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. :)

Jure Miljevic

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

718 Excellent

About Jure Miljevic

  • Rank
    Very Obsessed Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

1,039 profile views
  1. Hello Not an expert, but I do not think those lines were intended to help Hs 126 pilots to asses dive angles. Probably they had been used by observers who could, given the known height over terrain, determine approximate distances to objects at which the lines pointed and perhaps to assist them when taking photos with hand-held cameras. Cheers Jure
  2. Hello Deadalus72 I found this on the web: Otherwise, try Dinger's Aviation Pages here, with wealth of information about Skua and many other types. Cheers Jure
  3. Jure Miljevic

    Best ju87

    Great Mike, and I would be only too happy to assist you, if by lucky coincidence I would be around at the moment. I must confess that yesterday it occurred to me that perhaps I am taking plastic modelling a bit too seriously. Luckily, this morning a close encounter with a Spitfire (well, front fuselage from spinner to windshield, Merlin 63 included) made this moment of weakness irrelevant. Anyone else suffering from such heretic thoughts occasionally? Cheers Jure
  4. Jure Miljevic

    Best ju87

    Thanks, Mike. That helps and I am almost convinced any additional length Ju 87 D sub-type may have gained must have been on spinner. I would not mind if someone would measure the surviving one, though. Cheers Jure
  5. Hello Tbolt According to Nicholas Millman's book Ki.27 Nate aces (Osprey) these are flare projectors. They appear on some of Ki.27 and Ki.79 photos, and they always seem to be installed under the starboard flap. Cheers Jure
  6. Hello Harold According to Tom Ivie and Paul Ludwig book Spitfires and yellow tail Mustangs (Hikoki) Lt. Lampe flew Spitfire Vc JK180, QP-X, Betty I in January 1944. There are two photos of this plane in mentioned book, along with a colour profile. Xtradecals offers decals for this aircraft in one of its sets (here). Will search further, perhaps I can also find something about Lampe's Mustang. Cheers Jure P.S.: In the same book there is a photo of Lampe's P-51 C 43-24838, QP-X, Betty II. I did not find any decals for this aircraft available, though.
  7. Perhaps P-36 A of Lt. Philip Rasmussen would suit you, if you want to build one in NM: I think Rasmussen's victim over Pearl Harbor was a Nakajima B5N2. There is no shortage of decals, as several producers offer Black 86 in their sets. Cheers Jure
  8. Hello Probably old news, but still ... There are some Comet drawings here, although the set contains only one profile drawing of Comet 2 and the plan view drawings represent Comet 4b. Perhaps Nimrod drawings can be of some use (here and here), although differences between both types are considerable. Cheers Jure
  9. Hello Bill I understand Comet 2 differed from her predecessor in having three ft. longer fuselage with one extra window, new Avon engines and drooped wing leading edges. One can take a Comet 1 kit as a basic model, but there are no ready made conversion sets for Comet 2 in 1/72, as far as I know. Neither is there an abundance of Comet 1 kits as I am only aware of Fliegerhorst kit (in-box review here and build review here) and Welsh models kit (photos of built model here and build review here). Of those two, Welsh Models kit with vacuform fuselage and wings might be more suitable than resin Fliegerhorst kit, which I doubt is available anyway. The other path one may follow is converting Mach 2 injection Comet 4C kit. Shortening plastic fuselage is less difficult than cutting vacuform or resin fuselage and inserting plugs, but I am not certain about other modifications necessary. Removing leading edge pod tanks is relatively minor one, but with Comet 3 and 4C a major airfoil modification had been introduced, although I do not know if that would be noticeable on a 1/72 model. Cheers Jure
  10. Hello Antb You can try with drawings on this link with more Fw 190 drawings on a basic WWII fighters page here. Resolution of scans is not particularly high so one cannot indulge in rivet counting, although positions of rivet lines are more or less clear. Cheers Jure
  11. Hello Liam It is possible but, as Steve and Christer A indicated, hardly worth trying. One could turn Sea Fury into Tempest Mk.II, but that would require to extend wings, relocate radiator from right wing to the left, replace vertical tail, replace five bladed propeller with the four bladed one ... and probably plenty more. Cheers Jure
  12. Hello Is not that late Rik Mayall as a Captain Flasheart from Private Plane episode of Black Adder marches forth series? Cheers Jure
  13. Hello As Mike and Steve suggested, scissors on Vampire are facing aft. Here is a photo of T Mk.11 undercarriage leg, taken by Luc Colin, and found on this Prime Portal walk around. There are photos of Vampire single-seaters (Vampire FB Mk.5 VZ304, French FB Mk.9 Vampires) in various books and magazines, which clearly show aft facing scissors and forward facing pneumatic lines, but I was not able to find them on-line. Cheers Jure
  14. Hello Kushan_Farsight You could try airwar.ru website. Scroll down to about quarter of this page and you will find five webpages on Su-7, starting with front line fighter Su-7 sans suffix and finishing with Su-7 BMK fighter-bomber. For drawings one can consult another airwar.ru page here. One book that is listed as a source on almost all webpages linked to above is Perviy sverhzvukovoj istrebitel-bombardirovchik Su-7 B (The first supersonic fighter-bomber Su-7) by Viktor Markovskiy and Igor Prihodchenko. It is very informative and it also includes a photo of Polish air force SU-7 BKL with BDZ-56 FN pylon. A rather superfluous caption states that in extreme circumstances air forces of other socialist states could have been tasked with tactical nuclear strike missions. Unfortunately, I was not able to find this photo on the web. Cheers Jure
  15. Hello NoSGO Whether fluid or rigid flying formation is more suitable remains one of never answered combat aviation questions. I think in 1918 Sholto Douglas decreed rigid five planes wedge formation for his squadron. Previously many pilots had been separated from or lured away from formation and then easily finished off by a pair or more German fighters. Air victories decreased slightly, but losses dropped significantly. During WWII ˝Deadly duo˝ Gentile and Godfrey, among others, experimented with fluid pair formation. During Vietnam war North Vietnamese had flown in all kind of formations (and single aircraft) under more or less strict instructions from ground controllers. So had Israelis but on the other hand regularly dissolved their formations and fought individually if found this advantageous. Over Vietnam USAF started with fluid four, which by then had deteriorated significantly towards four aircraft welded wing formation. I read somewhere that a standing joke at the time was that in combat wingmen had been allowed to utter only three phrases: to report their position, to inform their leader that his aircraft is burning and to say ˝I'll take the fat one.˝, obviously reserved for night missions in local bars only. Cheers Jure
  • Create New...