Circloy
-
Posts
312 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Events
Profiles
Forums
Media Demo
Posts posted by Circloy
-
-
There's a mass of information, advice and questions over on the RMweb forum along with some inspiring model railway projects.
Its a lengthy discussion (currently 95 pages) and includes discussion on software options including links to the silhouette software Centre in the USA.
Considering getting one myself.
-
1
-
-
Anyone shed any light on this - got more of a German look to it rather than US
http://www.americanairmuseum.com/media/11539
https://b17flyingfortress.de/en/b17/42-5053-bloody-tangier-show/
-
On 2/21/2019 at 11:14 PM, Radpoe Spitfire said:
B17 "My Amigo"
Radpoe Out of respect for the crew can you correct the title and use the planes correct name "Mi Amigo"
-
23 hours ago, tonyot said:
Since a B-17 named Mia Amigo
Tony,
Hate to be a pedant but out of respect for the crew can you correct the title? The aircraft was named Mi Amigo !
-
1
-
-
On 2/23/2019 at 9:06 AM, ivan-o said:
I am sure that one of the Officers talking from Lakenheath said that although they are remembering this crew they actually lost 43 planes that day alone!
On 2/23/2019 at 9:41 AM, Paul821 said:Roger A Freeman (Mighty Eighth War Diary) confirms that + additional 4 planes written off after landing.
There were 799 planes dispatched that day but only 99 reached their intended target due to weather conditions.
Whilst the loss of any aircrew on the 22 Feb 1944 should never be forgotten. The self sacrifice by the crew of Mi Amigo on that day deserves the special remembrance that it was afforded by the USAAF & RAF this year.
Badly damaged following the raid possibly by flak and certainly by the Luftwaffe on its return leg Mi Amigo was lost some 80 miles from its Northamptonshire base. Emerging from bad weather and with engines failing they found themselves looking over a heavily populated area, probably never knowing it was Sheffield, with little options for landing they spotted an open grassed area and headed for Endcliffe Park. As they did their last engine began to splutter and fail, the park was their last hope! To their horror a group of kids were playing in the park with no power the options were stark. Endcliffe Park sits at a low altitude and by now the aircraft would have been below the surrounding hills without engines so climbing away was not an option. The park is small crash and landing beyond the kids was not possible. A crash was now inevitable but where? Other than the small wood that borders the park anywhere else would have meant crashing into housing with the loss of civilian life. The crew chose to sacrifice their only chance of life and it is for that reason that Mi Amigo hold a very special place in the hearts and memories of Sheffield people. This was not just another crash it was a unique sacrifice on the day and a rare event in the whole war.
The flypast was a fitting tribute to their self sacrifice.
First Lieutenant John Glennon Krieghauser, pilot.
Second Lieutenant Lyle J Curtis, co-pilot
Second Lieutenant John W Humphrey, navigator
Second Lieutenant Melchor Hernandez, bombardier
Staff Sergeant Robert E Mayfield, radio operator
Staff Sergeant Harry W Estabrooks, engineer / top turret gunnerSergeant Charles H Tuttle, ball-turret gunnerSergeant Maurice O Robbins, tail gunnerSergeant Vito R Ambrosio, right waist gunnerMuster Sergeant George U Williams, left waist gunner
All aircrew lost that day
-
2
-
-
On 7/3/2018 at 9:56 AM, stevehnz said:
Is there a reference available the shows what parachute flares or smoke floats looked like? It may perhaps help to determine what might be on those underwing racks by being able to match a shape.
Steve
details on smoke floats found here
https://ww2data.blogspot.com/2017/02/british-explosive-ordnance-aircraft_13.html
& parachute flares (British about 1/4 way down page)
-
2
-
-
19 hours ago, stever219 said:
I’ve no experience if the Revell kits but the “G” is notorious for very deep panel lines around the nose and some peculiar moulding of the nose transparency that produces a distorted look to the glazing.
The new Airfix kit is very good, but will only produce a late “G”: looking at the way it’s been tooled though an earlier “G” or even a late “F” might be on the cards in 2020 or so.
Having been in the news recently I'd looked to do 'Mi Amigo', an early 'G' type, lost with all aboard killed when it crash landed into woods in Sheffield after avoiding kids playing in the park. Whilst Airfix was reputed to produce a more accurate model it represented a late model 'G' - shame as the the main squadron markings were included in the bomber supply set. Reviews of the Revell kit highlighted issues that put me off using that as a start point.
Think I'll be waiting to see if Airfix do an early 'G'
-
Not sure what format your camera saves the file in if it's one of the compressed options - JPG, TIFF, etc then editing in Photoshop can be a bit of a faff. You'll need to tweak Hue, colour balance, exposure, gamma etc. If on the other hand you have a raw file Photoshop has a module that gives greater flexibility and has pre-sets that directly adjust colour balance, light temperature and much more with pre-sets for such as lighting type While the pre-sets can do most of the adjustment on their own they may not be perfect but they can be tweaked to suit your own preferences.
http://www.photoshopessentials.com/photo-editing/camera-raw-vs-photoshop/
A great benefit is that they leave the original file untouched and save the edited version, and the edit itself, as new files
Not sure what format your camera saves the file in if it's one of the compressed options - JPG, TIFF, etc then editing in Photoshop can be a bit of a faff. You'll need to tweak Hue, colour balance, exposure, gamma etc. If on the other hand you have a raw file Photoshop has a module that gives greater flexibility and has pre-sets that directly adjust colour balance, light temperature and much more with pre-sets for such as lighting type While the pre-sets can do most of the adjustment on their own they may not be perfect but they can be tweaked to suit your own preferences.
http://www.photoshopessentials.com/photo-editing/camera-raw-vs-photoshop/
A great benefit is that they leave the original file untouched and save the edited version, and the edit itself, as new files
-
The bare steel would have been primed during initial construction but the tanks would have been finished before leaving the factory in the then current US military colour, not in bare primer.
http://bright-cars.com/uploads/chrysler/chrysler-m46-patton/chrysler-m46-patton-11.jpg
http://www.pencaderheritage.org/main/phhistins/tanks/tank10.jpg
http://www.pencaderheritage.org/main/phhistins/tanks.html
Abrams but illustrates the point
http://www.cobases.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Detroit-Arsenal-Tanks.jpg
-
1
-
-
12 hours ago, dcrfan said:
I can't help smiling at the marketing specialists appearing on this thread spouting off plucked sales figures to support their pronouncement of the death of various scales. From my viewing point the other side of the world there definitely is still a market for 1:76 especially to railway modellers. I don't recall seeing any OO scale layout that is not populated by Airfix vehicle kits.
Not a marketing specialist just a realist.
Looking at the relative offerings, excluding aircraft, from Airfix & Oxford die-cast: Airfix offer approx 20 products suitable for use alongside OO/HO railways, Oxford approx 2250. The real marketing specialists are putting their money where the future is. The voices within railway modelling forums also indicate what's currently fashion on layout and where the future for 1/76 vehicles sits.
However this amounts to thread drift so I'll be saying no more about OO/HO offerings.
Hope that Airfix do make a successful toe dip into 1:35 military market so much so that they consider new tools of oft overlooked British equipment.
-
53 minutes ago, Paul821 said:
But there is still a market for 1:76 out there to cater for the large number of modelers who are using 4mm to the foot. Luckily Oxford die-cast are in that market and Hornby have re-entered it this year with the reissue of some of their die-cast vehicles.
True but the market has swung to die-cast. When Airfix introduced these kits there was little if any suitably scaled die-cast available for railway modellers. Matchbox, and others, were a fit the box scale. the only consistent option was to use civilian conversions of military vehicles. The market is now swamped with suitably scaled die-cast of all types of vehicles. At similar RRP's and without the need to invest time and other monies (for glue/paint) I suspect that Oxford have sold more AEC Matadors in the last 5 years that Airfix have in the last 20. I can only see investment from Airfix/Oxford being in die-cast and not kits.
54 minutes ago, Paul821 said:Fortunately the difference between 1:72 and 1:76 is not too great
The numbers are deceptive, the difference overall is 5.5% which whilst it doesn't sound a lot put two similar size objects (e.g. buses) side by side and the difference between 1:72 & 1:76 becomes very noticeable. Don't worry about the jeeps though as they'll probably be alongside dissimilar items they'll not stand out, just keep them away from any Oxford variants.
-
On 11/25/2018 at 9:09 PM, Das Abteilung said:
4mm to the foot? Who mixes Imperial and metric??
Actually the Germans started it !! - Marklin introduced 'O' gauge in the early 1900's to use 32 mm wide track or 7 mm to the foot scales @ 1:43.5 Hence HO , or Half O, which scales at 1:87 (3.5 mm to foot) expanded to 4mm to foot to allow models of British locomotives to be motorised using the motors available in the 1920/30's.
Suspect that Airfix at the time were looking to satisfy both the railway and military modeller but by using both 1:76.2 & 1:72 they never got it right and agree that 1:76.2 should be dropped if they plan any more small scale military vehicles in the future.
As for the use of other companies molds it has to be a good thing surely, a quick way to test the market with a reasonably sized range and, if successful, follow on with new tools of your choice. What chance Ferret's, Foxes & Saracens for 2020?
-
Cant see the detail but resistor A looks to be a Diode - totally different functions ensure you're happy with what you propose to do - even small voltages can kill !
-
2
-
-
@ 32.5 & 35 tons both types were over the units rated weight of 30 ton though having said that I'm certain that there are pics of them carrying Shermans (31 ton) in the desert campaign.
Unlikely but not impossible - especially if the tank was battle damaged & say shorn of it's tracks.
-
3 hours ago, Mjwomack said:
SE Finecast do some brickwork
I don't know anything of this firm, but you could every brick right!
Personally I've never found the SE Finecast brick sheets well defined, being very soft in detail. Additionally in 1/24th scale they only offer plain, by which I think they mean stretcher, bond which is relatively weak and certainly not suitable for structural work such as railway arches. The Victorian builders used English bond for their structural items. This web-page will help illustrate the difference https://brickarchitecture.com/about-brick/why-brick/brickwork-bonds.
You could try and convert the SE-Finecast product by cutting to individual brick rows, re-scribing alternate rows an then relaying. Somehow I don't think this will be successful.
By no means does it allow you to get every brick right.
-
For 4mm that's exquisite there's a level of detail there that you often don't see in 7mm - 'O' gauge.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Father Cool said:
That's Nice!
What scale?
-
1
-
-
https://www.wwiivehicles.com/great-britain/aircraft/amphibian/supermarine-walrus-amphibian.asp
Not sure if the above clears anything up but certainly contains some very detailed pictures.
-
1
-
-
On 8/25/2018 at 8:55 AM, Albeback52 said:
Wonder who will be the first with this!
. In case anybody is wondering about the origins of this illustration, look no further than yesterday's The Sun! They were taking the mince out of the Defence Secretary's (alleged ) response to a rather large gap in MOD funding. There were other (alleged) but equally bizarre ideas!! Please note I included this here purely as a bit of fun and, not as a statement or comment. It WOULD make a good , fun project though!Allan
That's NATO (North Avon Tayto Organisation) sorted then!
-
8 hours ago, bentwaters81tfw said:
Silly as it sounds, if you are spraying yellow or silver, prime, then spray it with gloss black, then the colour coat.
Knew about spraying metallic coats over gloss black, never thought about using it under yellows 'suppose I've always considered it would darken the colours.
Red's I've allways sprayed over a red primer which bring's the coulor out
-
1 hour ago, Olly_5 said:
Reminded me of the project a team i'm involved with is currently working on
https://www.facebook.com/192967507490617/photos/a.541393592648005/1717868858333800/?type=3&theater
Laser cut from thin MDF with none of the dimensional/warping issues you get with card. These are then clad with plasticard to suit brickwork, tiles etc. In our case window frames will follow to get rid of the bombed out look.
-
22 minutes ago, busnproplinerfan said:
What year roughly is that Dodge? What maker made the truck before the Dodge name was put on it?
Genuine Dodge product - they produced in the UK from the early '20's. That particular cab style was also used by Leyland & Albion and known as a LAD cab (from initials of the users) Late 50's - mid 60's.
1 hour ago, Gorby said:Only the truck has their company name on it.
It is an odd area, there are many bits of machinery that have just been abandoned in fields and gardens, old JCB's, tractors and plenty more besides, so they could have acquired them anywhere. Having said that, with the salt air things deteriorate quite quickly, and these look to be in too good a condition for them to have been left in the open commensurate with their age.
The CAT also has the company name on on the rear tank, & the BR22 also has a name high on the rear but the picture here don't show it clear enough to make out.
-
1
-
-
Can't comment on the masking tape, just sprayed the interior of 2 JLTRT Gresley coaches using lifecolour acrylics over a Halfords gloss base and was already dreading sealing the interior with masking tape, what i'm reading on here's not helping ease the worries of paint lifting.
For removing sticky gunk residue from tape etc I always start by using lighter fluid & cotton buds, did the trick when I was a kid and still works. Just don't smoke when using it!
-
1
-
-
On 2/25/2017 at 8:50 PM, 06/24 said:
I'm struggling to find reference material for Midland cattle docks,
Details of LMS cattle docks in "LMS Architecture" OPC book believe the authors are Jenkinson & Essery
-
1
-
First Lieutenant John Glennon Krieghauser, pilot.
Model WOT6 British WWII Truck (35507) 1:35
in Kits
Posted
Fail to see how the inclusion of a machinery body is a mistake. ICM obviously set out to produce a model of a British lorry they had been able to measure and by all account appear to have succeeded, even down to the tyre pattern.
Not all lorries were fitted with general service bodies & the modelling world would be poorer if we only had models of 'GS' types.
ICM don't claim this to be a general service truck so whilst it may be an odd choice it doesn't make it a mistake. The inclusion of WW2 census numbers and post war tyres appears to be the only mistake of note.
Coupled with the equipment frorm Resicast's own machinery truck, available separately, this could be used in a much more interesting diorama than yet another 'GS' type loaded with boxes & drums.