Jump to content

ho590hm

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    84

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by ho590hm

  1. ho590hm
    Very nice kit arrived last week. One minor query: The kit has alternate engine parts for the extending cylinder used for noise suppression and thrust reversal covering three configurations - in cruise, deployed positions for takeoff, and with reversers deployed. The instructions only seem to show options for cruise, and an incorrect combination of the reverser doors deployed and the cylinder in take off position with door retracted. I think that step 15 in the construction should be using parts D16/D17 and D10/39 in conjunction with the deployed reversers. The cylinder position for takeoff uses parts D36/37 and D14/42, which include the reversers in their stowed position. See https://www.airliners.net/photo/Swissair/Douglas-DC-8-32/375225 for a view of the takeoff position with the reversers stowed which also shows how good the moulded panel detail on the engines is. That's the config I will be using to differentiate from all the other DC-8 kits out there.
  2. ho590hm
    Producer accepts Paypal direct to vitaly.yastrub@gmail.com after placing your order on the website so that you have an order number to quote. Someone on airlinercafe.com has validated this. I sent my order this evening and got an immediate response of shipping tomorrow at a price of $36 plus $10 shipping. Cheaper than EE price AFAIK Will let you know if any glitches. Howard
  3. ho590hm
    Air-Graphics MRA.1 now showing as sold out
  4. ho590hm
    The short shots were on parts H34 and H41 - the fuselage halves - definitely a build stopper. The sprue does seem to include the early angled AH-1W exhausts, but not the early equivalent of parts 73 and 74.
  5. ho590hm
    To RichG - NO STEP areas often reflect the positions of the underlying spars and ribs that support the structure, where skins may be thick enough to resist standing on one side and not the other. The skins attach to the same spars and ribs, so it would not be a coincidence if the panel lines matched the NO STEP lines. Now how to we get the decal to span the trench?
  6. ho590hm
    Like the UH-1Y, this contains a complete set of sprues for the AH-1Z (except canopy), even less of which is needed for the AH-1W. There is a new sprue for the W - check yours on arrival as both my fuselage halves were short-shot missing the rotor pylon. Howard
  7. ho590hm
    I think it would be the first time Airfix used a photo of a real aircraft on a boxlid. +1 for wishlist.
  8. ho590hm
    Probably about as accurate as the original Revell B-2 ATB kit (4577) from 1987. Does not even match the released renders round he cockpit.
  9. ho590hm
    Happy to take offers for my Mach 2 kit in the stash. I thought not.
  10. ho590hm
    Just done a detailed review of the sprues against a walkround I did at Farnborough 2010. Very good representation of a lot of surface detail - SFB entirely satisfactory. My comments are at the AMS level, with the opportunity to add the following detail at thin wire level. Side braces on cable cutters Cargo hooks around gear struts Handles around top edges of windscreen Refine chamfer on front turret support Missing intake on port side of rotor pylon Connection wire to rear of IR turret Tail rotor actuators Filing out the trunnions on the supports for the skids - or replace with brass. Some very small aerials to add underneath The interior is light gray on the forward doors and screen above sill height, otherwise black
  11. ho590hm
    Just got mine from Hannants. The full sprue set for the AH-1Z is included - except transparencies, with a complete new sprue for the UH-1Y, plus transparencies. Plenty of spares......
  12. ho590hm
    Quoting Wikipedia: Built on the first generation E-Jet, its wing is redesigned, and it introduces new pylons, landing gear, horizontal stabilizers, cabin, cabin air system, air cycle machine, bleed air system, and a new fly-by-wire system.[37] The switch to a composite wing was not yet justified economically for a similar shape, the less draggy flaps are single-slotted instead of the more complex double-slotted on the E1, and the engine pylon is shorter.[21] The raised, 11:1 aspect ratio gull-wing partially accommodate the 2.01m (79 in) diameter GTF, larger than the CF34 by 66 cm (26 in), while the trailing arm landing gear is taller for 23–25 cm (9.1–9.8 in) higher door sills, giving a 5 cm (2.0 in) lower nacelles than the E1. Fuselage is similar.....
  13. ho590hm
    Now available from Hannants - and still showing available after four hours.........
  14. ho590hm
    I feel the uncontrollable urge to cross-kit to get an RAF C3 and C5......after building the C4.
  15. ho590hm
    Just been looking at the drawings from Space Ranger, which give all the information needed for checking the depth of the nose - and the quality of plans The basic cross section of the fuselage is circular with a diameter of 90 inches for the centre section, with the cabin decking on top and tweaks for the bomb bay. The side view shows that the decking extends 58 inches above the horizontal centre line of the fuselage at the centre of the upper turret, giving a depth of 103 inches at that point. For the nose profile the table in the fourth drawing defines exactly the nose cross sections of the basic (almost circular) fuselage back to the 90 inch section. The two relevant columns are the R value and the r/90 degrees value. Add these together to get the depth of the fuselage - the R value defines the depth below the horizontal centreline, and the r/90 gives the height above, so you can check the profile as far aft as the start of the cokpit. Then its back to the side view for the upper line. That's just a quick look - probably need to do the same for the rear fuselage given the discrepancies shown above. Howard
  16. ho590hm
    I am glad JWM agrees. But it does lead off-topic to the concept of a contra-rotating Triebflugel......to maintain aerodynamic symmetry with those twisted wings in level flight as well as balance the torque in rotating mode?
  17. ho590hm
    Wrong. The distinctive curved blades curve the wrong way when viewed from the front, so you would get all sorts of aerodynamic turbulence from swept forward blades.
  18. ho590hm
    Love the subject. I presume this is resin, so that as soon as I buy one an injection moulded kit will appear. Concur with alt-92 on the rotors - the napkin seems to show contra-rotating blades (which fits the laws of physics) but the CAD shows both going the same way. Better than the Italeri C-27J, where both propellers rotate the wrong way. Apologies for OT gripe. H
  19. ho590hm
    Looks like the MkII may be covered by the KP kit.
  20. ho590hm
    Still showing as in stock at Airfix website this morning - ordered mine last night. Shame that the free postage limit is £20 - need to buy an extra one to clock up the extra penny! Are we seeing a trend here - Big H got their Spitfire stocks a couple of weeks after release, AFAIR Get your Vulcans on preorder now?
  21. ho590hm
    I have just been looking at the kit with a view to building it shortly. Am I missing something or are there only ten pairs of combustion chamber halves on the sprues, rather than the 18 required? Also the floor assembly in front of the front bulkhead seems to be missing from the sprues. You do however get two control wheels - part 9. Any other views on this? Howard
  22. ho590hm
    HLJ have the F-4E on order stop already as available pre-order slots filled. Release quoted as March 2021.
  23. ho590hm
    Just working on a kit sourced through eBay. The model includes two smaller copies, quoted as 1/144 scale, which fit into a structure which matches onto a 1/144 S-IVB stage. The Ranger itself is three times the size of these copies, which implies that the larger model is actually 1/48? The only image I have with people to provide scale indicates a length of about 60 feet, which would be 1/72. Film licence? Howard
  24. ho590hm
    Just working on a kit sourced through eBay. The model includes two smaller copies, quoted as 1/144 scale, which fit into a structure which matches onto a 1/144 S-IVB stage. The Ranger itself is three times the size of these copies, which implies that the larger model is actually 1/48? Howard
  25. ho590hm
    Very good build thread over on airlinercafe.com. Key issues seem to be the different heights of the tailplane slots on either side of the tail and the fit of the engines. There is also a great link to some scans of the mechanics manual from the aircraft, which gives station diagrams. See airlinercafe posts On a dry run the side profile of the engines is close, and the pylons are the right length, and the trailing edge at the right angle. The problem is the slope of the leading edge which is too steep - the top of the LE is about 5mm too high. If you combine that with the moulded locations on the lower wing, the engines get far too low. I think it will be a case of flattening the bulge in the lower wings to match the pylon drawings and taking a wedge out of the leading edge of the pylon to get the right angle. That matches the earlier observation that the lower wing is too curved. I note that the wing appears to be generated by a straight line from root to tip (like the Revell 1/144), whereas the real aircraft appears straight generated from root to outer engine, then the depth reduces more slowly out to the tip (which minicraft seem to have got better). Howard
×
×
  • Create New...