Jump to content

WV908

Gold Member
  • Content Count

    754
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by WV908

  1. WV908

    Airfix 2021...

    The 1/48 Sabre IV has just been added to it too Cheers, WV908
  2. WV908

    Airfix 2021...

    Similar to Hornby in that this year's range seems a bit conservative regarding re-releases but still a good number of new toolings. What is evident and surprising is the comparison of the ranges in terms of size. Airfix looks like a bit dropped off in this regard, and I'm sorry but there is not one single new tool in that range with 'Joe Public' scale 'wow factor' at all. The Mossie and Vampire are duplications of current projects / available kits and I don't see the Chippie selling well to the general public at all. This isn't a 'nothing for me' post as I'll pick up t
  3. Thanks for the encouraging comments everyone. I'm hoping to have another go at it in the new year Cheers, WV908
  4. Hi @tomprobert None so far sadly, bar the fuselage ribbing. I hit a brick wall concerning my scratchbuilding skills when it came to the cockpit interior. I tried a few different ways of doing things and ended up binning them. I kept the 2nd yolk I made, but I'm still really not happy with it. Cheers, WV908
  5. As am I with you all haha - it's a massive learning curve with any subject and the Phantom just takes it to another level. I've looked again at the burners since getting home and it's not quite as simple as I planned, but I know it will work, with some finess applied. I have wrapped a strip of 40 thou around the tightest radius on the burners and it just conforms, but not comfortably, so I've ordered some 10 and 20 thou which will work much happier than the 40. Whilst I wait for that to arrive I have another new arrival to keep me occupied...
  6. 6? Ouch. I'll have to give that another look. For now I'll say at least 2mm then haha and will have to observe more closely where the panel lines are. I need to bear in mind that I had neither the nose or tail cones fitted so was using purely the fuselage itself. Interestingly both the set and rake of the vertical stabs seems to be wrong - too shallow on both accounts. @Cees Broere Thanks for clearing that up regarding the burners. I'm going to have a look at mine tonight and make some paper templates before cutting the cladding. Luckily the way that these have been des
  7. Thanks @Antti_K Those are brilliant and confirm that I've scaled the drawings correctly and have my measurements correct. Now I'm over the doom and gloom with the burners and can fix them, I want to make a few points regarding the drawings and the two kits, without providing definite dimensions at this point as I need to find my calipers. So. Point one. The Tamiya kit is too short. By *drumroll* 2mm. It loses these at fuselage stations 46.68 and 515. The first is right at the rear of the radome so can be shimmed or replaced with the flightpath item. The second is smack
  8. @Anthony in NZ Now I've got my head around it, we can still use the burners we have (yippee!) As you can see, the burners have a slight lip at the end, with the pronounced, hard edge on the outside, but nothing on the inside. Looking at photos of Speys I have determined that this lip exists both inside and outside on the real thing, meaning there is a natural step inside. Next thing is the geometry inside these cans is way off - on the real burner there is a curve, which butts up to the petal rollers, humps and rolls outwards to meet the st
  9. Hi Anthony, Not really keen on sinking more money into this but I'll sit on the project for now and see what happens with your developments. I'm about this --- far from just selling both Phantoms because I'm fed up of them. I've had a look at cladding the burners in 40 thou strip which solves the outside diameter instantly. The problem is re-profiling the inside and getting it to look right as it will visibly curve outwards from the petals. Cheers, WV908
  10. @Anthony in NZ Bad news I'm afraid. Those 3D printed burner cans are way, way too small. I've checked multiple drawings to ensure I'm right and they are 3-4m too small in diameter across the board. They should be 34mm at the fuselage and 30mm at the end of the burner. These are 30mm at the fuselage and 27mm at the end of the burner. I'm so gutted by this. It's a 3D designed and printed item. It's sloppy and it's killed my enthusiasm for the project completely. Edit: To add insult to injury the interior and exterior contours of the burners are wrong too.
  11. I've gone ahead and printed the plans from this link that was supplied in my thread; http://soyuyo.main.jp/f4/f4e-1.html I've only printed the Spey Phantom drawings, but I'll compare them to the Tamiya 'J' this evening. Although you've already done significant work, hopefully I can provide a benchmark for you from these drawings to give you reference points for checking the outer dimensions. Cheers, WV908
  12. @Anthony in NZNZ No worries - From links given to me and comments from others, it would appear that the height of the intake at it's opening does not change, but rather the shoulders are broader and flatter on top, giving that appearance of a taller intake. There is a gradual increase in height leading to an apex at the rear of the canopy, beyond which you are in the area of the Speys and the work you've already done. Looking at what is cut out and replaced the conversion actually looks equally achievable from both the Revell and Tamiya fuselages, with the exception of intak
  13. @Anthony in NZ Did Derek supply measurements for the exterior height of the intakes too (and possibly the rake angle of them)? Cheers, WV908
  14. Aires cans don't have the thrust reverser petals sadly, otherwise they would be perfect. Cheers, WV908
  15. Is anyone aware of any WIP's that have popped up yet? I've made a start on mine that I picked up today and there's some interesting issues. I've only really looked at the hangy-offy bits so far. There's the missile fit for an F3 on the sprues so I have my hopes up for that in a future boxing. The kit is a bit of monster - makes the old Revell look flimsy in comparison. The engines are amazing but why oh why didn't Italeri supply extra / dummy burner cans and thrust reversers? Cheers, WV908
  16. I'm hoping to butcher it into an RAF gun pod if it has no use for an RAF Toom and if it's big enough. Cheers, WV908
  17. Is anyone able to tell me what this pod is from the Revell kit please? Cheers, WV908
  18. The 1992 blue scheme is a purchasable camo in the game so I can't quite take credit for that haha - If it has done it I would have added the serial and squadron crests The jaws are additional 'decals' of sorts. I'm hoping they'll do a 92sqn crest soon then I can actually do it up properly. it is a fun, if not overly realistic playing game, but the visuals and quality of the models are second only to DCS really. The issue with DCS is you need to remortgage your house to buy anything so I'm more than happy with this for now (and they just added the Harrier GR.3 which is
  19. I feel you pain haha, but that is the bane of scratch building. The first go a piece you make is nearly always a trial piece haha. Actually, go on have my FGR.2 (please don't shoot me for sticking jaws on it haha) ; Cheers, WV908
  20. As silly as it may first appear, the Phantom (in this case an FG.1) model in War Thunder is an excellent shape reference to use as I believe the Russian based developers scanned XT899. It certainly looks right! I do have shots of my FGR.2, but not from the cinema mode so there's a bunch of unnecessary rubbish on it and to be fair this angle of a teammate's FG.1 shows the shape off nicely. Cheers, WV908
  21. From what I've seen of your build they will fit first try Cheers, WV908
  22. They are a treat - it's been difficult to gauge the increase in fuslelage diameter due to the Revell fuselage having cavernous holes where the burners sit so I can certainly understand why Cees is having issues in that area, although the Revell fuselage profile pretty much matches (with some expansion of course) - I have offered them up to the Tamiya and at first glance it's a better fit, but only due to how the fuselage is constructed. The Revell fuselage has better contours in this area and as soon as I make the right cuts, it should open up just right for the Burners. Tamiya for
  23. WV908

    Spitfire IX UF-Q

    Oh dear, if I'd seen this quicker I could have saved you a few quid. The decals for MJ250 come with the Revell kit so you could have had mine as they are spare! Well, if anyone else needs them, please let me know Cheers, WV908
×
×
  • Create New...