HAAFPhot

Please excuse the late and slightly irrelevant question folks but what were the aero series tanks made from? I am building an A1J and am looking to represent the odd bit of light wear. I am guessing aluminium, not phenolic asbestos Ono? Thanks in hope CBA

I don’t think it’s resentment Dave, I suspect it is more frustration. I get the Iconic status, but it is a single type with many variants....some with civvy colour schemes and some in 1:32 belonging to a certain heavy metal group. My lot actually started military flying and have had some iconic types....but they just don’t sell. Surely you have to wonder when small companies in the Ukraine are bringing out Beavers, PC6, Miles Messengers, and yet Airfix.... Another Spitfire (usually more expensive and less well produced than some Easter European companies). Haven’t seen an Auster in decades, Westland types? Other than a few notable examples (ok the Lynx and possibly Seaking HC4) nowt. Plenty of DFCs awarded to helicopter crews but... Yea I know, Spitfires sell and so they should but how about the rest? Incidentally I am resolve to building just one Spitfire. It’s not anti, there are just so many other quirky iconic aircraft that served.

Anything British Army Aviation Austers, Scout, re release the Lynx (with a GT option for Granby) a decent Gazelle (not a civvy cab with a military scheme), Beaver AL1 (1:48 and again Op Banner or European schemes for a change). I guess a Skeeter is a bit too obscure for Airfix... never happen anyway

Not my thing but I was brought up near a UK gunnery school and they look the part. Fact is photography brings out the bits people won’t see in the flesh. Nice one. A friends dad was a CPO there who served on the Glamorgan. Seems several lifetimes ago now

Now this.....I could actually get excited about. The AAC had one on trial at AACC for a while. Drove the locals nuts with the thumping

Chris, I believe that the threat to downed crews was part of the reason the MI28 has a small cabin to grab individuals.

Makes sense and as likely more crashworthy. Better to auto with all 3 than 1 hanging. The A109 went this way. I don’t buy aerodynamic efficiency on an attack helicopter as an absolute priority as speed is often not a huge issue, although endurance is.

Well I was guided by the MOD and yes I have seen the “unladen” performance of the early A and D models. But an air show, particularly with eastern bloc types, is never a good gauge of performance. We still hold the rotary speed record, but that was not set by a line squadron Lynx, nothing like. This said, at the time the Mujahadeen were taking the things out “hot and high” simply by shooting down at them, and again noted that if they ever came down to speeds associated with translation (10-14Kts IAS typically) then the UC popped down, landing or otherwise. The Hind remember is an incredibly old airframe that keeps going, but it could never be described as a pure gunship in much the same way as our Lynx or Scout couldn’t be because they too had a trooping capacity, although ours generally only carried reloads out to a FARP and you have to assume the Soviets did the same. Of course it also served to bolster morale in that downed crews could be recovered (nice to know in Afghanistan), a design feature carried on with the Havoc but only possible with the AH using rescue straps carried by the crews (or in the case of Jugroom fort pure bottle). The comment re Longbow is correct, and in fact would have afflicted the first 9 or so of our cabs as they were straight 64As and not the modified WAH with the RTM ECUs. This said, even then, the WAH still struggled with the environment. Many military helicopters start life as adequate, but development of equipment, weapons, DAS etc soon lead to a higher MAUM and performance suffers. Either by reduced limits, endurance or MAUM, or all of the above. This is often not as simple as adding a more powerful ECU as transmission, airframe, blades,systems will as likely need reinforcement to cope. The Sea king strake was one small stroke of genius but very rare. As I say, back at that particular time they were considered underpowered. Now, I am out of the loop so couldn’t say.

It was believed back in the day (least within our Avn intel cell) that the things were so underpowered, transitional take offs and in the main landings were pretty normal and the UC deployed below a minimum airspeed. Might be something to do with that, or simply that locally they were in short supply and felt to be superfluous so not replaced, bit like the original engine cowl arrangement for the Westland Scout. More trouble that it was worth

That’s great. I think I have these images in a scanned book that an associate of mine sourced for me. He has a Polish wife and visits the Krakow museum regularly where I believe he met the chap who sent them. My Los A must almost certainly be wrong but the route leading to that is interesting and they are great little models from IBG.

Bloody tough job but someone has to do it.

Brilliant and many thanks. I may well take you up on that. Do you know anything about the configuration of the nose gun mounting without gun fitted on the PZL37A? I want to model the Bis they took to...Belgrade? Which was often in armed.

Bugger...apparently not good job I intend building the lot. Guessing the PZL37A Bis that did the tour in civil reg was early so more like the olive drab then as it was fairly early on? Sadly my 37a has a pale blue underside but I went with what info I had....still a great little model though

Cheers Ray. I wasn’t aware they did solvent based lacquer. Appreciated chap. Ordered a set as I have a PZL11a to build and a Los A bis, although I believe the latter were a more OG colour. Looks like this works well with gunze thinners which is handy.

Fascinating and thanks for the info. A Polish friend of mine bought me the IBG PZL37A as a Xmas present which triggered a few interests. Firstly the detail and quality of the IBG kits is superb, but it also got me taking a much closer look at the Polish aircraft (and its pilots) which again, is fascinating. The plan is to build the lot (IBG in any event) so any info on paint accuracy is appreciated. I use predominantly Gunze lacquer or MRP so some mixing or cross referencing is likely. Thanks again. CBA

Ta

May well be. The receivers on the Brownings will be easier to repair/scratch build than the barrels. Worth a look, thanks

Hi all. I have some 1:72 Aires barrels for Lanc etc. I am thinking the join may/will be bloody fragile. Thinking of reinforcement with fine guitar wire.... Any other tips less likely to have said barrels stuck to the ceiling, dog, eyelids etc?

Thanks in errr.....retard (opposite of advance) as this opened up a can (more like a cookie) of fecking worms for me too. I found that the whole assembly was actually too long to fit in the bomb bay (yes, it is the Revel Chastise aircraft) so I thought “No problem”. From what I can see from other reference the fairing was indeed 2 piece leaving the roof section of the original bay in place (presumably where the cable release was fitted to allow the arms to spring open). Looks better already so what about the back end? The whole assembly fits like a glove except that where they should fair together, the infil stands 2mm proud of the rear of the original bomb bay (and before anyone cries user error, the sides sit flush nicely as does the front of the ramp section). I knew it would require surgery and I have the P38 standing by (A Walther P38 May be more useful ) but really....Revell There has been some question regarding the lower gun. Looking at some reference material (apparently from a book) it is suggested that the lamps were standard Aldis lamps mounted on locally manufactured mounts, front in a cowl through the front camera aperture, rear on a locally produced bracket through the lower gun turret port. The reasoning stated was that they were easy to adjust here and did not require cutting away bomb bay structure. Any counter or other comments welcome. I noted that someone rightly suggested removing the small circles on the bombardiers bubble. I have but be aware that they are recessed, not simply moulded as a raised line, so if you want minimum distortion on the bubble, you need to pretty well re profile the entire bubble. I followed Neil’s dihedral fix ending up circa 6.5 degrees. It does look a lot better, and I have to say that I cannot detect any real error on the outer engines as a result. As regards the Bomb. I went for primer as it was called for in the scheme I am after. Not sure about the comment that the colour was as a result of the wooden profiles slats being removed last minute as the ends would surely be a different colour, and by the time of the raids several grey (practice) mines had apparently been dropped sans wood as had the single live test mine. More likely they were on a production run of their own and either ran out of paint or time. Thanks again Neil and Chaddy Est al. Appreciated

Went for the Tamiya one in the end....can’t rule others out though All a bloody minefield either way

Colour

There is reference to pave way and laser target markers being used in theatre, however as far as I know there were only 3 designators in theatre and one was destroyed. I seem to remember that they were on loan, either from the IS or UK SF. Early on their was a rather silly dit being spun, laying blame for the black buck accuracy on the SAS FACS using wrong codes etc which for so many reasons was crap. Hugh McManners make mention of them as an FOO/FAC during Op Corporate.

Oh man....just watched a vid where it was black. Who cares? And thanks

Well there is usually one who is late but 9 years? I guess things have moved on a bit since Neil did this build, but having re discovered modelling and having an aviation background I started buying the odd kit and wanted something to replace my Corgi Die cast Lanc I donated to kits for heroes. Someone offered this one and the Revell Shack bundled for £30 so I took them. I was surprised how they have progressed (my last revell kit must have been late 70s) but looking at Neil’s thread it never fails to astound me how badly wrong manufacturers can get things (there is at least 1 Gazelle helicopter out there in markings it would never have worn....someone painted an HT2 as an AH1 and someone used it for ref). I am building this one, changed the wheels and the guns ASAP and have some flight deck bits but otherwise it’s not bad. Dihedral done (actually looks much better and the outer engines look fine as is....weird), rad intakes next and the aft bomb bay fairing can wait. Oddly I have seen trials phots that suggest it is near right but the domed fairing makes so much more sense so domed it is. Now I am fairly new to bombers, love them and have huge respect but the minutiae just isn’t there so a question. Most schemes call for FDE and DG uppers, yet in many images and some models they look much lighter. One person quoting the light earth and green similar to the shadow cam on the Tigermoth. Is this based on fact, present on individual aircraft, a produce of photographs of faded cabs, or faded images? Thanks Neil/all, a real education that has answered a lot of questions I never knew I had.

Oddly enough I have just watched a vid stating these were painted to help crew find their way to the parachute escape hatch under the bomb aimers padding in low light, although smoke makes more sense, beta lights were on our cabs for night, not sure if they used anything similar during this period (obviously on instruments, what fun that has created for historic aircraft flights, museums etc)