Mu17

Well even allowing for the time difference between the UK and USA, Monday has come and gone without any contact - disappointing. Paul

How long did it take to get your model Paul

A sharp email brought a reply that the model has been cast and awaiting decals - posting promised for Monday - we shall see. Paul

On their Facebook site Brengun has announced a 1/48 Yokosuka Ohka MXY7 K1-Kai two seat Kamikaze trainer ref BRP48005 The box art suggests that this is will be a very nice model with all the detail net possible in 1/72. I was interested to see they have dropped the reference to Model 43 which appeared on their 1/72 version. As far as I can tell the glider was converted from two Ohka MXY7 K1 single seat training gliders . Although it was intended for training pilots of the never built, rail launched Model 43, it was derived from Model 11/MXY7 airframes and not from the unbuilt Model 43. Its only in the last few years that NASM has corrected their listing - despite the fact that in original paint MXY7-K1 Kai has always been plainly stencilled on the side ! and that stencil can be red on the 1/72 model !! Paul

Gary at Civilized models promised on 1st November my BD5 would be produced in the next few days and posted with tracking information. We are now 13 days on and no contact so tomorrow will be the round fortnight and I will again contact him for an update / explanation. My original order was 25 June ! and that's really not acceptable. Paul

Hi Rob PM sent Paul

The sales brochure was given to me by the UK Bede dealer, back in the day - he seemed ancient but was probably younger than I am today ! He loved the BD5 and did not consider it was difficult to fly at all, in fact a joy. I think from memory, he had one with a Honda Civic engine (does that sound right ?) Its carefully hidden in a file somewhere but I should be able to locate by the time you are home. I struggle attaching images to the forum, so can you send me a pm with your email - that I can manage ! Gliding is indeed a magical way to fly. Impressed that you are a UAV designer - I now fly rc scale sailplanes almost that size ! Any idea if the L/D of 1/15 was calculated or measured ? In the days before GPS it was very difficult to measure L/D in flight and it required a lot of expensive aerotows. Paul

Thanks for the kit photos 'Obsessed' - are you happy with the quality ? I've ordered the 1/32 which will be easier on my old eyes ! The Octupussy scene with the hangar is really fun. Paul

Hi Rob, not aware of that magazine article - any chance of a scan when you are back home ? Its always driven m nuts that I couldn't find out more about the S and its problems. Are you a glider man too ?? I'm mildly surprised the L/D was as low as 15 but I assumed the sink rate was pretty high. There doesn't seem to be any agreement on the exact span of the S version. My subjective impression was that the root and tip cords remained the same and just the span was stretched - possibly by increasing rib spacing ??? Of course you could be right and the taper remained the same with a smaller tip and your model certainly looks right. Happy to scan the sales brochure if you don't already have it. Paul

Oh that rob !!! small world ! It that a nice set of S wings converted from another model or a set that you have moulded ? Although the limited info says the S was a failure, it doesn't explain why. Somewhere I saw something written by a BD5 test pilot who had loads of engine failures and therefore plenty of experience of motorless flight. In his opinion, it would have made a good little glider as it was a handful to land in a field because of the flat glide angle. He had also been a gliding instructor, so his comments need to be taken seriously. Therefore it seems very strange that it should be abandoned after just one flight and to me, that suggests serious handling problems. But its all guesswork. The BD5S has always intrigued me - as I used to fly full sized sailplanes and love small span types. I also have what I assume is a rare BD5S sales brochure. Paul

Rob - absolutely - not responding to customers is a killer. Obsessed Member...… was the quality of the BD5J good ???? I love the BD5 and have converted a foam electric fan driven BD5 to fly as a slope soarer. It handles fine but is based on the original 14ft short wing and needs more wing area to fly in the lift on my small local hill. Its about to be modified with the (scale) 28ft wing that was used on the one and only BD5S glider. I don't suppose anyone knows anything about the BD5S sailplane ????? There seems to be almost nothing on the internet, It had twin mainwheels on a single leg on the centreline and a retractable nose skid. Allegedly it was flown only once and I guess thy hadn't accounted for the adverse yaw from ailerons on the long span wing, as the small rudder probably couldn't cope. Paul

Hi Rob, after complaints, I had previously been told my order had been dispatched around August but unhelpfully my computer seems to have eaten the email, so no proof. Anyhow after multiple attempts to contact via the website (which has no visible email address) I decided to raise a complaint with Paypal (you might be out of time - check) and there I discovered his direct email. So I asked for a reply in 48 hours or I would be raising a complaint. This DID produce a response - in which he said he had replied to one of my website contacts a few days earlier (nothing received by me) but that he appeared to be having email problems. He has promised that my BD5 will be cast in the next few days and that I will be getting an email to confirm that, with tracking number. I replied and also asked him to confirm that he received my email - which he has done. That email was gmcrorey@gmail.com also he uses gary@civilizedmodels.com I am giving Gary the benefit of the doubt for the moment -because I want the model and because I still have time to try to recover my money via Paypal. Lack of response to multiple contacts both before and after his recent workshop relocation are a fundamental concern - IT issue ? disorganised ? or ???? Can I suggest you try both the email numbers and point out that there is now a thread running which is doing him no favours. A quick resolution to both our problems would help turn his current tarnished image around. Good luck Paul

Anyone else had problems of non-delivery from Civilized Models in the USA ? ordered a BD5 back in June, eventually they responded to a query and promised to dispatch. Their blog says they relocated and had some disruption - and then that they could now respond within 24 hours - three more mails to them and no result. First problem I have ever had with suppliers but $70 is a hard hit. Paul

My favourite sailplane and I'm lucky enough to have flown alongside one in a thermal ! Interested to know the number of modellers interested in German sailplanes of this era and whether there would be interest in a photo book with marking details, cockpit shots etc Paul

Hi Andy, thanks for directing me to Norman Ough's book, which I wasn't aware of, although I do have his drawing of the 50ft pinnace from an ancient copy of Model Boats magazine ! I have been pointed to the Boats of Men of War which does in fact have a drawing of the 56 ft pinnace. Thanks also for your input Paul

As most will know, the larger cruisers and battleships carried a variety of ships rowing boats and often on two or three steam pinnaces. I think they came in 40ft, 45ft, 50 ft and 56ft lengths. The 50 ft one is well known - a restored one still sails and over the years a number of model kits and hulls have been made. The late Norman Ough made a great scale drawing of the 50ft single funnel version but can anyone help with drawings or photos) of the 56 twin funnel one please ? Any info most appreciated. Paul

The two seat OKHA trainer has intrigued me for about 50 years and I am amazed and delighted to see this model from Brengun. It seems odd that their Ohka Model 22 is made in 1/48 and their Model 11 in 1/144 !! It is I think well known and accepted that the single seat glider trainer was designated MXY7 K-1. Brenguns model of the two seater is MXY7 Model 43 K1 KAI However photos of the surviving two seater show that although it had been repainted soon after the war, the data panel is clearly original and carries the letters MXY7 K-2. item 18 on Brenguns drawing. I understand that drawings exist of a rocket boosted two seat trainer with small wings than K-1 and that this was the K1-Kai. The Model 43 was an entirely different design, although the two seater would probably have been used as a trainer for it. I stress that I am not a Japanese aircraft expert but when you start delving, it looks like there are no original, reliable sources and I suspect R.J Francillons seminal book Japanese aircraft of the Pacific War is wrong. Although he actually drew up many allied reports from the original documents - apparently taken to the USA and later lost in a fire I'm told - I personally think he confused the Model 43 K1 KAI designation, with the two two seaters that were captured. It looks quite possible that Francillon never saw these aircraft nor their data plates. I could be completely wrong but would be very interested in anything concerning this unusual aircraft which for no particular reason fascinates me. ………….. and what are the chance of Brengun producing it in 1/48 do we think ?? Paul

The Osprey book on Luftwaffe Emergency Fighters contains a previously unpublished photo of the Ta.183 wooden mock up and copies of many of its drawings. Although component manufacture had begun and I think a spar was in a test rig, no one has suggested that any major components had been assembled and certainly nothing resembling a flyable aircraft existed at the end of the war - sadly - great aircraft. Paul Williams

I am an older modeller !!! and whilst I never saw Harry Woodman's model, it was that article that me - as an aeromodeller, want to build an rc Schleswig Holstein. Given its fame, its seems a realistic candidate for a 1/200 pre-dreadnought......... hopefully before I am too geriatric. Paul

Getting back to the topic of Schleswig Holstein I have always loved this pre-dreadnought and would like to make an rc conversion - 1/350 is possible but 1/200 would be better. Can I ask those of you who 'follow the market ' if you think there is a realistic prospect of this appearing in 1/200 and if so - how far into the future ???? While you are contemplating - same question for the DKM Graf Zeppelin Crystal balls at the ready lads ! Paul

Thanks for all the comments guys - same conclusion as me - bunkham. Sadly I can't get any more information, other that parts of the hull bulged slightly ! in addition to minor cracking. To me that sounds like a reaction to unsuitable putty / filler. Incidentally - whats the most effective substance to use to give the plastic a good scrub ?? Thanks again Paul

A contact in Germany has described the sinking of a Hobby Boss plastic warship, converted to RC. Allegedly the plastic distorted , bulged and split because of contact with water - which seems highly unlikely to me. It was also claimed that normal 'hobby paint' (sorry not specified further) attacked the plastic ! More realistically I have heard some rumours that the mould release agent used by Hobby Boss can be difficult to remove - any suggestions ? As I have bought the Hobby Boss Mikasa and intend to sail it with rc, I would be most interested to hear of other modellers experiences - do any such problems exist ???? Or as I suspect, is this a problem caused by failing to remove the release agent ??? Many thanks Paul

I'm not normally a tank modeller but I am very interested in the amphibious German tanks developed for the proposed invasion of Britain - Operation Sealion / Seelowe. I believe that very many years ago, Azimut produced a set of floats in 1/35 to be fitted either side of a Panzer IIC, to represent the operational version of the so called Schwimmpanzer II - these floats were called Schwimmkorper. Does anyone have a set they are prepared to sell or even a completed model ??? Azimut recently issued a boat hull variant of the Schwimmpanzer II, which I have on order............. i.e. placed the order 2 months ago and they don't reply to emails ! is that normal for Azimut and does the model materialise on the end ?> - but HOW much later ? I have been very fortunate to obtain the Brach Pzkpfw 38(t) Schwimmpanzer conversion, so the Schwimmkorper are all that elude me. References to all the Schwimmpanzers are scarce to say the least - I gather that in 2013 a Russian book by Alexey Kalinin was published -Panzerkampfwagen 38(t) Design and Production (Despite the title I think its in Russian). Had anyone seen this book ? any good ? Some will have seen my post in the 1/16 section - I've got a Panda Hobby 38(t) around which I am going to build a Scwimmpanzer 38(t) as a radio controlled boat ! For the diorama fans amongst you, how many were aware of the plans to use two seat sporting gliders/sailplanes (DFS Kranich) to spot land extra ammunition, carried in the rear seat. 80 were actually converted for that purpose. Any help much appreciated Paul

Thanks Sgt, references are few and far between. Oddly the Panzer IIc variant of which 52 were built, seems to have had only the prototype photographed - no photos of them en-masse during training. The tanks were certainly converted as there are numerous photos of them with the sponson connecting brackets on the hull. Any new infor would be most welcome. Paul

Thanks for the comparative drawings - I had the impression that the turret and basic hull were the same............. obviously utterly wrong ! Looks like I have two options - the Dragon 1/6 or wait and see if a 1/16 Panzer IIc materialises - any rumours. ? I have already sourced a 1/16 Panda Hobby PzKpfw.38(t) to build the experimental schwimmpanzer based on that tank. Although a full motorisation and digital sound aftermarket kit is available for the Panda model, I'm taking the view that the long overhanging bow provides the model with such minimal ground clearance on anything but a dead flat surface that it isn't a very practical proposition as a driver. The model sits so low in the water that it will be very difficult to seal it effectively and an internal tube will need to be added to the hull, extending vertically as far up inside the turret as possible. The radio will need to be in this area, so turret traverse and gun elevation are not possible. Consequently it will be built as a pure sailing model - which should turn a few heads at scale boat steering competitions ! I have a wide ranging interest in WW2 and Operation Sealion is an enigma. It is often forgotten that Hitler did not originally plan to invade all of France and that the revised plan led to the Germans arriving at Dunkirk with no prior plan for what to do next. It was obvious that any invasion had to be mounted quickly before the British had the opportunity to recover. It remains unclear whether Sealion was serious or a spectacular bluff - only Hitler knew the truth. What can be said with certainty, is that enormous resources were being poured into preparation at the same time the initial planning was being carried out for Barbarossa. Clearly the cobbled together landing craft - converted river barges - were not up to the job. I am aware of the Sandhurst war game that showed Sealion would have failed. It has been argued that not all options were explored but what ifs are difficult to argue. It can be said that if Hitler had decided to go for it, then Sealion would have been launched despite the general staffs concerns. The ability to deliver a second wave of troops (after dragging unpowered barges off the beach at the next tide) is very doubtful, as is the ability to resupply ammunition. War is unpredictable and with a significant element of luck. If the (then) best and most experienced army in the world was landed on the beaches of England, with no prospect of retreat, then there might well have been some prospect of success - but at the cost of a phyric victory. Of course we will never know and I quite agree that the odds were strongly against success. However, the speed at which the Schwimmpanzer were developed is quite impressive and despite that they seemed to be more seaworthy than the swimmi9ng Shermans. Paul Regardless of if it could have succeeded or not, there is still considerable doubt whether it was serious or one of the greatest bluffs of all time. It can be said that to the highest levels of the General staff, every effort was made to prepare and make it work.