Jump to content

As a result of the close-down of the UK by the British Government last night, we have made all the Buy/Sell areas read-only until we open back up again, so please have a look at the announcement linked here.

This site uses cookies! Learn More

This site uses cookies!

You can find a list of those cookies here: mysite.com/cookies

By continuing to use this site, you agree to allow us to store cookies on your computer. :)

Steve Collins

Members
  • Content Count

    179
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

21 Good

About Steve Collins

  • Rank
    New Member
  • Birthday 09/14/1954

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Glendale, AZ
  • Interests
    1/72 aircraft in general, IAF and 352FG specifically, 1/72 armor

Recent Profile Visitors

1,966 profile views
  1. Nice work there, Andrew. I used to see those guys when they'd come down to Homestead from Mountain Home in the late '70s. That was before they closed the active duty squadron and sent the planes to you guys in Vermont. I've got a couple of -57s (B-57B and B-57G, both in Vietnam) coming to a slow (very slow) boil. Spending too much time on the rescribing. Yes, I'm about half a bubble off true. I _think_ I've got enough weight in the nose on both. Hope mine turn out as well as yours. Steve
  2. As far as I know, A-10s were never stationed at Ramstein. There was a detachment at a base in northern Germany (Jever?) for many years. GB had A-10s at (at various times) Alconbury, Bentwaters, and Woodbridge. In the early 90s, Spangdahlem had one squadron of A-10s for several years. Ramstein during that period had F-4Es, transitioning to F-16C Block 25s then Block 30s. Sorry for the hijack. Steve by the way, if you or anyone else should try this kit again, the cockpit and associated parts from the Monogram kit fit almost perfectly and improve the look immensely. Nice job you're doing.
  3. Very nice MiG there, Mike. Gonna bring it to San Marcos in August? I look forward to seeing it there. Right in the middle of building one now. Agree on the issues getting sufficient weight forward enough. I have weights inside the intake splitter and behind the cockpit. The fit of the clear part to go on the bottom of the fuselage was problematic for me. The fuselage plastic was too thick for the clear parts (which I don't think need to be clear, by the way) to sit flush with the fuselage. I had to thin the inside of the fuselage to get it close. In addition to the issues with the wing mentioned elsewhere, I found that the bottom of the wing is not deep enough to fit flush at the wing root on both sides. I thought perhaps it was my fault as I had clamped the wings while they were drying, so I bought another kit and the set from that kit were the same without clamping. So that will be an interesting FSR (fill, sand, repeat) session. But, in the end, it looks like a MiG-17, so I'll make it work. Cheers. Steve
  4. Opus, try running the tip of a new blade along the inner edge of the tape prior to pulling it up to separate it from the Mr.S or CA or whatever you try. Gently, of course, don't wanna score the plastic, just separate the tape from the filler. Steve
  5. Remi, I look forward to your progress. I have this kit and look forward to how yours comes out. Thanks. Steve
  6. A couple of things that may help with the clear parts, if you want to use 'superglue' (cyanoacrylate - CA) adhesives. Dip the clear parts in Future/Pledge Floor Care/whatever clear acrylic floor polish you have available in your area and let it dry overnight. The clear acrylic provides a barrier between the fumes from the CA and the plastic. You should remove the Future from the edges you're gluing, but just from the edges. Second thing is to find one of the 'non-fuming' types of CA that are available on the market. They're usually labeled as 'For Clear Parts.' Hope this helps. Steve
  7. I could never answer anyone when asked what my thinner ratios are, though I'd say it usually comes out to about 2:1 thinner:paint. The best way I've found to describe it is to mix the paint in a clear jar. After thoroughly mixing the paint, hold the jar up to a light and tilt it so you can see in through the top toward the light. As you tilt the jar so that the level of the paint goes across the bottom of the jar, if properly mixed, there should just be a bright separation line between the liquid and the paint that remains on the jar above the liquid paint (same as if you tilt a glass of milk and do the same thing). If the paint above the line is very translucent, you've gotten it too thin, if the line doesn't appear right away, it's not thin enough. Yes, very inexact, I know, but it works well for me for both acrylics and enamels, usually in the 12-15 psi range. Hope this can help you get a good mix for painting. Steve
  8. Glad I could help in some small way. Steve
  9. Opus, I think you wound up with a great looking little jet there. Outstanding job. Steve
  10. Yvan and Chris, you may be talking about two different iterations of the Revell B-17 (depending on how long ago you were a teenager, Chris). This particular one came out in about 2011 and is an entirely new mold. The previous version was done in the '60s originally and was a B-17F (usually released as Memphis Belle). That may be where the wheels-up/wheels-down difference comes in, among a host of other things, most especially quality and level of detail. By the way, Yvan, the build is looking good. I'm looking forward to seeing it progress as I have a couple of these to do myself. Steve
  11. Glad the wash is working for you. My modeling time is usually limited and the whole process is much faster than oils. Steve
  12. Maybe it's just an artifact of the photo, but is there something (sprue tag, mismold?) attached to the fuselage piece forward where the angles are? I think it should just be a slightly obtuse angle, just greater than 90 degrees, but seems to have a piece that goes, well, down from there that is impacting on the nose wheel bay piece. Steve
  13. Good luck, Opus. I look forward to seeing the result. Steve
  14. It works for me. Been doing it for years. Don't like working with oils, too messy, slow to dry, have to be very careful what you put them over, how you clean them off if you don't like it, on and on, whimper, moan. Watercolors are just easier for me. Hope it works for you. MiG is looking good so far. Steve
  15. Opus, I use watercolor paints to make my washes. I usually use the Grumbacher kind in the small tubes. I see you're from Washington, so you should have a Michael's or Hobby Lobby relatively nearby. I use lamp black and china white to make my grey washes, with siennas (raw and burnt) and ochres (same) for various shades of browns. I use distilled water in a plastic contact lens case (resealable, saves the wash for later use), put in a small amount of the paints I need, stir with a toothpick till the paint is well dispersed, then add a drop of dishwashing soap (washing up soap) to break the surface tension during application. Put it over a gloss or semigloss surface, wait 15 minutes for it to dry. You can then go back with a damp (not wet) q-tip (cotton bud) and wipe off any excess. System has the advantages of being easy to store, easy cleanup, and easy removal and redoing if you don't like the look. Of course, it can be overcoated with anything that is not completely water. I use Future. Sorry, not trying to hijack, just passing along something that works for me. Steve
×
×
  • Create New...