Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by PeterB

  1. This is my attempt at the same machine using the old Frog kit. I would imagine your much newer Airfix version will be far more detailed and accurate, particularly the nose glazing which I seem to remember Frog got wrong! Pete
  2. So, no points for accuracy I guess but it now looks a bit more like it. It seems the D0-17 E/F were only 3 seaters, later versions added an extra crewman to work the added defensive guns presumably. I have installed a simplified version of the rear seat in the stowed position copied from an RS instruction sheet and added the floor, pilot's seat and IP so it is ready to go together now, remembering to trap the strange tailwheel that was used on all of the 17/217 family. I should still be able to add the ventral MG15 through the hole for the dorsal gun sing a pair of tweezers - I won't fit that until the wing complete with undercarriage is ready to go on. To the left is a sort of rear bulkhead which goes just behind the ventral gun position under the wing, with a hatchway to give access to the rear fuselage - again according to the RS kit. Pete
  3. Hi Pat, You are always welcome to ask but I am no expert on rigging and the like. What scale is the SE.5a? I have a dozen or more WWI biplanes in my stash, mostly Roden or Eastern Express, but with the odd Airfix and some others including a Vickers Gunbus with etched rear frames which I keep putting off. All are in 1/72 and the rigging worries me a lot - the best way may be miniature turnbuckles! You can buy them, or alternatively make them from fuse wire I believe and I may give it a try. With rather less GB in the second half of the year that I will be joining, maybe I should start on some of them - after all there is always the next KUTA or two I could enter them in if they end up only part finishes. Pete
  4. Thanks James. I have also seen suggestions of a black squiggle, sometimes with either 74 or 75 and at least one where the 72/72 was painted over with patches of 76, but I think I will do a darker grey squiggle. All I have to do now is to decide if the rudder/endplates should be 76 or black. Pete
  5. With only a month left I thought I had better make a start on this so I am going to do some work on the fuselage - this is what I have at the moment! Unlike the later models such as the Do-17Z the early ones did not have the deepened front section making a sort of gondola for the ventral gun, and therefore only had as fairly shallow floor. In fact Airfix have missed it out almost entirely mounting the front seats onto the fuselage and only provide a sort of "footboard" with the stick and pedals. They provide 2 seats of which only the right hand one for the navigator/bomb aimer has survived so I will be using one out of the spares box for the pilots seat. The Radio operator/dorsal gunner had a small circular seat squab mounted on a frame so that it could be folded away, presumably for when he was working the ventral gun, and that has been lost as well, as has the IP, though I do have a Yahu one for the IPM Do-215B which may fit with a bit of work. I will also make up a rear bulkhead. The one real problem will be the ventral gun but I may be able to fit that later to avoid it being broken - if not I will have to try and put some sort of shield round it to minimise the risk of damage. More as and when. Pete
  6. Snap! It was only several years later that I discovered it should have been blue, or was it OD? Pete
  7. This is my attempt at the old Airfix Handley Page O/400 from 1918. I had a few problems with the wing alignment so it is a bit "wonky". Here is a link to the build thread. And here are some pics. It is painted with the Colourcoats version of PC.10 which is a problematic colour. It reputedly started life as a greenish brown, but rapidly faded to quite a dark brown, but this plane would be virtually brand new. As with many paints it looks different depending on the lighting and can look quite brownish, but today it looks a bit more green that I would perhaps have liked, particularly as the late war batches of paint seem to have been more brown than the earlier ones.. The kit markings are "anonymous" but I have found something similar on a photo of a plane operated by 207 Squadron RAF in August 1918 - previously that was 7 Naval Squadron of the RNAS who operated both O/100 and the later O/400 though probably not the latter prior to April 1918 when they became part of the RAF. Not the easiest of builds but it is not too bad, and I quite enjoyed it - well most of the time anyway. Pete
  8. As WWI drew to a close in 1918 the O/400 was replacing the O/100 in Squadron service and the much bigger 4 engined V/1500 was just starting to enter service, as was the smaller DH 10 sometimes called the Amiens and the Vickers Vimy. As I mentioned earlier the RAF decided that the Vimy was the best plane for their peacetime needs and so the other 3 soon were phased out. From then on the need for a heavy bomber was somewhat minimal and so a period of relative stagnation followed until the early 1930's. Before I go any further I will once more say that comparing speed and range of planes is not an exact science as there are too many variables, particularly bomb and fuel load, which are seldom given in the various reference books. All data below is from my Putnams book on the RAF. The Vimy was replaced in around 1925 by the slightly larger Vickers Virginia, which was developed through numerous marks, the last of which was the Virginia X, by which time engine horsepower had gone from the 2 x 360HP or so in the Vimy and O/400 to around 2 x 570HP, but the speed seems to have remained at around 100mph, albeit with a somewhat heavier bombload. In parallel, HP produced their twin engined Hyderabad and later Hinadai which had a bombload of around 1500lb and with 2 x 440HP Jupiters the speed increased slightly to around 122 mph. Both the Virginia and Hinadai were replaced when the last RAF biplane bomber, the HP Heyford, arrived in late 1933. This rather curious looking machine had a pair of 575HP R-R Kestrel engines and carried a bombload of between 1500lb and 3500lb at speeds up to 142mph, but the days of the biplane were numbered with specifications issued in 1932 that would result in the Hampden and Wellington, and a 1934 spec that led to the Whitley. The next Handley Page bomber after the Hereford was therefore the Hampden which entered service in 1938, 20 years after the O/400 and had a normal bombload of 4000lb, a max of 6000lb over short ranges, and two 1000HP Pegasus engines giving a top speed of 254mph. Once more the threat of a future war had driven rapid improvements in performance. As you may have guessed, this rant is a lead- in to a few “family group” photos! 15 years after the O/400 the Heyford entered service - this is the Matchbox Heyford Mk II from 1935 and is painted in NIVO. Just 4 years later the Hampden arrived - this is the old Airfix kit. It looks tiny by comparison with the O/400, which would not be matched in size until the arrival of the Stirling, Halifax and Manchester. Not a bad kit though I have had a few alignment problems, partly due to the modular construction method Airfix suggest. I am fairly pleased with the result. Pete
  9. Hi Try, There are always the engine nacelles as a back up. I actually also put in a lead cockpit floor/nose wheel bay roof though it did reduce the depth of the bay a bit! Pete
  10. Don't know if there is any mention of weight in the Revell instructions, but if you are going for wheels down you will need a lot and there is not a great deal of space in the nose if my latest Frog 219 is anything to go by. That too was a Revell boxing although actually labelled "Matchbox" so I was not quite sure which I was going to get until I opened it. The "original" Revell one like yours may be a bit better detailed. I will watch with interest to see how it compares. Pete
  11. Having used 4 or 5 different colours on the engine, I dirtied it up with Tamiya Smoke and stuck it on. The whole thing has had a coat of flat varnish. That just leaves the main rotor which on early Airfix helicopters used to be a problem for me. I remember throwing my first S55 Whirlwind because the blades would not stay on, and I thing the same happened to the Belvedere, but my first Scout was not a problem, until the tiny drive shaft snapped after a couple of years! I think the problem was due to a combination of inferior glue and a very small attachment area combined with the unsupported length and weight of the blades. Glue seems to have improved a bit since then and there is always CA as a back-up. I imagine the rotor head could stand some improvement but frankly I do not know that much about helicopters and it would be a real fiddle on something as small as this so I won't bother. Pete
  12. Hi VP, Yes, the original Do-217A was indeed very similar to the Do-17Z but then it started to put on weight!, and finally the K/M versions radically changed the nose glazing. I am beginning to have my doubts about Italeri's take on the paint scheme. They say black undersurfaces with a very high demarcation line which is OK, but the upper surface colours are a bit suspect. They say FS34079 mottle or squiggles over FS36440 or in other words "leaf green" over light gull grey - so I presume RLM 71 over RLM 76. However my sources on the subject of Luftwaffe Night Bombers say that when the "normal" maritime 72/73/65 scheme was overpainted in 22 Black underneath, the 72/73 was initially retained, and when 76 was later applied the mottle/squiggle was either 74 or 75, or maybe even both, so grey not green! Unfortunately most of the profiles I have are for the M version with inline engines, and they either show dark grey over 76 or even 76 over 72/73. I will have to put my thinking cap on as I have no pics/profiles of the planes that the kit has decs for. Pete
  13. Until I saw Enzo's F-105 entry for this GB I had not realised that the first Monogram kit I ever built was the one in the middle of this photo. Like the following photos, my old manual camera has resulted in less than perfect focus! What I thought was my first but is apparently my second is the B-52D which I believe dates back to 1970, though I bought it one Saturday in about 1984 from my local newsagents - I think it cost £10! About 3 years later I bought the B-36 which I believed was released in 1980 - it was mail order from Tony at HJ Walker's in Hackney and his first attempt was apparently mis-delivered to a bank in London where he told me it was blown up as a suspected bomb! The second parcel arrived safely and here it is. I put the perspex shelf up over the stairs specifically to display the B-52, but in the end SWMBO complained about dusting them and so the shelf has gone and the kits are on top of a wardrobe gathering dust! Since then I may have built a P-51 and I definitely built a Tigercat for the "In the Navy" GB but cannot find any photos - must be there somewhere! Later, Found it. AFAIK that is my entire involvement with Monogram - Revell is a different matter but most of the kits are long gone, but here are a few. The CR42 and MC 200 are old Revell kits from the 1960's This Ki-45 Nick is from Revell Japan a few years later as is the J1N Irving on the left below and finally this Frances. Pete
  14. Some of the pics remind me of a few kits I left in a shed at my parents house when I moved out. Returning to collect them a couple of years later I found that the roof had leaked, so the contents of the shed had either been soaking wet or baking in the sun - the plastic was warped and the paint and decs had started to peel off. That is why I have none of the 8 or so Airfix 1/144 airliners I built. Pete
  15. And I would have thought, wrongly it seems, that it was the old Frog kit - never even suspected Monogram did one! Pete
  16. Hi Mike, I agree so I will be applying matt varnish. Pete
  17. Bit more progress. As expected the skid undercarriage was a fiddle and is rather flimsy. The Air Graphics update set is pretty good though the instructions are a bit basic - "add/replace" is about all they say. The bulged door set were a bit on the thick side even after I sanded them down, hence I suspect the problem with the top glazing, but it does look the part. All I have to do now is add the tail rotors, paint and assemble the main rotors, and finish painting the engine and gearbox. The last thing to go on will be the probe/pitot under the Port side of the nose. I have added a couple of blade aerials, one in front of the windscreen and one under the fuselage. To avoid masking I will brush paint a coat of Winsor and Newton Matt varnish on. Probably not very accurate but a bit better than the basic kit! Pete
  18. As expected, getting the mudguards on was a bit of a fiddle but anyway the basic airframe is complete now. Bit of filling to do and then I will get some paint on and see what the joints look like. I have already put some Gunze RLM 76 on to see what it looks like - bit on the blue side perhaps but I think I can live with it. Pete
  19. My 1994 Aeroclub catalogue only goes up to P082 so they must be from a later date. Pete
  20. Thanks Mike, As I have mentioned before, being retired and pretty much housebound helps! Mind you, my wife is now in "decorating mode" which does slow me down a bit, particularly when I want to get in the kitchen to do a bit of airbrushing under the extractor hood - my spray booth is not big enough for the O/400, Stirling and the like. Bit better now we have done the kitchen but she is about to start on our bedroom, which will be fun. Pete
  21. There seems to be a bit of confusion between sources as to how many Scouts were used in Operation Corporate. Certainly they were flown by 2 units. The first 6 shipped out with the first part of the Task Force belonged to 3CBAS - Commando Brigade Air Support unit. Later they were joined by 3 Scouts of 656 Squadron Army Air Corps and these is a suggestion that a further 3 from 656 arrived with the landing force. However both units probably had Gazelles as well, and both types were listed as AH.1, which coupled perhaps with some chopping between units may have caused the problem. Certainly the Helis.com website only lists 9 Scouts in total along with a similar number of Gazelles, and 6 of the Scouts were belonging to 3CBAS! However they do list 3 which were loaded onto the impressed MV Europic Ferry and departed for the war zone on April 25th as part of 656 Squadron. Wiki says XT629 from 3CBAS was shot down by a Pucara with the pilot being killed and the crewman losing a leg,, and XR628 of 656 Squadron, having gone into a low hover to avoid A-4 Skyhawks, suffered a gearbox failure when climbing away after they left. The crew survived and the airframe was recovered but subsequently written off. They also say 3 Gazelles were shot down, one by friendly fire when lack of IFF resulted in it being mistaken for an Argentinian C-130 by HMS Cardiff! Anyway, most of the decs are on. I am doing it as XT637, one of the 3 656 Squadron Scouts embarked on MV Europic Ferry - I still have to add the aircraft letter "F" on the tail once I put the rotor drive section on. As I mentioned previously, the kit has the early this tapered tail rotor but I am fitting the later broad parallel sided one you can see behind the kit which comes in 2 parts. Following an accident the red/white stripes were changed to black/white, and rather than try and paint them I printed off some decs which look like they might just work - once dry I will trim them back! Getting there slowly. Pete
  22. Thanks Mike, I have some pics of the engines but will send a PM anyway as your may be better. The pics I have tend to view the blades edge on, hence my request. Pete
  23. Well Paul, I do happen to have the Novo boxings of the ancient Frog Vimy, but I gather it will need some work as it was originally the civilian Alcock and Brown trans Atlantic one with extra fuel tanks. I will hopefully get it built this year but there is not enough time in what is left of this GB - might end up in the KUTA! If you do decide to built the O/400, I would suggest not following the build sequence in the instructions if you are confident you can rig it another way - wing alignment and the undercarriage should be somewhat easier then. Also, I suspect that the wing walkway decs should really go between the fuselage and engine but at that stage I could not get them on there and they ended up outboard of the engine! Other than that it is a fairly straightforward build, and the boxing I had was fairly flash free with little sign of mould deterioration. Pete
  24. Mike, Can you confirm what colour the main rotor blades are - I have seen black and grey suggested, and photos seem to show both. Maybe even black underneath and grey on top? Also, some seem to have yellow tips and some do not. Pete
  25. Well, that is now done. Bombed and fuelled up and the armourers have just fitted the Lewis guns - just waiting for the crew to arrive! You can see the strange horizontal ladder-like catwalks above the engines I mentioned earlier in the above shot, together with the braces I have fitted. If and when we get some halfway decent weather I will take some pics for the gallery. Pete
  • Create New...