Jump to content

Trenton guy

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Trenton guy

  1. Sword’s 1/72 T-38 included the entire mechanism (front and rear) in their T-38 kit. I don’t think you can get that mechanism any other way. An additional advantage of the Sword T-38 is that  it is actually a T-38. An older kit, it is thin on the ground but pops up on e-bay from time to time. 

  2. Ordered mine from Hannants and glad I did. Now available here in the US, at Megahobby and Sprue Brothers, for twice what I paid at Hannants. There is a postage differential but not that significant an increment when added to the rest of the monthly order at the big H. Before you ask, USPS has only sought customs duties once in the 40 years I have been ordering from Britain. Started in the early 80’s when the £ fell to parity with the $.

    The £ recovered but I never stopped ordering from the fountainhead of scale modelling.

    • Like 2
  3. Got mine direct from Airfix yesterday. Having struggled for most of the day to get everything aligned on the new Meteor so that the wings and fuselage would close, I am a little worried about those “right way/wrong way” assembly diagrams that I noticed and Julien flagged in the review. I am not new at plastic modelling having been building continuously since 1952, but I found it all but impossible to align the many little tabs and bumps around the cockpit insert and the spar/wheel well assemblies. Lots of jiggling, clamping, closing gaps with finger pressure when clamps wouldin’t do it, some super glue and more jiggling. Seems like one can’t glue anything until everything clicks in. Not so easy with only two hands. And the Meteor did not need any “this is the wrong way” diagrams. Knowing the tolerances on these kits I was extra careful with clean up and test fitting.. a little afraid to start the Anson.

  4. According to “Tailspin Turtle” here, that canopy was also used on early production aircraft, although often replaced later. The second canopy was related to internal changes that raised the third the crew member to flight deck level thus necessitating additional headroom. Existing AJ-1’s did not have the cockpit rearranged, hence not all canopies were replaced. There were tailplane and stabilizer changes that were universally retrofitted as they were a flight safety issue. All this does mean that the kit can only be finished in the early blue schemes ( as the kit provides. Not claiming that the kit schemes are all correct for an early machine. Still need to research that before building. Fortunately, I still have my Anigrand AJ-2 for a gray/white scheme.


    How quick we are to condemn. 

    • Like 2
  5. 9 minutes ago, Phoenix44 said:

    Your "proven" is not everyone's proven. I remain at a loss to understand how sheets of plywood fixed between ribs sag in any way until a substantial amount of time passes? These are sheets of wood, not fabric. They are not positioned sunken between the ribs (as I understand it, which could be wrong) so should not be portrayed as "pits". The plywood is the skin. So why would plywood sag in this way, with most of the dip occurinv whrre urs attached? How does it curve from where its attached like that? I'm struggling to understand how plywood sheets can end up looking like a square trampoline with somebody standing in the middle? And on the underneath of the wing they are somehow sagging upwards? Photos are inconclusive. What we know is how the wing was constructed and there seems to be a bit of a jump from that to what Airfix appears to have produced. If I'm missing something here, I'm more than happy to understand the process or what I'm misunderstanding about the construction but you are not offering that. The Airfix wing looks like the plywood is attached below the ribs. Was it?spacer.png

    I believe that I have read here that not all Anson wings (particularly UK built one’s) were plywood. Am I imagining that?

  6. Apparently, there is more than one kind of “correct” Anson upper wing surface detail. The Airfix renditoin looks a lot like some of the photos posted here but it does not look much like the wing of the one in Ottowa. Got up close and personal with that one and paid very careful attention because I was trying to figure out what to do with the 1/72 Special Hobby one at the time and rather flummoxed by the contradictory published and posted information I was reading. The wings I examined very close up were as smooth as could be. Not a sign of a ripple or even a panel line. I assume it was plywood covered with fabric since the only surface detail at all was the pinked edge of a layer of fabric that ran spanwise along what I think was the rear spar. That detail was so fine that it wasn’t visible a few feet away.

    Someone  more knowledgeable than me on the subject of Annie may be able to explain this but I am sure I saw what I saw.

  7. 12 hours ago, Wulfman said:

    Frog provided nose weights over 60.years ago !


    Ah, that long age Seahawk !!!  Nose weight but no wheel wells. You can’t have everything. Those Frog kits are very fondly remembered, even if they did cost 2 1/2 times what an Airfix series 1 did.

  8. 2 hours ago, rickpeck said:

    Not what I was hoping for but I will get one. The earlier version is what I'm interested in the P-400 etc. for the Pacific area US fighter Groups. 

    I built the RS model kit and it was ok. The extra 'armor' on the nose and engine panels were odd and reason I didn't buy anymore except one for the decals only as I was hoping for a new P-39 kit sort of . Think I sort of want a Tamiya 1/72 P-38H now😃

    Of all the kits I have built in the last 20 some years Arma so far is the only kit I used the kit decals. 


    According to Hyperscale, today, the first release Sprue will include parts for all versions, the P-400, Airacobta Mk I, etc, etc. True to form Arma will release all versions eventually, but it is nice to be able to choose any version from the beginning if you have the decals. My plan is to start wth that very colorful P-39D “UMP” from the 1941 Carolina war games.

    • Like 7
    • Thanks 1
  9. 23 minutes ago, Graham Boak said:

    Now we know - it's another P-39Q.  Not even an early one.  Unexciting choice, could have been better.  Of course, the head of the Polish Air Force postwar flew one.

    All existing P-39 kits have significant shape issues, particularly in the rear fuselage. You can be sure this one won’t. Also, not so hard to convert to early versions using parts from the now redundant Academy P-39’s in the stash (although, if history is any guide, other versions will follow). I for one am very excited about this.

    • Like 6
  • Create New...