Jump to content

elger

Gold Member
  • Posts

    1,119
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    The Netherlands

Recent Profile Visitors

3,263 profile views

elger's Achievements

Very Obsessed Member

Very Obsessed Member (5/9)

3.3k

Reputation

  1. Thanks - yes I think I mean those (I didn't know what they're for). The instructions seem to show one side with a "grill", the darker square near the wing root close to the radio operator's section, and a little square vent behind the air vents behind the engines, but the other side appears to only have blanks - no details. But I think the Eduard exterior detail set includes a grill for both sides. But I gather that if these vents/grills were fitted on this aircraft they would have been fitted on both wings.
  2. I have a question for B-17 experts (@tomprobert perhaps?). About the wing vents, a fairly well known issue of late B-17Gs. Airfix provides late wing vents on the port wing, but the starboard wing has blank parts to fill up the gaps - see the illustration from the manual: Is this asymmetrical configuration accurate? Were these wing vents of late B-17Gs only fitted to the port wing? If so - should the starboard wing be smooth (should I get rid of the panel lines left by the blank parts?
  3. I had a sneaking suspicion that the radio operator's gun might have been removed by November 1944 so I was very happy to get confirmation so I went and removed the ammunition box that I had installed earlier. Also happy to hear that my choice for the interior colours is appreciated - all the information is out there, in various forums and if you look at period photos it's clear what most of the interior colours are (or what they're not, at least). Most restored/preserved B-17s have interior green interiors, except Sentimental Journey which looks to be pretty authentic. Anyway, some last photos before the fuselage is closed. One day I will remember that all but nothing of an interior of a 1/72 ww2 bomber can be seen once the fuselage is closed up With the fuselage mostly done I can start on the wings. Thanks as always for looking!
  4. As mentioned this subject has come up before. How I see it: Revell is the better kit, Airfix is the better model. Airfix is more accurate in many respects, but it's considerably more difficult to put together and has heavy panel lines. Hasegawa is a great option: almost as accurate as Airfix but not quite (main canopy escape hatch in the wrong place, somewhat freakishly large tail wheel come to mind) but not as detailed on the inside. Not that much can be seen. And its much more expensive than the other two.
  5. Thanks! I switched to Mig paints when my wife and I had a baby two years ago - she was suspicious of the smells from MRP I had been using, and I realized that made a lot of sense. Had a look around, tested some alternatives but figured Mig paints were the best of the worst. Apart from that they don't make your workspace/house smell like a chemical factory, I love how easy they are to use and clean. I still use a spraybooth and mask when I airbrush. But first and foremost, they've made painting more fun again in that respect. And as much as I loved using MRP they are so volatile that if I sprayed them on too thick one layer would start eating another. Because the Mig paints are water based sometimes they splatter a bit but I have about the same rate of mistakes and things I need to fix. Colours are often a bit off (their RAF dark green being a particularly bad offender) but with a bit of creative mixing you get a long way. They are more delicate as you say, but similar to any other acrylic, especially water-based. Their varnishes are even worse indeed. I prefer Vallejo flat or satin mixed with isopropyl alcohol for my clear coats. One thing: I found that Hataka thinner works best with Mig paints - you can indeed get a silky smooth finish.
  6. @tomprobert @72modeler do you have any thoughts about whether or not this aircraft still had the machine gun in the radio operator's compartment? I don't see one in the photo (in the first post) - but is there any reason to think that it might have had it still or were they phased out in service at some point?
  7. I'm finishing the flight deck and the floors - and getting the parts ready to fit into the fuselage halves. Some changes to the kit parts - in addition to adding most of the Eduard interior bits I made a hole in the bombardier's floor, and covered it with a thin clear plastic disk. I'm also adding the hose for the hot air that was fitted to the very front of the bombardier's floor. I added seat cushions to the pilot seats from sheet styrene, cut to size and added a bit of texture. There was some difficulty fitting the Eduard instruments panel onto the console in this assembly sequence - the PE parts of the instruments panel on top of the PE parts added to the console made these components not fit anymore and I ended up filing a gap in the lower section of the instruments panel. Not sure if this was my fault, but if you're planning on using these aftermarket parts keep an eye on this. Although I generally really like Airfix kits, I wasn't impressed with the fit of the components of the ball turret. All oxygen bottles are from Quickboost by the way. Only the guns left - the PE ammo belts are always very tricky...
  8. Thanks! Acrylic base (Mig Ammo) sealed with a clear gloss coat with dark brown oil paint streaks on top.
  9. B-17G 43-37913 named "Seattle Sleeper" took part in the bombing mission to the rail road viaduct at Altenbeken on Sunday, November 26th, 1944. It would be the aircraft's 33rd mission. The aircraft had been called "Lucky 13" before, but changed its name when it was taken over by a new 1st pilot, 1st Lt. John Stevens. Stevens, who was 21 at the time, was from Seattle himself. On the 26th, the co-pilot was 2nd Lt. Stanley Johnston (21) from Oregon - it was his third mission. That day the navigator was 1st Lt. John Weisgarber (22) who changed shifts to this flight as it would be his 33rd, coming close to his final mission. The radio operator was Sgt. Rene Pratt (21) from California. This mission would be his 25th. Sgt Quilla Reed (22) was the flight engineer. Sgt. Mabry (Don) Barker (24) was the bomb aimer. The mission on the 26th was supposed to be his last. Sgt. Robert (Bob) Anderson (24) was the ball turret gunner. Sgt Richard (Dick) Trombley (25) was the only waist gunner on board. Sgt Henry (Hank) St. George (21) was the tail gunner. The aircraft's position was in the back of the formation, and according to Slofstra and De Boer's book about the aircraft's crash, it was Johnston the co-pilot who was responsible for maintaining the throttle who let the aircraft fall behind the formation. Despite warnings from the crew, they were unable to catch up and when the formation was attacked by Luftwaffe fighters, Seattle Sleeper was an easy target. Heavily damaged by enemy fire, the aircraft lost altitude but the pilots maintained control and ended up in the clouds. Assessing their odds, they decided to fly back to England. However, the damage was too severe and by the time the aircraft was over The Netherlands the crew abandoned the aircraft - not a minute too soon because shortly after the last crew member had evacuated the aircraft it exploded. The crew landed by parachute around the town of Haulerwijk, not far from the city of Groningen. Debris and wreckage also landed around the town, not causing any significant damage. Pilot 1/Lt. J.R. Stevens evaded capture Co-Pilot 2/Lt. S.F. Johnston evaded capture Navigator 1/Lt. J.C. Weisgarber taken prisoner of war at Norg (Drenthe) Bombardier T/Sgt. M.D. Barker evaded capture Engineer T/Sgt. Q.D. Reed evaded capture Right Waist Gunner T/Sgt. R.P. Pratt taken prisoner of war at Norg (Drenthe) Ball Turret Gunner T/Sgt. R.T. Anderson taken prisoner of war near Noordwijk Waist Gunner S/Sgt. R.A. Trombley evaded capture Tail Gunner S/Sgt. H.M. St.George evaded capture The crash - but also the context in The Netherlands as well as that of the USAAF, and its aftermath with the narratives of the escapees is described extensively in Slofstra and De Boer's book. The title, Vliegers op de Vlucht, is a play on words as "flight" in Dutch is the same as "on the run" - the title translates as something like "Flyers on the run" and "Flyers in flight". I've been working on the model for a few months now, making rather slow progress. I'm adding some parts of Eduard's interior sets, and adding oxygen tanks from Quickboost. Deviating slightly from the build sequence by adding the clear cheek window parts at this stage, masking them from the inside in an attempt to blend them in with the rest of the fuselage. Here's the interior so far: I'm still working on the flight deck and the floor of the nose, and I'm also going to be adding the guns from the inside (leaving the barrels off until the end). As always, thanks for looking!
  10. Don't know the 217, but the 17 and 215 have an issue with the tail unit being represented somewhat simplified/inaccurate. There's a resin set that addresses the issue; this review explains the problem quite well: https://archive.aeroscale.net/review/10945/ No other major issues I can think of. Built the 215 a few years back, good decent kit. Somewhat heavy panel lines but nothing too bad.
×
×
  • Create New...