Jump to content

As a result of the close-down of the UK by the British Government last night, we have made all the Buy/Sell areas read-only until we open back up again, so please have a look at the announcement linked here.

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. :)

alancmlaird

Members
  • Content Count

    284
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

374 Excellent

1 Follower

About alancmlaird

  • Rank
    Established Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Stirling
  • Interests
    British civil aircraft. WW1.

Recent Profile Visitors

812 profile views
  1. If your aim is scratch-building using other kits bit's n pieces, there is one bit of info that has been useful to me for 50 years: There seems to be a ubiquitous 5' 6'' chord common to almost all British 2-seaters....DH4, BE2c, RE8, Bristol Fighter, AW FK3 and many more! Get yourself copies of Harleyford's WW1 books, turn to the appedices giving dimensions and let your imagination run riot!
  2. BA testing the water to splt back to its European and Overseas division? You heard it here first!
  3. I built a vac-form DH1 by Phoenix, in tandem with a scratch built one, both in 1/72 scale. The Phoenix kit is pretty old I think, and pretty crude but accurate. . The engine, props and wheels were vac-formed rather than white-metal or resin as more recent vac offerings, and were replaced. The scratch-built one gave a more satisfactory result, I think You'll find the build on here maybe a couple of years ago.. Link below. Ialso posted the finished model on a separate page. I saw their DH6 once recently on ebay, but decided against buying and began renovating my scratch-built DH6 from 45 years ago instead!
  4. G-APWA was not a BEA service aircraft. It was only painted up that way for a sales tour of South America (with Prince Philip I think!) subsequently sold there. However, It came back and is preserved somewhere in the UK. (is Woodly a place?) G-APWB/C/D were the BEA service machines on Scottish regional routes. All 4 were short, earlier version.
  5. I've been following this thread for a while and now I can't recall whether the definitive method had been arrived at in 1/72. Having done the 9A conversion from Alan Hall's Airfix article (and the DH9) about 50 years ago (!) I'll add my tuppence worth (pre-decimalisation you see). So here goes...... Mr Hall just used a big lump of balsa (talcum and dope painted/impregnated) with the kit rear fuselage, but even then I didn't like this method and fabricated a new front from plastic card on mine. The Liberty engine of the 9A makes the front fuselage bulkier overall than the 4, and needed a new hard-carved radiator with prominent horizontal louvres. The kit rear fuselage needs built up tapering up from the tail to the rear of the Scarff-ring, and the front cockit needs shuffled rearward. Tailplane, fin and rudder are unchanged, though replacing the 'planking' rib detail is vital! I followed Alan Hall's suggestion of using the greater span and chord wings from the Frog Westland Wallace (Westland were entrusted with the redesign of the DH4 to 9A originally), but narrowed at the centre section (the Wallace has a wider fuselage). The Wallace's leading edge slats have to be filed off (a task that nearly defeated me at the time!), and I think you need to make thicker struts - the inners being thicker than the outers! Longer U/C legs need to be fabricated too. Don't know if this is any help at all for a 48th scale build - I will say that I saw a DH9a conversion at a show keeping the smaller DH4 wings and it just didn't look right. Personally, I'd just buy the Russian 9A or R-1 kit now! I did - both - and have enough bits left over from 1969 to build a DH16 airliner using the Wallace wings I kept in the loft all these years.
  6. G-AFGN is a model 14 = Hudson type That aircraft is the historic one that brought PM Chamberlain back from Berlin with his 'piece of paper' from Hitler!
  7. It does. but good, economical. writing stands out, whenever its from. Sir Walter Scott I still find readable, Treasure Island and Robinson Crusoe too! It surprised me that Sherlock Holmes was a bit impenetrable, I gave up after a few of the short stories (What the hell is the 'Mystery of the Red Haired Men' all about?). Most 1960's Science Fiction (and other 'cool' novels) I loved at the time are almost all complete drivel now. See, fashion and contemporary style dates badly. Surely tech articles never date? Must dig out the few Airfix and Aircraft Illustrated that I still have from the late '60s and early '70s to see if I'm right. Bet you there are very few typos, though!
  8. Well, yes, but as far as I can tell, little more than I got per page for the occasional article I wrote for Airfix magazine in the 1970s. I'm just returning to modelling since then (after 40 years, and I can say most definitely that the quility of kits, magazines, and completed models is immeasurably improved. If you think that SAM etc. are bad for typos, don't even think of buying a newspaper! My local newspaper group outsourced sub-editing to India for a while!!! One howler this produced was 'Nearly 18 people made redundant' I notice Airfix Magazine has been criticism-free so far. I've only seen/bought a few since my return to the hobby, but I didn't notice any howlers there particularly, and I think The Aeroplane is a fabulous historical info source. Not everything is on the internet, you know.
  9. alancmlaird

    Hannover

    Painted? Really? I just left it in the pale blue plastic finish! It was fine if you weren't bothered about joint lines. I do remember it had the best pilot an observer figures I'd ever seen - remember the usual distorted aliens you used to get with older kits like the RE8 and Camel?
  10. I agree. While the 'empty' undercarriage bay is invisible most of the time, that wee mod to the u/c makes a big difference. I'll be adding that to the 'finished' Dak as well as the next one (which incidently will need undercarriage doors!). Thanks for the idea. The next one is started, but hols, DIY and generally being distracted is getting in the way of progress....
  11. Maybe you should leave it for a bit. Sleep on it. Try again at the end of the month. Maybe.
  12. Club motto...."Tempus est iam consules mora exacerbaverant" (The time for procrastination is now)
  13. Could you start with a Jupiter from Airfix's Bristol Buldog and scratch additional detail? I used to use it on so many other conversions way back, and I remember it as pretty good? The kits can be bought easily and pretty reasonably from ebay.
  14. I built this kit when it came out at first (1965 or thereabouts). It was a kit I desperately wanting because of the Mossie's regular features in comics like Eagle, Lion and Valiant, and those little war comic like Commando etc (I was adicted to them!). I thought it was brilliant, but to this day I can still remember being annoyed at the wonky wheels. I''ve just finished Airfix's original Dak, which someone referred to as a 'nostalgia' build. Must follow it up with an Airfix Mosquito, and this time get the wheels straight!
  15. 'Mazin how a bit of rain increases modelling productivity. I broke my usual rule and was (carefully) painting some bits while other areas were still drying. Usually this can guarantee I will touch wet paint somewhere in the process, but I got away with this time. Sharp-eyed members will notice the use of new Dak decals on old Dak kit. These decals are lovely, perhaps a bit thick and need plenty of MicroSet and MicroSol to ensure sticktion. the port fuselage registration even has a cut-out for the door hinge. Might apply an over-all matt varnish though. The paintwork is showing 'tide' marks from the decal applications and a few handling scuffs and stains. So, perfectly acceptable result - from a 40 year old kit! Is it worth trying to bring it up to today's standard? No, that wasn't the point. ~It was a liberating experience though, not really bothering how well or not the build turned out, as the alternative was putting both unbuilt kits in the bin. I really intended to be building both old Daks simultaneously, but this first one took wings (!) and it got finished way ahead of the other one. (Even sharper-eyed members will note that the rear-most window should be the same size as the others. That can wait till I know it can be successfully accomplished on the other Dak!) I'll turn to the second one now. I know I should be simply building it using the alternative Dan-Air markings that I have from the new Airfix kit's decals (I might yet), but I fancy something a bit more adventurous - aided and abetted by Mr Scimitar.
×
×
  • Create New...