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. :)

Boffin79

Members
  • Content Count

    14
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

13 Good

About Boffin79

  • Rank
    Newbie

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Norway

Recent Profile Visitors

85 profile views
  1. The canopy looks fine to me. The A-1 only had a single gun station at the rear of the canopy, as compared to the twin arrangement on the A-4. There were also differences to the engine nacelles and radiator fronts. If I’d hazard a guess, the wing probably looks thicker due to the shorter wingtips of the A-1.
  2. You're right. I checked Cato Guhnfeldt's book after I wrote my post, and the pattern is visible in overcast lighting as well (page 33). Question then is; is it aluminium with light blue spots, or light blue with aluminium spots?
  3. Are we sure about that? To me it looks like the shadow from a tree behind the photographer (looking also at the ground under and around the tail).
  4. Not entirely surprising - I have their previous boxings of the A-4 and the C-6, and the wing is clearly constructed to allow the shorter wingtips of the A-1 to be installed. Had originally planned to scratch-build new wingtips in order to build an A-1 and a C-1 out of these, but now I won't have to
  5. Yes, should have noted that in my post, but figured it would be obvious as the aircraft in the picture carries an RAF C-type roundel, and the article states that F.400 was captured by the Germans in 1940 and then lost in 1943. The drawing at the bottom is probably closer to the truth.
  6. This page is in Norwegian, but a run through Google Translate should provide you with some of the information you need: http://forsvaretsmuseer.no/Marinemuseet/Sjoeforsvaret-organisasjon-avdelinger-og-drift-1814-2016/MARINENS-FLYVEVAAPEN-1912-1944/Flyene-i-Marinens-flygevaapen/JUNKERS-JU52-3M-1940 By the looks of it, they retained the civilian colour scheme of overall silver and black, while only adding flag stripes to the wings and rudder. Armament consisted of two M/29 machine guns (licence-built Browning M1917). Also, the DP Casper decal sheets for Operation Weserübung contains the scheme for this particular aircraft (no. 400).
  7. Got this kit the other day, and I just noticed something funny about the boxart : Link: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Me109_G-6_D-FMBB_1.jpg
  8. It’s still available on http://www.ipmsstockholm.se/home/urbans-color-reference-charts-part-i/. I believe there was a transition from .org to .se a few years back, and the .org site was no longer maintained.
  9. Well, you're in luck - the movie version is also being reissued: https://www.specialhobby.eu/en/our-own-production/special-hobby/ha-1112-m-1l-buchon-movie-star-1-1.html
  10. From what I've read, 24 A-6s were ordered, but only 19 arrived in Norway (the remaining five were redirected to Britain and the RAF and redesignated Mohawk III). Of those that arrived, only about seven were assembled but not yet fitted with guns at the time of the invasion.
  11. That's what I meant, your box art looks correct to me for the A-6 variant :-) This thread from a Norwegian model forum has two pictures of 75A-6 no. 447 from the first delivery in Norway - the second picture definitely looks like bare metal finish, and the engine cowling dimensions appear to match a Twin Wasp.
  12. The Norwegian Hawk depicted is correct for the 75A-6 variant, which was the first batch delivered to Norway just before the invasion in 1940. These were in bare metal finish and with Twin Wasp engines. The 75A-8, which was delivered later to the "Little Norway" camp in Canada, were as you said in pale green and with Wright Cyclone engines.
  13. Boffin79

    1/72 Buchon

    I had the same challenge a while back, and my conclusion was that both the Buchons and the CASA 2.111s most likely were painted in the same colour scheme; i.e. RLM 70/71/65, although the RLM 71 was a relatively light version compared to more recent renditions of the colour. My guess is that the movie makers relied on the Ries interpretations of the RLM colours from 1963 (http://penelope.uchicago.edu/~grout/encyclopaedia_romana/luftwaffe/colors.html), which has a relatively light RLM71, almost approaching a dark RLM 02. Can't remember the exact mix I went for, but I suspect that Tamiya's recommendation of XF62 + XF49 1:1 might be close enough. If you prefer using Humbrol, I would probably look into mixing 242 and 240. Cheers, Chris
×
×
  • Create New...