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. :)

Wm Blecky

Members
  • Content Count

    367
  • Joined

Community Reputation

151 Excellent

About Wm Blecky

  • Rank
    Established Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Southern Manitoba, Canada
  • Interests
    USN/USMC Pre-War,
    Luftwaffe &
    RCAF

Recent Profile Visitors

557 profile views
  1. Thanks all. Any thoughts on Academy's F-16C ANG kit? I've been looking into that kit as well. Perhaps I've misread some of what I've come across, but it seems they offer 2 versions of this kit, the first release with some "errors" (the F-16CG/CJ) and then an improved (corrected?) F-16C which came out as an ANG and Thunderbirds kit.
  2. A question for those more familiar with the various F-16 kits out there, specifically ESCI's F-16A as compared against the Revell kit. I wanted to get a Revell F-16A kit and as the only ones currently available are the MLU versions, I picked up an ESCI F-16A kit. It is very well done with respect to surface details. There are a few areas that I will tweak with some aftermarket bits, but overall a well done kit, especially when you consider how long ago it was when the kit was issued. That brings me to my question. Does the ESCI kit represent a very, very early A? Particularly when it comes to the area that is directly behind the cockpit and including the rear portion of the canopy? I ask as when compared to the Revell kit, ESCI in this area is flat and there is no "step", while Revell (and other kits) has a "step": ESCI Revell If someone could clear this up for me that would be most helpful.
  3. Thanks Peter. According to the information on BarracudaCast's website (I am referring to the 3 different 1/72 sets of wheels related to my question), set #72136 is for the early version series 1 Tempests Mk.V (plus Typhoons as well) - smooth tire, no tread and no diameter given (as a side comment, set #72137 is remarkably similar in appearance, virtually identical to my eye, it is listed for the Fairey Firefly Mk.I and Barracuda). Both sets have 5 lot hubs. Set #72221 again, smooth tire, no tread and listed for later Tempest Mk.V's (series 2 and later - Mk.II, Mk.VI) and has a 4 slot hub. Set #72222 is listed as a 4 slot, 32" Wheel with the block style tread. It is compatible with Postwar Tempests, the Firefly, Hornet, Sea Hornet, Barracuda V and Firebrand. This is the set that I am considering for use with my Sea Fury kits. I do not have set #72222 on hand (yet), but if there is any appreciable visual difference in diameter, the 32" to the 34" diameter of earlier wheel types, I'd be hard pressed to see it, especially in 1/72. Going the other direction, 32" to the 30" diameter of what the Sea Fury has, same thing. The only difference I could imagine, if/when Roy offers his 1/72 Sea Fury wheels might be tire tread or perhaps hub details. It should still be a 4 slot hub and I'd bet that the disc brake detail of the rear of the wheel hub will appear the same as that in set #72222. Set #72222 Set #48151 (1/48 counterpart to above 1/72 set) Set #48344 (1/48 Sea Fury, there is also a second set with diamond style tread) The real thing (a real bugger of a challenge to find pictures of an aircraft's wheels, lots of model kit pics though! LOL ) : The diamond pattern tread might prove to be more preferred or even perhaps the circumferential style. But I think at the end of the day, in 1/72, a 2" difference will prove difficult to tell (unless sitting next to a kit with the "correct"size of wheel). If memory serves, I think I have a set of Ron's Resins Sea Fury wheels. I'm going to have to try and find them see how they compare. Either way, it does not change the fact that that list of tire sizes is a fantastic piece of reference material for a modeler. Thanks all for indulging me.
  4. Good points, thank you gentlemen.
  5. Definitely a good resource to have on hand. Thanks for posting it. I've already found a use. I compared the tire sizes for the Hawker Tempest and Sea Fury and, if I am reading this correctly, it shows that the main wheels are the same size while the tail wheels are different: I had contacted Roy Sutherland some time back, inquiring if his 1/72 Tempest wheels would work for a Sea Fury, he replied that they wouldn't as they were different sizes. This table would appear to contradict him. He said that he would be releasing a set of wheels for the Sea Fury in 1/72, but have yet to see that. He did do a set in 1/48. So unless it is an issue of tread pattern, this chart would suggest that a set of treaded Tempest wheels would work for a Sea Fury - right???
  6. Thanks everyone! As Steve pointed out, the scheme is quite appealing and that was what interested me in the kit. If the plastic was at least decent (say like the Italeri kit), I would have jumped at it. Now, after reading all the great replies, I will pass on it. Hasegawa offered their MiG-29 with the same scheme, maybe I can find one of those and then use the decals on one of the Italeri MiGs I have sitting here.
  7. Thanks Chris. I don't suppose you have any idea as to how good the kit is?
  8. Does anyone have or know what kit Revell boxed in their 1:72 MiG-29 Fulcrum Reunion offering, kit #04393? I've tried Googling for an answer and have come up empty handed. I thought it might have been the Hasegawa or Italeri offerings, but in the pictures I could find, the sprues do not match up. The Revell offering appears to be scribed, but that is pretty much all I can make out. If anyone can tell me, I sure would appreciate it. Wm.
  9. If 1/72 is your scale, AZ does one: If the AZ 109G is not your first choice, you could always purchase the kit, keep the decals and related parts, use them with the new Tamiya 1/72 109G or Fine Molds kit. A bit of a pricey proposition, yes, but you could always sell or trade the basic AZ 109G kit to offset the cost.
  10. Googling 'Spanish Ju 88' pulled up lots of color profiles for me, but no pictures of the actual aircraft. Same for Finnish Ju 88s, no Post War examples (not even any color profiles), but several war time ones. Avia Editions published this book, Junkers 88 et 188. The text is in French, but there are lots of pictures.
  11. I was wondering the same thing myself. As for the Colourcoats paints, I 110% agree! They are fantastic. Only problem, a true challenge to obtain in Canada I did find a potential source in the U.S. for the Xtracolors though. Still, I'd be far more happy if I could locate a good source for the Colourcoats.
  12. Thanks Ed. I'll check that out. I've been looking around the net, what about a fluorescent/fire orange color Humbrol does (did?) this color. I am wondering if it may be a more likely candidate?
  13. The main reason I am looking at Xtracolor's range is that they seem to offer the most diverse range of paints. Of course, should one of their red's be found to be a reasonably good match, my next hurdle would be to find a means to get a couple of tinlets shipped to Canada I would be open to suggestions for other paint brands. I do have access to Humbrol, AK Interactive and, albeit limited, Model Master enamels (not a fan of the acrylics).
  14. There is also RLM 23 by Xtracolor or SAS Red/Orange
×
×
  • Create New...