Jump to content

John R

Gold Member
  • Content Count

    1,451
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by John R

  1. You didn't mention that it never flew. I decided not to build one because of that. Just as well considering the problems that you had. Do you think A&A just don't care about their customers knowing that modellers who have an interest in Russian a/c are so keen to get their hands on such kits that they will put up with their deficiencies. Anyway well done for producing a silk purse from a sow's ear! John
  2. Can you cut glass? If so a useful source is old double glazing units which usually just get chucked into a skip.
  3. Superb job and I wish mine was going to turn out that good. I'm just in the throes of painting mine and got rather a shock when it came to dealing with the red around the intakes. There are masks supplied for this BUT they are the same shape as the red area implying that you have to paint the red first, apply the masks and then apply the white finish, which is a recipe for disaster. I assume that this is what Inflames found. I wonder if saw this coming and didn't get a shock as I did. Did you brush paint the red? Airbrushing it looks a nightmare. Interestingly the canopy on mine
  4. Really nice job. I wrestled an Amodel version to the ground several years ago and it generated a lot of interest because almost nobody else managed to finish one. I hope yours was a lot easier. https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/234914842-tupolev-tu-128-a-model-172-scale/ John
  5. For tapering I coat the tube with a CA/talc filler and sand it to shape. Tedious, but if it's the only way... John
  6. The Ye-2 was the first of the series that evolved into the MiG 21. It had a swept wing but MiG changed to the Delta wing for the subseqent versions. The Ye-2a was very different, actually a version of the Ye-5, the first MiG 21, with a swept wing. I have finally finished this model after it has been sitting 95% complete for over six months because it was so much trouble that I could not find the motivation to finish it. It is one one of those kits that sucks the joy out of modelling. Zillions of tiny parts, many of which don't quite fit. The final straw was that after shaving
  7. I am on the same position as klubman01 as having the Revell kit and the PJ nose. Where was the 1.5mm added? Super job, by the way. John
  8. There are some very sad people out there!
  9. Leave it as it is. It is an historical artifact and an example of its time. It would take an enormous amount of work only to produce an inferior example of a Valiant. I wish I had kept some examples of my earliest kits which were built to the same standard as that one and which I was very proud of at the time. John
  10. Pedant - It was the length we were interested in! Does this look better? I squashed it and the white Bucc until the wheels were round and the white squares square. John
  11. The perils of perspective. The forward fuselages correlate with our thoughts...but look at the back ends
  12. I have just revisted Davids post #42 and if you line up the fuselages so that the main gear doors are aligned then the wing root and intakes also line up whilst the front fuselage, canopy and nose gear are moved forward about the amount we suspect. The black lines are David's, the red ones are mine. John
  13. The plot thickens/unthickens... now where do we go? I tried emailing the FAA Museum but it (surprise) is closed For those interested Roy Boot's book 'From Spitfire to Eurofighter' is available cheaply (£0.81 upwards) from https://www.abebooks.co.uk/book-search/author/BOOT,-ROY?cm_sp=brcr-_-bdp-_-author John I do not remember what they were but there was at least one, a date, that presumably could be verified. There are always 'typos', slips of memory and unverifiable details as evidenced by threads like these on BM. However I do agree that reviewers can be su
  14. I have just read the Flight article referred to by Mike. It does not mention the fuselage extension and it is such a very comprehensive description of the Buccaneer that I feel that it could not have been written without the cooperation of Blackburn. It does, however, show those drawings with the 6th and subsequent a/c having longer front fuselages. This seems to be the earliest reference to them and it would appear that they were used in all subsequent publications. John
  15. I found this in Boot's book. "As a result of the outcome of trials and also pilots' comments a new standard of Buccaneer had been designed and was to be introduced on the eighth aircraft. The build of this aircraft, XK 524..." Not XK 534 as shown in the diagram. He then when on to describe the changes, none of which mentioned the intakes or fuselage length. Regarding the 6th & 7th a/c he mentions the changes to the a.c. system and autopilot development but again no mention of the intakes or fuselage lengthening John
  16. Just to confirm it was those in post 55 John
  17. The side view drawings are those used in Roy Boot's book published in 1990. So where did they originate?
  18. Sorry - I did not know that. I looked at the drawings referenced above and the S2 intakes are where I think the NA 39 intakes are. Thanks Chocolate Crisps.
  19. Another thought. Can anybody please post a picture of the fuselage of the latest Buccaneer from Airfix showing the relation between the fuselage and engine nacelles?
  20. I have the book and have seen no references to changes in fuselage or intake length except for that series of drawings which only appeared as part of the description of the planned development program. However I will have another look. Regarding Roy Boot as 'the authority' may not be entirely sound as I remember a reviewer remarking, when the book was first published, that there were a number of errors. Is Roy Boot still around so we could ask him?
  21. Here's a thought. If more powerful engines were installed then the intakes might have had to be enlarged to cope with the increased mass flow. The simplest way to do that would be to shorten the nacelle which some might interpret as lengthening the nose. Dennis - That drawing shows the relationship between the mid-cockpit frame and the intake to be very like the real thing. Talking with my friend, Chris, yesterday he reckoned that if there was a change it would be almost indiscernible on a model and the only thing that really was bugging us was not knowing the answer. Inf
  22. I wouldn't want one from an Everton fan so there!
  23. I would have given it a 'like' if it had taken off from Anfield instead of Goodison... John
×
×
  • Create New...