Ngantek

The 'add paints for this scheme' portions of the airfix website often seem to be out. The instructions look like they suggest humbrol 77 navy blue glossed with 35. Dunno if that's accurate, but it's not DSG at least!

Yes, the old rivet debate raises its ugly head once again! Whichever side of the fence people are on (always amazes me how polarising this issue seems to be) the designers clearly made a deliberate and well informed decision to go with recessed rivets, so it's always nice to see language that reflects the thought and care that went into it, regardless of whether or not people agree with it. As @alt-92 posted earlier, Mos' question to Chris gives a pretty clear overview of Airfix's thinking on the matter; in their experience of the limitations of IM tooling, they find recessed detail comes out sharper, and gives better and easier finish around any filling or repair work around the seams. The 'accuracy' of the end product will suffer for more out-of-scale, less well defined raised rivets (particularly when washed round the outside of, rather than washing inside of recessed), just as it will suffer from having the rivets incorrectly recessed. It's not a binary thing, rather a pragmatic decision made given the limitations of the medium that some will appreciate and others disagree with.

I have similar issues with time, and have found chipping does work leaving gaps between the processes, and indeed with different kinds of paints. The issue, as people have said, is getting the water through the paint to the solution. I've found you can get decent results using hard-dried Tamiya acrylics (which I habitually harden even further by cutting with x-22) and even Lacquers (I use Mr Hobby), but the chipping process will take rather more work; it's a case of abrading or scratching the paint enough to expose the chipping solution, after which, application of water will be able to aid in chipping around the initial scratch. Personally I don't mind this, I find it easier not to go too far, where not-fully cured Tamiya or water acrylics, those with heavy hands like me can find they get away from you very quickly. The paint also stays 'dry' and comes off in solid chips which in my limited and not very skilled experience, works better than when the paint starts to come away with the water and just makes a blurry mess of everything. I'm not sure I'd advise using IPA to start the process, I suspect you'll be down to ruined paint and bare plastic in the blink of an eye. With the 'harder' top layers (and generally with chipping to be honest), I tend to opt for fairly robust under layers, so usually lacquers and even sometimes sealing with a very thin layer of varnish. Anyway hope this helps and of course your mileage my vary. EDIT: Here's a good guide on chipping with more robust and fully cured paints. It's using lacquers, but somewhat applies to harder-cured paints that won't respond to just a gentle brush of water. I think in all cases though, it'll be a case of just trying it out with the specific combination of paints, chipping medium and drying times that you use, and messing around to find what works best.

I guess it's as you say; white over two black would correctly be the 19th destroyer flotilla according to this. I guess the split dark top band as shown from astern would therefore be incorrect on the port side, but is correct presumably re painted white in that port side picture. That bow stripe I entirely didn't notice, (you mean those two lines sweeping down and aft from the bow)? Could they be scrapes or perhaps they're lines hanging down and curving back up to the break of the forecastle? Didn't I just read on another thread that it would be common practice to have a bowline leading outboard attached to the whaler (which inconveniently for that theory appears to be to starboard!). Andy

It seems like a similar time frankly; note that darker line of 'dirt' on the starboard side athwart the torpedoes looks the same in both photos. I interpret that last photo Rob posted as the darker area of the bows following a stripe up the lower aft end of the forward lower superstructure, and ending on the funnel, with a continuation of the lighter patch beneath the pennant number extending to the funnel's base. The whaler might even be painted with a darker bow to match this stripe perhaps? I agree with Rob about the port side funnel area too, looking at it, again sort of like the lighter patch at the break of the forecastle is extending up the front of the funnel. Nice scheme isnt' it? Also on the port side, it's hard to make out from the glare (and in the case of the version above, fuzziness), whether there's a further darker patch to join up with the dark area you see from astern that Jamie pointed out. Another book seems to have found its way onto my kindle too it seems 🤔. Andy

Good save Alistair. That kind of thing often knocks the wind out of a build for me, so well done getting it fixed. Interesting about the Tamiya not sitting on its flat Aluminium (I assume XF16?); I'll file that one for later avoidance. I tend to use lacquers as a base coat to chip down to, and haven't yet had any issues with tamiya XFs on top of their lacquer version LP-38, or indeed when there's some chipping solution and/or aquagloss between them. The chipping looks nice. Did you use a chipping solution? Andy

Looking great Jon. As for other kits, I suppose there's the Altantic Glowworm if that comes back in stock to cover the interwar A-I classes. @mark.au did a lovely build of a V&W in the scale which I think was a Showcase IM kit of Vendetta if you can ever source one. Atlantic are doing a type 1 Hunt too now, and L'arsenal do a nice type 3 which aside from the hull is mostly 3d printed in the black cat style. Andy

Beautifully done Jeff. They both look fantastic. That radar on the director has come out really well, I think the shape that the styrene has allowed you to achieve looks a lot better that it would if it were out-of-scale mesh without the rigid outline. The Oscar looks even better too with the work you've done on the fuselage. Really nice. I'm always very envious of the tidy style that you finish your ships in, and all the scratch detail really brings this one to life. Great work! Andy

Any reason you use epoxy for these? I've never tried, I suppose my concern is that it might be a little 'fat' to give a tight resin to resin join?

Looks great to me. Of the colour, I'm entirely no help to you since being colourblind, all green brown camouflage shades look exactly the same to me. Everyone is different of course but I always feel better for having finished something, glaring warts and all, than for having put it aside because it wasn't up to the (always entirely unrealistic) expectation in my head. That however is partly with the benefit of such an absurd stash that I essentially have infinite opportunity to do it again better 'one day'. I suspect there's a skill at taking perverse pride in the errors that one has deliberately not got sidetracked by; it's a skill that I at least am trying to develop! Andy

Heartily concur with Rob Is the IBG Hunt coming next then? Andy

John Lambert's drawings of Belvoir (a type III) suggest (it's only a drawing from one side) the props are rotating outward at the top; that is when viewed from astern, the starboard prop is rotating clockwise. This is also the case on L'Arsenal's 1/350 Hunt III. It's not clear to me to what extent that aspect of the drawing is really accurate however. The excellent plans of Badsworth from Kagero Topdrawings 69 by Waldemar Goralski have then similarly outwards at the top (why didn't I refer to that first!?) Dean's Marine's 1/96 type 3 example build seems to be the opposite, but the props here are not so much accurate as designed to propel a model ship of that size! The instructions state the full size vessel had 4 bladed props, but this is contradicted by all the other sources I can find. I also seem to have two port side props in my kit for reference. Andy

Lovely isn't it? It's a special Lockheed model 8 Sirius being flown to the far east by the Lindberghs for their honeymoon! It seems while in China, they were lending some aid mapping out flood areas, and were using the Hermes temporarily. Sadly, the aircraft was somehow toppled over and required repairs as a result. The aircraft is now apparently in the Smithsonian. There are more great pictures from this set here: https://www.maritimequest.com/warship_directory/great_britain/pages/aircraft_carriers/hms_hermes_d95_ernest_w_foster_collection_page_3.htm The build I posted earlier models Hermes and this aircraft during the visit, and is frankly what I would've done too had I not fallen down this Indian Ocean Raid rabbit hole. Andy

Like Jeff, I have a particular interest in this one and in fact have the same kit on the shelf to boot. Looking forward to seeing how it's done Andy

Amazing work. The sharpness and evenness that you were able to achieve with the brush is particularly impressive. How long was the build? I imagine stretched sprue rigging would be more peoples' cup of char if they were able to get it to turn out like that! Andy

I really like this approach and keep resolving to do similar, but never manage to avoid the pitfalls of AM, additional detail, scratch 'improvements', weathering, research and generally letting it snowball into a much longer and frankly less enjoyable experience. Nice sharp work on the scheme, it does, as you say, very much look the part for the shelf, despite the humble old tooling. I think you got it just right with the 'representative rigging', it does a lot toward making it look less plastic modelly and capturing the overall effect that the rigging has on the ship's profile. I notice you did squeeze some etch railings in though to good effect. This is a wonderful lesson in enjoying a kit for what it is, rather than suffering for what it isn't. Thanks for posting! Andy

Looks great Stuart. Particularly impressed by the self control to leave construction of the superstructure till this point. The bases look great. How did you achieve the initial texture? Andy

EDIT: Sorry wrong thread! The perils of viewing lots of threads at once on a phone! I must say incredibly impressive work all round. That home made finger gauge is quite a revelation... how were you able to keep the slats aligned and normal to the frame? Also curious what program you use for drafting. This work seems very rewarding, giving you a great understanding of the hull contour. I'm reminded about a Paul Budzik video where he talks about the scratch creation of nose for a voodoo giving a much better feel for the shape and how it was created on the real aircraft. Wonderful work all round! Andy

Thanks Stuart. Yes open to any and all suggestions! I did start off with that approach actually, but was finding it hard to keep everything aligned, and parts kept debonding. I'd certainly prefer not to have the high probability of smashing the model as part of the equation. In the end, bedding the 'L' brackets into the model with some pilot holes and CA seemed to give a sturdier, straighter foundation, but as you say, made the netting much more difficult. I suppose I could try building the L brackets on some separate straight edge, but would worry about transferring the whole assembly and getting pilot holes in the right place. Just holding the ship at a convenient angle is a bit of an issue here it turns out! The bond between the quarterdeck and the round down vertical supports has popped out numerous times. Cheers, Andy

Crikey, you don't hang around do you? Looks fantastic. Sea base looks really great too. Andy

It's a nice kit, but the shape, particularly around the nose and cockpit, is a fair way out. I did a quick summary of my views on the kit here if it helps. TLDR version is: The nose cone is out, and can be slightly improved by the quickboost (not the pavla) nose, but the tapering of the fuselage before the nose cone limits the improvement possible. The shape issues however, extends much further back; the canopy is off and has a corner at the windshield join where it meets smoothly on the real thing, but the aftermarket remedies are not numerous or easy. The cross section around the cockpit area is off too, giving the whole nose a slightly bloated shape that I do notice when glancing at it on the shelf. It's fine, it's clearly a Sea Vixen, it's just not quite right. The kit builds really nicely, and it's probably better to enjoy that advantage, rather than eliminating it by undertaking major reconstruction. It's a bit 'odd' though, offering lots of options in posing of airbrakes, flaps etc, without following through (they leave large exposed areas of the inside of the model). I liked the kit, just know what you're getting into. I'm probably happier for the fact that I have an Airfix one in the stash, which while not being my usual scale, earns a pass for it being one of my favourite aircraft. HTH Andy

Bit of a change of pace for you isn't it Alistair? Always love a starfighter. The kit looks.... involved... NASA is a cool option. Looking forward to it! Andy

Looks great Jeff. Nice moment taking off the block. Those teeny little oerlikons look amazing! They're so small, I could barely make them out in the other pictures. Andy

It's looking amazing. I shudder to think what your version of 'does look good' must be, all those yagi aerials look absolutely perfect! The styrene work is a great improvement too. Drilling holes into gussets hidden on the underside of platforms is really going the extra mile! Nice you've managed to keep it in subassemblies for so long, hopefully the painting won't be such a logic puzzle. I guess with all those gussets, it'll be a job for the hairy stick? Andy

Yeah and to think I thought there was a chance of getting it done for the deadline! Speaking of which, are you tempted by the FAA one or not so much? The netting.. yeah it's one of those ideas that I tend to happily bumble into, refusing to consider quite what a job it is once started. Andy