Jon Kunac-Tabinor

From memory, the Hakaristi was the emblem of Count Rosen, the Swedish noble who donated the first aircraft to the nascent Finnish Airforce, hence it was adopted as their national marking. It was widely used before the Nazis stole it for their own evil purpose, being seen on interwar RAF and WW1 aircraft of many combatants. I assumed the FAF had dropped it totally in it 1944 when they sued the Russians for peace and effectively "swapped sides", but I never knew the AF kept it on as their official emblem. It's bizarre but then I guess if it means something else to the Finns that's what it means. #Agent K, don't worry about the snowflake comment , boomers always be booming Jonners

Hi Des. I'm interested that you seem to think that many who have come to the hobby in the "internet era" - that's the last 30 years by the way- are just here for "public self fulfilment". What is that? Is it the same as winning medals at contests? Or getting your local clubs best model award? Can you expand a little? I have to say your statement does seem a little judgemental. I'm afraid I don't know the model you refer too, so it's difficult to comment. But if it's the only example that you can give then that does not an epidemic of acclaim-obsessed-modellers make. Just a talented modeller who has got things wrong. Can you also tell me when the last "frequent abandonment" of contemporary "fluctuating trends" was? And what was the trend too? Anyway, surely "trends" add to the hobby? Even if they start out as overblown, they soften and enter into the cannon of the hobby. They are just techniques after all. Why would you be afraid of being exposed to, or learning new things? I've never ever seen an article that says you must do something. There is a reason the foil in eggshell technique is not now widely used. It's bloody hard to do! There are now dozens of metallic paints that are simple to use that have replaced it for the majority of modellers. You can of course write an article on it and submit it, which would help newer modellers to rediscover what may be soon be a lost technique. Thanks for your input cheers Jonners

Ok so the 109 is not to everyone's taste, yet that does not mean yours is right of course. What sort of style would your prefer? and would you like to see all contributors adhere to it? All contributors are modellers and have their own style. I'd also politely suggest that this does not apply as you state to every article too, and invite you to prove otherwise. "Every article every month".? What would you prefer the photos to show ? I'm trying to ascertain here what you want. You are forthcoming as to what's wrong (the easy bit I'd venture) but what should the pictures show? The issue of 1/72nd articles is noted, but magazines are, as I've said before, limited to what people provide. I'm doing a 1/72 one next time. But if you have builds you can photograph and write about and they are 1/72nd scale and finished how you prefer- then submit them please. Printed flat colours can be an issue I agree. There are lots of print profiles and translation between can result in issues, add in RGB to CMYK conversions and that will also affect things. Better to judge them as guides. Sorry it's not to your specific tastes at the moment but thank you for taking the time to comment. cheers Jonners

I meant kit as in tools, not model parts. Sorry - it does come over as confusing, I will edit for clarity. cheers Jonners

Think on at a pace that suits. Glad to have your input. Ta muchly & nostalgic musings always accepted. jonners

Hi - I'd be interested if you could expand on this a little please. Can you point to some examples where experts in magazines have not catered for amateur enthusiasts, or point to how you feel their articles have done this? Is it, for instance, tone? Do they use too many bits of "kit" ( i.e. tools and gadgets)? Do they assume too much knowledge of what might be called "advanced" modelling skills? A preponderance of fashionable finishing techniques? I ask because I'm an amateur enthusiast and I also contribute to magazines, so I'm keen to know what you think we are getting wrong? Also - and lets use this month's (July) Scale Aircraft Modelling as an example. It has 92 pages including the cover. How many adverts in that number of pages would be too much? And also what puts you off if you see an advert? It would be great to have some further input on this. As a contributor we try to appeal to as catholic an audience as possible in an article, so its upsetting to think we might be being too highbrow, or some such other off-putting trait. cheers Jonners

Hi Pete. I did a double take too, but this might help. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fiat_CR_42_Falco https://www.airliners.net/photo/Italy-Air-Force/Fiat-CR-42-Falco/223258 https://www.stormomagazine.com/RegiaAeronauticaColorsinWWII_3a.htm (scroll down to the almost bottom for the Propellor Blades section) Although to be fair it does state props post 1941 were black. HTH Jonners

HI - just a note to say that the blades of Fiat-Hamilton prop used on the G.50 ( and CR.42) were light blue front with black backs. It adds an interesting touch to the model. It's hard to see in period BW pics of the 50 of course, but if you google the CR-42, you will see the survivors in the museums feature this. cheers Jonners

I'd echo these comments from John & Paul too. I've done builds for companies that are supporters of magazines and been honest. Its never been cut. My feeling is, to be honest, that there is a small portion of the modelling community that is utterly resistant to any kind of change, and actually just likes to whinge. Forums work well for people who won't or don't want to open themselves up to the free for all of social media. They provide great resources and community atmosphere, but there is (I hate to say this non-social media users here) the slight hint of the pub regulars sitting at the bar knowing it all and congratulating themselves for that. All the time. As I did, and I still maintain. If you do not like articles in magazines, write one yourself. Editors are always receptive to new writers. I love BM, and I love writing for magazines. We exist together, not in spite of each other. I'm "trying" to get more "random" punctuation in my articles too! Jonners

Fab!! I always enjoy seeing someone enjoy using the decals, and you have created a real stunner there mate. Jonners, dead chuffed.

https://www.air-craft.net/acatalog/Harder-Steenbeck-126783-0.15-0.2mm-Fineline-Air-Cap.html#SID=642 With acrylics I find i get very little if any paint build op on the needed. its design to "pinch" through your figers or a cloth so it cleans the need as you wipe away. I also find its far easier to see where the paint is going too. My Silverline 2 in 1 can with these as well as the normal ones These guys are my new go to for GSI & Tamiya paints too. Great service and the prices are decent, plus they have stock. Cheers Jonners

Hi I suspect it is the flow improver making the paint clog iornically, I found vallejo works well with it sown thinner and retarder, full stop. Have you tired with just the thinner- and perhaps up that a little too. It also sounds like your nozzle has gunge in it. I have the Evo silverline - so essentially the same as you, and I'm always amazed at how much gunge can come out of the nozzle when you think its totally clean. You "can" if you are VERY careful used the released needle to gently push crap out of the nozzle, but you need to be very very careful. Have you any cellulose thinners or liquid "reamer" as they call it in the UAS. A good soak & spray out with that will work wonders. Vallejo do some very good online tutorials for their paints. I used them on a 1/72nd Blenhiem for a mag article as was pleasantly surprised once I followed their advice. You will till get a bit of tip drying- have you got the two pronged "pinch" tip cap for your brush? I use that all the time. far easier to clean the tip when painting Best of luck Jonners

I'm slowly edging towards starting this model- as the schedule allows, but in the meantime, an unashamed plug for my friend Jeffrey's excellent resin parts: https://www.hypersonicmodels.com/product/fj-2-fury-tail-surfaces You know you want to! Jonners

HI - sorry if I confused. My understanding was it was related. The mod sheet seems to imply the UES was removed when the MDC was fitted and that RAF Buccs didnt need an underwater system anyway. So perhaps there is a changeover period while RAF ones were modified? I think we need an answer! LOL cheers Jonners

Just to reinforce Challys post above. The third and foremost triangle on the port side showed the aircraft was fitted with the automatic underwater ejection system I believe. If you read the MDC modification spec sheet shown in previous posts you can see that this was removed once the MDC mod was fitted: Hence the third warning triangle was no longer needed. My thumbs up for a new S1 conversion too please cheers Jonners