Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by fishplanebeer

  1. Just to add that the book is well worth investing in at around £15 as it contains period pics, schematic diagrams and lots of photos of the Hendon example as well as the 48th scale plans plus a 72nd scale plan confirming the location of the stencils. Regards Colin.
  2. The book by Richard Franks, "The B.P. Defiant - A Technical Guide" has 48th scale plans and is still available on Amazon. HTH. Regards Colin.
  3. In many H-3's the canopy had an additional mg in the upper section whereas I believe the H-6 didn't have this extra firepower installed, but other than that, especially in 72nd scale, the cockpits would have been pretty much the same AFAIK. HTH. Regards Colin.
  4. Just to close, I know that when Lancasters went in for a major service (or major damage repair) they would be broken down into the major sections and that only the nose section usually retained its original identity when it came out the other end of the process. As such 'S' R5868 had a completely new/different rear fuselage fitted along with probably new wings etc. etc. . Which raises the question of whether a B.I could end up being a B.III or vice versa which I know has been covered by a previous post so I won't revisit this particular aspect. However what is important, for me at least, is that R5868 still has components that were of the correct period and timescale so is still authentic even if not as it was when originally built. There is little authenticity or historical value in an aircraft that just has an original data plate around which everything else is brand new aluminium apart from the Merlins. When I've visited the British Museum the artefacts that are original are the ones that I have always found to be of the greatest interest, such as the original ancient Greek helmets and the items recovered from the ancient pyramids. A copy would be fine to give the visitor a sense of what these may have looked like but the originals have an aura and historic context well beyond that of a cleverly constructed and accurate replica. As I say just my personal opinion. Regards Colin.
  5. So if a data plate and the known serial number is enough to make it 'the real deal' then I rest my case. Personally I'd be much more interested in seeing the remnants of the original aircraft, a wee bit akin to the RAF Museum's decision many years ago not to fully restore the Halifax but instead to preserve it in the condition in which it was recovered. At the time I thought this was wrong but with the benefit of hindsight I now completely understand and agree with their decision as I can now gaze upon the real thing and not a proxy or 'new build' with no provenance but lots of new aluminium and paint. Regards Colin.
  6. It's absolutely true that any early or even later marque Spitfire would have been modified throughout its life and then 'fiddled' by those seeking to keep it airworthy or to achieve museum display standard thereafter, but at least to my mind they are still essentially the original, even if they are not as they were when they originally came off the production line. Very different to a rusting wreck dug up on a French beach after 50 or so years and then presented as the real thing after a very expensive new build with practically nothing of the original incorporated save the serial number. Just my take on this and I'm sure many will disagree. Regards Colin. Ps. the RAF museum's MK.1 example was reverse engineered many years ago to take it back to its original spec so it is possible to take them back to original factory condition if desired, just not sure how you can reverse engineer a collection of rusty, salt water damaged and twisted metal bits into anything resembling very much.
  7. Just to say that almost all recent Spitfire restorations are based upon the owner securing its original serial number and identity in order to give it some form of provenance from a crash site they have unearthed or inherited. The reality is that almost nothing from the original aircraft then ends up being incorporated into the supposed reincarnation so they are effectively 'new builds' with very little of the original. I don't have an issue with this in general terms as every 'new' Spitfire is a joy to behold when seen flying over Duxford and other places as they preserve the wonderful sight and sound for future generations but they have absolutely no historical merit. Personally my favourite Spits are those that remain pretty much as they were built, airworthy or otherwise, as they are the real thing and have genuine provenance. Just my take and I'm sure others will probably disagree. Regards Colin. Ps. I've always been puzzled as to what happens to the original, bent & corroded parts that these 'new builds' are based upon -are they just scrapped/binned?
  8. Sorry, looking more closely at the box it seems to be just another 're-box' after all. Regards Colin.
  9. Does anyone have any sprue shots etc. of this forthcoming kit which I assume if an LF.IX. Regards Colin.
  10. I've found some pics of the B.VII's being used in the Dambuster movie and these appear to have metal elevators but as these had been in storage for a while it is not entirely surprising that this was the case by 1954 when the filming took place. It would be nice to know if R5868 has metal or fabric, although 'G' George in Australia apparently has fabric and is more of an accurate time capsule given that it was sent to Australia during WW2 and would not have had the same level of restoration that R5868 has received perhaps? Regards Colin.
  11. I know that the very early Lancs had an issue with the wing tips which were prone to coming off and a very hasty mod was then done to solve the problem but despite trawling all my Lanc books I can't find any reference to the elevators being changed from fabric to metal or find any pics which show them being in place. In some respects fabric was preferable as it was easier to repair and most inflagrations in a Lanc were well away from the tail section so they didn't present a particular fire risk. My best guess is that they were changed to metal at the very end of production, as in post war, and those continuing in use with the RAF or sold to other countries may have had this mod applied retrospectively to make them more maintenance free, but of course I could be wrong. It might be worth digging out the pics of the B.VII's used in the Dambuster film to see if they had metal elevators as by then these would have had any such mod applied. Regards Colin.
  12. One of the biggest issues surrounding Bf109's generally, and particularly during the BoB, is that there are relatively few pictures extant of the aircraft from above to confirm the exact colours and camo pattern so it will always involve a degree of 'educated guesswork'. The pics of the captured AE479 at least show where the upper pattern ended over the ailerons and flaps as these were not repainted to avoid upsetting the handling characteristics, but as to where the lines went over the rest of the wing and tail planes (and if they were solid or soft edged) will be subject to some conjecture I suspect. Regards Colin.
  13. Some of us have to care about the cost of a kit so it's all relative depending upon your own circumstances but it is still worth highlighting. As for getting back to Mk.1 Spitfires in 72nd scale I suspect I will receive a lot of 'comments' for my views but I still don't get why there is always so much debate about the very minor and almost imperceptible errors in a 72nd scale fighter that is barely six inches long! As the builder you may take great satisfaction from knowing it is accurate to within less than 1mm in every dimension and all the rivets are the correct depth and exactly where they should be but who else will ever notice? Even a keen observer is far more likely to notice a poor build, paint job or obvious error so for me these are the areas I focus on in order to improve my modelling skills. At least that way I hopefully end up with a finished kit that looks something like the real thing which is my rationale behind building scale models in the first place. I will now bow out of this post as it is clearly not for me Regards Colin.
  14. Arma are very good kits but no better than Eduard yet they have a track record pre-Ukraine and recent oil price rises of pricing noticeably higher. Sort of the reason why I've not bought anything from them as yet other than a couple of Hurricanes that came down quite a lot in price after the initial release. Regards Colin.
  15. Quite superb! Regards Colin. Ps. I think the black discs already referred to were in fact perspex/clear viewing ports and presumably there was a reason why it didn't have an aerial mast?
  16. If Eduard do release a Mk.1 at some point it will be very good news, although for me not as good as if it was a Mk.XII, and price wise it should be far more reasonable than if Arma had a go at it! Regards Colin.
  17. Not withstanding the fact that the Tamiya kit is superbly detailed and a pleasure to build the biggest issue I had with it was not with the dimensions, albeit I'm not someone who pays too much attention to this, but the way in which the front screen also includes part of the forward fuselage. For me as someone with modest skills this makes it extremely difficult to replace with a more accurate example so in the end I suffered this inaccuracy and used a Rob Taurus replacement for the other two parts of the canopy which just about worked OK. Regards Colin. Ps. bought the Revell Mk.IIa when it first came out thinking it would be an accurate and state of the art kit but the reality was woefully different so it was rapidly consigned to the spares box.
  18. Sorry, just to add that one of my biggest snagging issues is removing errant dust and small hair particles which seem to be attracted after each spraying session so do you have any tips on how to avoid this please as your finish is quite superb and completely bug free. Or like me do you spend considerable time removing such things afterwards with very fine sanding sheets as has been my only option and which has added to my multiple delays so far? Kind Regards Colin.
  19. Lovely build and I'm deeply envious as I've been working on the Eduard F6F-3 on and off for almost 6 months! Did you suffer the same fit issues I came across with the lower fuselage joint and the cowling ring? Maybe mine was a Friday afternoon job as it wasn't great and somewhat disappointing given that I'm more than capable of making my own errors as well. In the end I had to buy another kit to replace the dog's breakfast I made of the starboard wing and I'm still at the 'snagging' and retouching stage so suspect it will a few weeks more before it sees light of day, but I doubt it will compare with your superb rendition. Thank you for sharing and showing me how it should be done. Kind Regards Colin. Ps. on a positive note as mine is the Profi edition the pe for the cockpit and engine is quite superb if you can summon up the patience and have the requisite eyesight to use all the parts.
  20. I have the Microbox set in mm's and it caters for all my needs. The moldings of kits is not so precise as to worry about such micro differences as they approximate as best they can to a particular hole size, so to be honest I wouldn't get too hung up about all this stuff. Just go with a bit that is a wee bit too small and then carefully work your way out until you have a hole that fits - simples! Regards Colin.
  21. I've perused all the books I have on the Lanc (quite a few) and there is no mention of any conversion to metal covered elevators during its service in WW2 so I can only presume it was a post WW2 improvement to extend its longevity. By this time I think other types had been similarly improved, most noticeably the Spitfire, so this would make sense but with the Spit it was far more pressing due to the high speed and 'g' performance requirements. Whereas with a Lanc which was generally not expected to perform high stressed manoeuvres it was less of an issue but perhaps did improve its safety? Regards Colin.
  22. Just to add that the carrying of a single 500 or 1000kg bomb during the BoB was uncommon so if you want a mainstream aircraft then best to leave the bomb fairing off unless you have a photo(s) to show it installed in your chosen subject. Regards Colin.
  23. I think the fairing was a form of plastic which covered the more substantial metal hooks underneath, at least this is how it is described in all the references I have. BTW I have pics of a BoB period Heinkel carrying and dropping a large external bomb, either 500 or 1000kg, so these were definitely being used at this time and were not just a later addition for the 'Blitz' period and there after. HTH. Regards Colin.
  24. If you invest in a set of modeler's drill bits, not excessively expensive given that you will use them for years to come, then it's just a simple case of trial and error, and as Tbolt says, start off with one that is perhaps a wee bit too small and go from there. You can always make things bigger but it is 'difficult' to make things smaller. If you fiddle around with a bit that is too small it is quite easy to enlarge the hole a wee bit and this is always the method I use to get parts to fit correctly and much safer than going up a size. Regards Colin.
  25. During the BoB and early Blitz period the He111 would carry a variety of bomb configurations, from the standard 8 x 250kg bombs in the internal cells (4 each side) to just having two plastic bomb carriers, one reach side, which could carry the 500 and 1000kg bomb on each one. Obviously when the external carriers were fitted the above bomb cells were redundant as they couldn't be opened so often the space was used to carry extra fuel. In addition aircraft could have just one plastic bomb carrier fitted, often on the port side, so the bomb load would then be 4 x 250kg bombs plus the single 500 of 1000kg device. HTH. Regards Colin.
  • Create New...