[1/48 Do17Z - seated aircrew options?]

The ancient Monogram Ju 87D had a pilot and gunner, but to me they appear a bit underscale. Otherwise, there weren't that many German multicrew kits brought on the market for some time, and during most of that period figures were somewhat unfashionable. I have no idea whether the AMT Ju 88 contained any crew figures, but if it did, their quality likely would have matched the rest of the kit... Not completely but pretty sure its Hobbycraft offspring and their Do 17 didn't include figures; neither did the Fujimi Me 110, Dragon/Revell Ju 88, Revellogram He 111. --- Quite recently Revell did some aircrew sets, but I am unsure about their scale and subjects...

You could always model her with escape hatch open, after they took to their chutes

[Building an F-4D by using an………F-4B?]

I seem to recall reading somewhere that the J radome was slightly larger due to the different radar set (but this may well be incorrect - there are many kits on the market using the same basic radome tooling for B/C/D/J - which of course may be incorrect as well), but as @CT7567 says, I also cannot recall reading about such difference between B and C/D. 

[Spitfire IX References?]

There was also a rather good booklet by Wojtek Matusiak published by Mirage - primarily covering those flown by Polish aircrew, but with a lot of good general information (IIRC).

[1/32 or 1/48 P38 kit - circa 1980]

15 hours ago, RJP said:

That have me a start - pale blue sounds like the Aurora kit I (or my brother) had in the 1950s.  According to Scalemates, it first saw daylight in 1953.  

 

Ghastly thing as I recall it - could that have been it?

You recall correctly regarding ghastly, my father (or uncle) had one of those too, and when I had access to it 20 years later, it did a number of dogfights in which ghastlyness didn't matter much. It was big. However, it was moulded in a rather intense medium metallic blue - the even more ghastly Me 109 was metallic wine red IIRC, and the undescribable "MiG-19" (or 17?) in vomit-inducing metallic green.

 

[PDU aircraft project (long post, lots of images)]

58 minutes ago, Dave Fleming said:

 

I'd think more likely Temperate Sea Scheme colours - the roundel colours show it's most likely take with ortho film; That would make the blueish EDSG appear lighter than in real life.

You mean as a base, or as the paints for the experimental pattern? If the latter, that would be a very marked contrast between EDSG and DSlateG, type of film notwithstanding.

[Looking For Martlet/Wildcat Images]

47 minutes ago, ClaudioN said:

All Martlets had .50s.

 

Seems I'm in for Alzheimer treatment, if there is one.

[Building an F-4D by using an………F-4B?]

22 minutes ago, DrumBum said:

My last 2 builds were Tamiya and I just wanted to stick with the awesome fit of these kits!!!! 
 

thanks again

 

 

Then definitely Monogram is not for you

[Seafire FR47 Korean war rocket loadout]

The 47 was the last kit I managed to finish, some 25+ years ago... Sorry, I don't recall how I painted them, but I think there was a somewhat hazy shot in an old Air International, ca. 1980- (very ca.), possibly accompanying an article by Eric Brown? This is mine , but you really can't see anything on the photo (better picture here, they may be black or dark green), and the model is in long-term storage... somewhere! IIR the article correctly, the underwing tanks were not well liked as they impaired manoeuvrability, and I seem to recall they were not jettisonable, so not useful in combat (I may be wrong, it's a long time). What I remember is - if you use the rockets, forget their tail parts. The fins are fat, and there's not much you can do to them. I am quite certain I replaced the exhaust with pieces of metal tube (either alu or brass), and made new fins from thin sheet. A pure joy considering there are 32 of them, but in the end it was not that hard. And also get a replacement sliding canopy (IIRC mine was Aeroclub for the Sea Fury), as the kit part was frankly dreadful, as it stopped 1mm or so each side above the slice rails, and had a somewhat uneven texture. No idea if they ever got around retooling this part, as it is so focal. And another possible small improvement is adding something as a chin intake interior, as it is an empty hole. I think I used a part of the 46 cowling underside part.

[PDU aircraft project (long post, lots of images)]

On 3/5/2009 at 10:29 PM, ben_m said:

 

Hudson N7334 (shot down by friendly fire on 3rd March), which has a interesting camouflage scheme:

 

Thanks for bumping this thread up again - and many thanks for that most interesting page from AM! A highly interesting paint scheme, however, I wouldn't call it "blotchy" but "fency", as the pattern consists of diagonal fences. Is anyone able to spot any colour demarcations of the original scheme, or can we assume the base was Dark Green? --- I really should seriously consider rejoining AB...

[Looking For Martlet/Wildcat Images]

1 hour ago, detail is everything said:

The photos also appear to show no sign of guns fitted.  I would expect to see an inner gun barrel sticking out and a hole next to it for the other gun barrel 

What was the practice for direct purchase aircraft - .30s or .303s? If the latter, I'd imagine they were fitted after arrival; and how about the gunsight - UK GFE, possibly?

[Good 1/24 WW2 Aircraft kits]

Wasn't there also a Mosquito, as first of the "new" Airfix 1/24s? 

Not quite sure about the Hurricane, IIRC @Troy Smith has stated that the Trumpeter kit is excellent; and considering their track record that may even mean it's their best aircraft kit allround  

[Heinkel He-162A 1/72 Comparison - AZ and Special Hobby?]

On 1/14/2023 at 4:34 PM, MDriskill said:

To say my references vary on this point is putting it mildly (the Dragon kit actually agrees with what must have been considered the best drawing at the time: Alan Hall's classic "MAP Plan Pack" on the He 162. But not with other drawings I've seen).

Alan Hall and MAP may have been slightly antagonistic - AWH published SAM, MAP/Argus SMI  I do not know the AvNews drawings, but those by Pat Lloyd (IIRC he at least collaborated on them) indeed look very good - and I think covered a number of projects like butterfly tail, so are possibly the source for the AZ kits.

 

I am pretty sure that the 162 was covered in an ancient Luftfahrt International volume, with a number of reprinted original drawings. If of use, I can have a look (I should have at least part of my LI's instantly accessible).

 

1 hour ago, MDriskill said:

Ha, I built one of those as a tyke, but it's not in my meager stash of survivors! Those exotic German Lindberg subjects were a treat to a fevered pre-teen brain (Ar 234, Do 335, Fw 190D, He 100, He 162, Hs 129, Me 163, Me 410).

They also had a Do 17 and a He 219. All of those kits would lead to an instant summon at the ICC for atrocities... Just like the US types they did in the mid 60, of which I luckily have managed to avoid contact with except for the Kingfisher. To be fair, they (probably) predated most of their superior competition. I have a feeling they may have been tooled at Lindberg's German facility, as they are so completely different in each aspect of approach to Lindberg's 50s kit, some of which are just plain gorgeous (1/64 B-58, F8U-1...)

[Building an F-4D by using an………F-4B?]

I think you could build one of the earliest F-110As, which were Navy Bs loaned to the AF and returned soon after (IIRC). However, memory is hazy...

A cheap way for a fairly nice D would probably be the Esci/Scalecraft/Ertl kit, but the mould is something like 40 years old and should probably not be presented directly beside a Tamiya or ZM Phantom...Same goes for the Monogram.

[Curtiss Tomahawk I]

1 hour ago, Carl V said:

Hi, Bruce:

            Should you care to trust me with your email address, PM it to me and I would be pleased to send you PDFs of the relevant chapters from the first volume of my unpublished book on the Canadian Association with the Curtiss fighters. Over a hundred photos of RAF Tomahawks, most previously unseen and some good detail shots.

            This offer applies to anybody else out there who might be interested.

Carl

Hi Carl,

as I wrote here:

"If you happen to have a chat with @Carl V anytime, I'd be happy if he could confirm whether this was actually released or not. If it was, I want it, plain simple. And if he had Mr Hopp (or someone else) prepare the scale drawings for Blenheim/Bolingbroke, Stranraer, Cat/Canso and the Curtiss's, I'd be hugely interested (and I will pay, of course). Mustang to a lesser extent, but if the drawings cover the Allison variants, as before applies. Even more interesting would be the manuscripts of all of them, as I think it highly likely he had completed a lot of the research, and if he happens to have done so, I'd be highly interested and again, I don't want anything for free. Hard work has to be remunerated.", 

so I will gladly take up your offer - and I am still prepared to pay, of course. In particular for the drawings, if those ever were produced.

[Germany Puma Tanks]

Luckily I do not need translator to have a quick go through it

Part of the problem, possibly with many armies around the world, but certainly at the Bundeswehr, is that it has been attempted to run them like a business, with just in time logistics for spares, outsourcing etc. That may have worked in peacetime to some extent, with only limited peacekeeping missions going on, but is bound to run into problems when demand suddenly surges. If you have close to zero stocks of long lead-time spares, problems are inevitable, especially if the suppliers have tailored their capacities to (normal) demand. And they will not be able to suddenly increase their capacities to meet increased demand, if only for the lack of suitably qualified manpower. To some extent it is a systemic failure, but then in (relative) peacetime no one liked to spend more taxes to retain a higher degree of independence from just in time supplies; so in some ways the situation is also to blame on voters. I could comment on my view of the qualification of the current and at least four preceding German MoD's, but that would probably be considered political .

 

From what I read, 16 or 17 of the Pumas have returned to service already, with only the one with the cable fire requiring more thorough repair. Suppliers and politicians are blame-gaming in my view, with reality probably somewhere in the middle of the field.

 

As regards the PzH 2000, as Jochen stated, they have been employed - if reports are true - in a fashion for which they simply were not designed out of operational necessity, and I have my doubts any other comparable system would have fared much better. Any barrel of any artillery (or other fire) weapon has a specific life/TBO after which it has to be changed or refurbished as far as I'm aware, and this is measured in shots. It would be interesting to know if the guns fell short of this, which may have been influenced by non-observance of e.g. max shots per given period to avoid overheating, or if the limit was actually reached sooner than expected because the guns performed so well.

 

My perceptions, and hopefully not considered (too) political.

[1/48 Seafire 47 contra rotating propeller - How to replace lost part]

15 hours ago, AntPhillips said:

 

 the Mrs keeps promising me another shed to house the non-hobby stuff, but then she keeps finding other projects to finance instead

May we call you "two sheds" after you were successful?

[Westland Whirlwind HAS.22 (A02056V) 1:72 Airfix Vintage Classics]

Actually this kit was retooled twice in the past 66 years, with the first one (in 1967/8) being more drastic, so it's not quite the original. The original had no innards, with two alien torsos sitting on a shelf, and no main cabin windows (nor sure about the cockpit side windows). The floatation bags for the wheels were removed (or blanked) in the 1973/4 retool, as regrettably was the plinth on the tail rotor drive tunnel for the upper nav (?) light (which is still on the clear sprue, as well as a searchlight [I think]). I'd love to have seen Airfix adding a new, separate base for the spine light and this kit reappearing in the lovely blue/red Antarctic scheme. And frankly, the rotor head and blades more than show their age.

[Airfix Great Western paddle steamer 1/180 scale]

A re-release will not necessarily bring the price of older boxings down - the Type 3 and especially the Type 4 boxings are really scarce and hence usually expensive (I saw the latter only once in my active ebay days, which spanned from 2004 to something like 2017).

I'd say the smaller one is more of an approximation, with its integral paddles on the half-wheels - but then it's something like 65.

Sorry, I am a collector so am of no help re building hints.

[Kit storage]

1 hour ago, Heather Kay said:

 The boxes aren’t all that important, 

That depends on if the kits are realistically intended to be built. If not, a bad box may make a huge difference to price in case of reselling (at least if sold on to a kit collector like me...).

[CMK cockpit for Hasegawa's 1/72 J2M3, has someone used it?]

1 hour ago, TheKinksFan said:

Thank you for the links, I had seen that aeroscale article, but that Czech forum post was new. At least it proves that if you are some kind of modelling wizard from Czechia, the end result will look like that. 

It's hard to say exactly what went wrong with the Sword kit, and what caused what. But as the fit is so vague in kits like it, the fuselage was really hard to close around the cockpit, I had to clamp it from several directions, first by hand, and then with clamps. Later I noticed that there was crack in the plastic, a real split, on the fuselage behind the cockpit. I had to clamp that shut, it shut the gap, but caused a twist in the plastic where the rear window should be glued. The rear windows are separate parts, and should be glued to that horizontal structure that connects to the back of the seat. The cockpit wasn't entire centered between the fuselage, so I had to glue that horizontal beam (or whatever it's called) off center behind the head rest. One of the rear windows fit, but because of the twist in the plastic, the other would not. 

I have finished a Sword Reggiane Re.2000 and a Fiat G.55, those were much easier. I have an Airfix B5N2 on the bench, in comparison it fits like a dream. I think I need a break from short run kits. Too many short run kits will drive one crazy.

Somehow this sounds like "call it a day", which is not yet a Kinks song I think (and will never become one). So how to make this a SUNNY AFTERNOON? A couple of years back, I bought a big load of scrap kits because it contained three of the four (I think) "lost Japanese" Revell 1/32 kits, including two Raidens. So if you want an impressive Raiden, drop me a line. Would have to be dismantled and rebuilt, but I think both are essentially complete.

[CMK cockpit for Hasegawa's 1/72 J2M3, has someone used it?]

On 1/4/2023 at 1:11 PM, TheKinksFan said:

My build of Sword's Raiden has come to an dead end, and I'm not able to finish the kit. 

If you're tired of Jack, build LOLA instead (but I am not aware of any Japanese bomber with that reporting name, sadly...). Or give Jack a WATERLOO SUNSET the old school - AA firecracker, and off he goes.

Sorry I can add nothing about that cockpit...

9 minutes ago, Bob C. said:

OK, I'm crushed.  No one commented on my Kinks references (even you, TheKinksFan).  Maybe one reason is I completely blew the title of the second song mentioned.  It's actually "Tired of Waiting For You", not "So Tired".  So you are all forgiven for that.  I should have known not to trust to memory back to 1964/5.  No, no, don't tell me to STOP YOUR SOBBING.  I'm just sitting in my SHANGRI-LA waiting for a SUNNY AFTERNOON here in Southeast Pennsylvania.  OK, I'm getting out of here before I get carried away.  SET ME FREE!!

 

Best wishes, 

Bob C

Better now?  All day... IMHO has one of the best yet most simple riffs in history. The Stranglers' version is also rather cool - but I don't want to go too far O/T...

[Serial Yak 6 undercarriage - fixed or retractable?]

2 hours ago, Smudge said:

Ok @tempestfan I think I found it.

 

I'm not a member so I can't see anything. Maybe I'll join. Looks like it might be something 'up my street' 

 

Thanks.

Sorry, I didn’t want to put up a blatant ad for the site There are fora whose admins do not react favourably to such, and I confess I am ignorant to the policy applicable here. But I gave you a clue, and it seems to have worked

All the better if it’s up your street anyway, I think you will not be disappointed after you joined. You may well find out there are folks leading a secret double live, building here and collecting there…

[B5N2 wheels down question]

On 1/1/2023 at 7:30 PM, MDriskill said:

Gotta love Maru Mechanic: here's their ridiculously detailed side and front drawings of how the gadget worked.  Being the first IJNAF bomber with retractable gear, Nakajima obviously put some thought into it!

 

 

Ohhhhh yessss - they are so in love with detail it almost hurts. Some of the most beautifully drawn "plans" I have ever seen (no idea how accurate, however - but the draughtsmanship is stunning!). Such a pity they are so hard to get around here. --- I can't set the cursor under the box below for some reason --- I am not sure whether they should update/replace their Dinah with a new mould, or rather try again what they did some 20 years ago - contact Arii/MicroAce, and put those gorgeous ex-LS Dinahs (and possibly the Nells, too) in a red box. And as they shied away from the ex-Otaki Japanese types in 48th back then, some of those may be a viable addition to the Airfix range even now. And when I look at the eye-(and mouth :-))watering low prices of those kits at certain Japanese sites, it can't really break the bank? I prefer a well-researched Japanese kit of 50 years vintage, possibly lacking some of today's finesse, over a wonderful true-to-specimen LIDAR, where no-one with subject knowledge eradicates the restoration additions. I have a dim recollection the 1966ish Dinah was based on a captured one at Middle Wallop (???, well, back then, before my parents even met), with some creative additions faithfully copied (subconsciousness says "wheel cover plates").

19 minutes ago, MDriskill said:

Ha - thanks for asking, I never understood this either until looking it up!

 

Agreed, I'd love to see Airfix update their classic Val and Dinah at least. I can think of a few other Japanese birds overdue for a 1/72 update too...Ki 44 Tojo, late-model Ki-43 Oscars, J2M Jack, and no. 1 on my list the E13A Jake floatplane.

[Serial Yak 6 undercarriage - fixed or retractable?]

On 4/18/2021 at 10:27 PM, JWM said:

The funny story is that two weeks ago I started work on this Alfa (original) kit (the same reboxed then by Zvezda, Encore, Mistarcraft) which was in my stash for 30 years...

 

There was an even earlier incarnation of the Alfa Jak-6, in a black and white box supposedly from the mid 80s, with english-only text on the box. My example is missing the instructions, so I can't comment on them. The general parts are the same (mostly), but with some significant differences: No "Frogmen", what appears three fold-up seats moulded flat, and - choice  of fixed and retracting u/c (though no wheel bays on the nacelles. The box art actually depicts a machine with extended retractable u/c. As I have currently no photohost which is acceptable here, I will upload pics in a certain modelkitcollecting forum in a minute.

[Mig-23]

26 minutes ago, Rob de Bie said:

Here's the Airfix MiG-23 on the 4+ drawing. Roughly speaking, 5 mm is missing at the front, 10 at the rear. Also, the angle of the rear side of the wing glove is too strong.

 

 

Rob

Your pic implies the wing chord must be undersize, too, as the "step" appears to intrude into the rear sweep area? OTOH, the glove span looks pretty much spot on, and the fuselage breadth quite close, so we are not talking about an 00 scale model...