Jump to content
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. :)

mollythedog

Gold Member
  • Content count

    397
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

417 Excellent

About mollythedog

  • Rank
    Established Member
  • Birthday 19/06/1958

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    a black hole
  • Interests
    Royal Navy, USN, scratchbuilding, FAA, learning to photograph model subjects better........

Recent Profile Visitors

1,994 profile views
  1. I really like this,very nice work on an old kit and proof that you don't need wood decks,photo etch or metal barrels to make a splendid model. mtd
  2. Thanks to everyone for the kind remarks and compliments. I hope I can show that if you put some effort in, just about anything can be made, and it doesn't have to be kit related. Luckily on BM there seem to be a number of others that agree and do much the same,though to a very high standard,and in the "normal" scales. As I mentioned previously,this is still a WIP and at the same time I built the Attacker I finished a second prototype to represent Battler, a little later time wise,but still with the same weapons fit. Both models were finished in time to take to a model show,and it was interesting to note that of the 2, the Battler attracted the most favourable comments,by a considerable margin. I can only assume that she appeared in more "traditional" Royal Navy colours (though I freely admit that the colours I chose were something of a guess,based on the time period and "typical" colours that were possibles. Thinking about this afterwards I concluded that if I'd seen,for example, an Essex or Midway class CV painted in Royal Navy camo it would appear "odd" and not right. Despite that fact that it appears well documented that several RN CVEs left the yard in US colours it looks "wrong" in most peoples eyes. But this is mere guess work on my part, it could just be peoples taste and nothing more. Battler 43a by plastichacker, on Flickr Battler 43b by plastichacker, on Flickr Unfortunately the pale green looks far too green in the photos, it isn't in "real life", ditto the weathering,which looks far too heavy and obvious,again to the naked eye it is much less so, though I am still playing with paints versus pastels on this. Anyway,this is how this version looks. Again,it has my Martlets (Wildcats) on deck,and has the prominent HF/DF mast forward, one of the very first and most important additions in RN service,but apart from the the 2 models are essentially the same. Battler 43d by plastichacker, on Flickr Battler 43e by plastichacker, on Flickr Next step is to try and correct a couple of areas that could be more accurate,and modify the weapons fit and emplacements on the port side. And try and cast it without breaking the mould,as the goal is to have several different ships of this important class. Battler 43c by plastichacker, on Flickr Battler 43f by plastichacker, on Flickr mtd
  3. Bringing this WIP (and it is very much that at the moment) slightly more up to date, I did manage to mould and cast a couple of models. Unfortunately the mould broke but I had a couple of castings to play with,and I was in all honesty expecting problems before I started,so the breakage wasn't a surprise. I was really keen to fit them out and actually see a Royal Navy CVE in 3D,and the camo schemes promised to be interesting to work out and apply. And to be honest, I was going to a model show,to see some friends and wanted to show something off.... Based on the excellent series of books by By Alan Raven I chose to portray Attacker very early in her career,painted in a Royal Navy "type" scheme,but painted in the US yard using US colours,as per the Raven drawings. The colours I used were various mixes using enamels,Humbrol I think and are not "perfect",the problem being that many blues lack covering power and tend to be quite weak,requiring several coats.Not a problem on a large model but can drown a small scale model. All the PE 40 and 20mm are fitted and the deck is a decal I drew and printed myself-apart from "commercial" items like glue,paint and plastic everything is my own,mistakes included. Attacker 1 by plastichacker, on Flickr Attacker 2 by plastichacker, on Flickr Among the deliberate mistakes are the wrong layout of the port side single 20mm tubs,and I am really not sure if the US 5"/38s are correct. I also didn't paint the side of the island in camo,this will be corrected. To make it more interesting I added a couple of my Swordfish on deck,along with attendant deck crew. It is quite difficult to photograph,and the light wasn't ideal, I would have preferred to try out in natural daylight, but it is monsoon season here and I've forgotten what the sun looks like,so these will have to do. It is mounted on a simple base just with some double sided tape, not pretty but atleast I could hold it and photo it without breaking something. attacker 43a by plastichacker, on Flickr attacker 43b by plastichacker, on Flickr attacker 43c by plastichacker, on Flickr attacker 43d by plastichacker, on Flickr attacker 43e by plastichacker, on Flickr attacker 43f by plastichacker, on Flickr mtd
  4. mollythedog

    HMAS/m AE2, Scratchbuild

    Steve, I would say you are completely correct. IMHO one of the most important "skills" is being prepared to try something,and being equally prepared to stop,and try again. This is part of the learning process, and can be,at times, the most fun-problem solving and thinking outside the box. Of course for kit building it is meant to have already been done for you (supposedly) but it is a very important part of scratch building. And,quite often, the "mk 2" is better than the first effort. And you are not alone when it comes to mistakes and what gets concealed either-ask me how I know..... mtd
  5. With the basic bridge structure out of the way I could get on with detailing the hull some more. A lot of staring at photos, probably 15 minutes for every minute of actual modelling done, but unfortunately the photo documentation for these ships,or more precisely, "A" ship at "A" given time is not that good. Add that to the fact that they were not identical,particularly with regard to things like the external pipework,and that much of the detail I was looking for was in the shadow of the overhanging flight deck in most photos. These 2 photos show the master hull with about 80% of the detailing done-much of the work remains hidden in the photos. Repeat items like the 40mm twins were mastered then cast in resin, and the single 20mm and their shields will be added in PE later,ditto the other details,such as the access steps to the flight deck etc. The 5"/38s are fitted aft at this point in time (some months ago) and the large platform right aft on the port side is the LSO safety netting(crash hole)-more on this in a later episode..... hull and bridge 3 by plastichacker, on Flickr hull and bridge 4 by plastichacker, on Flickr mtd
  6. Hi Steve, No worries. I am really interested in trying out this material too,though as I said before,I think it would be more useful for larger models and not really practical for 1/1250, or possibly even 1/700,unless the thinnest available material matched closely the dimensions of the hull of a ship in that scale. But 1/350 and bigger,and used with superglues I would think it would make for an extremely solid and stable construction. I have no idea of course how it is in warmer climes,nor with variations in humidity,which I would imagine would be a factor to consider in your case-like i know anything about Western Australia! I'll have to source mine in England, as there is no where in France or the rest of Europe that might stock it,under a name or product that I'll ever find. mtd
  7. I was quite keen to get on and finish the early RN bridge,and see if the PE bits I'd drawn would fit. It is quite fiddly but works,and looks ok,though as usual the camera is harsher than the eye and in real life I'm pretty happy with how it turned out. Early RN bridge 1 by plastichacker, on Flickr Early RN bridge 2 by plastichacker, on Flickr I still have to trawl my photos and try and sort/date the sensors fit for several of these early Attackers, as I intend on having several models for my collection,and they will probably be different as per the prototypes. Ditto the camo schemes they sported. mtd
  8. As mentioned previously here is a photo of the USN 4" Mk9 fitted to Stalker. Points to note are the heavily cut away screen and very low mounting-this is clearly a LA gun. The Ruler class did not have this cut away screen,as the HA was much higher (to allow for higher elevation ) and easily cleared the screen even at 0 elevation. Photos are difficult to find,as the mount was almost hidden both by the shadow of the overhang of the flight deck and by the screen itself. Stalker 43 4 inch LA by plastichacker, on Flickr mtd
  9. mollythedog

    HMAS/m AE2, Scratchbuild

    But,surely,your process involves the bonding of different materials to each other, this involves both chemistry, physics and a bit of wizardry, I suggest you get on to them ask for the other 2 million you are owed. BTW I bought some of that Tamiya PLA you mentioned. It is just thin plastic card,despite their fancy name and price tag. But the 0.2mm might be very useful for plating larger models,it is about 8 thou and so falls between the normal 10 thou and the really thin 5 thou that Evergreen sell,so should glue better and be less likely the melt if too much glue is used. Still useful for anyone that scratchbuilds, even for the odd kit builder that likes to mod. mtd
  10. It's true to say that the USN and the private yards that constructed the majority of the mass produced ships during WW2 were better at record keeping that their British counterparts. As well as building to standardised designs,there were less supply bottlenecks,and is it also well worth remembering that they weren't being bombed by the Luftwaffe for most of the war... As I am concentrating on building an early Attacker class CVE that is where my efforts have concentrated,and after studying a number of photos I am confident in saying that the references that state that they were fitted with the US 4" Mk9 are correct-atleast initially though I am fairly sure that from mid 1943 on,as they came in for refit the LA guns were replaced with British MkV HA mounts. I may crop a couple of photos and post on here,the size and shape of the Mk9 cannot be mistaken for any RN gun I know of. My model was fitted with 5"/38s when I first did it but is undergoing a number of revisions,and has been fitted with the correct 4" as of now. At very least I have found 2 ships that were so fitted. Again,none of these comments apply to the Ruler/Bogues,so if you want to convert the Tamiya 1/700th kit that is probably the easiest route to go,though as I said before I don't have the kit to hand to say much more than that at the moment. mtd
  11. Thanks Maurice for providing those links-I had intended posting these but you saved me the job! As for the matter of 4" guns on CVEs, it is somewhat confusing and after quite a bit of searching I am still not sure which ships carried which guns,and when. As completed,in the US yard,they would almost certainly have had US weapons. The problem is that just what was changed to "RN Standard" and when. For example Attacker started working up in late 1942,in the US, but didn't arrive in Liverpool for conversion to RN practices (fuel stowage,A+A's etc ) until April 43,so presumably carried US weapons until atelast this point. As for which 4", there is some disagreement in my references.Some state the the CVEs (NOT the later Rulers,which,like their USN counterparts,carried the single 5"/38s each side) were fitted with US 4" Mk9 weapons-a low slung LA mount used mainly on the Flush Deckers. A strange choice as a replacement. Friedman states that the surviving early units were refitted with standard RN 4" MkV HA guns in 1943. A very good photo of this gun/mount can be seen on P.38 of Hobbs "RN Aircraft Carriers in Focus",though he erroneously states that it is a USN MK9 when it is clearly a RN MkV-a very good reference photo in any case. So,if modelling these ships,take your choice.... mtd
  12. Anyone following the link in the previous post can see the CVE construction process from around page 25 until page 40. It is pretty amazing,but the modeller clearly has found a way of cramming 25 hours into each day- I think it is a Commencement Bay class CVE. Well worth a look. Once the flight deck is in place the placement of the parts that surround can be added-mainly the side walkways and 20mm galleries, side trunked funnel casings port and starboard, and 40mm gun tubs. A major identification point for the early RN units,and,as far as I can tell,unique to this class (the Attackers) was the 20mm galleries,which were quite short,and carried 2 x 20mm per gallery,and there were only 2 per side. Later units,and all USN ship had 3 galleries,and carried 3 x 20mm per side,thus making a total of 9 x 20mm port and starboard. I don't know why the early ships had a much smaller number of 20mm,but assume that the air threat was not considered that great for the Atlantic convoys they were originally intended to work on. They also only carried 1 x twin 40mm forward per side,and never,going from the photos I have, had the second,staggered 40mm fitted port and starboard slightly ahead of the bridge. If building the Tamiya kit these items should be considered if you want an Attacker rather than the later Ruler class. There are other differences I'll try and detail later. Hull 9 by plastichacker, on Flickr
  13. mollythedog

    RGB colour numbers

    I would not disagree with anything that has been said here regarding light/angles/paint/photos/videos and a myriad of other things,but as the OP wanted to print a decal onto decal paper and match it (I use that term as loosely as you want) to a painted model then in the end,sampling colours from your printer onto the actual paper is the quickest,easiest and most direct way i can think of. If anyone else has a better solution I'd love to hear it. It will never be perfect,though I'd admit the professional decal printers (that use an entirely different process) probably could do it fairly easily. I'll stick to my £30 Canon Pixma that gives me very good results,and wish you all luck with your endeavours. mtd
  14. mollythedog

    RGB colour numbers

    I hope I am not stating the obvious here,but might a slightly different approach work? Rather than getting too tied up on RGB/CMYK just use whatever program you are using to make as many small (say 20mm square) swatch boxes,and fill them with various "mixes" of your preferred colours,and then print off the whole sheet, onto your usual decal paper,using your usual settings-in fact treat it like a decal,even varnishing it after if using inkjet,to get the actual colour of each printed swatch. You do not of course have to do a whole sheet, across the top of an A4 sheet in one line or as many samples as you require. I have used this technique many times when trying to find the exact shade I want,and I keep them for future reference,much like a colour paint chart. If your program allows text then label each swatch as you drop the colour into it and this will print with the rest,giving you instant reference to actual colours that you will get from your current printer on your usual settings. Works for me.....
  15. Thanks for the comments. I hope to show that you don't "have" to go the kit route,regardless of the scale-it is just plastic modelling,and if you have the plans and photos there's no reason not to make something unique,and relatively (looking at the prices of the average 1/350 or 1/200 kit,plus PE,corrections,wood decks,metal gun barrels and all the other doodahs you "must" have) cheaply. !/1250 just happens to suit me. It is an international collectors scale,and allows for a large number of very detailed models in a fairly small space. One small correction-very few apart from the old Triang and the things sold with magazines are "diecast",which is an entirely different way of making things. Most 1/1250 commercially made models are cast in a soft white metal,allowing for incredible detail, depending on the master model of course. Another comment on Milliput that I forgot to mention before-you should really try and keep the "sausages" of each component as closed as you can,in their respective plastic bags.The light green one seems little affected if not closed up-it dries up a bit but moisture added to it revives it. The darker one is another matter-it can get a sort of "skin" on it of darker material-this should be removed-pared off with a sharp blade,exposing the fresh stuff underneath.Chuck the skin away and use the fresh stuff.If you don't,no matter how well you mix it,this shin will stay in the mix and never go off,and never harden. This probably sounds like too much messing about,but it really is remarkable stuff for model making and if you haven't tried to use it you should.It is second to none for filling metal and resin castings,nothing else comes close. Lecture over. Oddly enough I started a scratch build of a 1/144th scale CVE many years ago,for R/C-it's still sitting in the basement about 75% complete.Maybe one day I'll finish it. Here the flight deck has been added,and the bridge "blank" is sitting in place-now it looks like a CVE. The shape of the side sponsons can be seen,and the 5" positions. I scored the position of the lifts,but changed this later for another method. I spent a ridiculous amount of time searching for etched scribing templates in rectangle/rounded corner squares,and found not much at all-either not in stock,no longer made or just the wrong size. It is something I an not well pracitised at,and I can only admire the aircraft blokes that cheerfully re-scribe an entire aircraft.Mental. Hull 8 by plastichacker, on Flickr
×