Dennis_C
-
Posts
1,629 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Events
Profiles
Forums
Media Demo
Posts posted by Dennis_C
-
-
55 minutes ago, Aardvark said:
will be Czech beer
sprue and pork shank sprue???
Hmmm, some paprika goulash with palinka or tokai bottle sprue would be good option too!
-
2 hours ago, Fulcrum@ said:
Academy is a copy of the Heller kit, with engraved line...
Does it mean Academy is good or bad?
-
1
-
-
It's all good except for the fact that Italeri released a kit of pre production Gripen over 25 years ago...
And pretty uncommon case when a short run manufacturer repacks a mainstream kit. I know Eduard doing this with Hasegawa kits but in that case they give some own goodies, add a nice decal sheet. And I do not recall other examples really.
-
19 hours ago, VMA131Marine said:
Er, have you seen the wing of the F-104?
How about the F-117A? No curves there either.
Actually that's my latest completed model, I saw and photographed F-104 in at least two museums and I thought about F-104 before writing my post
Even helicopter rotor blades have air foil with curved upper surface. Ignorable in 1/72 but still
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, Col. said:
There's three oxygen bottles lying on a shelf behind the seat and not much room for anything else back there. Have a look at some photos of what's included in Airfix' 48th scale kit and you'll get the idea
Yeah. I had I look at 1/48 instruction. Some scratchbuilding is probably likely now
-
Some comments regarding Airfix kit.
My prior experience with Airfix was quite positive in terms of fit. Some models were almost no putty (Defiant, Skyhawk, Hurricane). Some required not more than average sanding (Vampire, Gnat). But PR.XIX is not as straight. Fuselage parts and wing joint seem okay, but e.g. propeller is just awful. And no nice prop plug-in feature like in Hurricane or Defiant when you can insert prop rotating mechanism as the last assembly step. Here you just insert prop into fuselage before fuselage halves are joined. And then break it several times.
My second impression is oversimplification. No undercarriage bay details, gear struts are molded together with covers (say hi to the 70s), rear wheel bay is very simplistic and bay doors are grossly thick. That's sort of okay for the complexity level but not strong impression after Tamiya and Eduard
so some work needed before this is on par.
-
46 minutes ago, Col. said:
Nice work so far.
Having wasted a lot of time and effort detailling the cockpit of two Airfix XIX kits only to never see it again through the overy thick canopies I'd say either don't bother or get vacuformed replacements
Yeah, Airfix canopy is simply horrible. Pity Eduard did a number of canopy options but not a PR windscreen.
29 minutes ago, alt-92 said:Rob Taurus and Pavla have them.
Yup. Saw these on big H too. And added to some other goodies like e.g. eduard's exhaust pipes for eduard's mk.ix. Eduard's plastic exhausts are fine but with quite pronounced molding seam will not get perfect result.
Honestly I had three attempts to use vacform canopies of which one canopy went completely ruined (for AZ Hueycobra), one was quite okay (Sword's T-33) and one could be okay but I favoured plastic one (OV-10). So I will try but who knows the outcome...
BTW with good canopy rear section of the cockpit for Airfix will require some work as OOB it's completely bare. Anyone knows if any special equipment to be there in PR version?
-
Very nice build! And special thank you for comparison photos! Now I know for sure I should think three times before buying this kit
-
1
-
-
Great work! Very nice Crusader here. And fully agree it's a top kit. One of the best I ever worked with.
-
1
-
-
Simple sprues with not so many parts.
Construction starts with the pilot!
-
4
-
-
Yes. That is the last of the trio.
Let's see what airfix squeezed into a box that is more than twice as smaller as eduard's.
This will represent a machine from 81st squadron as flew in Hong Kong in 1951.
-
2
-
-
Hi again,
Some work been done on Eduard's Spit to get ready for interior priming.
Put together major cockpit parts by adding PE and some tiny plastic bits. Nervous job at times!!! But fit and engineering looks perfect. No bad fitting parts at all. Some putty used for gear bays seams and just a very little on the wheels.
Radiator grills worked well on my kit. I attached plastic sides first and PE was literally sliding at its place.
Awesome kit.
Probably just have to assemble propeller and switching to Airfix mk.XIX.
Dennis
-
4
-
-
Seems this is the MPM plastic. Very familiar to me. Make sure you dry test fuselage to wing joint thoroughly. I recall the fit was bad and I was doing some plastic inserts.
-
1
-
-
Gentlemen,
I have a question (two questions) that were probably answered million times already... Spitfire cockpit colour.
1. As I understand mk.IX and mk.XIX even produced post war in 1945 should have standard grey green colour. So that's easy. How different should be mk.I? Some time ago as I was building my early Hurricane and Defiant I stopped with Eau de Nile which probably can be described as a greener hue of standard grey green. Is it good approach for a Spitfire manufactured in June'40 as well?
2. Area behind the seat and rear armour plate. Should it be aluminium or interior colour? References and instructions actually give different responses.
-
2 hours ago, Jackson Duvalier said:
Those beautiful rivets are easy to lose to sanding and/or paint accumulation.
Yeah. First time I build such fully riveted kit. Should be super diligent with dry fitting to minimise or avoid sanding.
-
1 hour ago, Jackson Duvalier said:
The Tamiya kits are very good as kits. They lack a bit as replicas, as Troy mentioned above. But they are fun to build. Though I've no idea how that rudder made it out of the factory. It's not a deal breaker with some sanding however.
I actually compared the wing chord of tamiya and eduard. Tamiya does look wider maybe fraction of a millimetre at trailing and leading edges. Also it seems a little more elliptical at the leading edge. I.e. it's widest at half span approximately. I'll do some shots as eduard and airfix come off the sprues.
-
1 hour ago, Jackson Duvalier said:
-The peg that holds the dorsal dome light is a tight fit. The transparent part is tiny. And transparent. If the peg doesn't slide tidily into the hole you'll never find it when it pings off into the aether. I suspect a tiny bit of blue tack on a stick would work rather better than tweezers for this operation.
Hi, and thanks for the recommendations!
Specifically for the transparency issue. I'll see later how this would work. But what I concluded myself recently - for such tiny transparencies Kristal Klear works better than plastic pieces at least for me. Just a good drop of Kristal Klear as the very last step in the build and you have a nice transparent enough light that becomes flat after the PVA dries.
In fact that's my plan for tamiya mk.I, drill a conical recession and than paint silver and put kristal klear at the end.
-
1
-
-
Ok. Today I opened my Eduard mk.IXe box. It will be mostly OOB with only Sky's Decal set added as my plan is to make an Israeli Spitfire that came in time for Independece War, but Eduard only supplies decal for the 50s markings option.
When you say OOB for Eduard profipack it actually means this:
So it's technically out of the box, but the box is full of treasures
Perhaps the only worthwhile addition may be a resin replacement for exhausts. Need to think about it.
Just look at this wheels, and cockpit framing, and those wing tips and stabilizers!!!
And superb level of surface details
Spent over an hour looking at the sprues and instruction book to understand where 6 undercarriage legs and 6 stabilizers should go. Nothing is done
More tomorrow.
So far looks like the best kit I've ever held in my hands 😉
-
4
-
-
Just my last two cents. I've actually have another model on the shelf where the same mistake is made by the manufacturer. It's Meng's FIAT G.91. It also has a wing fence that highlights the absent curvature. Also the issue is seen at the wing-fuselage joint. It's a little less pronounced as the wing chord is shorter and only one fence there.
Difference is Meng's FIAT was only the second model from the firm and was not announced as fantastic Gina...
-
It's great we have a simple, affordable, easy for assembly, new tool kit of MiG-17F. It will work for many as is and it's a starting point for rivet counters too.
Just pity Airfix did not do well here although their recent releases are praised for geometrical accuracy (hope it's not because no one checked).
Sorry again if the comment is disturbing to anyone. I'm not super expert, just relying on what others say and a little bit on my own eyes.
Probably CMK is doing a replacement resin wing, correct turbine, right ejection seat in a while...
-
5
-
-
44 minutes ago, Work In Progress said:
No idea what kit you're looking at, but I'm looking at this one in RFI -
- and I can see the curved upper surfaces of the airfoil extremely clearly on all three fence lines. Just try laying a ruler or sheet of paper across the bottom of the fences.
The inner fence is most obvious. It should have same width almost all the way through. But its noticeably wider at the last third. That is because the wing is flat for 2/3 of the chord.
Look at the fence width at blue marks (sorry for crude screenshot quickly made):
-
4
-
-
I've read all the comments here and Gabor's analysis on another forum. And honestly I'm frustrated. Airfix just did awfully bad job with the model. Wing of MiG-17 is indeed complex and I can understand simplification with the leading edge. But flat wing surface... Sorry. All aircraft have curved upper wing side. It's aerodynamics basics. And it's very prominent especially where the wing has several fences that highlight curvature.
Then MiG-15 ejection seat and non-afterburner engine... this is just homework not made.
And after all this idiotic barrel and missed C7 part on molds. No quality control?
I understand a comment that the model is for Johnny to be bought in a grocery shop. But why Johnny should build a wrong model?
I was really looking at it as an adversary model for my Vietnam and IDF collections but unfortunately not this time.
-
3
-
-
Preparations for interior and some exterior painting are finished for my mk.I. A small tetris challenge with all the parts to be sprayed with primer and then silver, interior green, gun metal, black and yellow etc. Just in a little while as mk.I waits for two others to come up:
Now time to switch to the next box - should it be eduard's mk.IX or airfix's mk.XIX?
-
5
-
-
10 minutes ago, Troy Smith said:
AFAIK, the 72nd kit is the same basic outlines as their old tool 48th Spitfire Mk.I, and the prop seems fine in that. I'd eyeball the kit item against photos and judge for yourself.
The 48th Tamiya old tool Mk.I/V is a little short, slab sided, too wide in the cowl, and has wings slightly too broad in chord.
HTH
Thank you for quick response! I do plan to put eduard and tamiya fuselages next to each other and the wings of all three models as well. I'll post what I see although I believe there were tons of similar comparisons elsewhere... Just a bit later as I unpack mk.IX and mk.XIX.
F100D Super Sabre EC 2/11 Vosges (1:72)
in Ready for Inspection - Aircraft
Posted
Nicely turned out and a great set of the Huns!