed, but I have found Sword decals being very problematic in the past so I also got a Wolfpak sheet 72-041 as a backup. As it turns out the Sword decals worked very well for the most part, but a couple broke while removing them from the paper so I used a mix of the Sword and Wolfpak ones. I had a problem with both type silvering, but was able to fix that. So here it is: Next up in my arcane schedule should be the North American T-39 Saberliner, and I have the Anigrand kit, but with the recent announcement of the Sword kit I am going to wait for that first. So next will be the Wolfpack T-2C Buckeye. Enjoy
  15. Yea, I am going to have to start doing that.
  16. I use CA exclusively for filling on all models, but I have only seen this on resin seams that are under stress.
  17. I still have builds that go back to the '70s, but they are mostly plastic.
  18. Today it appeared on their web site https://www.plusmodel.cz/en/AL7038-Martin-T4M-kolova-verze
  19. My modeling tastes in recent years have tended to the obscure. This means that I build a lot of resin kits. Recently due to some home renovation I have to move some kits and to my horror noticed that seams that were perfectly filled and painted are now popping open. This seems to be most prevalent with Anigrand kits. Being Anigrand kits that was a bit of warpage in fuselage halves that required some gentle persuasion to meet and being resin I used ZAP CA+ to do the gluing. I can only conclude that over time the glue is failing. Has anyone else seen this, or have another explanation? I guess I could use epoxy in the future, but it is such a pain to mix, and then wait for it to harden.
  20. hsr

    Holy Grail kits

    I have a bit of an eclectic list of wants, but unavailable: For ships all in 1/700, and 1/720 just doesn't cut it: A Tennessee Class Armored Cruiser (ACR 10-13) CVA-59 Forrestal CVSN-65 Enterprise Aircraft, mostly from the "Golden Age" of flight, all in 1/72 in any medium (vac, resin, plastic) Aeronca L-3 Berliner-Joyce P-16/PB-1 Boeing FB-5/PW-9 Boeing F2B-1 Boeing XPBB-1 Brewster SBA-1/SBN-1 Curtiss PW-8 Douglas B-19 Douglas DT-2 Hall PH-1 Kaiser-FleetwingsXBTK-1 Martin XP5Y-1 Martin P3M Martin T2M-1 Martin T3M-1 Naval Aircraft Factory TS-1 Standard E-1 Taylorcraft L-2 Vought VE-7 Vought FU-1 And for armor: M44 155mm Howitzer If any of these have ever been kitted and I just missed it, please let me know
  21. While it may have been shown, and maybe even sold, at the Moson show it is not available on their web site, or anyone else's. So calling it "released" may be premature.
  22. That is how I interpret it, but I used my 1/72 ruler and the 55' 3" number. I don't think it would be too difficult to fix the Italeri tail with sheet and strip styrene, but since I already had the Fujimi tail I used it. Thanks
  23. According to Scalemates.com https://www.scalemates.com/kits/revell-04579-grumman-ea-6a-wild-weasel--148071 Revell made a 1/48 EA-6A and the Hasegawa is a rebox of the Revell kit. Thanks
  24. Except that Italeri messed up the tail and Fujimi missed out on the wing cord A lot of steps and if each one introduced a small error it adds up Thanks
  • Create New...