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. :)

Kjetil Åkra

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

67 Good

About Kjetil Åkra

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Storsteinnes, Northern Norway

Recent Profile Visitors

121 profile views
  • JWM

  1. Absolutely stunning. It is so great to see mine and my co-author´s interpretation of colours and our findings regarding technical issues translated so beautifully into a 3D-shape! Congratulations, JWM. Best regards, Kjetil
  2. Kjetil Åkra

    captured Heinkel 115

    JWM, thanks for your tip regarding rigging. I´ve purchased some very fine line specially made for digging some time ago so I´ll probably try it on a model at some time, but certainly not Chorozy´s MF 11 first! That kit deserves better than my fumbling hands when it comes to rigging! And I was very impressed by the Fazan-kit. That certainly shows skill! Also congratulations on finishing the He 115. Kjetil
  3. Kjetil Åkra

    captured Heinkel 115

    That's a deal! But don't worry, it will be a while before I complete it. Other projects have intervened and I am an extreme spur-of-the-moment kind of modeller! If you talk to Mr. Choroszy again please tell him that is kits are absolutely stunning and a delight to work with. Kjetil
  4. Kjetil Åkra

    captured Heinkel 115

    Glad I could help, J-W. I am not sure exactly when the book will be published, but the final draft is getting quite close nowadays. We decided to use a slightly different lay-out than originally planned so now I have to convert all the pages, but that is part of the fun! Be sure I´ll announce it on this website when it is ready! You could be right about the makeshift attempt at a non-standard national insignia on the fin, but on balance I doubt it as they did overpaint the regular markings (except the bottom part) and would probably want to be as inconspicuous as possible when they sneaked into British airspace. I don´t think there would be any remnants of overpainting of the neutrality markings either, but the choice is yours! Interesting that you have the Broplane MF 11. If you really want to make a model of that aircraft I´ll make you a deal. I´ll donate my started Chorozy MF 11 resin kit to you so you can finish it. I have assembled the fuselage and lower wings but nothing else. It is a wonderful kit but a biplane which quite frankly scares me as a modeller ( I just cannot do rigging!) and I have not dared trying to finish this one. Let me know what you think. Kjetil
  5. Kjetil Åkra

    captured Heinkel 115

    Hi Kari. There is some information on the colours of Gladiator 433, but they were not similar to the ones of He 115 no. 52. I cannot remember exactly what the new colours used on the Gladiator were, but I think they involved a grey and a kaki colour. Nils probably has more info available. Kjetil
  6. Kjetil Åkra

    captured Heinkel 115

    Hi again. The coloration of the He 115 Ns on Norwegian service is complex. As I mentioned my colleague and friend Erik Pilawskii has analysed and written a treatise on their evolution. I have incorporated his essay into the book and I think the easiest way to answer your question is to give a sample of the profile pages for the Norwegian He 115s. I therefore present them here (sorry about the "sample" background, but its just in case someone is tempted to use the drawings themselves). These pages should give you an overview of how we bee live the six Norwegian He 115s were painted. Aircraft No. 60 would be similar to No. 58 (it is on a page detailing the two captured German machines). Please note that the current drawing of F.58 with the appliqué camouflage is tentative and for illustration purposes only. It is very hard to deduce what its camouflage looks like but a better resolution image of the photo also reproduced below has surfaced, so I´ll make a new interpretation for the book in due time. Regarding our previous discussion about painting canopy frames, it seems to me they were painted on F.58 too, when it received the extra coat of an unknown colour on tiop of the existing one. As you can see you have the choice of using either RLM 02 overall or the Cerric aluminium overall scheme if you choose not to do the greenish version of no. 52! Hope this helps. Kjetil
  7. Kjetil Åkra

    Norwegian He 115 in 1/72

    Indeed. Everything one would need to make a very accurate He 115 is now in place. I may not have mentioned it, but a researcher at Sola Aviation Museum discovered original works drawings of the He 115 in a Swedish archive recently and some of them will be published in the book. These drawings also contained very detailed measurements so an accurate model is now possible. Ideally, I´d´like to see all main variations depicted, that is, the he 115 A, the He 115 N, the B-1/B-2 and the C, but also the modified B with the French cannon under the nose. It would´t take so much effort, just a few extra optional parts. Kjetil
  8. Kjetil Åkra

    captured Heinkel 115

    No problem caused at all, JWM! Regarding your new questions we know that F.52 at first did not have its canopy frames repainted, but when that special scheme worn by that aircraft while it served in Western Norway was modofied somewhat, the canopy frames were also repainted. So, there are two slightly different variantions of this scheme, one with unpainted frames and one with (and a few other differences) I have profiles and camouflage schemes of both. Material is much more scanty when it comes to No. 58 which also received an extra upper surface scheme. I have to check at work where I have my good phoot of this machine! Regarding the colour scheme featuring on the He 115 Ns while in Norwegian service, it is a bit complicated. I'll also have to check my manuscript at work for a more elaborate answer on this one. A good friend of mine with years of experience working with photo interpretation and colour research has analysed the available photo and we believe we have found the answer. Kjetil
  9. Kjetil Åkra

    Norwegian He 115 in 1/72

    Lovely build! You surely have more stamina that I would have with such an old kit! I sincerely hope that either Airfix or Revell would recognize the potenital of the He 115 in 1/72. I mean, what other aircraft allows the construction of German, British, Norwegian, Swedish, Spanish and Finnish operational aircraft with such interesting and varied schemes and roles? I wonder if it would be possible to suggest a 1/72 kit to either of these manufacturers? i would certainly make my research material available. Kjetil
  10. Kjetil Åkra

    captured Heinkel 115

    You're right, Vingtor. Here's the answers I gave: 1. Norwegian He 115s had natural metal propeller blades (both sides) with spinner in RLM 02 (originally). This was kept throughout their carrier in Norwegian service. The exception is the two captured Luftwaffe He 115 Bs which were remarked and repainted in Norwegian colours (numbered 62 and 64). These two kept their original German colours on propeller blades. 2. Yes. It was there. Swedish and Norwegian aircraft had a somewhat different opening to Luftwaffe He 115s. I can send you a photo if required. 3. The exhaust was placed the same way on all he 115 variants, including the He 115 N. I think the photo you refer to showing something on top of the wing shows a venturi tube on top of the engine nacelle behind the engine, placed there by the RAF. Depending upon the quality of the image it may look confusing. You should not need to modify the exhaust system for a Norwegian version.
  11. Kjetil Åkra

    captured Heinkel 115

    Answer sent to Jerzy by PM, just so people don't think I was unresponsive! I failed to his his posting here, though! Kjetil
  12. Kjetil Åkra

    Etendard IVP/IVM 1:48

    Having put Kittyhawk´s Super Etendard together (almost ready for paint now) I may be able to offer a few things on the basic contraction of these kits. They actually go together very well, despite the quite complex arrangement of fuselage parts. The main problem I found was with the tail section to the main fuselage; be sure you dry fit a lot here. Also, the fuselage spine insert may require some extra work and of course, dry fitting. But take your time putting the fuselage together and you should encounter no major problems. I really liked this kit and the level of detail is very high. In my opinion the way the have chosen to design the fuselage means there is a minimal amount of join lines to remove and it works well. I also have the Kinetic SuE and this is far more conventional in breakdown of parts, the fuselage is split in half and includes everything from the radome to the tail fin. This means a lot of join lines need to be removed and I find it odd Kinetic at least did not choose to offer a separate radome like Kittyhawk did. So basically, Kittyhawk´s offering is more complex to build but saves a lot of post-construction work. Wings, wheel wells and air brakes are all very well moulded and fit very well too. Unlike the Kinetic offering, flaps can only be modelled down unless you do some serious cutting of parts, but it gives more life to the model so I did not mind. I cannot really compare the Kittyhawk and Kinetic offerings of the SuE in detail, but let me say that the instructions of the former is superior! Kinetic does offer a very extensive decal sheet though, but Kittyhawk´s is certainly not bad. Kjetil
  13. Yeah, you are of coruse correct and there are several photos in Brinzan's book that show this. I should have been more specific. I think separating them and posing them at different angles will be a minor issue, fortunately. But It is one point HB should have researched a bit more. Kjetil
  14. Actually, upon closer study, it seems that aircraft no.1 to 20 also got the external stiffener behind the fuselage later in their career, so a 1942-era No.1 can be built straight from the box. Which is what i intend. Kjetil
  15. Fortunately, no.1 in its later appearance (as seen in the colour photos) had the same air intake as in the kit and also the later bulged canopy (as confirmed in a caption earlier in the book), so it is possible to build no. 1 from the kit as is, if you remove the external reinforcement strip behind the cockpit. At least that's what i think, so far. And yes, it would have been more interesting to have a six-gun version. Hopefully, there will be conversion sets around for this kit because it does have potential. Kjetil