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. :)

Paul Thompson

Members
  • Content Count

    390
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

182 Excellent

About Paul Thompson

  • Rank
    Established Member
  • Birthday 04/27/1958

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Dalgety Bay, Fife.

Recent Profile Visitors

1,216 profile views
  1. What, you want a packet of starter smoke clouds? Paul.
  2. As a rule of thumb, there was a practice of some Royal Aircraft Factory types re-using components from earlier types, most often the wings, but as Melvyn said it can get complicated. I'm not aware of any printed or Internet source that lays it all out, so lacking that I'd indeed go the Windsock Datafile route, most of which can still be ordered from the Albatros Pubs website. When it comes to smaller things like wheels, engines, bomb carriers, and weapons, then you do have standard types. Once again though, you need to have a working knowlege of what was useually fitted to what before you can swap kit components with impunity. And that takes you back again to Datafiles. There is a lot you can glean for free from Internet copies of photos, but the Datafiles usually have rarer and more detailed shots, plus the plans. Some of the latter suffer slightly in the printing, having been redimensioned slightly so they're too large or small (the Early Fokker types are particularly bad, the D.I-III being far too small IIRC), but in most cases it isn't too dramatic and they serve well enough for comparing the major components of related types. Paul.
  3. And FWIW, years ago, when I enquired of them if they had plans to re-issue the Contrail Staaken kit (so before the Roden kit was released), they said they did have it but it was in too bad a state to be economically used. Some of the other moulds were alos in a bad state, but they didn't specify which. Paul.
  4. Nieuport 17. All the various boxings of this kit and related types are well moulded and the fit is good. Also, usually fairly cheap. Tons of colourful markings. The only thing to be wary of, if you find the earliest boxings, sometimes the fuselage plastic had turned inwards a bit at the lower front, which was easy enough to straighten. If it bothers you, be aware that the undercarriage on the Albatros kits is too small. Various people have produced replacements over the years, but probably not available any more. I forget offhand how much the legs should be extended, but I've done it, and am not the most dextrous guy in the world. IIRC the wheels are also a tad undersized. One other thing with the Albatros kits, the engines are noticeably too small, to allow for the plastic thickness. Probably best not to look too closely, because once seen, you can't unsee it. I've made a few of them and used to replace the kit engines with Aeroclub or HiTech substitutes, but the carving out of the kit fuselage reducedthe pleasure, so I don't do it any more (and aftermarket engines are harder to find now anyway). Paul.
  5. The flying surfaces. Shape is fine, but the rib tape representation is way too heavy. I must say, however, that IMHO that is insifficient reason for a re-tool just yet, because the rest of the kit, and overal fit, is excellent, even allowing for it being more than 10 years old. There are many other important but unkitted types in 1/48th I'd rather see them do. Paul.
  6. One of the first vac companies I came across doing mostly WWI. For the day, they were excellent, especially when they stared to regularly include metal parts and decals. Very similar to Joystick. I' recommend them. Most of their subjects are still not covered, except by other vacs, or resins, (some of which are more iffy than the iffy-est of Phoenix). Paul.
  7. Right, I just checked the US Amazon site, same message as UK, not available now. Paul.
  8. Last time I contacted them was 12 or so years ago, so it could well have changed, but my experience was the same as many others on the WWI Mailing List at the time - normally no reply to a parts request, but after 2 weeks the parts would turn up at no cost. My last contact was over the wing for the 1/48th SE 5a. in response to having an error in rib number pointed out, they produced corrected ones and sent them to whoever asked, no charge, and no proof of purchase required. Paul.
  9. Amazon UK has a message to the effect that it isn't available right now due to quality issues with the source file. Paul.
  10. I have a theory about the D.VIIs. They prrovide separate fuselage sprues for each manufacturer's boxing (Fokker, Albatros or OAW), due to the lkouvre, panel, and exhaust configurations. I've built two,, with the lower wing gap being far too small and needing cutting and sanding. But those were both from the same fuselage sprue (and damn it I can't remember offhand which it was, will check later). So what I wonder is, do the other versions have the same problem? It's as if that sprue was made to a slightly different scale than the rest of the kit, and maybe it only affects the one type. Perhaps more than one person worked on mastering the fuselages, and they used non-matching data to the guy who made the flying surfaces. That's also throw the strut lengths. It is the only Roden kit with IMHO very poor fit in places. The others I've built have had the odd issue, but mostly easily sortable. Duncan, I appreciate you taking a chance on this. I already have most of the Roden kits I want, being only interested in the WWI stuff, but dependant on price may beat myself up and convince me to buy a few more. That includes the ground stuff, which I have the non-documentable feeling has had wider exposure amongst non-WWI specialists than the aircraft. Paul.
  11. I like them and have built many, all 3 scales. But that was as they were first released. The prices now seem disproportionatly higher than then. There are some which have been superceded by recent Eduard releases such as the 1/72nd Fokker D.VII ,1/48th Bristol Fighter (but still the only readily available game in town for Mark IV and Arab engined Biffs/Brisfits) and SE5as. A few of the 1/32nd kits are also now competing with WNW, mainly Sopwith Triplane and Fokker DrI, and probably others will suffer when Copper State Models get around to them. On the whole though at the right ptice they're very good starting points. Not for shake and bakers, but if you put in a lot of time with preparation (I always go over all mating surfaces with a headband magnifyer to be sure I've killed all the flash) and don't mind adding some internal details then you'll end up with very nice models of some currently otherwise unavailable subjects. The early releases in 1/72nd (Gotha series and Pfalz scouts) suffered from very brittle plastic which led to breakage of small parts when removing from sprues. Later kits are in a more standard plastc that is easy to work with. I don't know if they'd still supply those early kits, certainly doesn't seem to be the case if you go by Ebay prices. One thing undisputable, the decals are more often bad than good. Again, they have improved as the company has aged, although it is still a bit of pot luck. Printing and colours are sharp enough, but depending on the wind direction you may or may not suffer fracturing or disintegration when wetted, total non response to standard setting solutions and a propensity not to conform to anything but a totally flat surface. The former problems can usually be cured with Microscale Liquid Decal Film. Setting into detail requires placing ontoa wet shrinking varnish (Johnsons Klear and successors) and topping with the same. The decals are drawn down as the varnish dries and then look fine. Then again, sometimes you get lucky and they work perfectly. I'll say one thing, Roden usually offer a wide variety of colour schemes for each subject. Many of their kits are also star sources of spare parts, things like bombs, guns and engines, which I always find a use for with less well endowed kits. What I have no idea about is how many WWI modellers have already filled their stashes - Roden have been going a fair old bit now. Newer modellers seem much less tolerant than us old geezers brought up on vacs, Merlins and Pegasus. HTH, Paul.
  12. As always in these discussions, this is the point where I remind everyone that late war RFC/RAF aeroplanes only use turnbuckles on the control wires. The flat stuff, called Rafwires, had a tensioner built into the connector, and it looked nothing like a turnbuckle. Gaspatch do the appropriate connector in their metal turnbuckle range,(just to confuse) , They're at the end of the list, as RAF late-type see http://www.gaspatchmodels.com/products/metal-turnbuckles-32.html. 60 in a pack, should do you. BTW, I've used the RB PE. Nice idea, can't get it to work in 1/32nd due to flexibility in the wing cellule causing some lengths to bend, and believe me I've tried very hard to make it work. RB even make teensy fold-up PE connectors. They look quite good when done, but are beyond my feeble dexterity level, especially given how many you'd need for something like a Camel. Paul.
  13. I'm sure they're quite capable, and also sure they decided not to bump the price up a tenner to pay for it. Paul.
  14. Worth looking up the 5 corrections needed for a truly accurate Pup from the Airfix kit - stil a very good kit, but a few odds and ends need attending to. Some are really easy, like snipping off the redundant control horns (Airfix put them both sides of the ailerons, which is daft). Others are a bit more involved but it may not bother you. Basically, the nunber of stringers showing through on the area under the ockpit opening is wrong, the tailplane needs shic=fting a millimetre or two, the little lugs sticking out of the outer wheel faces need to be lopped off, a slot and piece of sprue should be put into the end of the fuselage under the tailplane to reproduce the exposed kingpost (common to many Sopwith types) and the typical Sopwith triangular channel needs carving out on the underside just behind the cowling. Additional slots may need opening in the cowling depending on the engine, which also may need replacing - the one supplied is nice enough but may not be the same as what the Shuttleworth Pup currently has. All these refinements were detailed by Ray Rimell in Scale Models when the kit was originally produced, along with 4 or 5 simple conversions. I can scan it if you're interested. A harder kit to build but needing far less tweaking is the HR Models kit, one of their fairly recent injection moulded efforts that was much better than their earlier resin stuff. This kit has multiple engine and cowling options as standard. Still, since you already have the Airfix kit I assume you'll want to stick with it. Whatever route you follow, Pups usually would have a simple lapstrap, easily represented by painted masking tape, although I'd check the internet for shots of the Shuttleworth machine since I'd expect that to fulfill CAA regs it would be fitted with a some sort of Sutton Harness for safety, but don't actually know. Paul.
  15. Funny isn't it? Since that was written, there have been increasingly more realistic and useful strut materials available from Contrail, and then Aeroclub, as well as brass Strutz. And now they've all gone. I keep hoping someone will reveal to me some genuinely useful successor, but apart from that recent-ish tool for crushing metal tube from Albion Aloys I'm not aware of anything (except satay sticks, knives and sanpaper, which works well but is also really tedious and slow). Oh well, sorry, drifting off topic again........... Paul.
×
×
  • Create New...