Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

1,421 profile views

Knight_Flyer's Achievements

Very Obsessed Member

Very Obsessed Member (5/9)



  1. Thanks again for your replies. It sure is turning into an intriguing area of research Found some more photos that appear to show "yellow", although it is a good point about colorization. I have found other photos showing OD, only thing is... the engine cowlings are nmf and not painted. Maybe from a different timeframe to the supposedly "yellow" anti glare?
  2. Thanks guys, just wanted to double check I wasn't missing anything. I have come across archive film of the B-17 and in one shot looked to me faded OD. Other shots had a bit of yellow tint to it. As for the photos, some look enhanced or been reproduced too many times and colours appear to have been "corrected".
  3. Ok, this is bothering me somewhat. Does anyone know what is the actual colour of the B-17 Bit o Lace nose anti glare panel? Someone pointed out it looked like a pale colour and I've also noticed some model builds have it yellow. This I assume comes from photos of the plane showing a pale colour. I've always thought they be painted a dark colour such as olive drab. Would have thought a pale colour do the the opposite of anti glare... throw a lot of glare into the pilots eyes defeating the purpose of painting it in the first place. Here you can see in front of the cockpit windows - a pale looking panel?
  4. I've not heard of SEA 1 and SEA 2 either... also agree it is risky using restored aircraft that is museum or air show birds as references for colour matching. Those planes aren't always painted to being historically correct. The people looking after them are probably more concerned with preserving the history behind the plane and the schemes painted are just representative of the period... not necessarily accurate.
  5. No, I've managed to sand and file the parts so the fit looks acceptable... took me a fair amount of work. The top of the engines are suppose to be level with the surface of the wing. Without any alteration, the engine will sit below the wing with a noticeable step up. It's the sort of thing I expect from a short run East European kit not a brand such as Airfix.
  6. Good choice, the Stuka is a nice kit and be my recommendation too. The 262 may have been the first, unfortunately those poor fit engines is probably a hassle you could do without... unless you want the challenge of seeing if you can complete it before throwing it against the wall
  7. I think the undercart assembly is the main concern for me. It reminds me of the Airfix 262 engines and I found that fiddly to get right. I don't mind doing some work as long as it's not fiddly in the sense of tedious, annoying and requiring a lot of time and effort to get right... otherwise I may as well only buy short run East European model kits Thanks for doing the list, it's useful to know
  8. From what I've seen, the Hobby2000 F-111 kit are reissues of the Hasegawa with cartograf decals and canopy masks. Only thing that puts me off is the price - around £50 although I did see one advertised for £42... then again - are old Hasegawa kits going for around that price these days on ebay? It was a few years since I last bought one and won it for around £20. From a modelling aesthetic view, I prefer to build F-111 models with wings swept forward... just think it looks better in that position
  9. From reading the comments it seems to me there is no "accurate" Spitfire Ia as such. Not too different from the conclusion about the Hasegawa Wildcat vs the Airfix Wildcat... neither is perfect and each have their own pro's and con's - really down to the modeller to decide which kit they like the look of more As for the vintage Airfix Spitfire Ia derived from the Vb... is this the one? Please ignore the Spit in the foreground as that is the new tooling. I did encounter a few fit issues particularly with the lower wing section joining the fuselage. Otherwise I found it reasonably ok to build.
  10. Neat looking build. I have the Mi-24P somewhere... will get round to building it someday... as soon as I get round the parts count
  11. Very nice result. Although I'm more impressed with the price - £8.99... don't see many kits for that amount of money
  12. Great looking build. I like how you managed to enhance the raised panel lines instead of sanding and rescribing them.
  13. Thanks guys, that makes it more clearer on what the others were saying. Think I will err on the safe side with the acrylics... so if paint does flake off... I just start all over again with a different technique
  14. Not in the RFI section. If you look at the rules pinned to this section it says: "The critiquing/advice is meant for the skill set of the builder, not the accuracy of the build and is meant to encourage development of those skill sets and the sharing of ideas." There are other more relevant forum sections for discussing the accuracy of a kit. In fact there's already a thread about the Airfix MiG-15 here: https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/58911-the-new-airfix-mig-15-so-whats-wrong-with-it/
  15. It's seeing comments like that what makes me nervous Maybe I should leave the tracks alone or assemble the wheels as working... could have a few hours of fun rolling tank around on living room carpet
  • Create New...