ckw

I guess there simply isn't the interest. Warbirds draw huge crowds at airshows, major airports always have hordes of spotters yet local private fields have few if any spectators despite usually much easier and closer access to the aircraft. Perhaps a case of "familiarity breeds contempt". Cheers Colin

I was thinking of "Shelf of Doom" for mine Cheers Colin

I've seen this discussed in various Railway forums. Here is a pretty good explanation https://gardenrails.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=11777 Cheers Colin

I don't see that washing the sprues can do any harm, but for me a wipe down with IPA or Mr Hobby thinners just before painting is more important so as to remove any finger grease, marker residue (I use markers to check for good seams) etc. If you are still using Humbrol paints, that may be the problem. There seems little doubt that the quality and consistency of Humbrol paints has suffered in recent years. Cheers Colin

I would use gloop (mix of Tamiya thin and bits of sprue) for this. Cheers Colin

The year did not start well ... 3 builds consigned to the shelf of doom for various reasons. I do hope to recover them later. Desperately seeking some success, I looked for the easiest to build model in my stash and came up with this ... Zevezda Yaks 3 1/72. Although this is one of their snap fit kits, I was surprised at the quality and level of detail. Would put some other "proper" kits to shame. Confidence slightly restored, I moved on to something a little more challenging RS Models Arado Ar 66c 1/72nd - nice simple rigging on this type. Presented no real problems, but the tail struts needed replacing with brass rod to fit. Hobby 2000 Junkers Ju 87 D-1 1/72. I'm a big fan of Hobby 2000 boxing up good quality older kits (in this case Fuijmi) with new, quality decals at a decent price. Good value for money Hasegawa Yokosuka P1Y1 Ginga (Frances) 1/72. Typical Hasegawa, not much more to say except I got it for a great price on Amazon so couldn't say no. Airfix Vickers Wellington GR Mk.VIII 1/72nd - spent too much time on the interior which is effectively invisible. To be fair, Airfix do warn you of that in the instructions. I was attracted by the less common colour scheme. Having got a bit of confidence back, I felt up to a challenge .... Valom Bristol Bombay Mk. 1 1/72 - having read scary things about Valom kits, I was expecting the worse, but while nearly every step presented a little problem, none were too difficult to overcome. Certainly not put off further Valoms Hasegawa Kawanishi H8K2 Type 2 (Emily) 1/72 This is the new tool which I got for a bargain price on Amazon a while back. Goes together very nicely. Only problem was the size made painting a bit of a challenge. One thing I didn't like was the wing walkway decals are printed on one large decal for each wing. As I was pretty sure silvering was bound to occur somewhere, I painted these instead. Italeri Lockheed P-38J Lightning 1/72nd Having waited in vain for Tamiya to release their P-38 in 1/72 I opted for the new Italeri kit which is based on the Academy kit not the evil Dragon one. The colour scheme intrigued me, so I consulted the BM hive mind Not sure we came to a definite conclusion, but I believe the scheme was possible as a 'one off'. Overall a nice kit - added some detailing for the open cockpit and a little surgery to produce the drop down side windows. The kit provides spoked wheels, but the photos I found of Miss Ann had solid covers, so these were added. Italeri Messerschmitt Me 210 A-1 1/72 - didn't like the way the kit canopy was split down the middle, couldn't find a vacform replacement so somehow convinced myself that cutting the kit canopy up and displaying it open would be a good idea. Worked reasonably well, but meant adding a bit more detail to the interior. Italeri Fiat CR.42 Falco 1/72. Biplane and Italian camo - just asking for trouble. First attempt at spraying camo freehand. So that I had a chance of correcting inevitable mistakes, I used Colourcoats enamel, but sprayed a coat of Klear/Future after each colour. That way if I mis-sprayed or splattered (which I did far too many times) I could quickly wipe off the mistake with a thinner dampened cotton bud without damaging the previous colour. It worked. Eventually. I also found drawing the camo outlines with watercolour pencils of a similar shade helpful. Looking at it now, the splotches seem a bit over scale - yet the shape and position corresponds more or less to the kit plan. My only regret was using the kit instrument panel decal - it is much more visible than I expected at this size and looks very much like a basic decal. Revell Handley Page Halifax B.Mk.III 1/72nd - not much to say. Decent kit, caused no problems. Airfix Bristol Beaufort Mk.1 1/72 - this one seemed to fight me at many points, though there's nothing really wrong with it, as did the paint for some reason. This one nearly ended my year as it began with a trip to the shelf of doom. Time for a break. Cheers, Colin

I use adhesive lead tape - the type used for balancing tennis rackets or golf clubs. It's particularly useful when you don't have a large enough space for lead shots as you can cut strips to glue on floors, landing gear bays etc https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B00LPME7VU/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1 Cheers Colin

I guess it depends how you look at it. Klear (and the various techniques for using it) has been around a lot longer than most, if not all the acrylic paints and varnishes. I think modellers can be quite conservative - when you find something that does the job, you stick with it. I don't really think its a case of trying to save money but what I'd say is if (as I have) you have used Klear successfully for some 40 years and got the required results, why pay more for an alternative? Especially when properties like non-yellowing require many years to prove. Note - I have not been continuously for 40 years, but models finished with Klear before my long break have, following a wash, looked as if I'd built them yesterday. I'd say explain to me why I should change! Cheers Colin

I like milliput, but it is difficult to rescribe without getting crumbled edges. I this is going to be an issue, I'll use 'gloop' - a mix of left over sprues in Tamiya extra thin. Takes a while to fully dry, and you may get some shrinkage, but once set it can be worked just like the kit plastic. Cheers Colin

All of the fuss over the TV thing (which I haven't seen) prompted me to re-read the books (well the first 2) after some 40 years or so. To be honest, I was disappointed. I think Asimov was a great short story writer, but sustained plot or character development ... not so much. To my mind the books seemed very dated and rather shallow. On the other hand, they are very much of their time ... and in some ways quite amusing, 'atomics' being a power source for everything On the plus side, I can see how they are a great starting point for film or TV adaptations. But not I'm tempted enough to get Apple TV. Cheers Colin

I've found the various types of Gorilla glue very effective - and seem to last well in the bottle. However I've never used an accelerator on them. Cheers Colin

I had a similar issue elsewhere. I think PayPal have changed things. If you want guest payments using a donate button, the account holder has to enable this in the settings. I'm pretty sure that previously guest payments were allowed by default. Cheers Colin

That's interesting - I'd not come across any of these before! But why so many? I would have thought you'd want to replace two options with a third (neutral) one - not five! It will be interesting to see what happens over time - whether any or all come into general use. I suspect in a few years one variant will win out - the others will quietly disappear - and will become as normal as using 'Ms'. However, I wonder how 'real' or widespread these new pronouns are? I see this post was written in 2018 - my kids live in London and Brighton, have many LBGT+ friends, and I've not yet heard any of them spoken or written. I'm all for it though - a living language must be able to adapt and change with the times. As I said earlier, I think there is a real need for this - but just one please! 5 options only adds to the confusion. Cheers Colin

There really isn't a word we can use - aside from 'it' which doesn't seem very nice! IMHO I think it now has to be up to those who want to escape 'gender typing' to decide what words to use and let us know. If it doesn't already exist (and I couldn't find one), then someone could probably earn themselves a pretty penny by compiling a gender neutral dictionary. To some extent we've been through this before with the Mrs/Miss/Ms - younger viewers will probably not realise this was a big issue a while back. Generally it was resolved by simply asking the person how they preferred to be addressed Cheers

Fair point ... i should have said "personal pronoun". This is a demonstrative pronoun. You can't use it in place of he/she; his/her Cheers Colin

Sounds like malware on your PC, or in a browser extension Cheers Colin

I won't hold my breath, but would be very happy if they did one - I have the Italeri version, and can't say its fired my enthusiasm! Cheers Colin

Supplementary question ... Why don't we call people from Spain or Portugal Latinos? 😁

Because ....

Actually they had good success e.g. Alexandr Pokryshkin, scored 48 of his 59 victories while flying the P-39. The big difference was that combat on the Eastern front tended to be at much lower altitudes than in the West. Cheers Colin

I've started to continue searching for the item after I've found it - if keep extending the search time I hope to move the success rate a lot closer to the first place I look. Cheers Colin

Exactly - which leads to speakers preparing everything they're going to say as a PowerPoint presentation, and then reading it to the audience word for word. Yawn! Cheers Colin

I learned the lesson the hard way ... in my early career I had to give presentations at conferences in universities. On my maiden voyage I made the mistake of saying something along the lines of "if your secretary ...., she will ..." and was immediately called out (in front of a large audience of senior academics) for assuming that a secretary was a 'she'. I've been paranoid about it ever since. BTW - how long has it been since anyone had a 'secretary' ? Anyway to I hate the "he/she" (or should that be "she/he"?) work around, so find myself using "they" to sidestep the issue which some people object to on grammatical grounds! Why don't we have a singular gender neutral singular pronoun in English? Does any language? Although "they" may now be acceptable for singular use, it is still a plural, and must be treated as such in grammatical structures. Yes - I sometimes wonder if the current vogue of the right/need to self identify has been a step backwards in some ways. I get confused - if someone goes to the effort of publicly identifying themselves as male or female does it mean they want others to treat them differently than if they hadn't self identified? If not, why bother? But as my daughter (she/her/hers) frequently points out, I just don't get it! Cheers Colin

That story was doing the rounds at my university (University College Dublin) back in the '80s - some of us pinned our hopes on it being true 😁 Cheers Colin

It is quite possible that Tooby was talking about a number of illustrations but it got mixed up in the edit. If so I can image he won't be best pleased! Cheers Colin