Jump to content

Werdna

Gold Member
  • Posts

    864
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Werdna

  1. Thanks @Rumblestripe - now I see them @erlawerke That's very impressive work - congrats on a superb result.
  2. Might just be me, but I'm not seeing any pics..?
  3. Agree, it should have been preventable from a flying perspective, as said above. But that's not to say it wasn't avoidable, for reasons which might not yet be clear.
  4. Same scheme as the one I chose. I found my old RFI here:
  5. Without knowing which particular examples with covered gun ports you are referring to, it's difficult to comment, but certainly the NASM example has the ports visible. It's a great kit though. I built one last year, the RFI is on here somewhere.
  6. I agree this does seem to defy logic somewhat. Particularly the logic of three different shades of RLM81 (ranging from dark brown to dark green). But research does indeed suggest that three discrete 'recipes' were developed under the '81' banner. I guess there must have been a reason for lumping them all under the same designation, rather than issuing new ones.
  7. Thanks Jack Montex makes a canopy mask set for this kit - most of the Montex masks I use tend to have an aversion to curved surfaces, but this one was different. It actually stayed in place
  8. Fuselage was metal, wings and tailplane were wooden, which I suspect accounts for the different surface finish. There are also some period colour pics around which appear to confirm this scheme. Interesting write up from Joe Picarella (the man behind the research) here: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/emperors-new-clothes-joe-picarella-mraes
  9. Superb kit of a diabolical subject. An aircraft specifically designed to kill its pilot. Anyway, this is the rather excellent FineMolds kit of the 'Ohka' Kamikaze weapon. Tamiya levels of quality, engineering and fit and decent decals made this a hugely enjoyable build. Colours are based on the recent IWM restoration of their own Ohka, now on display in London. Finished in the markings of one of the aircraft discovered on Okinawa at the end of the war. (Keen-eyed readers will note that the IJN's lawn-keeping skills are nowhere near as good as the Luftwaffe's ) Anyway, hope you like the pics
  10. Hopefully mortgage interest rates will have settled by the time it is published...
  11. It's worth mentioning that none of this came to light 'just a few days ago' - Ullman's research goes back to 2013 (possibly further) - check the date on this link below: http://www.clubhyper.com/reference/rlm83darkbluemu_1.htm
  12. There's various discussions about 74 having a green tint 'in certain lights' or 'when newer' - and some paint companies do seem to have really focused on that aspect, to the point where some mid-war Luftwaffe models in 74/75 are turned out in what seems more like RAF day fighter scheme. I personally prefer just a plain dark grey for 74 (Mig Ammo's RLM74 is my current favourite), but that's just my personal opinion..
  13. It was always green - right up to the point where new and compelling evidence emerged of it actually being blue....
  14. Thanks It's Vallejo RLM 25 - not quite as dark as I was hoping, although it's possible I might not have given it enough coats..
  15. Thanks Jamie No filler on this anywhere, as I recall. It goes together pretty well. The only 'downside' to the Italeri kit is the lack of internal detail through the wheel wells - so no engine/supercharger or armament visible. Some of the Dragon/Trimaster kits come with a full engine.
  16. If a pic of Green 8 ever does emerge, it had better show the plane after a forced landing on a golf course..
  17. Hi all This is the Italeri (Dragon/Trimaster) 1/48 Ta152H, finished as 'Green 8' of Geschwaderstab JG 301, one of the aircraft identified in Axel Urbanke's recent JG301 research. No pics of Green 8 are known to exist, but it's depicted here without the familiar JG 301 red/yellow tail band, as it seems that some of these were painted over before the end of the war. If a pic ever emerges of it wearing the tail band, I'll paint it back on Markings applied using Montex masks, with the octane triangles from the kit decals. Anyway, hope you like the pics
  18. To me, that is just over-exposure or some other kind of photographic anomaly. Otherwise, we'd have to accept that the lower rear portion of the tail - not to mention the ground in front of it - would all appear to be the same colour. Which is unlikely....probably...
  19. I must say, I do struggle with the logic of using colours like 76 and/or 77 as upper surface camo colours, at a time when the RLM's main objective was supposed to have been ground concealment. Having said that - where's that photo of dark/light coloured Fw190 wings on a railway car..?
  20. If the records are correct, then although they were from different production blocks, 500408 would have come from the same production line (ie Mimetall, Erfurt) as 500570 - which is another well-known and photographed (and much modelled) D-9. There's also a lot of discussion of 500570's colours in the Japo books, as well as widely online - so if all else fails, you could do worse than take paint guidance from those sources.
  21. I would tend to disregard 'numbers' in favour of 'colours'. The '83' designation is ambiguous and now widely thought to have been a blue, and not a green at all. A combination of either dark green/light green or dark green/mid grey is what I would go with, depending on the specific aircraft.
  22. Hi all I came across this site the other day - thought members might find it interesting (not sure it's been posted here before). A fascinating and fairly in-depth analysis of the RAF's captured Ta152 and an attempt to establish its precise colours (before the RAF painted over at least some of it). A lot of the information is probably applicable to most other late-war Luftwaffe colour schemes, not just the Ta. https://verde9.com/en/painting-of-green-9-ta-152-h-1-w-nr-150168/
  23. Agree completely, I've just finished Revell's 1/48 Ho229, which is a rebox of the old Dragon offering. For a relatively 'new' kit (from Revell's perspective), it was absolutely terrible - the fit of the parts was laughable (not in a good way), while the vague instructions were at best misleading and at times just plain wrong.
×
×
  • Create New...