Jump to content

gingerbob

Members
  • Content Count

    6,259
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by gingerbob

  1. A bit late, but nice to see one of these built, and especially nice to see the comparisons you've done! Apparently DH chose the path Graham suggests above. bob
  2. Make it work like the real thing!
  3. Hello all, [Note: this will be a work in progress for a while, and I may end up adding to this initial post over time, rather than make you (future reader) sift through a thread looking for bits of information. If necessary I'll make a new post just to alert you that an update has occurred. [Edit: slight change of organization already...] I will also admit it when I don't know about something, and I welcome input from others to help fill the gaps.] I've been refreshing my memory about the Accurate Miniatures SBDs, and along with that the differences from one Dauntless
  4. Perhaps I shouldn't even offer this at this stage, but I've been looking at Dauntlesses, and it appears to me that when the prop blades began to be black, they might have retained the red and yellow bands but (and this is where I'm speculating/interpreting) had the blue overpainted/replaced by black. Edit: And then I see a shot that clearly shows a line between the... must be blue... and black of the main part of the blade. Maybe sometimes? Ah well, they weren't Wildcats anyway.
  5. On the flap/slat system in general, this thread is worth a careful look: https://www.key.aero/forum/historic-aviation/91151-westland-lysander-auto-slats-flaps And what I think is a "follow-up" from Andy Sephton to the article linked to in the above thread.
  6. Having this GB [well] in the back of my mind, I recently thought, "Oh, the Tempest!" That's long been a kit that I have a particular affection for. Trouble is, I couldn't find mine just now, though there are several other boxes to check in. I did find a Stosser that I fiddled with years ago, which might possibly work as a substitute...
  7. I have no experience with them myself, but the comments I have seen have not been very favourable.
  8. Bravo, Alan! Not to slight anyone else, but THAT'S the sort of answer I was hoping to provoke. Thanks all, now I can go back to what I was really thinking about... let's see, what was that? Edit: Or can I? A good article (pt.1 of 3) on NZ use of Dauntless, and... one on the Avenger.
  9. Just what got me thinking about it. I can't say that the Avenger strikes me as a first choice for close support!
  10. Hi chaps (and possibly chappesses), A rather esoteric question, but does anyone happen to know about the thinking behind New Zealand's acquisition of Avengers? That is, what role did they intend for them to fill, regardless of what they actually DID use them for. Please note that I have nothing against Avengers- or NZ judgement- 'twas just a question that struck me. bob
  11. You might have better luck if you put it in the appropriate category! (Not being snarky.) Somewhere in here? (I don't follow the ship stuff, so there might be a better place): https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/forum/356-maritime-discussion-by-era/
  12. No, I believe that all XVIs had the 'e' armament arrangement. Don't know about the Frog kit, sorry. bob
  13. I just hope they remember to extend the wings before they launch her! (Looking good, Tony, but you've heard that already.) bob
  14. This is probably it: Seafire Mod 164 (Class 4B [and then something I can't read]) (as Mod Spitfire 911) "To introduce the new type air cleaner" first discussed 6 Apr 43 (LTC N/1132) applies to Mk II and III. Spitfire Mod 911: LTC 1117 first discussed 23 Feb 43 (then 1146, 6 Apr 43) applies to Mk.V I don't know anything about actual use on Seafire IIs, but I thought this might give you some waypoint for reference.
  15. Are you saying that there were 20 B.IV (DZ serials) with bulged bomb bays, the somewhat uncertain handful of B.XXVs, and that's ALL with single-stage engines and bulged bomb bay?
  16. Yes, but raised rivets tended to be about the scale of the bolts in Frankenstein's neck. Not "far more accurate" than golf-ball pocks, in my opinion.
  17. Oh dear, that's what I get for popping over to Group Builds to catch up with current events. I've had P-51s (aka "F-6A") - the ones with cannons and (usually) cameras- on the brain for a couple of weeks. They were the first Mustangs in combat with the AAF, starting in April-ish '43. Hmm...
  18. I'd love to see the full class list, if convenient. I think that they changed a time or two, but frankly I haven't considered that "essential information". Foolish of me, I know! (What difference does it make?... until it makes a difference when trying to figure something out!)
  19. And likewise more info- having found "The Spitfire V Manual" on the second attempt- in the bookshelf that I thought it was in to begin with! Section 10 (Electrical) paragraph 2: ... "A 3-pin socket is mounted on the port side of the fuselage aft to frame 11, under the fillet, for testing the electrical services or radio installation. A door cut in the fillet gives access to the socket." Further in the chapter it mentions that the "A.R.I. 5000" (IFF, cheese-cutter style) is used with the TR9D in addition to subsequent radios. Incidentally, in relation to the
  20. Thanks Ray, and "Crimea". Just to be clear, I wasn't "arguing", it's just that I'd seen such a comment quite recently, and put it on the mental list of things to check out. Note that the mod says "to provide for", which doesn't necessarily mean that it is ready to "plug and play". The mod is "Class 2", by the way, if that means anything to anyone. The plug-in on the cowl is, as far as I can gather, strictly for engine starting (if it powered the electrical system, they wouldn't need another socket, would they?) and I don't think that the wing-root socket could be used to start t
  21. Are you sure about the wing root one? It isn't to start the engine, but to provide power to other systems, for maintenance etc. I have NOT checked whether it was not yet there on Mk Is- I just assumed that it was always there on Spits. EDIT: Hmm, I wonder if this is it: Mod 154 "To provide for ground connection to general electrical system to facilitate ground testing of TR.1133". The ledger says Mk I & II, first discussed 10 Nov 39, leaflet action (can't read the details) Jul-Sep '40, "Cleared" [whatever that means] 11 Nov 40.
×
×
  • Create New...