Jump to content
This site uses cookies! Learn More

This site uses cookies!

You can find a list of those cookies here: mysite.com/cookies

By continuing to use this site, you agree to allow us to store cookies on your computer. :)

alex_stela

Members
  • Content Count

    90
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    6

alex_stela last won the day on January 4 2016

alex_stela had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,331 Excellent

2 Followers

About alex_stela

  • Rank
    New Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Ustroń, Poland
  • Interests
    aircraft models, esp. Falklands War and Korean War

Recent Profile Visitors

807 profile views
  1. OK, it`s dry, so I could start sanding. I use normal sandpaper on flat surfaces and sanding sticks around the details. When this was done, I started cleaning the lines. I used a toothbrush. The next step was to cover the sanded parts with a layer of primer. As you can see the panel lines on Airfix model look much better now. They are narrower and more delicate. Of course, corrections will be needed in some places, but I will do them later (before painting). Now let's move on to the Italeri model. Here we have a completely opposite problem - the panel lines are a bit too delicate and disappear in some places. I decided to gently deepen all lines with a sharp scalpel and modeling razor. In this way I prepared both models for further assembly. However, before I took care of the cockpits, I noticed the difference in size of under fuselage fin between the two models. After checking the photos and plans, it turned out that the fin in the Airfix model is too small (Airfix on the left, Italeri on the right). About 1.5-2.0 mm in height is missing, which is clearly visible in this scale. So the next step will be cutting off the fin from the fuselage of Airfix kit and insert the filling, which should give it the right height. TBC
  2. Why? I like challenges like that, so be sure I will enjoy it! So let`s start. I cut main parts of both kits from frames. I filled shrinkage pits and assembled wings. Italeri first - no bigger problems, some putty was needed under cockpit area. Parts of the wings matched each other perfectly. Airfix took a little more work on wings, but after some sanding everything also fit. Some putty was needed at the bottom of fuselage halves. I decided to get on the panel lines now. My "patent" for too wide "trenches" is very easy. I've already use it on the old OEZ Letohrad 1/48 Su-25 model and I think it worked: We'll see if I remember how to do it after all these years... First thing I do is deepening (!!!) the lines with engraver. After that I cover the deepened panel lines with Mr. Surfacer 500 (quite thick, dense coat). When Surfacer will be dry I sand it from the lines. They should be much thinner and shallower after that. Soon we will see if this operation was successful...
  3. Yes, it`s a shame that the best 1/72 Sea Harrier is almost 40 years old now and is... Italian! Hope that Airfix will make new tool someday, because I don`t see a real chance for new Tamiya, Hasegawa or Eduard... I have Kinetic`s 1/48 SHAR kit in a stash, which is not perfect, but something like that I would like to see in 1/72. Current Airfix kit looks as a toy after assembly. I`ll see what I can do with it. Last year I tried to improve Airfix` 1/72 Skyhawks (which also sucks and Fujimi`s A-4s from `80s are still much better), so I have some experience. In the worst case I'll put the Airfix model behind the Italeri on the shelf and I won`t have to look at it.
  4. It may be strange, but in my "Falklands War model collection" Sea Harrier is still missing! That's why I decided to make two at once. To make it more interesting, they will be models from two different manufacturers - Airfix and Italeri. They are most popular kits of SHAR in 1/72 scale on the market (so far) and are well known, but I`ll try to compare them on this occasion. Airfix kit is from 2011, meanwhile, the Italeri is a rebox of the old ESCI kit, which comes from 1983! It would be logical if Airfix was better, but as you know - it is not. So let`s see both kits. As you can see - my Italeri`s SHAR is from anniversary combo box (with Wessex HU.5), but it`s the same as in standard box, except for decals. AIRFIX SPRUES: ITALERI SPRUES: Airfix has more parts and seems to be better detailed. Let`s take a closer look... AIRFIX PANEL LINES: ITALERI PANEL LINES: COMPARISION (ITALERI OVER AIRFIX): As you can see the old Italeri/ESCI kit is MUCH MUCH better in this regard. I will have to work on Airfix` lines... AIRFIX ENGINE EXHAUSTS: ITALERI ENGINE EXHAUSTS: Both are craps - Airfix exhausts will be very difficult to process (sanding required in the middle) and Italeri are too shallow. I will replace them in both kits with Pavla`s resins. AIRFIX SIDEWINDERS: ITALERI SIDEWINDERS: 1 point for Airfix here, but I think I will look for substitutes for both kits. CLEAR PARTS COMPARISION (ITALERI ON LEFT): Italeri is much better in shape and details. AIRFIX DECALS: ITALERI DECALS: Another point for Airfix. I have spare SHAR decals from DP Casper, Xtradecal and Condor Decals, so main decals are not a problem for me, but I have to use stencils from kits. To make "the match" even I will use almost the same additions for both kits: - Eduard`s PE sets (73384 for Airfix and 73457 for Italeri), - Pavla`s resin air intakes and exhausts (72-118 for Airfix and 72-082 for Italeri), - Pavla`s resin MB Mk.10H ejection seats (72-060 for both kits), - Pavla`s resin gun pods (72-117 for both kits), - Master`s Pitot tubes and angle of attack probes (AM-72-052 for both kits). ADDITIONS FOR AIRFIX KIT: ADDITIONS FOR ITALERI KIT: I know that there are some shape issues in Airfix kit and I will try to do something with that. I hope it will be fun.
  5. Very nice! I like weathering! Good job!
  6. Yes, there is a lot of lead in nose, in cockpit area and even in engines. Fortunately that was enough.
  7. I`ve just finished another model for my Falklands collection - 1/72 IA-58A Pucará, A-532, Grupo 3 de Ataque, Fuerza Aerea Argentina, Falklands War 1982. This particular aircraft is well known from photo taken in Argentina mainland before its departure to Falklands (BAM Malvinas, Port Stanley) on 27 May 1982. It took part in air raids on British units in Darwin/Goose Green area on May 28. It was later damaged in ground collision with Pucará A-514 and captured by British at Port Stanley airfield. Later used as training target and destroyed. I tried to recreate the look of A-532 from the photo. Characteristic is big 300 gal fuel tank under fuselage (not painted) and 2 TERs on underwing pylons. Bright camo with sky blue underside, control surfaces in natural metal. Yellow bands on wings and fin (later overpainted). Special Hobby kit (also reboxed by Airfix without resin and PE parts) is not very well detailed and has some issues, but it`s quite pleasant to build. I`ve changed a strake in front of the fin, enlarged underwing pylons (and added transparent light covers), changed sweep angle of the horizontal tails and added flap fairings. Centerline pylon, fuel tank and TERs are from spares. Decals are from SH kit and DP Casper 72018 set. The rest (except for some self-made details) is OOB. Painted with Hataka C136, 137 and 138 (brightened). PS: Special Hobby announced new-tool 1/72 Pucará kit in 2018, but I still haven`t seen it...
  8. Fantastic! Seems that it`s not easy-to-make kit, but you did just great!
  9. Thanks for your comments, guys! I forgot about position lights!!! And it`s not my first time... But I've already done them (minute ago) so I can get on with the next model.
  10. My first finished model this year - 1/72 F/A-18F Super Hornet, VFA-2, USS Abraham Lincoln, Indian Ocean 2005. Hasegawa 00799 kit + Eduard PE parts + resin flaps by Res Im.
  11. It seems that we`ve found some interesting issue! OK - there`s nothing more worth for modeller than the word of real Aircraft Technician, and I say this with true respect! And it really won`t be a problem to get off those US RBFs from my Phantom`s Sidewinders (I think it`s 1 minute work). But I must be absolutely sure before I`ll do that. That`s why I paste some pictures from my research archive, so that you can make an judgment: Oh! That`s my bird! I see US RBFs on Sidewinder, but the resolution of this picture is not very good. Another Phantom from Stanley. I see US RBFs on Sidewinders again. And again. Probably again, but I`m not sure. And now Tornado from Mt. Pleasant - British RBFs on caps, US RBFs on missiles. RBFs on Skyflashes are total mistery for me. I don`t know what should I think about it now. Maybe standards were not standards everywhere in RAF? Maybe there is some other explanation? What do you think?
  12. OK, I got it. Is it possible that they've cut US RBFs and don't put British RBFs?
  13. As I know UK RBFs are red/white stripes, while US RBFs (as we use them on Polish F-16s) are all red with "REMOVE BEFORE FLIGHT" text on it (black or white). And all RBFs on British Phantoms and Tornados were UK's red/white stripes, as you've said. And I agree with you. But my point is that there was exception - RBFs on Sidewinders exactly in place that I've put them on my model. Like here: And they are also visible on Stanley's Phantoms in 1983/84 period. I don't know the reason - just noticed that.
  14. And you are right! But look at Sidewinders at Phantoms or Tornados and you will see this strange exeption! I think that those US RBFs came with AIM-9s "included" and were used only with them, even in RAF. So I've put them on my Sidewinders by purpose, not mistake. It was yesterday, so remember it well.
  15. I know British RBFs and even have Eduard's set, but on all pictures that I've seen Sidewinder's RBFs (even on Gulf War Tornados Sidewiners!) were American style, so I've used these one.
×
×
  • Create New...