Jump to content

Tail-Dragon

Members
  • Posts

    770
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Tail-Dragon last won the day on April 9 2014

Tail-Dragon had the most liked content!

3 Followers

About Tail-Dragon

  • Birthday 10/23/1954

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
  • Interests
    W.W.2 Aviation, Armour, Naval and Helo's

Recent Profile Visitors

1,928 profile views

Tail-Dragon's Achievements

Obsessed Member

Obsessed Member (4/9)

3.1k

Reputation

  1. I had read that a good base for yellow is German armor Panzer yellow (Desert sand?). I tried it and it works great. It covers very well, and the yellow topcoat covers it easily, and really pops. Plus, if the yellow has a thin spot, it just looks like a slightly darker yellow.
  2. Remember - measure, saw, hammer, swear ... measure, saw, hammer, swear, repeat as necessary!
  3. Hannant's has a large number of P-47 razorback decals, and also a selection of masks for the DO-335 (clear parts and markings) A paint mule is the perfect excuse to try masking markings. The DO-335 actually can make up into a pretty nice kit, just takes a little carpentry!
  4. Just because you can never have too many Spitfires, while waiting for paint to dry on my triple Malta Spitfire builds, I started an ICM Spitfire Mk IXc from the movie 'Battle of Britain'. The ICM kit is no Eduards, but is fairly accurate in outline, (and is in the stash, anyhow). I started with the wings, removing the canons, canon bulges, and lots of filling, sanding, and rescribing. I also had to shorten the landing gear legs quite a bit, replace the inaccurate wheels, and reprofile the fat propeller blades. I filled the lower cockpit wing roots and added stringers, scratch built a throttle and landing gear control, and then turned to the ugly seat. it needed thinning, new sides, bottom and front, as well as a back pad. I'm using an Eduard's photo etch QR belt (this is 1969, after all), and also using a left over tubular exhaust from an Eduard's kit. I've got some paint on the interior, so close up can begin ... Oh yes, I also had to do something with the weird square spade grip! It's going to be open canopy, but with the access door closed, Robert Shaw's 'Rabbit leader' has a nice set of crosses across the door that I don't want to loose! Thanks for looking, Colin
  5. Just an observation, EN398 appears to have not had a tight masked or matted camouflage, but rather a fairly tight feathered edge, both when Ian Kelltie flew it and Johnson had it. Looks really good in a black finish, I'm looking forward to more progress, I have the same exact project on the shelf, waiting! Colin
  6. Before you prime, is the left canon barrel not parallel with the right, or is it just camera distortion? If there is a problem, much easier to correct before paint.
  7. Good choice for the preferred scheme. 'Clunks' look so good in polished aluminum.
  8. A senior moment, couldn't recall his last name. Somedays I'm lucky to recall mine!
  9. Regarding the seat belts, I found the answer in a posting from Edgar (Burrows?) in 2008 ... "Early belts, Paul. The Sutton harness remained in use throughout the war, and (certainly on Spitfires) wasn't replaced by the (QS) harness, with the parachute box-type release until 1946. The confusion probably arises from the "Sutton harness, type K" being called the "The QK harness," sometime during the war, but the mods book, on the Spitfire, is specific enough to give 6-8-46 as the start-date for the "QS" harness "so making quick release operative." Edgar"
  10. Great marking choice - one of the most iconic Spit IXc's out there. Here's a question. Would EN398 have a Sutton, or a Quick release harness?
  11. This might help, from an IPMS Canada article .... The real thing. Colin
  12. Going through Brian Cauchi's book, it seems to be 'dealers choice' whether the canons remained in the inboard or outboard positions, and the photos show blurry, dark blotches (blast tube patches?) on none, or 2, or 4 positions for the machine gun bays. I personally am leaning towards 2 x 20mm and 4 x .303 loadout to match to firepower of the Vb's. I'm thinking the only way to know for sure would be photo's of the particular aircraft I'm building - of which there are none, darn it!
  13. The slight majority of photo's seems to indicate the 20mm in the inboard bays, slightly less in the outboard bays. I have read that when the outboard bays were used, the locally produced bomb carriers could be fitted to the inboard bays. My question was really about the machine guns. Some photo's seem to show blast tube patches (covers) on the outboard machine gun bays, while others show nothing. It is my understanding that the Universal 'C' wing could accommodate any of the armament mixes without modification, so it would be a local decision on what to install in the wing. I'm afraid this might be a case of "What happens in Malta, stays in Malta" !
  14. The Spitfire Vc's supplied to Malta were flown in armed with the 4 20mm canon, but prior to entry into service had two of the canon removed (either from the I/B or O/B bays) . My question is were the Browning .303's then re-installed in the outer bays, to give the same weight of fire as the Vb's? The C wing was designed to accept them, and the guns would be routinely removed and installed for cleaning and servicing, anyhow. There would have been no shortage of supply of .303's or ammunition as they were used in the Vb's. "Buzz" Beurling's combat reports (reprinted in the book 'Sniper of the Skies' by Nick Thomas) speaks of attacking with 'canon and machine gun fire' but does not mention the specific aircraft he flew on that day. Photo's in Brian Cauchi's book, and Paul Lucas's articles are inconclusive, and profiles are somewhat unreliable. Any thoughts, anyone? thanks, Colin
  15. ... more chipping done, now for dirt and decals! the end is in sight! Colin
×
×
  • Create New...