silverburn

And they're certainly seasoned at puttying and filling! Observe.... The tail - before... ...and after....<captain price>Beautiful....</captain price> The Spine and "parcel shelf" was a doozie as well. I even had a "dent" in the plastic just behind the airbrake to deal with too. Still, it's all smoother than a baby's bottom now! And we're still not finished! the 1:32 has the same problems as the 1:48 in many respects. The "parcel shelf" is just the first. Those who have experienced the 1:48 will nod sagely at the following... The gaps in the intakes: The fit around the wing roots (underside): The fit around the exhaust: I think I should point out that while I said not to expect daily updates, I do appear to be posting them...don't sweat it - I'm sure it'll come to grinding halt soon. It might have too - I spend HOURS puttying and sanding today. Groan. Anyway - check out the size of it! (Hawk is 1:72): PS - Anyone know why this one's tailfin is "streaked"? It's a nice weathering feature I might "borrow".

Ok, I have decided - I'm going to go "all out"...ie if it can be opened, extended, moved or rotated, it will be. So that means: - boom extended - canopy open - airbrake extended - Gear down - right engine "open" - flaps deployed - tail rudder slightly applied - ailerons deployed (to match the tail rudder, perhaps?) - leading edges deployed* - footladder deployed All of which are possible OOB. * this is the critical one. From what I've read these are only deployed automagically during high intensity low speed manoeuvres; critically they are not deployed for any reason while the plane is grounded. Can any of the "fairies" comment on whether this is correct or not? The rest could be (though it does stretch plausibility) while the plane is possibly being serviced or perhaps needs emergency engine repairs - the only reason I can think of to have everything "open" while fully armed? ...or maybe I should just lighten up - it cost £45, so why not go for it???

Lol - a classic! Well done sir...

Very nice! Hoping to do one one day in 2010! Watching this one.

Update: the tailfin is a smooth seemless join to the fuselage in real life. Looks like I'll be busy with the filler tomorrow...

Ok, I got a wee bit distracted by the fuselage today, instead of working on the engine as planned. :shithappens: For those considering this kit, some more important things to consider: - The main fuselage can bow outwards a bit, and pit is a tight fit - go round glueing sections at a time, and it'll be fine. Very little filler or sanding required for me yet, which I guess is a good thing. Here's the bow, starting at the tailfin section, and ending at the front of the pit. - The Nose Cone is 3 pieces, and is a nightmare of puttying and sanding if you want perfection. However, you can get to an excellent finish afterwards - only priming will show this one up, but it's utterly smooth to the touch all round: - The Tail-fin is less than satisfactory; Revell have employed a novel way of glueing it to the airframe by using a sort of "wedge" on the airframe, and I'm not sure the results are as intended. It's a tight fit, so you *must* superglue the fin parts together first (ie don't use normal modelling glue), or the "wedge" on the airframe will split it. You can do it that way, or resort to sanding the wedge - I felt more comfortable with glueing, and retaining a tight fit onto the wedge. Once attached to the airframe, you have a weird join to deal with (see pic below); I'm about to research it myself, to see if filler is required (ie if this a smooth join in real life). You will also need to press in the lower section of the fin while drying to ensure it remains flush with the fuselage. - You cannot assemble the wings and slap them up against the airframe, as per the 1:48; you must attach the lowers first, and the tops later, as the tops "tab" into the fuselage, as well as attach to the lowers. - The instructions get a little weird around step 14; you need to make a decision about whether you'll be running an exposed engine or not before attempting any work on the wings. Which is the step I'm at - I'm still undecided as to how to proceed; I was toying with a take-off config (full load, flaps out etc), but am now wondering if it's plausible to be stationery, engine exposed yet still be fully armed? Would such a scenario happen? Oh, and here is the pit completed, with the standard seat. Standard seat is merely ok - I might invest in a 3rd party version, or some belts at a minimum. Display decals sealed with "dripped on" Revell gloss. And at the end of today, we are here:

brilliant!

Just a quick one - pit underway too. Well..have you seen the weather??? Day for inside, modelling Seat is pretty basic (only started it in this pic). I know you can get higher detail 3rd party versions - but which version of rocket seat should I look for? Pit is...ok. The raised individual buttons are tricky to paint - just looks to simple a finish for drybrushing, IMO. I'm going to go over and re-do a few tomorrow along with a few other bits of tidying of straight lines etc - just my brush skills letting the side down on that front, pure and simple. And the buttons on the control stick are black, not red & yellow as here. Wish I could paint through my zoom lens...when I painted this, the lines look a lot straighter/tidier! I must be turning into Also - the montana gold is going down too thick...again.

Makes sense! Grats! Btw....Sumpy? as that any relation to rivet counting?

I asked, but this is what I got... Not to worry definitely planning one now. Just trying to find a good brush/compressor combo for £150. Anyway...to today's progress... I've seen the loadout I want. It's this: ...not entirely sure how achievable getting 6 LGB in 1:32 will be though! Also had a thought - if I'm running an engine out, surely it wouldn't be fully armed? Ie engine out implies maintenance, and doubt the health and safety brigade would allow it to remain fully armed in the process. I might build it closed (looks to be enough bits), but leave the engine as standalone. I'm definitely building it regardless! Also, I'm starting on the "naked" engine...and here are a couple of reference pics I intend to use. It looks very much like I'll be scratch building some pipework at this stage...a first for me Not entirely sure why one carries far more pipes/cables than the other though. Suggestions? Anyway, I kicked off the stand. And boy, was it fiddly...especially the clamps securing the "green" bit to the "blue" bit - gahd. Be wary of this one folks - everything on the "stand" sprue is quite flimsy, and secured far too well to the sprue itself. Very easy to break stuff. And it all seems unnecessarily complicated to build - especially the aforementioned clamps. And the whole assembly of the 4 "stacks" is unnecessarily complex and prone to error. I've been fortunate rather than skillful in getting them all off ok. Oh, and yes, I know it specifies yellow, but frankly the actual number of styles and colours I've seen for stands, I don't think I should be deducted any "accuracy" points. A quick dark wash will bring out the steelwork, a laquer, and this'll be done. Ignore the dodgy lighting - these do actually look like steel.

Thanks! I was toying with keeping you in suspense for a while longer there.... I should have chipped the canopy bits, now I think about! Too much of a rush to get onto my eurofighter...

Closing this up - moving to RFI so I can work on my 1:32 Eurofighter It's here.

Hi guys Original build thread is here. I'm closing this one up to work on my 1:32 eurofighter This has been a build done on "automatic pilot", as my wife gave birth right at the start. What that means is, there were problems during the build - but no fault of the kits - they were my own, mainly through sleep deprivation. It also means the grand plans I had for authenticity went out the window, and I just ran with it - incorrect decals styles (eg: some numbers should be in white, not all black, and the squadron fighting in northern europe were unlikely to be fighting in Tunisia at the same time), incorrect armour and everything. The only problem with the kit I found was with the glass - there's a gap between the pilot and centre sections. Very little sanding/filling required at all actually. What would I do better next time? The exhaust soot - I simply could not get it to "flow" right. I was using tamiya weathering pastels - a better applicator perhaps? And I'd still like to work more on chipping and weathering - they actually don't show up too well here, as it's all very slight. Noticable just fine to the naked eye, which I guess is what counts! Lack of sleep aside, this was actually a nice wee build. Total time spent: about 7 hours. Anyway...enjoy. Camera's ISO settings freaking out, apparently, if you're wondering why some are more tinged than others.

Yep, I was looking forward to doing them again in 1:32 (I'd used the same pic as you)...only to find no Storm Shadows (or Paveway's) in the kit! Looks like it's all air-to-air stuff. Booo. As you can see: Shame...I mean check out the steaming mound of plastic in this kit - surely a couple of Air-to-ground wouldn't have added much more to the sprues?

Hi all, My xmas present has arrived... This one varies from my other models in that I will be consciously taking my time on it, with a improvement in general accuracy and painting quality (and lots of walkaround photo's to be memorised) - so don't expect daily updates. That, and having a newborn to look after! While I'll be persuing accuracy/quality as much as possible, I'll probably still be limited to colours, which is why I've included my original 1:48 in the foreground (also found here) - this will be the closest colours I can match using rattlecans. Ie it will be a "proper" grey, rather than the blue-ish grey intended. Apart from that...I'll do all I can to match "real life", and to do the model justice! It will be modelled in RAF config, with engine out, and gear down. Likely I'll replicate the 1:48 load-out too, but more accurate - ie I won't be loading sidewinders and ASRAAM's in the same load out. I think that's right? Ignore the primed 1:72 Hawk - that's a test rig for a forthcoming project.

Cool - an easy fix since these aren't sealing in yet! A quick dust too (it's only surface dust btw Maxidad - thank goodness!) and away we go. gotta say though...that link looks very photo-shopped? Check out the lack of rear wheel, the overly white swastika, and the strangely placed cross under the port wing. And the distinct lack of a/c numbers. And the shiny (ie clean) tyres in what is transparently a boggy field, given the amount of settlement. It's still a valid shout though - here's another to compare.

Simply unbelievable work...it wouldn't surprise me now if you told me each fan blade was balanced to 10,000rpm...

Final update - decals fixed!

Added swastikas to the tail... (ignore the dust btw...) Alongside my current work in progress - a Ju 87. Also with added swastikas!

No probs - I can dump the yellow tips easily enough - the snag I see is that the desert cammo at the beginning of the thread doesn't seem to show the props - would these still be grey/green? Would seem a strange combination if they were... While I'm on, I may as well add the latest pic - swastikas and guns! Did my Ju88 at the same time...

Hi all, This is going in work in progress because it will be a practical experiment - but I thought I'd kick off the topic first before beginning. While daydreaming in the bath I pondered whether a cheap kit can be dressed up to rival the top-of-the-range OOB kit, within the confines of the skill of a merely average builder such as myself. In particular, I'm thinking of the Revell Supermarine Spit Mk1B (1:32 & £15) or the Pacific Coast MkIX (1:32 at £30). Plus all the aftermarket detail gubbins I might need. My theory is that it might be possible to build an equal or better Spit than something like the new Tamiya Mk IX (1:32 at £85) for less net cash. This won't be a rivet-counting exercise - they're two different manufacturers afterall, and frankly my skills are not great - merely an exercise to see which is best "bang for buck" for a relative newbie to undertake (I've only been modelling since the summer). They will be built as identically as possible (cammo, a/c numbers etc), with little or no scratch building unless specified by the instructions of the kit(s) themselves - the only constant being my cr@ppy modelling skills. They will be built side-by-side, and progress posted here. I think it'll generate some interesting results for the pro's/con's of each approach. So...any thoughts and opinions everyone before I go ahead and kick this off? Are there better kits to compare, for example? I chose the Spit because a) every modeller has/should have one and there are cheap and expensive versions of the same plane, even down to the version. Obviously this is thought experiment 1...no 2 is in the wings, but you'll all have to wait on tender hooks for that one...it's gonna be good

Yeah - it should be a relatively simple paint-in job - not perfect by any stretch, but a definite fix that won't be noticed by Joe Public from 3-4 feet I recon.

More work in progress...still got a bit to do I recon. In particular the exhaust soot needs to be better, and I need to increase the chipping around access panels, common areas. It's getting there...slowly. Part of the walkway decals been sucked off by the decal bogey man... But the biggest travesty has to be the prop. Good lord, it's ugly! It looks like it's been lifted off a completely different aircraft with this scheme. I'm toying with repainting the cone the match the rest of plane!

Excellent work - a masterclass in clean building...nowhere to hide the imperfections with a clean build I say! And this looks immaculate. Good show.

Barely! Started a Stuka, and will be closing up the weathering soon. On automatic pilot though...lack of sleep = lack of attention to detail. Details such as a fit gap 2 inches long... Baby treats screaming as an endurance olympic sport at the moment - especially since her volume control has 2 settings - 0 and 10. Though she's trying to find 11 as we speak...