-
Posts
15,617 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Events
Profiles
Forums
Media Demo
Everything posted by Giorgio N
-
One of the greats of car design (and not only), very sad to hear the news ! RIP Sure best known for the Miura and Countach (honestly how many cars have had the impact of these two?) but with a long string of important cars to his name. My favourite of his designs ? The Alfa Montreal, a car that I rate as one of the most beautiful designs ever. And one I had hoped to buy at some point, but then prices started going over the roof... I have in my list of favourite videos an interview he gave a few years ago, it's in Italian only but there are English subtitles. A must-watch for a car enthusiast
-
Great news indeed ! They already had a 1/48 kit that was IMHO pretty good, if they are going to make a new one I guess it means the old one sold well enough. I will however wait for the 1/72 kit, I'm sure it will be something new and not another reinterpretation of the ancient Supermodel kit...
-
Without considering the many schemes used during exercises (and there were a lot...), the F-104Js carried 3 schemes: 1) Natural metal, with different tones in different areas, particularly around the tail 2) Aluminum paint over the fuselage, with the exclusion of the rear fiselage and tail area that remained in natural metal (with the exception of a few panels), introduced around 1970 3) Grey FS 16473 over the fuselage, again with the exclusion of the rear fuselage and tail area that remained in natural metal as above. The grey scheme was used by aircraft of 207 Squadron but later grey aircraft were seen in other units. With all three schemes, the top of the wings was in white and the bottom in grey FS 16473.
-
Someone did exactly this a while ago: http://hsfeatures.com/venomtm_1.htm After reading this article I bought myself a Frog Sea Venom and a Heller Vampire but then never went ahead with the project. Later I found an Aeroclub Venom FB.1 so I abandoned the idea
-
The document doesn't mention the missile position but there's a possible hint as states that the aft rails are extended first in a combat cycle. As the IR missiles were usually fired first (doing the opposite would have risked having the IR missiles deceived by the exhaust gases of the preceding SHAR ones), makes sense to have them on the rear rails.
-
Pictures of operational aircraft I checked before building my Meng kit all seemed to show SARH front and IR rear. I have checked a couple of books to see if this was mentioned as a standard procedure but found nothing so I just followed the pictures. This was also the configuration generally used on the later F-106 Regarding the firing procedure, the MG-10 fire control system was originally set to fire triplets of missiles of the same type. I suspect that the aircraft later modified to carry and fire the AIM-26 may have seen this changed to couples as this would make more sense considering the kind of mixed load but I haven't found any confirmation
-
EE Lightning - Double Row of Vertical 'Dashes' ?
Giorgio N replied to Airbusboy's topic in Aircraft Cold War
They indicate the position of the rear fuselage frame -
Would these be enough ? https://www.super-hobby.it/products/Grumman-TF-9J-Cougar.html
-
Thinking of building multiple Harriers 1/72
Giorgio N replied to Stratto's topic in Aircraft Cold War
Unfortunately not surprised, Italeri are not new to similar errors. Another decal accuracy issue is in the British roundels in their first issue of the Sea Harrier, that are closer to the A type than to the proper postwar type. I'm sure that digging deeper we'd find more errors... -
Well, actually not really! WW2 types pale in comparison with the availability of camo schemes and markings of postwar types. Most WW2 types carried 3 or 4 schemes at best, there have been postwar types carrying 20 different schemes. Same for markings, both in variety and wow factor. Beside, in the end even with a varied choice of markings modellers seem to favour the usual 4 or 5, forgetting all others.. Range of types and versions? Again no comparison, many more different types were built after WW2 than during and the variety in design and configuration was much wider. The truth is that WW2 is culturally more popular for a number of reasons that go well beyond our hobby, it's become so ingrained in our personal and national conscience that everything WW2 attracts huge interest, the rest doesn't. Since our hobby is worth peanuts in the bigger scheme of things, we modellers just end up following the trend
-
Thinking of building multiple Harriers 1/72
Giorgio N replied to Stratto's topic in Aircraft Cold War
The decals in an Italeri issue of the Esci harriers will sure be better in terms of useability as they will be newer. The latest issues are also generally pretty good in terms of film and adhesion. Where Italeri decals do not shine is often in the accuracy, particularly when it comes to the stencils. These are often too big compared to the real things, quite noticeable for example on the red lines around the engine panels, that are very typical of the Harriers. The Airfix decals on the contrary are very good in every respect but as others have said their Sea Harriers are pretty inaccurate. Fortunately there are or have been a number of aftermarket sheets on the market. others have discussed the Modeldecals sheets and I can add the set that Xtradecals dedicated to the Falklands Harriers and the couple made by Microscale/Superscale. Sky Models from Italy also made a sheet with many aircraft that unfortunately are not always accurate. It is however interesting as includes a number of less seen options, like the Belize based 1473 Flt. GR.3s, the Falklands based 1453 Flt. GR.3s and the early Harrier Conversion Unit GR.1s. The sheet is OOP but worth buying if you see one at a decent price. Regarding using aftermarket items made for the Airfix kit on the Esci/Italeri ones, when it comes to the Sea Harriers there's quite a difference in width, the Airfix kit having a wider cockpit. The intakes are also designed quite differently so it would be very hard to use these. External parts (pylons, pitots) are of course much less of a problem. -
Thinking of building multiple Harriers 1/72
Giorgio N replied to Stratto's topic in Aircraft Cold War
I can only agree on the positive comments regarding the Esci first generation Harriers, very nice kits and proof that things like crisp moulding and good fit have been around for many, many years... Regarding aftermarket, IMHO the weakest area in these kits is the cockpit that is very empty. The seats are also not representative of the real things, being more similar to a simplified Stencel seat of the US AV-8As. A resin MB Mk,9 for the GR and Mk.10 for the SHAR would sort the matter... keeping in mind that IIRC no resin Mk.9 on the market really represent the variant used on the Harrier but are all Jaguar seats. In any case I used a Pavla Mk.9 on one of my Harriers in the past and looked convincing enough. The problem in using an aftermarke seat is that the rear cockpit bulkhead is not correctly angled in these kits, so the resin seat may not fit in the correct place. I can't remember any resin cockpit for the Esci kits, I have vague memories of a Heritage white metal set but this would likely be hard to find. Eduard has a PE set for the Sea Harrier though and this should be easier to find. One other area that would benefit from aftermarket or scratchbuilding are the intakes that represent the side auxiliary intakes in the closed position, good for an aircraft in flight but not a parked one. Pavla had a set with the upper auxiliary intakes correctly open but it's unfortunately out of production (also included resin exhausts). Don't know if there's anything else around. IIRC Heritage also did a similar set but this is also long OOP Other bits: Master makes brass pitot tubes for all variants, I feel that the Sea Harrier in particular would benefit from one of these. On my Sea Harrier I'm also considering replacing the pylons with the Quickboost parts made for the Airfix kits, just because these are more detailed (and would correct one problem, the presence of a bulge unde the outer pylon that would only be present when the pylon is not in place... easy to sand the bulge from the wing but then the pylon would need filling). -
rare pic of prototype F-104S with full load of M-117s
Giorgio N replied to Davide Calzolari's topic in Aircraft Cold War
Sorry Rob, I misunderstood your post. The BL-22 pylons of the S attached directly to the fuselage undersides and are independent of the central pylon. Here's a drawing of the pylon from the parts catalogue: I'm looking at the section of the catalogue describing the fuselage, there should be the attachment points shown. However the fuselage section is several pages long and finding the right details is not a quick job... -
rare pic of prototype F-104S with full load of M-117s
Giorgio N replied to Davide Calzolari's topic in Aircraft Cold War
The information I have is different: they were certified and all units had them in store. However they were never used for the reasons I mentioned and were intended as "war use" only.. although they may have well not even been used in such a case. In any case all the official documents I have related to the 104S (flight manual, maintenance manual and parts catalogue) include the BL-22 pylons. With the exception of the ASA-M manual of course. I agree that the BL-22 pylons were only really used for show and there are a few pictures showing them with various loads. One shows them loaded with BL.755 cluster bombs even if this load is not in the list I have of weapons allowed on these pylons... -
Some are better than others. I seem to remember that the Sea Harrier and Hunter titles are brilliant, others less so (and some much less so...) Manufacturing limitations however do not affect the overall shape. When this is incorrectly represented on a model it's always because something went wrong during the research phase, be it using wrong information or misinterpreting correct information. Where the various technological limitations hae an effect is in the representation of the smaller details where things like minimum thickness etc. force the designer to modify things to make a kit possible
-
I checked and have a copy, just send me a PM !
-
I hope someone has and will comment ! Having the set already I'd prefer not to buy another one I'm aware of the Aerocraft sets but I'd like to use the set I already have. Buying the Aerocraft sets would mean adding another £18 (£12 for the intakes and 6 for the exhausts) to what is already a quite expensive kit. That makes sense if someone really wants an S.1 but since I already have the Heritage set I'd prefer to be be able to use this.
-
rare pic of prototype F-104S with full load of M-117s
Giorgio N replied to Davide Calzolari's topic in Aircraft Cold War
The pylons under the intakes visible in the picture were only on the F-104S. Known as BL-22 (all F-104 pylons are known as BL-xx, where the latter is the distance from the fuselage centre), they were indeed rated for the use of bombs but this never happened during service: the bombs in that position caused a lot of drag and there were concerns about the ingestion of foreign objects in the intake when dropping the bombs. There are some pictures showing bombs under these pylons but they are all of either test flights (as above) or aircraft on static display on the ground. The same pylons were initially used to carry Sidewinders but the missiles in this position were quite close to the ground and the sensor got covered in dirt during the take-off run so the use was soon discontinued. All aircraft retained the capability of using these pylons until with the ASA-M upgrade all relevant wiring was removed -
Quick question: I have the Heritage Buccaneer S.1 resin conversion set, designed for the old Airfix 1/72 Buccaneer S.2 kit. I also have two of these kits so I'd be sorted.. however since the new tool kit is so much better I'm considering buying one. Does anybody know if the parts for the old kit would fit the new one? I know there are sets made for the new kit but having one already I'd prefer to be able to use this. Should the old set not fit the new kit I'd just use it on the old one. Thanks in advance!
-
Not station drawings but I remember that the most accurate scale drawings were considered those included in the 1/32 Echelon kit. I'm pretty sure I have a set, let me know if they can be of use
-
If using aftermarket seats, keep in mind that the cockpit of this kit suffers from an excessive depth. The rear cockpit in particular should be much higher up and the side consolles as they are look like buried deep into the pit instead of being at the right level. This problem also affects the look of the instrument panels, again particularly the rear one that looks lost in its place instead of what it should be. All problems that this kit shares with the Fujimi J79 engined Phantoms. In the past I addressed this in two different ways: on one model I used an Eduard zoom set designed for the Hasegawa kit modifying the cockpit structure with plasticard. On the other used a resin clone of the Fujimi British Phantom cockpit. Of course it's possible to just leave everything as it is but personally I hate the way the instrument panels look from the box
-
I have the Dimensione Cielo volume and can translate if needed. In summary, the 613 Squadriglia was established in Rome in June 1940 and a few days later the aircraft flew to Sardinia divided in two sections, one in Elmas (still today the airport of the city of Cagliari) and Olbia. The section in Olbia became independent in July and flew to Puglia the following month but the aircraft were soon back with 613 in Elmas. As Carlos wrote, some aircraft were converted for ambulance use in September 1940. At January 1st 1941 there were 5 aircraft, one with red cross markings, 1 in civilian markings and 3 in military markings. It's likely that the picture was taken around that time. The unit continued to serve with the S.66 wil the end of July 1943 but no mention is made of the schemes carried, All pictures in the book seem to have been taken in the early days of the unit
-
The 4+ book is an option if you are happy with many pictures of detail but little text. Also covers the other variants of the Tempest
-
The original FS-595 was issued in 1956 so would have been a pretty new standard when WG774 flew. Now IIRC the violet scheme dates from 1958 so a little later, but still I find the use of paints from this standard quite unusual Regarding decal 28, this was discussed in the thread in the rumormonger section and should read "hood release"
-
Paul Lucas mentioned this in a thread I started after having read the use of 108 in an issue of section 33B of AP-1086