Paul H
-
Posts
559 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Events
Profiles
Forums
Media Demo
Posts posted by Paul H
-
-
19 hours ago, Spiny said:
I don't think any extra surgery is required. The rubber bumper kit is basically the chrome bumper kit with added tonneau cover, rubber bumpers and Rostyle wheels. Even the dash is from the chrome bumper model so if you want to match the real thing it's actually easier to match the chrome than it is the rubber bumper version.
No surgery required at all! IMHO the rubber bumper kit is actually the best boxing to get as it's the only version with the half tonneau cover. Just a pity that the hardtop isn't available too, except in the racing / rally kit. Looking at the sprues, it seems that the kit was originally developed as a chrome bumper one, and the only changes for the rubber bumper cars are the two additional sprues with the parts listed above. As a result, various details are actually incorrect for the rubber bumper cars, e.g lots of the interior, and also the tail light lenses are the softer ones for the chrome bumper cars. The tail light lenses were squared off on the later cars: https://www.moss-europe.co.uk/shop-by-model/mg/mgb-c-v8/exterior/lighting/rear-lamps-mgb-mgb-gt-1962-80.html
19 hours ago, Spiny said:Finally, ride height. The MGB was raised a couple of inches when the rubber bumpers came in, but someone on here (sorry, I forget who but I think it may have been one of the Pauls) discovered that if instead of putting the chassis into the slot on the body where it's meant to go but instead put it slightly deeper so it's just the other side of the slot it looks about right. Not tried it myself so I can only go on the photos that were posted.
-
1
-
-
20 hours ago, 81-er said:
I'll be having both bombs attached and displaying it with the gear down, "pre-takeoff" for the album cover, as such
Ah - guess that would solve the issue of the correct crew too!
20 hours ago, 81-er said:I may well have seen that video a couple of times...
It is entirely possible that I may also have watched it a quite a few times too, but I can neither confirm nor deny anything
I am still undecided as to how I will build mine, however, I may well copy how he has used the Motorhead script decal for the stand instead of on the underside of the wings. I really don't fancy trying to get that to fit over engine nacelles & undercarriage doors, especially if open!
Forgot to say in my previous post - many thanks for the info on sourcing the second bomb, which is very useful, as that was bugging me & my knowledge of Luftwaffe stuff is not detailed enough to know what to search for.
-
1
-
-
On 03/02/2022 at 22:27, 81-er said:
I wonder if I can find some 1/72 JD bottles...
And with that location, easy to jettison the empties too
Will be following this with great interest - will the port side bomb be launched, like the artwork?
Thinking of that, have you seen this? The end result is displayed in a great way:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yy8GaV6u2oI
-
1
-
-
That looks great!
On 18/01/2022 at 22:10, PeterB said:A final bit of background.
As built this caravan was an office with map table and a small sleeping area, but once the second one was captured that took over the role of living/sleeping quarters, and in early 1944 Monty was presented with a purpose built third caravan fitted out as a map room. All three were painted green (SCC15 presumably) and served in Europe from D-Day onwards. If anybody had all three caravans, together with the various support vehicles, kitchen, defence units such as Bofors guns, and visiting vehichles such as scout cars etc, I guess the mobile HQ would make a good subject for a diorama.
Pete
Whilst looking for something else, I found some pics of the interior on the IWM site:
-
Given that the Healey is 1:25, I've often wondered if the 14" wires & tyres from the Aoshima 1:24 MGB would make suitable replacements.
-
My first car was a Morris 1000 van - in 1997! Slow, poor brakes (best described as bureaucratic, to the point of being Vogon) and minimal grip, but I loved it! Rifle bolt gear change, sharp rack & pinion steering, and very well balanced handling made it a hoot to drive. Replaced in 2002 by a Volvo Amazon, which I still have, but every so often, I have the itch to get another Morris Minor...
-
5
-
-
Looking good! Can't remember when I last saw one of these being built & the chassis tub looks fantastic! It's also surprisingly accurate for a kit of this age.
On 31/01/2022 at 20:47, rs2man said:Primed the body and gave the seams a smear of filler .
Where the wings join onto the body centre sections (those panels are referred to as shrouds on the 1;1) on the model are also seams on the real thing, with beading to hide the gap between wings and shrouds. Apologies if you're already aware - I mention it as the completed pic posted earlier has those seams fully filled over, which isn't accurate to the 1:1 car.
-
Really enjoyed catching up on you progress with this! I'm assuming, based on what I can see in your photos, that the dickey seat is moveable, which is a cool feature for this scale.
-
1
-
-
Thank you all for the info, very much appreciated! It's her 78 to 79 spec that I'd like to replicate as much as is practical with my limited experience with ship models!
On 07/02/2022 at 06:53, Chewbacca said:I wasn't aware that she was ever used as a navigation training ship.
I may be confusing that with Ulster - apologies if so! Thank you also for the build links!
On 08/02/2022 at 07:23, Ex-FAAWAFU said:I hope I haven’t misled anyone - especially Paul.
Not at all!
-
1 hour ago, Bonhoff said:
My dad served on HMS Ulster at the time of the reversing fail, but wasn't present on the day - He came back to port (Dartmouth IIRC) to find the ship 20ft shorter, after being present for my arrival into the world. I've got the majority of a Frog HMS Undine, a photo etch set and a plan....
IanJ
Have you seen this page? If not, might be of interest!
https://www.candoo.com/ulsternorrie/ulster/ulster7a.html#sore backside
-
In the end, I've started with the Airfix Tiger & Firefly, courtesy of a certain huge online retailer who delivers very quickly - it arrived earlier today, and the hull of the Tiger is already assembled and painted in the main colour, with my involvement being purely supervisory. I've donated a spare set of side cutters to the cause but suspect I will need to get her a bottle of her own Tamiya extra thin cement soon too. She's decided to go for the more complex track options, but there's still the basic ones if that goes wrong.
However, all the other suggestions are still very appreciated, and she is very keen to build more models after these two.
On 03/02/2022 at 14:24, Seahawk said:They're variable: some are ancient, some are relatively (!) quite recent (1970s), others are ancient but with a few more recent parts added to ring the changes. Of the ones that are still quite reasonable, I'd mention the Panzer IV, the Bofors gun and tractor and the Matilda. Maybe also the 5.5" gun and Matador and the 88mm gun and tractor. Some of the other ancient fossils might give a misleadingly depressing impression of the levels of detail to expect in 1/72 or 1/76.
I'll see what interests her, and do my research carefully.
On 04/02/2022 at 16:35, Foxbat said:When you and she are ready for the step up to 1/35, seriously consider this from Tamiya: Pz.II
Bin the figures and what you have left is a lovely, simple, well engineered build with no flash that is small enough to brush paint and cheaper than a lot of modern 1/72 kits. It was my first 1/35 tank when I was only a bit older than your daughters and still one of my favourites.
As a 1970's mould it has accuracy and detail issues compared to modern kits, but as a starter that you can be proud of when it's done it takes some beating.
Andy
I've been researching this off the back of your recommendation, and I can see what you mean! Definitely one for the future!
On 05/02/2022 at 11:25, sandsmodels said:armourfast or psc would be best for a 1st model, with 2 or 3 in a box they can improve with the second or 3rd model.
easy to get and quite cheap.
On 05/02/2022 at 12:01, Knevi said:If you bear in mind you get 2 or more examples in the kit they're not bad value, although the initial outlay is higher, and you have the option to share the cost if both of your daughters like something in the range as @Troy Smith noted.
Only just spotted that the PSC are multiples too. However, her attention span is such that a repeat of the same isn't likely to be of interest. As pure display / wargaming, those would be ideal, however the actual build looks a bit too quick and so wouldn't keep her busy for long enough. It's a fine balance, but model building is also a distraction from TV / screen time. The other isn't interested in armour & still has a few other kits to build first.
Thank you again everyone - if either of my girls don't go for any of the Meng toon kits (I haven't shown any to them yet but will soon), I may well give into temptation!
-
3
-
-
11 hours ago, Chewbacca said:
Interesting question. As far my records show, APOLLO was never fitted with the Type 199 variable depth sonar although if you zoom in on this photo of her at the 1977 Spithead Review, it does appear to show some sort of well where the sonar would have been, albeit with the transom fully plated in.
There is a very clear photo on page 101 of Ships of the Cold War Fleet (Clive & Sue Taylor), albeit take a little later in her life, that shows there is a guardrail around the forward part of where that well would be with a Gemini RIB on a cradle. I think that supports what we are seeing in this photo.
She definitely had the Mk 10 Limbo mortar in the late 70s as both the Spithead review photo and the Ships of the Cold War Fleet show and given that she was never converted to carry the Lynx, I think she kept the mortar until she was sold to Pakistan in 1988.
Many thanks for the pic - it's not one I've seen before and the highest resolution one on flickr is extremely helpful! Most that I've found tend to be taken from a much lower angle. As you say, there is something happening on the aft deck, but all the other pics I have find have items there obscuring it. However, searching again just now brought up some more pics that my previous searches hadn't found - this one is especially helpful, and tallies with your description - is it the same pic which you mentioned?
https://www.flickr.com/photos/42117802@N06/51591896805/
IIRC, I think she was predominantly a navigation training ship which may explain some of the lack of upgrades compared to her sisters.
11 hours ago, Chewbacca said:Of course if you want to be really picky, APOLLO was a broad beam Leander whereas CLEOPATRA was a standard beam. So you need to add 1.7mm
. If it were an injection kit I'd say that's quite easy but I don't fancy doing it with a resin kit.
Agree on the beam issue, but I won't have another one next to it to compare
I built a resin 1:43 Alpine Renault A110 about 25 years ago, and have several 1:24 resin cars awaiting build (one part built), but am still very much a novice with resin kits. Whilst I'm quite capable of widening and fairing it with filler (I designed an 84' sailing yacht which I built a display model of at 1:18 scale for my university final year, having moulded the hull in fibreglass), I did the calcs of the beam difference at this scale before buying, and reckon it's really not worth the effort. Also not something that's an obvious issue, compared to other differences. It would be less work to do if built as a waterline model, but I'll probably be building it with the full hull. The underwater section on mine will need some tweaks anyway, as it is slightly warped - I'm still undecided as how best to sort that, but it looks like some careful pie-cutting will get it into shape before a little filler. However I will research and address that when I get around to building it. I certainly wouldn't want to get into messing about with the finely moulded bilge keels though.
11 hours ago, Chewbacca said:You'll have fun with this though. I'm just finishing my first Atlantic Models kit (HMS PUMA) and it has been a really enjoyable build (albeit frustrating because I'm over-complicating it somewhat).
Good to hear - it is certainly so much more nicely moulded than any of my 1:24 resin car kits, so I think it will jump the queue ahead of them. Do you have a thread for your one? Would be very interesting to see how others tackle this type of kit!
-
1
-
-
12 hours ago, Troy Smith said:
Armourfast do a range of easy assembly kits for wargamers, 2 of the same in a box, and they can be bought (or could) separately on ebay.
They tend to feature one piece tracks. The doubke boxing may help as then they could get the same one each.
The old Matchbox range, many now reboxed by Revell, are decent too, more fiddly for sure, separate wheel and tracks, but they also come with the little diorama bases, which maybe a selling point, Loads on amazon for about £8 posted as well.
HTH
Wasn't familiar with Armourfast - a possibility, however that few parts probably wouldn't keep her busy for long!
The Matchbox ones sound interesting - I vaguely recall attempting some of their planes and cars when I was little. Will definitely be doing some more research on their armour, as they are all still easily available. She has managed her first two kits without too much bother, so a decent parts count isn't a problem.
12 hours ago, Graham Boak said:For simple basic subjects the Plastic Soldier Company range shouldn't be omitted. There are also some Italeri easy-fit kits, as well as their standard range.
Wasn't familiar with PSC either - look good, but quite a bit more than her pocket money will allow at the moment!
11 hours ago, Scargsy said:Depends on what she likes but a few things to consider...
Meng World War Toon Tanks? I build up a couple of these with my kids a year or so back - fun, fairly quick builds, tracks maybe a bit tight, but easy enough to get on once the glue has fully dried (we did a Sherman with Santa figure, Panther and KV2).
More realistic stuff then as @Troy Smith said the old Matchbox 1/76th stuff (reboxed by Revell) with diorama bases are quite quick fun builds but as he mentioned there's a few tiny fiddly bits - I'm almost finished with this Humber Mk II in the Matchbox Group Build and did this Panzer II a while back (plus once before as a kid and a M16 half track back then). Have a look in the current GB, there's a fair few of the old armour kits being put together... https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/forum/752-matchbox-50th-anniversary-group-build/
48 minutes ago, Tim R-T-C said:I can recommend the Meng Toon kits. Very good production with minimal clean up required, but lots of small parts to develop skills and real decals included.
Probably of most interest is that their exaggerated dimensions give plenty of space to work on painting and weathering techniques too, which you won't get on a lot of 1/72 tanks.
Good call on the Meng cartoon ones, thank you both as I'd forgotten about them. Hadn't realised quite how detailed they are either! Will show these and see if they appeal. The engineering and level of detail are certainly impressive.
11 hours ago, Scargsy said:Or how about getting her a 1/35 Tamiya kit like dad? I've built the M41 Walker Bulldog again recently here and back in the day I think it was my first 1/35 tank - pretty cheap kit, rubber band tracks a PITA and a bit tight but can be extended v slightly and fastened with some staples. Or are you worried once she gets a taste for Tamiya 1/35 plastic your stash might be getting eyed up!
1 hour ago, Bullbasket said:If it's going to be 1/35th scale, then I would recommend one of the Tamiya Shermans. Either the M4 or the M4A3. They are nice and simple, and despite their age, virtually no flash to clean up.
John.
Trying to avoid 1:35 for the time being - mainly due to size, as she will be brush painting it. I will aim to teach them spray painting in the summer, and after a few more kits under her belt, one of the older Tamiya 1:35s could be a distinct possibility. However, she does indeed have her eye on my Ardennes King Tiger... It may be that we settle on a smaller scale one in the meantime!
Thank you all - a lot of food for thought, which is very appreciated. Is all the Revell 1:76 stuff ex-Matchbox? Also, are any of the Airfix 'Vintage Classics' range of tanks any good, or are they best avoided in this situation? I'm not bothered about the most modern, crisp 100% accurate tooling, just that they look the part, are well engineered and go together easily. She is getting quite good with the side cutters & file, and also thinning paint (Humbrol acrylics, as they are waterbased) to apply several thin coats & has also been using decal solution too. However she isn't ready to be using a craft knife unsupervised, and doesn't yet have the patience for lots of test fitting and tweaking of parts. Now to get the other one as enthusiastic...
-
1
-
-
One of my 9 year old daughters (I have twins) has just completed an Airfix 1:400 Mary Rose, having previously built an Airfix 1:72 P51 Mustang, both from starter sets. There were predominantly her work, with guidance and assistance where needed from me (mainly for decals, especially on the Mary Rose). Now she wants to build a tank, having seen some of the 1:35 Tamiya ones that I have.
She is very keen, but still learning, and I don't want to get her something that will require a lot of rectification from me, e.g. to clean up flash / get parts to fit, as I want her to feel that it is her project, not mine. Those two Airfix kits that she has built already were great, and went together very nicely, so something of a similar ilk would be ideal, and I am keen to encourage this, as it gets her away from the TV and computer screen...
I am aware of the new Airfix 1:72 Tiger & Firefly kits which seem to have good reviews (the double kit set is tempting, as then that's one for each daughter), however are there any other 1:72 tanks in similar price range that I should consider, and which would be suitable for a child of her age?
Many thanks!
-
1
-
-
Having built this and a couple of others from the same series, they may not be as detailed as the glue kits, but the engineering is still pretty impressive. They also made excellent slump busters as I found when I was recovering from pneumonia a few years ago, since they could be built with just a couple of modelling tools when sitting on the sofa!
-
I've finally taken the plunge, and bought my first resin ship kit. I have too many models already in other genres (many of which I am clearing out as this place has widened my horizons beyond just car models) and my marine stash is growing slowly with a 1:144 Das Boot, a pair of 1:50 sailing yachts, two 1:18 sailing dinghies, a 1:72 Sunseeker gin palace, and about six unbuilt 1:700 liners & warships, and two unbuilt 1:350 warships. However, the only ships I have actually completed so far are three of Meng's 1:700 pre-coloured snap fit ones...
It will also probably be the last 1:350 ship that I buy due to the cost and display space required, however, HMS Apollo is a ship that I have wanted a model of for a very long time, and so is one that I am going to take my time over not only to build it properly (I am new to using PE & am yet to try rigging anything...) but also as accurately as possible. I did consider converting the ancient Airfix 1:600 Leander, but everything I could find out about that kit just didn't inspire me.
And why Apollo? My late grandfather joined the navy aged 13 and retired in around 1984/5. He served on Apollo in the late '70s, and of all the ships that he was on, she was the one that we remember him talking about the most. I can't remember all the other ships, but I know he was in Coastal Forces early on, then later on HMS Ulster (or Ulchin as she was nicknamed by that point, having been cut & shut with HMS Urchin's stern following a prior mishap with a dockyard wall when the bridge telegraph jammed full astern), HMS Ark Royal IV, then HMS Apollo and lastly HMS Diomede. It is essentially being built in memory of him.
I am starting with the Atlantic Models 1:350 HMS Cleopatra F28 kit (thank you @bootneck!), which as best I can tell is the nearest start point, as it has the foredeck gun unlike the other two Leander kits from the same source, and also includes the correct witch's hat mast and all the necessary marking decals.
However, if anyone can advise on any info which would guide me as to what equipment Apollo should have in her late '70s fit-out, compared to the instructions for Cleopatra that would be amazing! I have quite a few photos that I have found online of Apollo, which show some of the obvious differences, such as no transom cut-out, and of course her mast, but much of the other weaponry and equipment means little to me. One of the main queries that I have not been able to find answers to relates to her aft deck. Was there still the drop down (well deck?) immediately forward of the transom which on Cleopatra (along with the cutaway transom) was for the variable depth sonar, or was it fully flush?
Whilst I won't be starting the build for a while (I want to practice on a few expendable plastic kits first!) any tips or tricks for this kit would also be very appreciated!
Many thanks!
-
2
-
-
4 hours ago, Gordon J said:
Maybe it will be an armour kit. They have just released a M18 Hellcat so what about a Sherman Firefly? Surely not another Tiger or Panther!
Assuming you mean 1:35 as Tamiya already have a 1:48 one? However, they did rebox the Tasca / Asuka Firefly a few years back: https://www.scalemates.com/kits/tamiya-25174-sherman-vc-firefly--308947 but it seems to be difficult to get hold of now.
-
On 03/05/2021 at 12:04, airfixpeter said:
I am currently building a model of the Olympic and i have enough life boats to depict her with a full compliment but what was wondering did the rigging on funnels two and three get moved inboard to accommodate the extra life boats as i can't find a clear picture to see.
Any help would most appreciated
This youtube channel seems to have a lot of well researched and detailed info which may help you, if you haven't already found the answers. I'd saved it to look at more closely when I get around to building my Olympic, for which I am leaning toward the dazzle camouflage scheme:
https://www.youtube.com/c/LinerDesignsIllustration/search?query=olympic
-
Ditto - I've just bought an Atlantic Models 1:350 Leander from Mike, and couldn't have been better, with the kit being extremely well packaged and fast delivery. To say that I am extremely happy with it is an understatement! A big thumbs up from me!
-
1
-
-
30 minutes ago, cmatthewbacon said:
I think a Toyota GR86 and GR Yaris and new Nissan Z in 1/24 are all pretty likely. They’ve already done the first two in r/c form, and they’ve released pretty much every Z over the years…
best,
M.
I'm hoping for a regular 240Z derived from their recent 1:24 ZG kit. Even better if it comes with Wolfrace slot mags...
-
1
-
-
Solidworks is good - I used to use it professionally in my previous career working in a superyacht design consultancy in London, but it's not cheap... I now teach D&T (what used to be called CDT), and we use Autodesk Inventor and Fusion 360 in school as they do free educational licenses. I still prefer Solidworks, but then I was using it for nearly everyday for about six or seven years so know it very well, but the ones I use now seem to work in a pretty similar way and the same principles apply. Features such as the revolve and array tools can be especially useful and timesaving.
On 14/01/2022 at 23:42, albertross said:Possibly the two bits of advice I will give for successful 3D modelling are :
- Always constrain your sketches fully and use the origin point as reference wherever possible. (This will make for a robust model)
- Do not use projected geometry, it tends to fail when sketches are edited. (This will make for a robust model)
I haven't had issues with projected geometry that often however I usually allow for it in how I make any links / constrains, but fully and very strongly second your advice about using the origin properly and fully constraining sketches. When teaching CAD to my students, this is one of the things I always try to instill in them early on so that it becomes second nature, for the very same reason that you state!
-
1
-
1
-
6 hours ago, johnlambert said:
I've bought another kit for the Matchbox 50th anniversary group build.
I'm a fan of the Citroen Traction and the coupé/roadster is a very stylish machine.
Très chic! Please tell me that the build thread will appear soon!!
Am I right in thinking that this can be built as either the coupe or roadster? 1:32 isn't really my scale for cars (not scale snobbery, just that it won't display well with what I already have) so I've managed to resist getting one so far, but I do want to convert one of my Heller 1:24 Traction Avants to this body style.
-
1
-
-
That looks very nicely detailed and well thought out. I still haven't built the regular GT conversion yet which I bought about a year ago, but looking forward to the build thread of this one already!
-
Ah - I was wondering what that engine component was, as I'd noticed that the drive belt wasn't in the Targa kit. That all makes sense now. However, until you mentioned it, I hadn't spotted that the dashboard sprues were different though, and looking more closely, the front seats on that sprue are slightly different to the coupe ones, meaning that there are now three different front seat options across both kits.
The US Federal spec bits are presumably for Revell USA's own release - of no interest to me personally, but I think it's a nice feature to have the option. However, I'm now torn as to whether to get this one, the coupe, or wait for the convertible...
Aoshima 1974 MGB
in Work In Progress - Vehicles
Posted
Airfix also reboxed it - box art showed it as chrome bumper, but the rubber bumper parts were included too, except for the recently tooled Rostyle wheels.