2Step

It took me a while to think of it: most parts have already been scavenged by Jawas

that's a very good and fitting analogy! thanks

Thank you Right, but that would make a pretty boring diorama, wouldn't it - and I needed a concept for my second kit Yeah, that was my idea too. I admit to kind of giving up on that idea, because I was having problems with the parts. The ones you see are a couple of milimeters. To give a more "realistic" look, you probably would have to cover the ground with glue, and then sprinkle debris on it (e.g. I used "parts" of shaved of plastic etc.). Maybe I will give it another try... Thanks You made a nice summary of the arguments I read, which all allow a) the filmmakers to film it as they did, b) to have massive impressive wrecks for scenes in the movies (or games!) and c) to have the modeller build it in whatever way he/she wants. In the end, you probably satisfy the expectations of the viewer (film & model) not by the most scientific accurate scene but a scene he/she can relate to. And that is something we can relate to from ouer experiences. Hence a broken up and burned wreck. Just modelling a deep hole is just not the same ...

I bought this kit twice, for whatever reason (senior moment most likely). So after the more conventional build, I had to follow in the footsteps of some other modellers and build a crashed version (although there seems to be a lot of discussion how it would really look if one of these monsters falls out of the sky..). I added a few details were the ship sepertated to make it look not too empty (no attempt of rendering the original design faithfully was made!). As always, thanks for looking and all comments welcome. Cheers here are my other Star Wars builds: https://photos.app.goo.gl/75G5di2pDGK5bh1S9

Thank you In the end, most of those fancy designs failed the reality check. Partly they were just beyond the doable, partly beyond what a war torn Germany could still produce and partly just beyound available technology at that point ...

Now we're talking!

Well, it's not NAVY, but doesn't look too shabby ... I mean the scheme, not the build - that is beautiful!

Agree with both statements full heartedly. I once tried a biplane- ONCE!

that's a little bit sad? I just offered my WWII collection to a military historic collection here in a nearby city. They declined, saying they concentrate on post war stuff So the shelves are still full Well it was called Hohe Geschwindigkeit (high speed). But despite the advantage that German companies had in the development of jet aircrafts, in the end, the power of the engines never met the rquirement of the sophisticated airplane designs, and Germany was running out of fuel anyhow. After all, the best designed plane doesn't really do much without propellant... I am unsure what to admire more: your stash size or your life expectancy 🤭

you're right -and thank you

@Dave Klaatu btw: greetings to Tucson. I've visited Rayteheon there quite a few times when I worked with the US Navy in the early 2000s ...🌵

I don't think I really started before '70, although I had a couple of kits where I practically only watched my father building it. But He was more into HO scale trains ... ... but in the end the limiting factor is always the room for display!

actually, since I am retired, I build faster than I buy

you're welcome Well, therein lies the problem: I have about 60something Luftwaffe planes. I've got one Spitfire that I bought very cheap to try out some techniques .... I restricted myself to German planes (not because I am German, but I started with the more experimental a/c). Otherwise I would just buy and buy and buy and ... I have too many a/c in late war cammos (see para above) - and there is only so much variation you can do ... I am not sure this plane looks "good" in an esthetic sense... Let's settle for "interesting"

the older I get the more colorful my models thanks

Aaah, btw, if you don't want to check out my other builds - the answer is apparently: 13 (Messerschmitts) ....

I always had my eyes on the Lippisch P13a from Revell. But I have not seen this kit available (at a "kind of" reasonable price) for a looong time. So, when Amusing Hobby came out with this Messeschmitt 262 HG III with the same ugly configuration - featuring the cockpit integrated into the vertical stabilizer - I couldn't resist (prompting my wife to ask the eternal question: How many Messerschmitt's does a man need??). The kit is nicely done. The details are mediumish, the decals are not good or should I say not sufficient (no stencils etc, no ckpit instruments)? The instructions are ok for building, but include practically no painting directions (besides for the outside in a "not finished" look). I decided to build the a/c in a way to give it the feel of the first post war jet fighters (hence "Luft 47" or maybe even "50"?), as I have plenty of other planes in the mish/mash colors of late war Luftwaffe fighters. I added all the stencils I could match from my stash (not all might actually match: I have no idea what the actual tire pressure is, nor - even more surprising - could I figure out if the Heinkel jet engines also used the J2 of the Jumos as on the original 262s. Doesn't really matter, as it turned out I had no J2 fuel markings left anyhow. So I used the second best choice: triangles so small you can hardly read what it says ). I also added two Kramer x-4 missiles from the stash and a driver figure. I painted it all metal, hopefully representing a well worn but not abused machine (apparently, the Reichsverteidigungsbänder are still in fashion). The wheel wells resp. the whole interior leaves a lot of room for detailing (you can actually see the engines quite well. As I realized over the last decades that I hardly pick up my kits, turn them around and look into the the wheel wells, I skipped that part and made better use of my time ). So, without further ado, I give you Gelbe 7 from 7. Staffel/II Gruppe/Jagdgeschwader 1 : ... and in company with her sisters ... As always, thanks for looking, all comments welcome! Cheers Here are my other WWII Luftwaffe builds https://photos.app.goo.gl/od4agvy1tebuSm7L8

Admittingly, I used a short cut here. I drilled the hole and put a piece of clear plastic in the "window" that I punched out of a larger piece. It actually is a bit too small, but if I would have cut that out by hand, it would have been looking much worse Yours does look way better, but I didn't have any media to do something similar.

And now to something completely different ... In fact, so different, I am not even sure why I bought this kit. I guess I just kind of liked the looks of it? It's snap together, so it build quite easily and quick. It's also pre colored, so it painted even faster. Actually, I painted the metal parts and some smaller details according to pictures I found online (which was a bit problematic, because the color of the metal looked always different, depending on the light maybe - or they used different materials, especially on the exhibition models). The only details I added were some cables for the arms and lights on the bow. I also drilled holes for the portholes (which were solid) and added some clear plastic for their glas cover. Altogether the quality of the kit was very good, as were the decals (alternatively it comes with stickers, a bit like some Bandai kits). And to compare with my other 1/72 scale subs: As per usual: thanks so much for looking and any comments welcome! Cheers

Thanks for sharing! It's just great to see pictures from the old times. I wouldn't call it "good old times" - too many people died - but all the different designs, track access ... some things sure were better.

I was wondering abbout this effect, as I was considering to use it on the Mach 2 Vostok kit. As I cannot get my hands on that model, it is a bit of a mute point for me right now. But I am pretty sure, any sparkle added at this scale would be over the top and just not looking "right". I think plain flat white would do it. I use flat white primer for the "normal" white paint on my launch systems. Sometimes, I haven't really figured out what causes that effect, the primer develops a little bit of a 3D structure that reminded me of an ice cover. Maybe some try and error on some surplus plastic pieces?

Here is a pic of my precolored Revell X-wing (1/52?). I believe that was my first ever Star Wars kit. I just wanted to point out that the (much later added) base was COVID period effort. You can easily determine that when looking at the used test sticks making up the ground But I just got the Bandai version for my birthday. looking at your great result, I will make sure to study your WIP!!

Looks great. Was the transport part of the kit or scratch? I always fanatsize about the launch platform, but either my limited skills or my limited display space forbid that.

I like your scratch build! As far as I remember, the Ju52 did not detect the mines but exploded them by the magnetic field created by that giant ring it was carrying. There are surface drones under development for minesweeping, so the jump to airborne should be significantly less than 800 years

A very nice little kit that was supposed to help me over the wait for the Artemis kit in the same scale and be a bit of a replacement for a nice Soviet/Russian Rocket in 1/72, e.g. the Mach 2 Vostok (for those of us who prefer injection to resin kits!). The model comes either with a Soyuz MS crewed top or a Progress MS payload. I opted for the crewed version to go with my other rocket kits. It builds fine, although one probably could have thought of some cleverer ways to hide the seams on the rocket and booster parts. All the necessary details for this scale (IMHO) are there and the decals are very good. The painting instructions caused some trouble however. The instructions included a double sided colored page for the painting (who knows why on both sides of this sheet the exact same picture is printed). It shows a three sided view of the launcher in both configurations. I guess, the fourth side wasn't worth showing? But - and a big but in my view - there are errors. Error no 1.: the drawings on the instructions don't match the kit exactly. If you are (like me) using panel lines or hatches etc. to place decals, it doesn't work for you. In fact, putting the decals on for the "Soyuz MS" letters is a problem, as where they are supposed to go wrt the instructions are three protrusions on the body that prevent the decals. The kit or the real thing are also not symetrical, which makes it a bit tricky. I ended up placing the decals 90 degrees off their placing according to the instructions Eerror no2.: the white bands on the boosters are (according to the instructions) on the 5th band of panels from below. after painting it so and trying to put decals on, I realized that the 4th panel band should have been white. (actually, the picture of a build model on the carton shows it right as do original pictures. So I am willing to share the blame with Zvezda) I can easily live with these errors - sue me, Roskosmos In any case, the instructions don't give an exact date or launch number, and the rockets looked different on each picture ... I only added a few more simple details to the rocket body (everything in "remove before flight red, as I used those colors - including the inside of the nozzles to make it a bit more colorful). I had a bit of an issue with the larger nozzles of the boosters. Each of the four needs to be in its correct location (probably so they point straight down, despite the overall angle of the boosters). I missed that somehow and then they didn't really fit well into the holes in the kit (could be my fault or Zvezda?). So the bottom doesn't look too great and considering the way the Soyuz sits on the stand, I refrained from adding details to the bottom. ... and without the boosters, plus the Progress MS payload ... and together with the other 1/144 launch systems (well, Ariane 5 is 1/125) As always, thanks for looking, any comments welcome! Cheers Here are my otherr space related builds: https://photos.app.goo.gl/DLrnifbiBdBnwxfF7