Jump to content

ho590hm

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    84

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by ho590hm

  1. ho590hm
    Amodel quote Humbrol 48 as a match for the blue - can someone tell me the FS number? Thanks
  2. ho590hm
    Did I spot a mismatch between the box art and the painting guide, with the prototype cut-off fin rather than the square? I guess this upsets the cross kitting option proposed by Ken.
  3. ho590hm
    As owner of the Primeportal image above (from the museum at Savannah) - I am happy for it to be used. There are several more in the sequence that confirm the view of the LE section change. The hanging example in SanDiego and the one parked in Seattle show the same feature - according to my unpublished images, as do the others on Primeportal. It is even visible on the J5s at the Chinese Air Force Museum at Xiaotangshan. Howard Mason
  4. ho590hm
    Hannants have them, and I acquired the RAF example in a mixture of hope and curiosity. Following dremeling through the sprue gates on the major components in order to test fit the major components, I can confirm that the fuselage windows are a bit irregular as previously reported, and will need to open up some of the holes and shim the transparencies to a consistent height. One of the engine exhausts is solid as previously reported. The tailplanes have matching thickness, which is good. The intakes looked suspiciously deep, and I brought out an Airfix Nimrod for comparison. The shape of the engine fairings under the wing unfortunately seem to me to match exactly, although the Mach 2 kit has more engraved surface detail. The Nimrod of course had much deeper engine bays than the Comet, in order to accommodate the Spey engines, so some major surgery will be required to flatten them out. The wings also have a marked change of dihedral at mid-span which seems to be a bit exaggerated. Can anyone else confirm this? Will check references in the archive tomorrow. I suppose the alternative would be a "What-if" Comet 4D with Speys.... Howard Mason
  5. ho590hm
    Concorde listed twice with two different numbers (A05170V and A05107V) with same dimensions and artwork. Unfortunately the quoted length of 431mm equates to the production model not the prototype. Are we getting both?
  6. ho590hm
    Does this explain the earlier mention of a visit to the Museum of Flight in Seattle, perhaps?
  7. ho590hm
    Two 1:144 Concordes listed - one identified as a prototype - with same prototype image, different kit numbers (A05107V and A05170V - anagram) and same dimensions in the technical specification. The quoted length is correct for the production version..... Does this mean Airfix is rerunning both of its tools? Confused of Farnborough BAE Systems archive
  8. ho590hm
    Rereleases of Fi156, C-10A(Jetstream), Dominie. Prototype Concorde in BOAC markings.
  9. ho590hm
    I have not yet found a 1/72 X-3 which reflects the discontinuity between the nose and the cockpit, which occurs at the line of the upright frame in the cockpit glazing. This does not appear to have the kink - but happy to be advised otherwise by someone who has the plastic in hand Walkaround at http://www.primeportal.net/hangar/howard_mason3/x-3_stiletto/ See
  10. ho590hm
    If one was looking for an accurate Concorde, the Airfix/Heller 1/72 monstrosity would be in the other direction, Dick Ward had to redesign the decals to fit as he made the error of basing his original work on accurate plans. BAE Systems has just recovered the original prototype drawings to its archive at Farnborough - approximately 8 tons of Mylar representing 200,000+ drawings which has been catalogued by a team of volunteers from Brooklands, Duxford, Yeovilton and Le Bourget. We also have a production drawing set on microfiche. I would therefore dispute the contention that there is a lack of line drawings of this iconic airframe..... There is nothing I would like better than to have an accurate representation in plastic - at either scale. Howard Mason, Heritage Manager, BAE Systems
  11. ho590hm
    Very tempted by this even though I have yet to finish the An-124 (and Tu-144 and Il-86) One concern from the rendering is the new centre section which seems a bit too deep. Most frontal shots on airliners.net seem to show a horizontal line between the new inboard engines. Perhaps its just the angle. Cheers Howard
  12. ho590hm
    Really good to have an early model of the original prototype. Waiting for the next iteration, like the J-20. Halfway through the build. Overall a reasonable representation, based on images available on the web. Key irritations to date are: Shape of the lower rear fuselage - tapers too much compared to available images Engine exhausts need grinding down to fit through available holes Nose gear door hung on wrong side, with three chevrons rather than two at front and rear Need to fabricate the prominent internal fairing behind the ejector seat - original has strips of tape which allow a good guess at shape Moulded limit of the nose radome needs rescribing in correct position Purists will enjoy adding some greeblies to the main and nose gear areas, and what I assume are radar reflectors on the wings. Oh that the original Airfix Jaguar had been this good....
  13. ho590hm
    The Sinsheim Buran model (almost) represents the BTS-02 atmospheric test version that they exhibit at Speyer. You would need to remove the four jet engines and mod the rockets to represent the flight-worthy Buran. There is also a gear fairing under the nose to cater for mounting the nose leg lower to improve the angle of attack for runway takeoffs - but that is not an issue as it seems to have been missed. Not sure the BTS-02 was ever carried by the An-225? But happy to be proved wrong. Howard
  14. ho590hm
    I concur with Ken. Extract from my primeportal WA below. Shame about the tanks - they look correct on the boxart. Hoping to revisit in May. Howard
  15. ho590hm
    The following may be of assistance: HA-300 on Primeportal Taken a few years ago at Schleissheim, near Munich. Howard Mason
  16. ho590hm
    Looked in the BAE Systems archive at Farnborough, and found the flight test reports or the DH91, four boxes of stress calculations in immaculate handwriting on foolscap, the resulting type record and five volumes of contemporary pictures. A lot of these are Flight and Aeroplane copyright, but I will see what we can provide. Howard Mason - BAE Systems Heritage Manager
  17. ho590hm
    Given mould sizes, I think we will get Hastings, Andover, Beverley before Belfast and VC10. Just a hint, Didier.... Howard
  18. ho590hm
    Hard to resist, although that fin leading edge looks a trifle blunt, and the upper line of the nose seems to blend into the base of the windscreen rather than somewhat below as per the original. The Miliput will act as nose weight......
  19. ho590hm
    Really looking forward to this kit as a contribution to future bankruptcy. I have a slight confusion here - probably showing my ignorance. The Aardvark image of the Lugansk aircraft from Friday seems to show the canted fins of the T-10-5 series, but the slender nose of the T-10-1. I also cannot discern the fairings sticking forward from the fins that appear on the T-10-10, nor a nose probe. Ken Duffey's image from Lugansk and the walkaround available on scalemodels.ru (dating from 2006/7) seem to have a different nose configuration - looks like an Su-27 nose grafted on, but joined at an angle and not aligned with a structural break. Did the T-10-5 series have the old or new configuration? My view of the Modelsvit CADs seem to show the later nose configuration. All comments welcome.
  20. ho590hm
    While I quail at the effort required to depict the Modelsvit Tu-144 with its gear in mid retraction sequence, it is no more complex mechanically than adding a 90 degree sideways tilting bogie to the folding leg of an Argosy. Mind you the Mach 2 Argosy tail boom would still not accommodate the wheels! As someone once nearly said "Ye cannae break the laws of geometry, Captain" We can always pretend that the blanked off gear bays conceal a mechanism that includes a baseplate for a 90 degree rotation as soon as the base units clear the inner structure. I have not yet checked to see if the hull is deep enough to accommodate the rotated gear. On the positive side, the configuration as depicted will stop the model rolling off a table. Would they really use RLM 62 green so late in the war?
  21. ho590hm
    Might need some major surgery on the landing gear. Each unit consists of two parallel angled legs, with a wheel between them and wheels on the outside. Each leg has a downlock in the same plane as the leg. That is a rigid rectangular structure where the axle cannot twist through 90 degrees, and could not therefore be steerable unless the entire mounting rotated through 90 degrees. However, the combined width of the three wheels will not retract through the available slot unless there is a 90 degree rotation......
  22. ho590hm
    Now that looks really nice SFB!
  23. ho590hm
    Good news on the An-70 - gives space to clear An-22, An-124, Il-87, Tu-144, Il-76, Buran, Tu-126, Tu-160, M50, off the bench first. Hem.
  24. ho590hm
    Disappointing that the An-70 seems to have disappeared. Growing proliferation of Migs - I wonder if the E155 series (prototype of Mig-25) is forthcoming.
  25. ho590hm
    There should be no doubt that the actuating mechanism visible in the background is identical to that found in the B-25D that is at the Yankee Air Museum in Michigan. Unless anyone has information that the same mechanism was used on another type, the image is of a B-25. Howard Mason, Heritage Manager, BAE Systems
×
×
  • Create New...