Bobk

Both LF models and Kora have made resin kits of the Macchi C.201.

I would suggest that you check out what David G Airbrush Exploration, on Facebook, has found vis a vis the nozzles of Gaalheri Mobius airbrushes. You can find his trials and tribulations on Facebook and it's reviling, he posted some micro photos of the nozzles that speak volumes. He had the same problem as you had, that the needle didn't quite seat so even when you don't pull back on the trigger he still. The photos Feb. 23 post that has the micro photos and if you want to go down a rabbit hole go to earlier posts about Gaalheri Mobius airbrushes. David G. is almost a god to those of us who use airbrush, he is handed and has no problem with using cheap airbrushes as long as they work well.

I would like to know what you consider ""reliable"". I would think that, barring small differences, the aircrafts' handbook would suffice. Have you taken a look at the "Plany Modelarskie 118 Breguet XIX because these are very detailed and inclusive drawings. They at least a very good starting point.

There are several good and one great reference on the Breguet XIX. First there is a good plan of a later radial engined one in an old "Aeroplan" magazine, Nov.-Dec, 1989. Then there is "Aeroplano" no.1, which can be found online for free from the publisher, has a plan for an Lorraine powered one in 1/72 and also the Super Bidon. There is also the "Typy Baroni 44 Breguet XIX" one of the many polish profile like publications. Also there is a group of plans out of Poland "Plany_Modelarskie_118_Breguet_XIX" which is nothing BUT detailed plans of the Polish built Breguet XIX, and a copy is for sale right now on EvilBay. Then there is what I consider the best reference, in the digitized collection of the Polish Air Museum there is a handbook for the Breguet XIX A and B for free download, I know most of the references I have are for Polish XIX's but the only difference that I know of in appearance is that the panels directly under the opening for the rear gunner on the Polish machines where fabric covered rather than metal...or the other way around. But if I'm not mistaken you have an interest in SCW and the Poles sold some to the Republic so.....! Last but not least Air Enthusiast did a good article on the differences between all the different variants which included small drawings of those differences.

I have a copy of a long gone build of the Dujin Breda 39 from Master194 french website, which was painted green. The reasoning behind that was explained thusly "Le surfacer est excellent pour traiter cette maladie et aprés ponçage et recouche d'apprêt des caches sont disposés sur le blanc afin de réaliser les marquages avant le passage de la peinture de fond j'ai employé ici un vert Tamiya car avec plusieurs amis espagnols nous avons pensé que cet avion était vert, mais il pouvait tout aussi bien être d'une autre couleur bleu, etc... Je pense que seul le rouge est à écarter car c'aurait eu un petit côté suicidaire à cet endroit et à cette époque" or translated "I used a Tamiya green here because with several Spanish friends we thought that this plane was green, but it could just as well be of another color blue, etc... I think that only the red is to be discarded because it would have had a small suicidal side to this place and this era :" The long gone Aeronet GCE webpage had these two responses, 1. "The 39 was a 39 or a 39s..??? I did not fight, it was the mount of the correspondent of an Italian newspaper...the cigar was painted in a dark color...Blue...?? according to some...green according to others..??? and that it wore the "false" Italian license plate I-MASS but in the existing photo the engine that would define if it was a 39 or a 39 S is not well seen..." 2."But I still have doubts about the color and I suspect that we will never know...some say blue...(if the Italians used the color blue a lot in private planes) others say green.....( they also used a lot of green...in these same planes...) The original color of the I-MASS.....very interesting of course like the multiple military-civilian hybrids used in our war, I don't think anyone knows..." .

this may help. https://massimotessitori.altervista.org/sovietwarplanes/pages/I-17/index.html. Please understand that there where several prototypes for the I-17 with several differences between them. Please understand that Amodel has produced both major "flavors" of I-17 the TsKB-17 with outward retracting undercarriage and the TkKB-19 with inward retracting undercarriage. There were several other differences between them other than the undercarriage one of which was where the radiators where placed.

I think that if you look at the J.M. Bruce volume 5 Warplanes of the First World War he did a smash up job of describing Roland Garros's L .... as I remember...I could be mistaken.

There is, or was, a comparison build of both the Huma and RS Models Flettner on IPMS Deutschland the RS Models comes out the worse accuracy wise. It's to short and the fuselage is wonky because of this and the details on the RS Models come out smelling like roses. So the best line of attack is to combine the two together and make a stunning model. I found the article. http://www.ipmsdeutschland.de/Flugzeuge/Rummer/Flettner_FL282/Flettner_Fl282.html

this also will help

There are times you get addicted to an out of the way plane and you spend entirely too much time digging up research information, well for me this is it. This is one of those planes for me, I have gathered what I could find over 10 plus years. I have to say you've done a great job on a surprisingly accurate model. The main problem with the Huma model is the representation of the wings. I was going to handle it by re-skinning them a la Harry Woodman but I really like your solution. Looks like you nailed the interior, engine and cowling, my pet peeve is opening slot for the exhaust and I learned something from you about the size of the opening of the cowling front, thank you. I've sacrificed several Heller Bucker Bu-133's to use as engines. I have several in line to build, two in Spanish Civil War colors and one in the same scheme as yours. You are doing an amazing job!

I saw that there was some discussion about ammonia destroying copper or brass on airbrushes. I think that this shows how much of a concern it should be as long as ammonia is used in moderation and being aware of the concentrations that cause problems. https://www.facebook.com/davegs.airbrush.exploration/photos/ms.c.eJw9zdENgFAIQ9GNDIUHLfsvZlDx9~_Q2dQcPI1uRctTlDySAakRrQVOwtUUhp~;A~_C~_QU~_idEpvlJ50JoJiAWGM~;E~;ANZDbB6wWMm9t~;qvbX3VqK65WCxboQtKXw~-.bps.a.2217473291691580/2217473598358216/?type=3&theater

this should help a lot. http://www.aviationofjapan.com/2008/06/zero-interior-colours.html and this http://www.j-aircraft.com/research/gregspringer/wem-review/wem-review.htm

An answer to the puzzle https://millaerea.es/blog/base.php?marco=./numancia/numancia.php "And our friend, the Soriana plane? What happened to her? When she was hanged at the Barajas airfield, she was confiscated by the Republican army. Being a plane of high autonomy, it became a two-seater and was assigned the license plate EG-042, being used in surveillance and liaison missions. As the national army approached Madrid, it moved to the southern bases of Cordoba or Seville."

if you want a view of the wing you would be hard put to do better than this http://elhangardetj.blogspot.com/2012/03/flipando-en-colores.html second photo down.

This may help a little, it's from Secret Projects forum. A break down of what appears to be all Gil-Pazo aircraft. https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/gil-paz%C3%B3-paz%C3%B3-aircraft.23653/

Until there is a record of RLM 01 Silber being used on Bf-109's in Spain, and then the only record there is mentions Silberweiss why doubt it. If any documentation shows up that mentions RLM 01 Silber than I will gladly say that it could be RLM 01 Silber.

Mr. Johnston has done his research and quotes primary sources from contemporary times to back up his claim that they are painted in Silberweiss. Isn't it a bit presumptive to discount contemporary descriptions of colors from people who saw, touched and ordered that color paint and painted or retouched the paint on those Bf-109's. The recorded color IS Silberweiss and not Silber RLM 01. There has been many, many suppositions as to what these Bf-109's have been painted and the one that comes closest to the photographic evidence appears to be the theory that Mr. Johnston has put forth. And the documents in the VK/.88 and pilots logs and journals point to the fact that it was Silberwiess. Mr Johnston makes a very good case that two of the units where used for assessment of the color that the Bf-109's where painted vis. a vis. camouflage and concealment, one in Silberweiss and the other unit in "European" two green scheme. Mr. Johnston has footnoted the chapter about camouflage with official documents and photos that back up his suppositions. All of this is laid out in his book "German Eagles in Spanish Skies", David Johnston, Schiffer Publications, 2018.

About half way down David Johnston answers that question and gives a good modern approximation of the color. https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/hyperscale/viewtopic.php?f=149674&t=239891&p=2470572&hilit=a+little+help+from+Bf+109#p2470572

This might help ..... http://universalviewer.io/uv.html?manifest=https://collection.sciencemuseum.org.uk/iiif/objects/co8465602#?c=0&m=0&s=0&cv=0&xywh=-6818%2C-407%2C19108%2C8124

Could someone please dig up an old Air Enthusiast Quarterly that opened with a couple of paragraphs from an eye witness that mentioned that the SB's came off the the boats and sat on the wharf's and were in a "brown" color. I remember this stopped me in my tracks when I read this eye witness account. I can't vouch for the accuracy of his words but it is an interesting nugget if true.

I'm reposting this from a previous post on this category' The Aztek double action airbrush are one of the most divisive, anger generating subjects that modelers talk about. Love it or hate it, just remember it's a tool and as such it takes practice and patience to come close to mastering the use of this tool, it also takes an understanding of the design of the tool. I don't know the design history of the Aztek line of airbrushes but I think they wanted to rethink airbrush design and did a fine job of it. I think the mindset of the designers was to design an airbrush that was easy to use by anyone, even those who had no experience. They threw away the rule book, think "Apple" of airbrushes. As such it has to be handled differently than traditional, old school airbrushes and I think that is the only place where Testors / Kodak dropped the ball. They took all the technical words out of the manual and replaced them with pictures which did make it easier for the complete novice to understand how to use it. That was fine as far as it goes but it also put off the traditional airbrush user and contributed to the feeling that this was a toy and not a "true" airbrush. Also it fostered a feeling that it was a poor design. I picked one up maybe a year after they first came out and was happy with it, and that is with several other traditional double action brushes in my possession. The ease of cleaning and the super cleaning station along with the performance was very handy for me. Well it has only recently that I read a letter from Testors that was sent to a user that spelt out, in words, the design and "correct" way to use the Aztek. Several important points showed up in the letter. 1. Never use the "Blow Back" or "Reverse Flow" method, where the airbrush nozzle is covered and a shot of air is used and forced back into the reservoir to help mix paint or clean the airbrush. This seems to be the main problem with the way traditional airbrush users, for the lack of a better word foul up an Aztek airbrush. Almost from the time that the airbrush was invented this was the gospel way to mix paint and clean the metal bodied "traditional" brush. When a traditional brush user does this it forces paint and cleaning fluid past the "needle seal" in an Aztek airbrush. The paint and cleaning fluid then evaporates and leave a gummy residue on that needle to the point that it will freeze up the needle control and people will force the finger trigger which causes ......... 2. The plastic connection in the trigger to break. It's part of the design of the Aztek airbrush to use the easiest to manufacture pieces to bring down the price of the brush. It works as long as you stay in the parameters of the brush. In the 3000s version of the Aztek that connection isn't plastic and is a slightly better, stronger metal piece. There are several online forums that show you how to clean up a gummed up needle control and how to PREVENT it from happening. So if your trigger freezes up DO NOT FORCE IT!! There is a very good post on the Aircraft Resources forum that will walk you through how to free up the needle and repair that problem if your trigger freezes up. Again this points out another difference between a "traditional" airbrush from the Aztek brush. If this happens with a traditional airbrush you just immerse the metal body in the cleaning fluid of your choice and "work" the piece until it comes free, can't do that with an Aztek because it is built to close tolerances when it comes to "forcing" a part. And a traditional airbrush user will, just out of habit, use a force that is ok to use on a metal brush. 3. Speaking of immersing the brush in your favorite cleaning fluid..... can't do that with an Aztek. Due to the design of the Aztek brush it depends on the air tube in the body of the brush to stay pliable so that the trigger will be able to shut off the air when you release the trigger. When the Aztek is immersed in cleaning fluids much past the metal ferrule in a "hot" cleaning fluid it will affect the plasticizers in that air tube and will cause it to deteriorate and eventually fail. But then again there really is no need to dunk the whole body of the Aztek and drowned it in any cleaning fluids unless, and it's a big unless, you have not read the first point that I wrote about and have been "back flushing" your brush. A traditional metal bodied airbrush will gladly be immersed in a bath of cleaning fluids with little or no problem as long as rubber o seals are taken into account. So a traditional airbrush user will out of habit cause problems for himself by over use of cleaning fluids on the body of an Aztek air brush.. 4. Just like a traditional air brush you still have to make adjustments to the nozzle control before you spray paint, sometimes with a Mac valve or positioning the needle in the chuck, etc, etc...... With an Aztek the best way to adjust the needle to with the ferruled wheel. With a traditional you can adjust the brush so that with the first pull of the trigger all you will get is air, but with an Aztek it is usual for the nozzle to be set where with the first pull of the trigger you will get paint and air so you have to adjust the ferruled wheel to stop the paint flow. 5. The nozzles can be soaked in cleaning fluids, hot or not. And they can be taken apart and "deep" cleaned but that is not recommended by Testors. I confess I have done it, but not often maybe twice a year or when the nozzles give me problems. The recommended cleaning procedure in this letter is to soak them in Acetone or the appropriate cleaning fluid for no more than 10 minutes but I have left them in overnight - ish. There are several forum posts that will walk you through the process of "deep" cleaning the nozzles. 6. I have only the plastic or resin bodied Aztek air brushes, but I think this also applies to the metal bodied Azteks too because the internals are the same only the outside has changed not the internal workings. So I think, and I only think, that most of the problems that people have with the Aztek air brush is the fact that they, out of habit, treat the Aztek as a traditional metal bodied old school air brush. Rather than using it as an Aztek air brush. It's not a problem of the user, it seems to be a problem of communication from Testors. It boils down to a matter of taste, like do you prefer a PC or an Apple 'puter? They both work well but they are very different and I think it's the same with the Aztek line of air brushes. In their haste to make an air brush for the masses they forgot to tell the traditionalists that it needs to be handled a little different. I use my Aztek for mostly acrylic paints and have not used much in the way of "hot" solvents or cleaning fluids on it and it works for me. I'm also posting this to give you an idea, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i5C9XRo6Qv0

One of the best english language books about the Spanish Civil War in the air, other than his own "Some Still Live", is on sale at the Naval Institute Press in the Clear the Decks area for $3.70 + shipping. https://www.usni.org/store/books/clear- ... n-no-glory

this might be the book that "tells all" about color and deployment of Bf-109's in Spain. https://www.amazon.com/German-Eagles-Spanish-Skies-Messerschmitt/dp/0764356348/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1525968675&sr=8-1&keywords=german+eagles+in+spanish+skies

If you can wait a few months this might help. https://www.amazon.com/German-Military-Vehicles-Spanish-Civil/dp/1473878837 also if you can find the book "Motores en Guerra Guerra Civil Espanola" by Josep M Mata Duaso http://www.editorialsusaeta.com/venta-libros.php?editorial=Susaeta&ref=S0851143&id=55664 has a page or two about Opel Blitz

I have a photo from ebay that shows either a MB 200 or an MB 210 cockpit that shows the instrument panel as a very dark color. My guess would be black or midnight blue but I would lean heavily towards black.