rossm
-
Posts
1,906 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Events
Profiles
Forums
Media Demo
Posts posted by rossm
-
-
PM me an email address and I'll send you a scan of the page on Highball from the Modeller's datafile, lots of detail but not definitive on the number of aircraft modified,
Ross
-
The Special Hobby kit is hardly accurate either, but certainly a better starting point than this horrible old Frog offering that even I wouldn't bother with...as much as I hate to say it. Far superior to both kits, however, is the range of Beauforts from High Planes. Unfortunately, these are difficult to come by nowadays, unless somebody knows of a reliable source for them that I'm not aware of.
High Planes now have to be ordered direct from Their Website. They reckon even with postage from the other side of the world it's cheaper for us than selling via UK model shops.
-
There is a build of the Contrail kit in Scale Aircraft Modelling Vol22no1. There is a paragraph of description of the work done on the cockpit but there are no photos or drawings of the cockpit interior. It does quote Aeroplane Monthly March,May,June 1994 as references. I don't have these but the other references quoted (Putnam, Profile) don't have cockpit details so maybe, just maybe.....
-
1
-
-
The Rescue and the Lifeboat kits both have the later rudders. The Dambuster kit doesn't have the later rudders. The Rescue kit disappeared rather quickly, but for some reason, the Rescue kit didn't seem to sell quite as well and is still around at a few stores in Tokyo. I think that the situation might be similar in North America and Europe. All kits have the later 50 cal. gun rear turret as an option, but I think that the Falcon vacuform one is much better.
Best wishes,
Grant
The twin .5 turret in the kit is the FN82 whereas the Lincoln really needs the Boulton-Paul Type D. As both were designed to the same specification the differences are minimal and you could easily get away with the kit turret but since both conversion kits (Flightpath and Paragon) contain the Type D glazing it's not a problem.
-
The first WWII boxing didn't, the Lancaster 'Postwar' code 00850:4800 does, can't speak for the 'Dambuster' or 'Rescue' boxing. They can be bought from A2ZEE though.
Somewhere on the forums is an answer to whether the Revell kit includes them but I can't find it just now.
-
This post has more detail. I also bought the Academy F-86E because I want to do a slatted wing version.
If you go back in time the Heller F-86F used to be recommended as it also has a slatted wing.
If you want the 'hard' 6-3 wing I am not an expert on which kits to find it in but I think the giveaway is a small wing fence.
Ross
-
Hi Boys and Girls,
I'm on the scrounge again!
Does anyone have any photos of the captured JU88 EE205 other than the one in 'War Prizes' by P. Butler, on page 64. Thanks in anticipation.
Regards,
Glenn.
Don't know it it's the same photo but go to The IWM photo search page and put in EE205 as the keyword. If it doesn't have to be EE205 then I've a couple of HM509 in the RAF Chivenor book by David Watkins.
-
Thanks for all the responses. I found the freightdog sheet after posting - doh!
Anyway - I also found this photo in Mosquito: Classic Aircraft no 7 (Bowyer and Philpott) which is possibly the one referred to by Wooksta.
My interpretation is that the first and third aircraft are MSG/Black; the second aircraft does appear to be a darker Grey with Black undersides. The fourth aircraft is MSG/Green upper and MSG under - there is another photo of the line up which tends to confirm this. The fifth aircraft has a dark fin with lighter rudder....... Which makes me believe it is this one:
Thoughts anyone?
Peter
The second aircraft is the subject of a photo in the Warpaint Special No.3 which quotes the upper surface as Dark Sea Grey. Extra Dark Sea Grey I could live with if the aircraft had originally been intended for Coastal Command - and it looks darker than a Coastal a/c on the facing page. I'm also intrigued by the presence or lack of squadron badges and what that implies in terms of repaints.
There also a small and indistinct photo of a 4 Sqdn Mosquito in this sort of scheme in JWR Taylor's Bomber Sqdns of the RAF
I also think the rudder in the second shot is not at the same angle as the fin so it isn't as helpful as it could be and the fin fades gradually from the fuselage, there's no obvious demarcation so I'm tending to MSG but if I saw the model at an exhibition with a DSG fin I'd be interested to discuss how well it matched the photo - you might convince me.
Ross
-
This was a bagged kit sold with instructions marked Novo - presumably descended from the Frog Mk.21. It's modelled on a photo in the old Camouflage and Markings booklet, also in the book RAF Chivenor by D.Watkins.
I cut off the lump for the autopilot, added Airwaves etched brass cockpits, Aeroclub engines, Airfix tailplanes ('cos they are short span ones) and various spare bits from Airfix (wheels, legs) and Hasegawa (spinners, wheel hubs) kits. The early canopy is also an Aeroclub item. I now wish I'd taken the time to scribe the panel lines but I started it a long time ago and lost interest when the paint peeled with the masking tape. Since it's Chivenor's 70th next year I thought I'd revive it and pair it with a Hawk in 50th anniversary markings which I have yet to build.
-
1
-
-
I don't have one 'cos I'd already 'invested' in a couple of Hasegawas but from a previous discussion I seem to remember the Revell kit has twin .5 turret clear parts, although the Lancaster turret was not the same type as the Lincoln it will be hard to tell on a model, and maybe even the Lincoln style fins (the Hasegawa 'Post War' boxing has both).
Until a previous post from Wooksta on an earlier thread on this subject I had planned to merge the Hasegawa kit with a Flightpath conversion for an expensive (£60ish) Lincoln. Unfortunately I bought the Flihgtpath conversion before reading that so I think I'll have to carry on down that route and take any hassle that turns up. Probably the Paragon conversion will get reissued before I start and I'll just 'have' to buy that as well !
-
I have been working on the same kit for a few weeks. I also did a bit of rescribing. Progress of my build can be seen HERE.
Looks very tasty. Bet it would look impressive alongside almost any other single seater (hint for photo when complete !).
-
Let me throw my handbag into the ring - no, that was a couple of pages back.
Even further back someone said they prefer to rely on those like Mike Bowyer who were there at the time - well Mr.Bowyer did pick up on the experimental Hurricane schemes tried at Duxford, who is to say Duxford was the only place that experimental schemes were tried ?
On the subject of interpreting B+W pics I can (given time) put my hand on a couple of Meteor (FR9 ? where's my memory when I need it?) pictures, look like they must be the same aircraft on the same sortie a few frames apart (ok, not proven) and one is very high contrast which you could swear was DG+MSG while the other looks absolutely standard in contrast so must be DG+DSG.
I've enjoyed this thread, just like I enjoy dipping into Mike Bowyer's colours books and Paul Lucas and other's articles but, at the end of the day (it's a cliche a minute just now), I like to make my own decisions based on everything I can find which doesn't include original documents or personal observation 'cos I'm too far from London and too young so I have to put some reliance on others. Being aware of alternative points of view gives me a chance to put something personal (interpretation) into my models and adds to my enjoyment of modelling. If someone picks up on it at an exhibition and we can have a friendly discussion then even better 'cos I might find out something I didn't know before.
So thank you to everyone who has put in their opinions on the 'alternative' Spitfire colour scheme and to those who put in opinions on personalities please don't waste my time with unhelpful posts that I have to sift through to get to the enjoyable ones,
Ross
-
Some more Able Mabel RF-101C photos can be found at this site.
http://www.secretvietnamwar.com/frame/f_war.htm
Polka Dot tailed RF-101Cs at Don Muang.
http://www.secretvietnamwar.com/frame/f_war.htm
Able Mabel crew photo on this page.
http://www.secretvietnamwar.com/frame/f_pix1.htm
Crew photo. Note Mary Ann Burns nickname above star.
http://www.secretvietnamwar.com/frame/f_war.htm
Best wishes,
Grant
Thanks again, Grant. I've started scribing the kit but it's going to be a slow build as I've others I 'must' do first,
Cheers,
Ross
-
Sticking my neck out a little, I think another difference between UK and US Phantoms was the amount of smoke the latter used to leave across the sky !
-
A bit of madness on a well known auction site got me a Maintrack one for £2.64 including postage. The metal is nice, the plastic parts ok (ish) so I think it's game on! Unfortunately my card index reveals (or doesn't reveal) that I have two tenths of sod all references, just a few external shots, and the kit instructions are less than precise. Does anyone have anything better please ?
Thanks in advance,
Ross
-
Hi all,
Has anyone got any Lincoln interior pics that they could share with me? Especially in the nose/bombardiers area but any interior shots would be great?
Any help would be great.
Thanks,
Nimrod
Not a lot but PM me an email address and I'll scan a few pics from Lincoln at War
-
Just got to put my list in....
Lightning
Meteor
Hunter
Wessex
Gnat
I was tempted just to list 5 marks of Lightning but decidied that was a bit unsporting !
Ross
-
So I finished the first (patchy) coat of black and did one of Neutral Grey which brushed on a bit better. Difference ? The black is Xtracrylix thinned with water, the Neutral Grey is Xtracrylix which hadn't been thinned. So I decided to get out the airbrushes again for the second coat of black. Many blockages, splatters, runs and swearwords later I'm going to have to strip the black and Neutral Grey, luckily the base pale grey is Xtracolour so I can use IPA which in theory will take off the acrylic but not touch the enamel (just tried a small section and it seems to work like that).
Seems like Xtracrylix doesn't like our summer temperatures (20C/68F today) as I used a colour cup (not the usual jar) and it skinned over in very few minutes. Same must be happening on the needle as I used two airbrushes (Badger 200 and Clarke double action) which both spray water ok. It's costing a fortune in airbrush cleaner as well !
This is going to take a lot of motivation to finish even though I can just about see how good it will look in that 'cow' scheme,
Ross
-
Grant,
I'm overwhelmed by all this help, don't worry about it coming in pieces - I appreciate how time consuming it is. Anyway, now I can do 60066 in either silver or grey with high confidence that it would have been part of Able Mabel. The 1960 date on the photo of 60085 suggests the kangaroo zaps are from Exercise Handclasp so applicable to 60066 during the Able Mabel period. As I'm having airbrush trouble this may move up the build list as a model with a single colour finish is very tempting.
Very many thanks for all the material,
Ross
-
Decals and instructions from Hasegawa 00252 RF-101C Voodoo "
'Polka Dots.'
Best wishes,
Grant
Interesting, that has to be taken from the Drendel/Stevens book as it has the 1967 date which 'must' be wrong. It's the same Polka Dots aircraft as in my boxing but it now has two kangaroos where mine has one and mine gave no information on date and base.
Thanks once again,
Ross
-
Many thanks John, I will keep an eye out for them. My principal difficulty (perhaps not surprisingly) is finding details of the area from the front of the cockpit to the back of the engine, including the gun mountings. It appears that the top of the fuselage was "flattened" and the two guns (and perhaps a sight) mounted on this flat area. If all else fails I will fake it - on the "who's going to know" modelling principle...
Richard
Best I've found is in the Putnam British Fighters book - looks like the guns were let into the corners of the 'flat area' as far as I can see from the photo. PM me an email address for a scan,
Ross
-
Ross,
The Kangaroo zap could have been from Exercise Handclasp IV, 21 Apr. to 12 May, 59. 4 RF-101Cs (unit not stated) went to Australia to participate in air defense exercises, fly-bys, and static displays with the Royal Australian Air Force celebrating ANZAC Day and Coral Sea Week. Another possibility is one of the Joss Stick Exercises, exchange exercises with RAF and RAAF units. April 1963, Misawa based F-100s and RF-101Cs (45th TRS) to Tengah. Also, RAF Canberra bombers to Kadena AB in March, 3rd BW B-57Bs to Tengah in March, Canberras of No. 2 Squadron, RAAF to Kadena in Sept. B-57Bs of the 3rd BW to Tengah again, in November. 18th TFW F-105Ds to Tengah in Sept.
These are the decals from the Mincraft repop of the Hasegawa kit, from the 70s or 80s.
Notice that to make 60084 as in the photograph, you would need an extra band on the rear fuselage, the main gear door does not have the white trim, there is no 45th flash on the nose gear door and there is some sort of trim on the intake.
If you can find a Microscale F-102 decal sheet that has the 509th FIS markings, I believe that it has the same leaping tiger. I'll check more on the last item. I think that it would be on both sides.
Best wishes,
Grant
Thanks once more for the information Grant.
In spite of bidding on fleabay not ending until 10.30 yesterday morning the Stevens/Drendel Voodoo book arrived today and this is a summary what it has to say about Able Mabel;
------
became operational 7th Nov 1961 with 4 a/c from 45TRS. Thereafter 45TRS and 15TRs rotated every 6 months with pilots and airplanes rotated every 6 weeks.
------
So it's a fair bet 60066 would have been involved in the late 1961 or early 1962 timeframe. The markings in the kit are exactly as the photo on the bottom of p26 which is captioned as being at Misawa during October 1967. Now jbaugher gives 60022 as shot down 21st March 1966 and camouflage was introduced from about the end of 1965 so that date is obviously a mistransposition of a 7 from ? I'm also going to guess, based on the statement in the book that a corrosion control facility was established in 1963 that most a/c went gray during 1963/4 which makes the most likely error being from a 1 or 2. Which would mean the kangaroo would have had to have survived a couple of years - I don't know how likely that is - or the error was from a 3. In either case I'm getting comfortable with using the kit decals.
Thanks again for the help,
Ross
-
Ross,
Don't give up on the polka dot markings in Able Mabel so soon. The photos that I posted were three years into the program. I think that there is a good chance that the initial aircraft retained the tail markings.
Here is a blow up of the aircraft in the background. It is either is 60028 or 60088.
I did some more digging around and found this photo. Notice the leaping tiger on over the insignia. That was the insignia of a Thai F-86D squadron. That would indicate that this aircraft visited Thailand. The photo is dated Aug. 1962, so there is a good chance that it was an early Able Mabel aircraft. Remember six months after Nov. 61, the 15th TRS replaced the 45th TRS at Don Muang. From Aircraft of the USAF in Japan, (title? I don't have the book easily available right now) by T. Matsuzaki. Excellent source of USAF aircraft in Japan, in the 50s and early 60s.
I will dig up the Dorr book on the Voodoo.
Best wishes,
Grant
Grant,
Once again, many thanks for the images. That one in the background looks more like 28 to me but I could make either 2 or 8 from the surfeit of 6's in the kit. There are no clues for either on the JBaugher Web Page. If I go with the full Polka Dots markings I have to stick with 60066 be4cause of the wheel door decals. That doesn't have a Thai tiger leaping the star'n'bar but has a kangaroo on the starboard nose - not an animal normally associated with Thailand !
I'll keep an open mind for now as I've only just got the kit and won't start it until I finish something else. I don't mind if I have to go grey as I can put a silver (not metal though) finish on a Vietnam F-105D one day.
Thanks again,
Ross
-
Can anybody point me in the right direction for pics of the cockpit interior of the early Lightnings ?
I have started on the Trumpeter 32nd scale kit and have the modellers data file which is hopeless for refrence on the F1-F1A
English Electric/BAC Lightning by Bruce Barrymore Halfpenny in the Osprey Air Combat series has a double page photo of the instrument panel of the F1. PM me your email address and I'll try to send you a copy but it's a hardback so I'll try the digital camera rather than a scan to get the best chance of not losing the bit in the middle.
I'll keep looking for more in the meantime there are 4 shots on Thunder and Lightnings
Ross
Coastal Command Colour Question
in Aircraft WWII
Posted
I don't have the kit to comment on the exact aircraft featured but as a general rule Coastal Command anti-submarine aircraft had white undersides with Extra Dark Sea Grey and Dark Slate Grey (a greenish colour) topsides from mid 1942 (? references differ) until early 1943 when the Dark Slate Grey was left off as it had little effect but consumed material and man hours. I'm not sure there would have been a great rush to overpaint the Dark Slate Grey but it would have ceased to appear on new aircraft as they were delivered. According to Paul Lucas in MAM January 2009 the same order eliminating Dark Slate Grey also raised the demarcation between upper and lower surfaces, however this does not always seem to have been applied simultaneously to actual aircraft.
Strike/fighter aircraft like Beaufort, Beaufighter, Mosquito were different, mostly in the use of Sky undersides and lower demarcation.
Anyone reading this thread is invited to comment on My Coastal Command Camouflage page where I attempted to make sense of the topic - however I have not yet updated it in the light of Paul Lucas article. It would be good to gather as many contributions as possible to try and get a definitive guide.
Cheers,
Ross