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. :)


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

924 Excellent

1 Follower

About Chewbacca

  • Rank
    Established Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  • Interests
    Royal Navy and Fleet Air Arm

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. It's the platform for the aft 6in mounting but its wrong and has to be replaced. This photo appears to show the platform as rectangular but its far from clear and you'll recall back in post #49 I said I had found some plans on a US site for sale for $235. Whilst I didn't buy them I did scrutinise the images they'd posted one of which shows that platform to be round. So the rectangular one fitted there now is going to come off and a new circular one (which I have made and which is sitting with the turret) put on.
  2. I certainly wouldn't argue that point. The annoying thing is that I know I have read somewhere that the trial wasn't considered a great success, but having just checked Friedman, McCart and Waters, none give any evidence for its success of not so let's hope the new book has some more info
  3. Best bet for the Airfix MANXMAN will be to look for the later boxing with SUFFOLK. Many more around and not too silly prices. I picked up one on Ebay a year or so back for about a tenner IIRC. In contrast, as Jamie says, some of the earlier kits are going for silly money. At a local model show about 2 years ago one trader was offering TIGER in a Type 2 box for over £100. Since all I wanted were the 2 hull halves and main decks to build a Colony class, needless to say I declined!
  4. Hi Terry, I shall be following this with interest as having served in the Type 42 destroyers GLASGOW and BIRMINGHAM, and having already converted the Airfix BELFAST to GLASGOW, my next 1/600 Town class conversion will be BIRMINGHAM at some point in the future. Arnold is absolutely spot on with his observation about the destroyer type flared bow fitted to BIRMINGHAM as opposed to the Cruiser type chine bow fitted to the rest of the class. Apparently it was an experiment to see which was the better design for future cruisers. The fact that no other cruiser had that bow suggests to me it wasn't that successful! The other major differences between BELFAST and the earlier ships is that BELFAST had a very prominent torpedo bulge fitted in her post-mining refit in 1940-42 at Devonport which none of the earlier ships did. Whilst they are described as torpedo bulges, apparently the main reason they were fitted was to improve stability after so much extra top weight was added during the refit. The forward superstructure, especially around the after end, is completely different and in all Town class apart from BELFAST and EDINBURGH, X and Y turrets are on 01 and 1 deck respectively; the third sub-class carried them on 02 and 01 deck.
  5. Fascinating insight into moulding which is way better than my last attempt to make 1/600 liferaft containers using plasticene moulds and plaster of paris filler. One thing I don't get though. Can you explain what you man by the use of the pizza cutter for the cutting lines? Don't see what that's trying to achieve or indeed how you're doing it. Thanks
  6. Somewhere, if I can find it, I have my late father's Sea Cadet Handbook from 1935/36, and I know that provides basic detail about the requirement for nav lights in the 1930s. I'll see if I can find it and see if the rules were significantly different.
  7. FH4 aerial complete so attention turned the rest of the masts which are a combination of cocktail sticks cut to the right length, placed in the chuck of a Dremmerl and turned down to the right thickness/taper and plastic rod. Both have been drilled out to take a thin brass connecting rod. Yards from master model brass rod. First test fit shown below - I need to slightly tweak the angle of the main mast which angles slightly back as shown in this image but should be at the same angle as the foremast.
  8. Good work going on here. Most impressive
  9. Perhaps it's just me but the Counties look really nice. This quality of this - from the photo at least - looks really clunky, reminiscent of a 1960's Airfix 1/600 rather than the standards we've come to expect from Japan in recent years
  10. I'm not especially familiar with the 1/350 kit. Are there any other features that mean the kit - and indeed the 1/700 - cannot be built pre-2005 when the first Kryten turret was fitted?
  11. Only just seen this since it was brought up to the top. What can I say? Best model I have ever seen and took me right back to being there (albeit in a different ship). The opening photos looked to me like they were taken back in '82 in the South Atlantic. The modelling is exquisite, the weathering perfection itself and the sea started to make me feel queasy again! BZ to you sir.
  12. Not the greatest of photos - I'll try to retake it with a DSLR rather than a phone - but you get the gist of what this aerial looks like in 1/350. The squares on the cutting board are 10mm to give an idea of scale
  13. 1/350 ARK IV is the one I would definitely go for. I don't know if it was seeing her on TV in the 70s in Sailor, or even having the privilege of seeing her sail from Devonport for the final time under her own steam (I was doing a Sea cadet training course at RALEIGH at the time and they took us all down to watch it saying that we'd never see it again), or the fact that she was the only ship to operate the finest carrier aircraft of all time (F4K and S2B), but there's just something about her that looks so right.
  • Create New...