Jump to content

Filler

Gold Member
  • Posts

    1,156
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Filler

  1. Thanks. Totally forgot that the RAF did have the Shackleton at that time. Still the RN really ought to have had their own carrier based AEW in my opinion, but @Graham Boakhas answered why they didn't. Thanks Graham. I will get myself a copy of 809 squadron and in the reviews for it I noticed a few people have recommended Commander Sharky Ward's book 'Sea Harrier Over The Falklands'. From some of the reviews I picked up that there was an RAF v FAA thing going on in how they operated Sea Harriers in the campaign.
  2. I've just started reading a book on the Falklands war by Martin Middlebrook. I'm not all that far in and so far there has been no mention of the lack of AEW aircraft. However, I have heard this mentioned before and I guess we had this capability gap between the Gannets operating on 'proper' aircraft carriers and the Sea King's that operated from the 'light' aircraft carriers. I quickly Googled this and found a good few hits saying that having AEW would have made a huge difference. Interestingly though, I found one comment from someone claiming to have been there that claimed that we did have AEW and other electronic aircraft operating secretly. I also read something related that said 801sqn used their own radar and performed very well, whereas 800sqn used visual techniques of spotting Argentine aircraft and this resulted in them downing them only after they'd attacked our ships. I know that there will be plenty members of this site who will have read a lot on this subject and maybe experienced it too that could tidy up some of this stuff I've seen this morning. And any recommended further reading would be appreciated.
  3. Thanks to you both for the clarifications and extra information. @Troy Smith, I picked up the IXb reference from Airliners.net photos. Perhaps not the best point of reference. I'll keep my eyes peeled for the Hasegawa Hurricane, but the Arma one looks like it'll be very nice. I'll probably follow @alt-92's lead with MH434. I do have to admit that whilst it's good to be 100% accurate, I am a bit of a pragmatist and near as damn it will usually suffice for me. After all, my modelling skills aren't really good enough for 100% or even 75% accurate. I'll probably even run out of that paint after my umpteenth time around tidying up the camouflage.
  4. That is very striking and tempting, but I do want to pick a subject where I can use the Mr Hobby paint set I have. And as the Spitfire seems to be causing me much confusion about versions, I just thought, I wonder if there were any Hurricanes in those colours and that were being flown around 1987ish. The good news is that there was, the BBMFs PZ865 Hurricane MkII. The bad news is that a quick shufty at Hannants, KingKit and eBay gives the impression that the MkII doesn't seen to have been of much interest to kit manufacturers.
  5. I think you've definitely achieved your aim. That's a fantastic build.
  6. Third time lucky? Spitfire NH238 DA, G-MKIX is I believe a IXc and that gives me the readily available and well thought of Eduard kits (Weekend or Profipack) to choose from. The one small caveat is that Eduard call it a IXc late version and I have no idea if G-MKIX is late or early. Perhaps being in civvy hands after 50 years it is neither. Looks nice, although not 100% sure I like the red spinner that much. But hey, beggars can't be choosers.
  7. I've found another potential candidate for a 80's airshow Spitfire. This is MH434/ZD-B an LF Mk.IXb. I've found it pictured at airshows in both France and England in 1987. At first it 'looked' like I had more kit options available. But looking a little closer, there seems to be many IXc models and possibly no IXb models. And even then, the IXc also comes in an 'early c' boxing. How significant are the differences between the various IXs? Does anyone have any advice which kit can be made OOB to represent MH434 (decals excepted of course)?
  8. I would like to join in the fun here with the Kinetic F-104S I am getting for Christmas. I'll have to get a shift on with it if I hope to make the Canadian GB that starts a few weeks after this one does.
  9. I've just declared my intention to build a CF-18A (Hasegawa 1:48) in the F-18 STGB, but I could obviously have entered it here instead. And maybe I still can if I don't get past the 25% built mark in that one! But let's assume that it was a success in the STGB, then I would still love to enter this GB and I would be looking at either a CF-18B to pose alongside it or if I lose the plot completely, I'll fetch down my 1/48 C-130E/H and use the Leading Edge Tactical Camo Scheme 1980-1990s decals I have. Probably be the Hornet though. And then again, I have just spotted that there is a good overlap with the Century Fighters GB where I was hoping to coble together the Kinetic F-104S I'm getting for Christmas. Hmm.
  10. All being well, I'd love to join in. My entry would be another of Hasegawa's 1/48 Hornets, in this case as a CF-18A of one of the three 1CAG squadrons based at Baden-Sollingen. It'll be mid eighties with CANADA in capitals and no fences on the LERX. Really hoping I can make this a successful GB attempt.
  11. @Paul Bradley, they’re fantastic and 1986 is just the right time. Thank you.
  12. Just having a quick search around and I found a build thread from a few years back where the builder replaced the kit carburettor intakes with tropical filter versions as they said were fitted on RR299. No idea where they were sourced from.
  13. Thanks @stever219. That’s great info on the Mosquito. It was a good few years back I asked about it and I seem to recall being left with the impression that there was quite a bit involved in modifying Tamiya’s kit including something to do with the engine exhausts(?) being wrong for BAe’s aircraft. Sounds like it’s not so bad and worth another look. Regarding shortening the tail. Is that an error in the Tamiya kit or just a difference in the version of Mosquito?
  14. So perhaps I just stick it on the back burner and keep an eye of Eduard's releases. Thanks again for your help.
  15. Thanks Troy. The Eduard kit is twice the price, but presumably a far better kit and Christmas is just around the corner! I did wonder whether it might just be a case of mixing and matching from a few sources for the decals, but with the extra info you've given me I can hopefully find them in one set.
  16. Apologies first. I know next to nothing about Spitfires and this enquiry doesn’t really fall under WWII. My area of interest is mid to late eighties NATO aircraft that you could well have seen at an airshow of the time. Recently I got a bit of a hankering for a Spitfire, Hurricane or Mosquito to break up the jets and I also have a set of Mr Color RAF paints (no idea how or when I came to acquire them) sitting in a drawer. My question is: What options do I have for a Spitfire that was on the airshow circuit in the 80’s and was in a scheme where I can use those paints? I have been having a look around, and I am really confused. I found photos of G-AWII (AR501) and it looks to have been in those colours, but I have found photos of it labelled both Mk Vb and Vc. I fancy it is a Vc, but confusingly it appears to have clipped wings and the Special Hobby Vc kit I have found looks to have elliptical wing tips. I also anticipate that decals might prove a challenge as I suspect that many preserved examples haven’t had decals produced and often would have been in inaccurate markings to boot. It does seem a tricky period for me as I had once looked into building the Mk.XIV Spitfire G-ALGT only to find that whilst there was a Mk.14 kit, it was the wrong Mk.14 And I also wanted to build British Aerospace’s Mosquito, but that turned out to be some oddball variant that has not been and quite possibly will never be kitted.
  17. A HFB 320 Hansa Jet in 48th scale with Luftwaffe markings.
  18. I know, and we never learn do we?! Guess why the Mirage IIIE in the bottom right is also in this collection of stalled builds...
  19. After lots of encouragement in another thread, I'm going to get my GB mojo going again. For starters, I will be seeing if I can push this veteran of 2014's Under a Tenner GB over the line (albeit a different line). It's approaching its 8th anniversary on the bench! In the original GB I think I'd started rescribing and rather predictably that was largely responsible for the wheels coming off. In the mean time I have made bits of progress and this actually isn't that far away now. I also attempted to drop the flaps (which isn't a particularly common state for a resting Dragonlady) and that has caused a fair bit of trouble for me too. I'll get some better photos taken, but on the to do list is; finishing cleaning up the horrific seams on the flaps and prime (this will be something like the 5th and hopefully final time around) and trying to glue them on at the correct angle of droop. Then it's sticking on the gear-bay doors and more spraying black paint. The Mr Surfacer 1500 black actually looks pretty good already. Finally it'll be decals of which there are thankfully very few and some varnishing. I think the missus is off to play basketball tonight, and if I can get the little un settled down early I might get a bit done this evening.
  20. Thanks for adding some perspective Chris. Probably am a bit daft worrying about such a thing.
  21. I was troubled a little bit by the 2022 Bunfight and just wanted to share my troubles and hear the thoughts of others. I really like group builds. I think they're a great idea and a brilliant way of providing inspiration to build a particular subject and I like how they provide encouragement from other modellers to make progress. However, despite this I found myself feeling a degree of confliction about voting in the bunfight and for similar reasons, I rarely ever put my name down on any prospective group build subjects no matter how appealing they are to me. I found it difficult to vote because I know hand on heart that when the time for any group build comes around, there's a very good chance I will not be able to participate (largely because I know I will not have the time available to build a model in the timeframe). So why should I try to influence something for my benefit when I quite likely won't make use of it? I've started out in about half a dozen group builds in the past and I have yet to even nearly complete a single one. And to be pretty honest, it looks like I might not be alone in that. It strikes me that a lot of group build entries stall very early on. Despite my initial reticence, I did vote and since then I have come close a few times to posting in various threads that I'd like to join and build a something or other, but each time before hitting submit post I have thought to myself, 'who am I kidding?'. I was even about to enter the KUTA GB last night and took the below photo. CH-53 from 2020's Helicopter / Autogyro / STOVL GB F-15 from 2020's Interceptors GB F-16 from 2017's F-16 Fighting Falcon STGB TR-1 from 2014's Less Than a Tenner GB (try entering that GB with a 1/48 scale kit in 2022!) I also have a Jet Provost from 2013's Training Types GB and another F-15 from 2013's F-15 STGB that are so barely started you could sell the kits as new. Not entirely sure what my point is here, or even if there is one beyond just feeling that by voting for something I might not partake in I might be depriving someone who will produce a model of their preferred group build. Sorry this was a bit rambly, but I really want to get involved in GB's but feel bad about false promises etc.
  22. Very enjoyable and absolutely incredible work, and most of it well beyond my abilities, but could you tell me a little more about how you dropped the flaps? I’m fascinated how you’ve achieved the angle of droop and how it’s so neat.
  23. I was looking to see what the five marking schemes are included in this boxing and it appears they've gone with at least four of the rather elaborate schemes that we've seen on Luftwaffe Tornados. I found this info on Eduard's Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/EduardCompany Sorry I can't embed it or something more fancy. The text along with two aircraft photos is; Cool schemes, but if only a few boring old line birds had been offered too. Thinking Norm '83 (until someone says that there were never any ECRs in Norm '83)
×
×
  • Create New...