Jump to content

TallBlondJohn

Gold Member
  • Posts

    606
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by TallBlondJohn

  1. On 12/08/2021 at 22:34, Maginot said:

    Great progress, good looking build. Yes, come on Airfix; re tool and re release, please.

     

    Lets face it, Airfix think this one's been done and won't re-tool. But is there any chance somebody else will produce a competing TSR-2? Pit Road did a 1/144 and I bought most of them - how were sales outside the UK?

  2. 16 hours ago, brianthemodeller said:

    I love the idea of a split fuselage - they did something similar with a U-Boat at the maritime museum at Ellesmere Port that looked spectacular. Downside was it was above the level of the perimeter fence so if you came out of the docks on a foggy night you quite suddenly came face to face with the torpedo tubes of a U-Boat - particularly if driving a truck! Quite unnerving if you didn’t know it was there. Left me with slightly loose bowels the first time in happened to me…

     

    Whatever you decided to do will look stunning. I will be sad to see this build finish after 10 years of encouragement and occasional heckling but I can see why you have had enough!

     

    Marconi in Edinburgh (I think it was) had an EE Lightning on a pedestal as a gate guard. I was unaware of this until meeting it one foggy night at 2 in the morning, which made me think that I'd definitely had too many light ales and also, time appeared to have stopped. Most perturbing.

    • Haha 5
  3. I use a beige base coat and then small streaks Humbrol chocolate (98) and red leather (62) without stirring the settled jar, so I get mostly clear enamel ooze with some pigment, applied with a coarse oil brush like Torbjorn above to get subtle streaks. If the base coat is acrylic then you can remove the enamel with thinner and start over. Let dry thoroughly, lightly sand and drybrush. Repeat if necessary. The carrier ooze also does the job of a transparent coat so you won't need one, but a thin coat of translucent orange/yellow, perhaps with a tiny bit of brown mixed in can be applied for different panels. Let each coat thoroughly dry first. This is also a good way to do wooden propellers, thicker streaks can present the construction layers of German props. The secret is don't overdo it - not quite enough is just right.

  4. On 13/07/2021 at 08:05, Eric Mc said:

    Yes, there is no hard definition. Both Alan Shepard and Gus Grissom officially made sub-orbital spaceflights in 1961 and nobody argued they hadn't been in space.

     

    Because they both topped the hard FAI definition of 100km - they had to, or the Soviet Union would have died laughing. In fact they did 100 miles just to be safe 😉
     

    OK there is debate about where space physically starts, but spaceflight is 100km. Unless you are the US Air Force, for the usual political and parochial reasons (and the X-15 is one of my all time favorites, I have the books and models to prove it).

     

    I have slightly less issues with Virgin/Branson than Amazon/Bezos as businesses and human beings, but if I was to take one of their flights (and yes, I can afford one - but just one) it would be Blue Origin simply because they go into space, no arguing. If VG could top 100 miles with passengers they would.

  5. Very nice - just the right amount of gloss too.
     

    I've built the same kit, same boxing and it was a bit of a battle, not helped by blue-tack masking pulling off the Xtracrylic paint. The tooling is ancient, 1960. Maybe they tweaked it in 1983. My decals had better register but were just as bad. Still, its a Hunter. The Revell kit is much better I hear - so little chance of Airfix retooling anytime soon .

    • Like 1
  6. 14 minutes ago, JohnT said:

    Hi Giampiero

    i remember seeing something like this way back in a book from the 60’s and I recall a suggested Ye prefix but it didn’t go into production 

    but then my memory can’t recall how many sausages I had a breakfast so that could be a red herring 

     

    Aha yes - MiG YE-4/2 I'd guess

  7. 15 hours ago, Adm Lord De Univers said:

    Oh no Jeff, that won't do at all. Go and get yourself 'down' to that famous online store - ibay - I believe it's called; otherwise I can't imagine how you'll find that vintage 1/600 kit? (But also bravo for supporting local shops.)

     

    Oods looking good too. And I agree on sticking with a scale, unfortunately 1/350 is too big and 1/600 is ideal but for some reason not popular or something?

     

    David

     

    1/600 is a natural imperial scale, 1 inch = 50 feet, so easy to work off plans. It was chosen by Airfix early on when every manufacturer had their own scale - so Heller, for instance, went for a metric 1/400. US manufacturers tended to go for 'box scale' where it varied to fit standard boxes, so your Lindberg (IIRC) Destroyer Escort and USS New Jersey ended up the same length, and other manufacturers had odd random scales like 1/570. But ship kits were always a niche market so no industry standard emerged.

     

    Except in Japan, where the manufacturers teamed up to form the 'Waterline Consortium' in the 1970s to do the entire IJN. 1/700 was chosen simply as it got Yamato into a standard box - and it suited smaller Japanese households. The Consortium branched out beyond Japanese subjects and eventually it became the global norm. 1/350 obviously is just half 1/700.

     

    But if you build in 1/600, you soon realise its the ideal scale for ships. 1/700 is just too small and fiddly, 1/400 a bit too large. 1/350 or 1/200 works for big 'display' models but not for a collection, unless you have a mansion. 1/600 is good for the eyes and efficient for shelf space. Unfortunately we will never see a new tool use it - another of those Betamax things I'm afraid.

    • Thanks 1
  8. On 15/05/2021 at 18:43, Jeddahbill said:

    Many thanks for all the kind comments!   Now some details on the engines.   Having the engines lighted while EVA pods are being deployed is a bit odd, but I really wanted to light the engines and decided to include both in the completed build. 

     

    Slight modifications to engine parts were needed to fit aluminum tubes for LED lights.  The tube helps with light blocking and provides support for the LED.  I experimented with three coloured lens caps - yellow, blue, and red.   Blue is often seen in similar builds and looks good, but I went with red as it is a bit different and looks very nice on the completed kit.

     

    Blue = engines at full thrust.

    Red = engines cooling after braking burn. This takes a while as somebody deleted the radiators from the design.

    Yellow = in between.

     

    So not odd at all - the EVA pod is doing a visual inspection after Jupiter orbit insertion. Infinity awaits...

     

    Beautiful build, wish I had the room for a Discovery.

    • Thanks 1
  9. Fantastic - having built this kit myself I know what an achievement yours is. I ended up replacing the fuselage completely with an Academy one and just using the nice thin wings and superb decals.

     

    Nice base too - the oil leaks are perfectly done. (Technically, can a rotary engine 'leak' when its designed to throw fluid out in all directions?)

    • Like 1
  10. Does anybody know how many inspection ports should be on the bottom of the fuselage for an Albatross W4 (or failing that a DII, assuming they are the same)?

     

    I filed off the ports on my 1/72 Roden to replace them with PE without making a note of how many there were - and now I can't find conclusive evidence anywhere. Just a sprue shot would do!

     

    Thanks

  11. 8 hours ago, Valkyrie said:

    Really great looking build, colours and weathering. I like the story too and will have a read up on that. U-33 similarly lies on the bottom near my home and generated my interest in u-boats. This definitely makes me want to look into WWI submarines now too.

    Thanks for sharing.

    Where do you get your base from?

     

    The base is the one in the kit - I painted it wood effect with brass bits by Humbrol, shading by Flory. The pintels were rather too long and spindly for my taste and made the model easy to knock over, so I cut them down by about 25%, drilled them out and fitted brass rods through them into the base and keel for strength. I also filled the base with Liquid Gravity for heft, and added a slab of plastic card to the bottom to keep it all in.

    • Thanks 1
  12. Micro-Mir's 1/350 K class submarine (early), built as the unfortunate K4.

     

    IMG_7440

     

    The K class are often cited as technological horror stories, but the Royal Navy did eventually solve the many issues with this incredibly ambitious concept, if you count 'not suddenly sinking' as successful resolution. But it was a time when anything seemed possible and it was thought that a high speed "submarine cruiser" could make everything else obsolete. Turns out this theory was correct, but it required the power of the atom.
     

    Doctrine was the real problem - the idea was the Ks would essentially be destroyers that could submerge to lie in ambush, but were expected to fight just as much on the surface, thus the guns and deck torpedo tubes. The result was a vessel that "had the speed of a destroyer, the turning circle of a battlecruiser and the bridge of a picket-boat", and led to several tragic collisions that cost many lives.
     

    starboard side IMG_7446

     

    Micro Mir's K Class kit is available for rebuilt 'swan bow' boats or this version, as built. Its a nice kit with good fit but suffers from a lack of sources. The Maritime Museum plans are available online, but they don't show good external side views and depict the K's as built - modifications immediately started!

     

    j8698_1000x.jpg?v=1540551080

     

    There are few good photos available, by far the best being the famous photo of K4 beached showing the starboard side:

     

    image-2019-05-10_1490x.jpg?itok=ycH023Pf

     

    The kit has the port side exactly the same, which isn't possible as the hull beam torpedo tunes are staggered. I fixed the tubes and repositioned the ballast tank openings to match other photos.

     

    portside IMG_7443

     

    kaground.jpg 340px-K-Boat_Launch.JPG

     

     

     

    The kit comes with photo-etch but its designed for a K after rebuilds that moved the 4" guns onto the superstructure deck. As built the Ks didn't have a hand rail or ladders, instead there were hand and foot holds which I drilled out. So all I ended up using was the propellers which look very nice. I also:

     

    • Added flood and drain holes as required
    • Added railings made from brass rod and EZ Line
    • Scribed various deck details
    • Filed out the funnels
    • Cut out and faced the funnel wells
    • Built the main deck hatch on the starboard side of the superstructure
    • Added life rings per photos from rolled up brass rod.

     

    IMG_7489


    The kit's main sprue comes with guns, propeller shafts and masts, and then there is an extra sprue with the guns, propeller shafts and masts again, but better cast. All the guns are identical, so I improved two of the 4" with some small details and rebuilt the other as the superstructure's 3". The masts and shafts are nicely done but I replaced them with brass rod, using Albion alloys 0.4/0.6/0.8/1mm tube for the masts. Until rigged and painted they worked, retracting into 1mm tubes set into the hull. I painted them duraluminum to look like greased metal, but they may have been simply grey. The spread aerial was worn by on fitting out trials, I can't tell from photos if it was used in service but I thought it would be good practice. The triangle is nickel silver wire and the aerial itself 0.08 fishing line.
     

    IMG_7490

     

    The kit provides the bridge windows as decals, but I drilled out the round ones and built the square ones out of photoetch ladder with Krystal Klear glazing. The bridge has an interior with pelorus and hatches, but its invisible. Oddly the decal sheet has nothing that fits the name plate on the kit stand, so I used 1/72 8" RAF letters which fit nicely.

     

    IMG_7453


    Paints are Humbrol satin 123, 164 and 165 with each used to weather the others. I ignored the kit paint scheme and followed photos - K's had black decks. Flory was used for washes on the details.

    Note the kit depicts the submarine in an unlikely configuration - funnels up but the boiler air intake doors (between the funnels) closed. So she can't be under way.

     

    IMG_7483

     

    starboard side IMG_7458

     

    I chose to build K4 not for the famous photo, but because she lies with K17 and her entire crew just over the horizon from my house. Brave men.

     

    • Like 26
    • Thanks 2
  13. Ah yes the tanks - they would be jettisoned before landing. So you need to know what state of X-15 operation you are going to depict. Tanks on and undercarriage down would only be for display purposes and maybe ground testing, never for flight operations. In which case a high nose and fully dropped bay door would be correct.

     

    Though its your model and you can do what you liked. I had this issue with mine, I wanted the airbrakes fully deployed but my kit only had extended landing gear. So my X-15 shows the exact moment of touchdown.

×
×
  • Create New...