Jon Kunac-Tabinor
-
Posts
5,149 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
7
Content Type
Events
Profiles
Forums
Media Demo
Posts posted by Jon Kunac-Tabinor
-
-
11 minutes ago, flarpen said:
Ok
So did you sand down the front and tip of the wing only or the trailing edge as well?Both, but with more sanding towards the wing tip. Sanding the trailing edge also has the advantage of reducing the chord slightly which helps sort out the extra width that Bjorn noted.
Cheers
Jonners-
3
-
-
1 hour ago, flarpen said:
How do you address the mating surfaces to the wings on the fuselage and tail booms?
If you thin the wing halves, wont you get a step to the fuselage? so you'll have to sand that down as well? and the intake to?Hi - selective sanding. I sanded the wings outboard of the booms and intakes. It still means the outer edge of the intake insert needs reshaping a little, but the boom-stub depth stays the same as does the wing to fuselage depth - so there's no step with the fuselage join or the boom join. It's not a 'perfect' solution but it avoids destroying surface detail.
I actually think that the wing depth is too thick all the way across its chord where it meets the intake section. But that's virtually impossible to fix unless you create an entirely new wing.
Cheers
Jonners
-
2
-
-
Great work Bjorn!
I bought this kit and I'm now reviewing it for a mag. I thinned the wing halves from the inside and that seems to have worked too. The bluntness on the leading edges seems to be in the middle of the leading edge, so sanding them thinner helps with this too- or at least it seems too!! I also needed to reduce the depth of the wheel well walls too of course. In the pic, the left hand wing is unchanged and right hand thinned.
Looking forward to seeing your finished model. Mine is currently destined to be a SAAF T.55.
cheers
Jonners
-
4
-
-
Thanks for this- the PDF v1.1 is very informative, especially as I have to review the new kit and was wondering about flat floors as I was planning on doing it as a 27 or 28 machines!
cheers
Jonners-
3
-
-
Stunning work!!
My first is on final assembly, and my second is being painted.
Should you need to know this, the wing leading-edge lamp glazings and wing-tip light glazings fit like a glove.
Splendid stuff
Jonners-
5
-
-
On 7/31/2023 at 11:14 AM, Dave Swindell said:
Too late for you @Jamie @ Sovereign Hobbies, but would a potential fix be to cut both parts along the panel line and use the front part of A65 and the rear part of B27?
On 7/31/2023 at 3:29 PM, Troy Smith said:I think it would, I mentioned this as well on post on Hyperscale.
I'd suggest fixing the ridge maybe easier, simply as you don't then need to cut carefully and line up the bits... and if you mess up the ridge, do this a plan B.
Having tried both options on my two builds, I'd say removing the bulge from B27 is easier by gentle scraping and sanding. The two parts can be used for a 'cut & shut' fix but the rear section of part A65 has some subtly different cambers on its mating edges that needs some very careful scraping and filing to get it to match with the front section of part B27.
It's doable but my opinion is it's far easier to just modify the intended kit part.
cheers
Jonners-
3
-
2
-
-
Flattery will get you everywhere!
Good luck Enzo- I'll keep an eye out for this build. And, yes- hope fully the plastic will be far better.
Cheers
Jonners-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Graham Boak said:
Bit of a difference between "years" and "decades".
What has only barely been touched on is that in "the old days" (which really should be the young days, I was young then but old now) magazines placed much more emphasis on information about the nature and history of their subjects, and there was much less opportunity or ease to look elsewhere for information. As for modellers appreciating additional parts, extra detail and easy of putting together something, there was actually considerable dislike of the new-fangled plastic stuff for its crudity. Fortunately, I never had to make models from basic materials, and so lack skills that would no doubt have been useful later. However one key result of change has been that modelling is much more expensive, with decreasingly less attention to knowing anything about the subject and a much smaller requirement for skill. Don't learn how to paint a straight line, buy a mask. Don't attempt to understand how seat-belts work or where they go, just buy a piece of pre-shaped and pre-painted plastic. Don't attempt to learn about aviation (or whatever) history, just be eternally surprised by anything new to you (but never lose the joy of surprise in the genuinely new! Everything was new to everyone once.)
The magazines have reflected the changes. You don't find articles devoted to the basics of what RAF camouflage was in WW2, despite what appear to be very common queries on modelling sites such as these and clear misunderstandings in some of the models displayed. Much of what wasn't known was secret then, we've had the joy of discovery in so many ways, but there's so much still to find in the less-commonly discussed parts of our history - which is what makes Colour Conundrum so fascinating, and the majority of "Here's my latest kit isn't it wonderful?" articles pretty tedious. Even when they are immaculately made and beautifully painted, they are just like all the others and are not giving us anything new. If that's what the modelling public is prepared to pay for, that's what it gets. Or is it what the current crop of editors and publishers think? Unavoidably something between the two.
Yes the years and decades difference was what struck me in the comment I was quoting about.
As a magazine, I think SAM can but only reflect changes in what people want- although I think I'm right in saying that we still very much want to publish articles that between them (at least) have a balance of the historical, the technical, model construction, and the decorative. The recent excellent series on the US of the Cuban Missile Crisis and modelling them is a case in point, as are Mr Bryon's beautiful built, superbly painted and knowledgeably understood models. Do we feature models that are built purely for the modeller's joy of painting and weathering? Yes. Do we feature models that are built purely for the modeller's joy of correcting faults in an old kit to give a decent result? Yes
It's very true that many basic questions on what "the basics of what RAF camouflage was in WW2" frequently appear online, and they are also answered very quickly, and usually pretty well. I suspect that we are, as in many things, between a rock and hard place in terms of magazine content here. If we repeated this stuff in every article about a WW2 RAF subject we'd get criticism for being repetitive and telling more experienced modellers stuff they already knew. We can never win, and we actually know this (should this be called Rumsfeld's Razor?). Ditto for pretty painted models, or 1/144 ones, or biplanes, vac forms, or 'boring grey jets' or whatever subsection of the Venn diagram that makes up modelling en masse. There will always be someone that thinks a magazine has swung too far one way, or the other. Even fans of F-111s or Tornados 😉
I think what we try and do at SAM (and I hope we do it more often that we don't) is to give a good mix of things that will be an interesting and satisfying read, whether sitting on the throne pondering with the porcelain, hunched at your modelling bench, or on a recliner in 'The Med' sipping an icy lager.
cheers
Jonners
-
1
-
-
48 minutes ago, ckw said:
so I wonder how much the magazines are responsible for encouraging the use of aftermarket? I'm sure I'm not alone in finding some of these products easily replaced by basic materials and a modicum of skill.
It's a question that's been asked before, and in the sense of a magazine reviewing stuff and saying "Here's a new product that does x, y or z, and we think it's very good because...." then yes, but that to me is like a magazine saying "Here's a new kit of a Farley Fruitbat, and we think it's very good because...". A magazine can't make a modeller buy things, it can only expose the modeller to things. A good advert may persuade someone to purchase its offering but that's different because the ad is designed explicitly for that, whereas a modelling magazine will focus on modelling rather than products per se. There occasionally seems to be a nagging feeling that, somehow, magazines are in cahoots with model companies to push products like its crystal meth. ("Once we get you hooked on resin wheels, there's no turning back! MooHahahahah"). It's just not true, and to the best of my knowledge, magazines don't push advertisers' products just because they are advertisers. Remember that with build articles we very much rely on what we are given. Even if we at SAM send a kit and aftermarket stuff out for a review build, the modeller isn't under orders to use it all, and can certainly say what they think of it (and they certainly do).
I certainly do agree that some aftermarket parts can be replaced by basic materials, and a little skill, and of course the necessary time and effort. And for some that's the joy, whereas for others it's not. But let's take photoetch seatbelts as prime example of aftermarket. Now you could try and scratch build something similar, but no amount of tape and fine fuse wire or thin plasticard will compete, especially in 1/72 or 1/48. Multi layer, or 3D printed Instrument panels and consoles ditto. CAD designed and resin cast wheels with deep realistic tread and proper hub detailing, ditto again. And some people like that stuff too, as it's a time saver so that can get on with painting. I use it if I think it will add to the overall build, but I also scratch build a lot too, because I enjoy it , because it's good for my skills, and also because if it's for an article I think people like seeing it done.
Should it be included in the box? Personally I like Eduard's approach of Profipack and basic Weekend kits, and I wish more companies would do that ( I know some are starting too). But I can guarantee that if all companies always put extra stuff in the box, then the same people moaning about the cost of aftermarket would moan about the cost of kits with it included too.
Modelling is a broad church, and I think it's often best enjoyed by occasionally seeing how the other denomination sing their hymns. You don't have to change your tune, but you might just enjoy a different harmony or two.
Cheers
Jonners-
4
-
-
6 minutes ago, ckw said:
Well for me it's perhaps more a reflection of how the hobby has changed ... in my earlier modelling days, there were lots of articles about kit bashing to make something different, or doing conversions with a bit of plastic sheet, brass and wood. Seems to me there's a lot less of that now and a lot more about buying the relevant aftermarket parts. I occasionally pick up the odd magazine - esp. if it features an item in my stash - but I'm afraid I tend to be disappointed. There seems to be a lot less of both improvisation and background research than I remember. Of course, back in the day the current wealth of aftermarket parts simply weren't available, so I understand why the focus has changed, but not really my cup of tea.
Cheers
Colin
I take your point, and I suppose we reflect trends.
I would counter that the aftermarket came about as much because modellers were fed up of having to do conversions from old hen coups and whale's blubber as anything else, and kit bashing was much more a thing because of the paucity of kitted subjects. I wonder if the modeller of days gone by would have still 'dope and talced' balsa-wood conversions if the kits had been there, or not used PE because they liked sellotape seatbelts better?
We try and feature conversions wherever possible in SAM, and one that don't just rely on a resin plug-in part too.
As ever, I encourage modellers to build and submit an article if there's not one in you like. That's effectively what I did.
Cheers
Jonners
-
5
-
-
On 3/25/2023 at 7:30 PM, Des said:
Welcome to the site.
If you hang around here for long you will discover that any mention of print magazines can be quite emotive for some and encourages responses about not having read one since the printing press was invented and cloistered monks stopped copying and illuminating them by hand or how the entire genre has gone downhill since the 19whenevers when aftermarket involved modellers hand-carving parts out of used matches.
I'm always amazed at how many modellers who 'haven't bought a magazine for years' can still seriously say that newer issues have gone down the pan compared to ones from the 60s, 70s and 80s???
I mean how do they know? A quick leaf through in Smiths? I am of course biased as I do some work for SAM.
Some people sometimes like to think of the past as a comforting, better time because it's reassuring – especially when the present is different, or changing in ways they can't grasp or handle. I get that and I also get it's just one opinion versus another, but I'd challenge anyone to pick up a copy of SAM from the last few years and prove it's not as good as it was 5 years, 10 years, 20 years, 30 years ago. And yes all magazines go though ups and downs (there was a time in the mid-80s that Scale Models was threadbare for instance) so there will always be exceptions. But in general? We are just as good now and we strive to maintain that.
Cheers
Jonners-
9
-
-
Thanks everyone, I will pass on messages to Sabine.
One thing I forgot to mention is that what Rowan like the most, was seeing his decals actually use don model. So if you have some, and were wondering whether to build that model or not – I'd urge you to do so.
Just like beer shouldn't stay in the barrel, decals shouldn't stay on the backing film!
Jonners.-
2
-
-
44 minutes ago, Dave Swindell said:
Not good news I'm afraid, Rowan passed away a couple of days ago.
edit, hmm, link to facebook post doesn't appear to work, it's from @Jon Kunac-Tabinor page, Jon, maybe you'd like to post what you wrote here?
<iframe src="https://www.facebook.com/plugins/post.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Fpermalink.php%3Fstory_fbid%3Dpfbid02QE5snt9UCRENy9RxWcMtdP7LmPTwePTFpgMgdb2bhNRHfjD4VEYB4zVEn8C81NGcl%26id%3D100076356300632&show_text=true&width=500" width="500" height="647" style="border:none;overflow:hidden" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="true" allow="autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; picture-in-picture; web-share"></iframe>
Hi there's post here in chat.
Jonners
-
1
-
2
-
-
Rowan Broadbent 17 July 1953 — 21 January 2023 RIP
Rowan’s wife Sabine has asked me to let you know that he passed away peacefully while in palliative care in hospital, in Langeac, France on Saturday morning. Rowan finally succumbed to the effects of one of the cancers that he had long fought and valiantly resisted.
Rowan was the man behind and the driving force of Pheon Decals, a company which did much to raise the profile of World War I aviation modelling, providing meticulously researched and beautifully produced decals for the enthusiast. His enthusiasm for, and knowledge of, the period was second to none, and this shone through in his conversations, his informative instructions and advice, and in the depth of research that was always evident in his work. He was also a passionate ‘petrolhead’, an aficionado of inter-war aviation and admirer of Hawker’s fine fighting aircraft – particularly the Tempest.
Rowan had lived in France for nearly two decades with his French wife, Sabine. First in Brittany and then in The Auvergne where the two shared their house with two cats and a beautiful view over the valley of the river Allier and its surrounding hills.
Rowan’s first battle with cancer started in 2017 when a kidney tumour was discovered, and while this was successfully removed, some of it had already settled into his brain, prompting another battle, with radiotherapy helping stop the progress. In between these two struggles Rowan had also tackled a heart condition which resulted in a stent being fitted, and a bout of sepsis after a particularly nasty attack of diverticulitis, a condition he had lived with for many years. He bore all of this with a healthy disregard for sentimentality or self-pity. While he would have been the first to admit that the occasional ‘black dog’ would bring him down, he maintained an ability to live life as fully as his situation allowed.
He was loved and cared for by his beloved wife Sabine during all this, and was happy for every day extra he could spend with her, having long before decided that he could be at peace with whatever the fickle hand of fate threw at him next.
The radiotherapy for the brain tumour and subsequent drug treatments prevented him from producing more decals as he felt he was unable to draw, or design, to the standard he required. He undertook a course of immunotherapy despite the inherent risks and while initially successful, these manifested themselves reducing his mobility and affecting his lungs. Even so he still continued to maintain composure and a stoic spirit. In recent months he had finally started modelling again having regained some dexterity and was enjoying himself immensely when the brain cancer returned.
Fiercely passionate, and a true friend for whom nothing was ever too much trouble, I am proud to have known him and even prouder to call him my friend.
He is survived by Sabine, his daughter and grandchildren, all of whom he loved, and loved to be with.
For those wondering about Pheon Decals, Sabine would like you to know that she will accept orders again from mid-February 2023, to give her a chance to reply to the requests for stock or catalogues already received. All orders will be fulfilled in the order they have been, or will be, received.
-
1
-
16
-
-
17 hours ago, Gambrinus said:
Hi Jonners.
Thank you very much for your offer. I would like to get back to you, when the project is ready.
I do feel rather humble. however, showing my completed model in this distinguished company.
Cheers
Christian
And please do drop me a PM if you need stuff.
Jonners-
1
-
-
Gambrinus, and of course you can ask me too.
Sorry just seen this. I probably have more images of the conversion, and the mag articles are by definition slightly condensed to fit the space we have available, but I can happily witter on for ages here.
Cheers and Im looking forward to seeing it.
Jonners
-
2
-
-
6 hours ago, franky boy said:
Hi Jonners
Just wondering. Are Marmaduke Press Decals still available? I was after one of the Meteor sheets.
Thanks
James
Hi James- yes- they are still available. You can email me at [email protected]
cheers
Jonners-
1
-
-
On 9/1/2022 at 1:56 PM, Julien said:
There is information about this in the Meteor decal sheets from Marmaduke Press, I dont have mine to hand ATM.
@Jon Kunac-Tabinor can you comment?
Julien
Hi Julian,
Mod 1092 - the sprung double flush aileron was introduced because the Meteor was found to not be a very stable platform for firing RPs from. Meteors were cleared for use with RPs in December 1952, so I guess the mod was introduced around then, but I've never been able to find an actual 'date'. It certainly seems as though it was intended to retrofit the entire fleet with them, but I never managed to ascertain how fast that happened.
The problem I encountered is that its often difficult in old photos to see which aileron is fitted( from the angle the pic is taken), but as a rule of thumb, using the December 1952 date one could conclude safely that pre-then they were all 'single tabbers'
As Matt rightly assumes in his OP, there's no link to intake diameter or canopy type- and with the latter- the clear vision canopy (Mod 1516) was only introduced in mid-1953- so one could assume that meteors with a clear vision canopy might all have been retrofitted with the new ailerons too, but that doesn't seem to be the case either!
Sorry to be of limited use
Jonners-
1
-
-
58 minutes ago, Dave Batt said:
Trouble is (or was, thirty years back) that it was the page designers who took the lead because they dealt with the exciting colourful images that would attract the browsers' attention, while the editors 'just' focussed on the boring drab grey areas that the designers were compelled to shoe horn between the dramatic stuff. Telling designers they'd have to reposition and resize a couple of images to get the captions in the right place to make sense would see near-tantrums, which is why Editors may now only see 'proofs' after the separations are done (i.e., it's too late to make changes).
Hi David, proofing nowadays is done on screen using press-ready PDFs and has been for years. Most artwork goes straight to plate when it's time to print, so colour-separated film doesn't exist anymore.
Our designers are always happy to make layout and typo changes, and indeed do - all the the time. But sometimes, as Gary says, we make mistakes and they get through. It's annoying (and believe me we don't like it when we make them) but we will always apologise and make good.
cheers
Jonners
Assistant Editor, SAM.-
7
-
2
-
-
23 hours ago, treker_ed said:
Can't find any in Dorset..... Been into the Swanage, Dorchester, and Weymouth branches over the last 3 days and none of them have any copies of any of the magazine's (PAM OR PSM). Off to Poole tomorrow so will have a look in there. Failing that, will have to place an online order.
***Edit :Happy to report that PAM is available in Poole Smith's, but no evidence of PSM sadly.
1 hour ago, Whofan said:I picked up PAM today in my local Smiths, they have 4 copies of each, and from Phoenix’s point of view the good news is that my local branch has sold all 4 copies of PSM and two copies of PAM (one each to me).
You can specify how many Smiths you want your magazine to go into. It costs more to have them in more outlets, of course. WHSmiths have 540-ish 'high street' UK stores, and to the best of my knowledge PAM/PSM isn't even in half them, which will explain why a lot of stores won't have them in stock.
cheers
Jonners-
1
-
-
On 6/11/2022 at 3:04 AM, hopkp said:
Very nice, that's something just a little bit different! Is there much 'fettling' needed to get the wings from the Mk.II kit to fit the Mk.V fuselage?
HI- there's a little work to do as the Mk V and Mk II kits use a different wing tooling from each other in terms of how it fits to the fuselage, but its not tricky.
cheers
Jonners-
1
-
-
15 hours ago, Holzhamer said:
Beautiful model, I can only echo gents above.
I do confess my ignorance regarding the Tempest, so can you tell me what are the major differences between this version and a Mk.V? Thanks
Thank everyone- I'm glad you like her. I'll try and post a few more things too, but time and deadlines mean it's just difficult sometimes (oft-times)!
Holzhamer- the main difference between the V and 6 was the engine was uprated to a new more powerful versions which necessitated moving thew car intakes ot the own roots, to give greater cooling area for the radiator. When the RAF decided to use the F.6 in the Middle East, it was found that the additional oil cooling was also needed (the oil cooler having been moved to behind the radiator on the 6) so an extra oil cooler was installed in the starboard wing leading edge ( effectively giving the same wing as the radial engines Mk II). This means the radiator front on the 6 is 'flat' without the characteristic circular central oil cooler and carb intake that the Typhoon and Tempest V used – and that changes the look quite a lot I think. A desert survival kit was also installed- hence the two water bottles behind the headrest. The Mk 6 was also the only Tempest to be cleared to use the MK VIII 'zero length' RP launchers too, and also, was often seen with an additional air filter mounted centreline behind the radiator (as on mine) to filter sandy air when taxing and ground running. It cut off automatically when the undercarriage was raised, and returned air ingress to the wing root intakes.
Effectively thats it.
cheers
Jonners-
3
-
3
-
-
Hi chaps,
Just finished this, and it will appear in Scale Aircraft Modelling in the next issue. This is Eduard's Mk V kit converted to the F.6 version using their Mk II Overtrees kit. Decals are from the Mk V kit, plus Aeromaster's old Storms in the Sky part VI sheet. It's NX204 of 6 Sqn, based at RAF Deversoir, Egypt 1949, flown by Sqn. Ldr. Denis Crowley-Milling ( Air Marshal Sir Denis Crowley-Milling, KCB, CBE, DSO, DFC & Bar, AE to give him his full final title!). MRP and Mr Color paints on the main, and 90 gallon ferry tanks from an Airfix Sea Fury.
Hope you like her!
Cheers
Jonners-
60
-
2
-
-
Hi chaps- please do let us know if your subscription copies haven't arrived. We can feed this back to ensure it doesn't repeat.
We did indeed change our fulfilment company for subscribers as we felt that in the long run it would provide a far more efficient level of service- especially to Europe. I'm sorry if there's been the odd hiccup as the first issue has gone out with them, but it should settle down now. I suspect that the long long Easter weekend just beforehand may also have just added its own twist too.
I'm also glad the tribute to Valeriy was well received too. War always takes the kindest and best first.
cheers
Jonners-
1
-
Correcting (at least partly) Pilot Replicas 1/48 Vampire Trainer
in Work in Progress - Aircraft
Posted
I did a very quick check of the fuselage widths between the Airfix single seater and the Pilot Replicas two seater and they are slightly different- the Pilot Replicas is a little wider. I dot think it's enough to look to wide per se when standing its own, but I'd say it would cause more problems than it solved if you grafter the two-seat nose onto the Airfix body.
Ditto with the wings- the Pilot Replicas wing thickness actually seems to translate into the inner-wing intake section being a bit too deep at its outer end. So grafting the Airfix outer wings would leave a step that would be tricky to eliminate (I'd think- from a casual eyeball of the parts). Whether you could transplant the entire Airfix wing and intake section onto two seat fuselage is an interesting question given the differences in fuselage design and parts breakdown.
I'm not saying it's un-doable (and I'm not one to turn down a challenge) but the differences in both areas just seem to make it impractical.
Cheers
Jonners