Troy Smith

As in what is usually called resin? It's not plastic, so you need superglue of some kind, or possibly a 2 part epoxy which gives more time to position. You can also get UV cure resin glue, has a little UV torch to make the resin cure. You may wish to say what kits, just to be clear as to what the bits are. There are various types of superglue, I tend to use the generic 3g tubes, Be aware that polyurethane dust is unpleasant, wet sand or wear a dust mask. AFAIK no solvent plastic cement works on resin. HTH

I shamelessly raid the Flickr account of @Etiennedup He's very careful about using only genuine images, and collates them on his Flickr. Etienne is also a modeller, so knows the value of the images. The lower two are likely American in origin, with the Hurricanes used in 2nd line duties is Sicily/Italy, there look to be USAAF Mustangs in the background of LB680. It maybe from India LB680 IIc M XX 5MU 17-6-43 52MU 15-7-43 'Fort Rupert' 25-7-43 Casablanca NWA SEAAC 7IAF 'MW-J' Missing 20-5-45 bboc MAAF SOC 30-8-45 but the history seems confused, as final place is MAAF = Mediterranean Allied Air Forces also NWA = North West Africa Records in the ME and FE are noted for being incomplete and wrong/lost though. The other depends on how you read the repainted serial, as KW98*, as there are only KW980, 981 and 982. or KW96* http://www.airhistory.org.uk/Hurricane/p053.html More digging needed! (and not right now)

More likely a replacement fin/rudder in fresh Dark Earth. The tone is like the fresh paint on the back 3 Hurricanes this shows the fin removed I don't have an answer, it looks like fresh Dark Earth, this has been discussed before on here, at least twice! I suggested a repaint after an engine fire or major oil leak, needing a repaint, but that is just a guess. this famous image helpfully has faded Dark Earth/Middle Stone, and some patches of fresh paint for an idea of contrast RCAF Spitfire V, 1943. by Etienne du Plessis, on Flickr And desert scheme Hurricanes in period colour note on here the variation in Dark Earth, with a fresh patch behind the U, and how shiny the cowling is, not this is taxying out for take off and already has quite an exhaust deposit Close up of Hurricane Mk II d . by Etienne du Plessis, on Flickr taken moments before or later , the above I think is a crop. I don't know what going on the the fuselage panel on S, looks to be Dark Green and Middlestone? Desert Hurricane's by Etienne du Plessis, on Flickr the other shot Hurricane Mk II d . by Etienne du Plessis, on Flickr and for reference, two more desert scheme in colour Hurricane 1944. by Etienne du Plessis, on Flickr Hurricane IIc by Etienne du Plessis, on Flickr AFAIK Upward flare discharger https://www.key.aero/article/everything-you-need-know-about-hawker-sea-hurricane 40 Upward-firing recognition flare launcher cutaway is unreadable, I'd need to pull the manual out but I now need to eat

not sliver/gunmetal, or covered in rust.... https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235043141-favorite-track-technique/#elControls_3128688_menu "Most tracks of WW2 vintage were a high-manganese steel for wear resistance and long life. This was most definitely NOT silver, nor graphite. It was a goldy-brown colour, sort of like a light bronze. Even late-war German tracks still appear to have had a decent manganese content. They would wear out in no time without it, and it was being sourced from Sweden through Denmark until very late." Various discussions on this, was quite a surprise to me when it came up, as steel colour going rusty are what you see on so many models... HTH

What book? Ah, a check shows https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235137723-dambuster-lancaster-aj-s/#comment-4931960 @Mark Postlethwaite is a member here. This may https://wingleader.co.uk/books/avro-lancaster-part-3/ have some more info? The folk at Wingleader are very good and do research carefully. Note, while the illustration in the book look like photos, I think they are digital art works, like the cover this is a drawing again, not a photo so if they are drawings, this is not relevant. They were not taken in a preserved example. AFAIK the only wartime spec Lancaster interior is the nose of F-Freddie https://www.ipmsstockholm.se/home/avro-lancaster-in-detail/ note the green leathercloth @Finn may have some suggestions? HTH

I appreciate English is not your first language, but I am not total sure what you are asking. Be aware that the Valiant WIngs books are not very carefully researched, the only one I have is the Hurricane book and it's full of mistakes, omissions and occasional fantasy. The Typhoon initially did not have reinforcing plates just in front of the tail, to the fuselage/tail join, the ones added are known as 'fish plates' clearly seen here These are standard from quite early in Typhoon production, and are also seen on aircraft fitted with Tempest tailplanes. The Tempest tailplanes over lap them Just visible here The person who knows all the answers is @Chris Thomas a search bring up I hope this answers your question.

Consolidated Mess apparently does have this information. Or some of it. @Graham Boak whose just refound his copy maybe able to confirm? True of many types.

@Jamie @ Sovereign Hobbies @dickrd @foeth ?

I belive the PM is OK, but crude. Many years ago I compared the Frog kit some plans in Scale Models, (1982 Scale Models special) IIRC the outer wings were a bit small or short. It was a long time ago though. This maybe of use https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235050552-any-ideas-for-a-seafury-to-fury-conversion/ and this is VP207 in the demonstrator scheme IIRC this had a blue cheat line, and the Centaurus one was in red. Again, has been discussed on here. This also well shows the raised cockpit in the Fury. HTH

Yes, but the Fury fuselage was entirely new as well.

These are Fury's not Tempest's. Note the 2nd Sabre Fury and early Centaurus one had demonstrator colours, overall alu dope with coloured fuselage cheat lines. I'll dig out the discussion on this if you like?

As was said, usually in reference to facing to Japanese, who were at their peak. Also, the ones at Singapore acquitted themselves reasonably well all things considered, @mhaselden Even if they had the latest mark Spitfire there it would not have made much difference. The Finns had highly trained and motivated pilots, and the version they had was better. I recall reading that the individual airframe with the most kills ever was a Finnish Buffalo as well. Not in the mood to go info hunting now though. Neat model, well observed.

this one? " "Old Faithful", the Humber Super Snipe staff car used by Field Marshal Montgomery during the Western Desert campaign (and then subsequently in Sicily and Italy). The car, number M239459, currently resides in the Imperial War Museum London, resplendent in desert camo paintwork." https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235129075-montys-old-faithful-staff-car-finished/

I doubt it was ever brown and green (sic), as prototypes by this stage used current fighter camouflage, with yellow undersides. https://www.hawkertempest.se/index.php/thetempest/2014-05-12-18-28-30/marki as can be see, it has the wider Tempest tail planes. Bear in mind 1967 was pretty much the dark ages on this kind of stuff, I believe that the reason the Ducimus guides are still highly rated is that it was only in the late 60's the relevant information was actually declassified! Neat project, it looks very different. and looks very ungainly with the UC down too! but sleek when airborne! HTH

Ages ago, Iain Wylie showed how he made one from two small perspex sheets, holed drilled through, using the rear end of drill bits as punches. I made one, and it did work OK, not brilliant but I did punch 2mm disc out of 30 thou card. Not sure where it is right now, but I'd suggest the sort of contraption you may find interesting. Neat work on the Baltimore.

Hi Lee I notified you as I know you are updated the FAA serials book, I presume you have the Sea Hurricane information. It is as noted by @Geoffrey Sinclair "Version 1, a few disclaimers and mark definitions to come" and "The original documents upon which this database is based contain many errors and inconsistencies. No doubt many errors remain. Any help you can provide by pointing out issues, or supplying copies of additional primary sources, such as log books, photographs or other documents will be gratefully received. Please help me to make this the most accurate source of information on the Hurricane. If you can correct any errors or resolve any queries please email me Your contribution will be acknowledged on the Sources page" http://www.airhistory.org.uk/Hurricane/contact.html So any corrections/additions you can make will be appreciated, if you have time. It also does collate a vast amount of information in one place, and is accessible to all, so hopefully will get corrections sent in as it is a major addition to the study of the Hurricane. cheers T

nosed over Swedish PR XIX, you can see the flat port glazing. This was used when the cameras were fitted as well. I've not seen mention of a cap. I don't know if you will get a definitive answer, @gingerbob? see here for the build which may have some useful info https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235138125-airfix-spitfire-xviii-in-148th-scale/#elControls_4931363_menu HTH

AFAIK not made by any of them. A Tamiya mix is this https://mafva.co.uk/?p=2607 BS381C: 1930 COLOURS. Deep Bronze Green BS.24 Mix: 6 x Humbrol 3 + 3 x Humbrol 10 + 1 x Humbrol 2. Tamiya: 8 x XF5 + 5 X XF63 satin over. In use: 1934-39 then post-war from 1948. It was used on British vehicles, but the armament colour was not gloss. There is a Vallejo which is very close. https://alliedarmour1940.wordpress.com/vallejo-paint-mixes-for-british-armour/ Vallejo Model Color 24 (Deep Bronze Green) 70975 Military Green is just slightly lighter than the BS.381 standard (Mike Starmer, 2019) Description: Very dark yellow green – a rich black green. Same as the tank colour? BS 24?

This was posted in the All The Hurricane Questions thread, where it is a bit buried, and this really needs a wider audience. For those unaware this is like the Spitfire production site, which is here http://www.airhistory.org.uk/spitfire/production.html where there is a list of the aircraft serials, each entry then having a brief history, engine fitted, manufacturer Mark, and allocations by date with final fate if known. This collates together a mass of separate sources, and is an amazingly useful resource. Example, AFAIK up until now for example, the only available listing of what mark or subtype a Hurricane (Mk.IV's were mixed in with Mk.II's on the production line for example) was has been the Air Britain serials books. Partial listing have been available in the F.K Mason book, but this has the lot. There is also a list of squadrons and serials used by them. List of members who I think will find this of interest sorry for anyone I forgot. @Graham Boak @gingerbob @Work In Progress @iang @Lee Howard @Bigos @GrzeM @Wojtek Bulhak @JackG @tango98 @ClaudioN @Giorgio N @tempestfan @MrB17 @Tigerausfb @Tomas Enerdal @galgos @dragonlanceHR @303sqn @Dave Fleming @dogsbody @Carl V @Ed Russell @stevehnz @k5054nz

Likely just painted over in the pic of AE-Q /Z5054. I can't see the need for a blank plate, even if damaged, could easily be sealed with doped fabric. Good question though. wow, just wow. Stunning, needs a separate announcement, not burying here! Thank you.

Oooh, a colour bunfight! Comes back to my point about using the real thing as a reference. Models on here, you don't know what lighting the were photographed under, or the camera settings etc. You have a RAL match, go with that. Not sure where my RAL deck is right now, but I suspect it's on the red/orange cusp an is susceptible to lighting conditions. Good plan, some subtle weathering can really help a model look less toy like, but does require practice. Again, refer to photos. You got picked as I had a look at the civil section and your name cropped up a few times. And you list civil aircraft in 1/144 as an interest, and as my knowledge of the area is minimal, thought maybe someone who knows the area would be worth notifying. I just looked in as this was a new member doing a documented build, and some encouragement and interest, as well as any possible hints and tips is part of what makes BM a great forum. And you added a useful tip on a Halfords grey match. @Turbofan @Viking @Alex1978 @Malair @Einar @CT Modeller @Challenger350Pilot @NorbertBu @Back in the Saddle

@gingerbob ? this is a nosed over PR XIX, but AFAIK same radiators

Fantastic! Thank for clearing up that detail. Again, @Bigos @GrzeM @Wojtek Bulhak I'll @Work In Progress as this was part of the debate, and it was there in the notes. You can just bookmark the threads. What maybe simpler is just to start a thread to ask for clarification, but the main areas of confusion for most Hurricane subjects is in the props and spinners thread, and the one on alternate parts in the Arma kit, as it covers what they are, and where you are likely to see them. Those 2 cover most poorly documented detail areas. Older kits don't give you options anyway. The trickier areas are the Mk.I, especially early on, and the mid 1940 fabric wing, the Wingleader book does a good job overall on that, the IID/IV, which are fairly rare, about 300 Mk.IID and 600 Mk. IV out of 15,000, and some Canadian quirks, and Soviet modifications. After that you have Se Hurricanes, Tac R and PR, which are poorly documented anyway, Met Flight use and then one off, nearly all have been discussed here at points. if you have not already seen it scanned here https://boxartden.com/reference/gallery/index.php/Camouflage-Markings/Hawker-Hurricane Only covers NW Europe, but a lot covers other theatres as well, in particular note the drawing on page 19, which shows the factory marking positions, a very common glitch I see on Hurricane models is the position of upper wing roundels, which are often just too far outboard, and the dimension for where the edges of the camo pattern should be. THis on page 2 https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/234963507-all-the-hurricane-questions-you-want-to-ask-here/page/2/#elControls_1682406_menu covers internal colours. The cockpit remained basically the same, with just a few added controls, mostly added later for radio, and armament additions. HTH

No acrylic really wants to stick to plastic, but you spread it about to make a film that coats the surface. They tend to be a bit fragile, because while they touch dry fast, they take days to fully cure. I brush the outside, and have no real problem, the occasional little scratch it about it. The green is Vallejo Model Color, the grey is Tamiya. They are specific mixes, hence the little bottles. 20240206_202232 by losethekibble, on Flickr I didn't bother cleaning the plastic, or using a primer. What you do need to do with Model Color is get it to flow, and this usually requires thinning. A brief digression, plain water due to it's molecular structure is quite 'thick' due to hydrogen bonding, this is what causes surface tension. You can reduce this by using a flow improver, I have a specific Windsor and Newton one, but at a push a tiny amount of washing up liquid will likely gives a similar result. I make a mix with a syringe, you want 3-5% flow improver, a graduated syringe makes this easy. I also use de-ionised water, mostly as I bought some years ago when I was intending to airbrush, I don't know if it make much difference to tap water, but I have it so I use it. Draw up water, draw up flow improver, shake. Add Model Color to a pallette, add water/FI mix a drop at a time until like full fat milk and paint away. This also works for Tamiya that it commonly said you can't brush. Tamiya uses an alcohol as the main solvent, it's 'hotter; than water and on it own causes the wet paint to drag up the applied paint, using the water/FI mix reduces the 'hotness' and it then brushes no problem. For larger areas, use a small flat brush. If it won't brush out easily to a flat coat, it's too thick, as a comparison Vallejo Model Air is a bit thin to brush, but you can brush it. For small areas of colour, like switches and control knobs, neat Model Color. Tamiya does tend to stick better than Vallejo, so you can use that as a base coat, I'd be careful about applying Tamiya over Vallejo, but the uppers on the Hurricane I used Tamiya grey and Vallejo green, and had to over paint in places. As with anything new, test on something first. For washes I use artist oils diluted with lighter fuel, it makes the thinnest, most seeking wash possible. I have applied this direct over Vallejo, and only if I scrub the wash hard will it damage the Vallejo. You only use a tiny amount of lighter fuel as well, so odour and fumes are minimal. Oil wash over neat Vallejo was how I did this, though I had used Mr Surfacer, but that was over the paint resistant polythene the figure is moulded in. https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235072084-132-airfix-paratrooper-officer/ And this how this figure was done, the wash really makes detail 'pop' which will help on a seat. As with anything, try out on scrap until you are happy with the result. HTH

No. The site search is not very good, but you adding Britmodeller into a google search term works well. Or just ask, given the sprawl of this you may want to start a new thread though. The Hurricane problem is most of what you want to know is fine detail, the only thing close to this is the Wingleader book, which does a good job, the Mk.I in detail is very confusing, as there are a load of changes, and the changer overs are quite fuzzy IIRC it misses the mid 1940 Hawker builds with fabric wings as well. I'm not, AFAIK most of this detail thrashing out has been done on here. The advantage is many contributors, the disadvantage is threads like this, now at page 97. Another problem, Hurricanes are simple simple simple COMPLEX, and it's the small details that trip up people. They are not obvious, and you need to know what to look for and the variations. We are still turning up fragments and question even now, like the small windows and what were they used for on the last couple of pages. This was down to @Tigerausfb spotting this and asking about it. Do you mean Airframe and Miniature Vol.16? It won't help. While on a casual inspection is looks great, in large part due to good printing, lots of pics , what looks to be a useful variant break down etc, where is all goes wrong is he doesn't actually know much about the subject, despite having done the SAM Datafile, the A&M book doesn't really add much to that, I only have a PDF of the Datafile, as it's not very useful and I have never found a used copy cheap enough. One thing, they have not discovered Britmodeller, as a much missing has been on here for years. The problems is it's wrong in some way or other maybe a third of the time, the variant isometrics look impressive unless you know what is missing, as well as confusing, as they show lots of one offs along with main variants. Examples No mention on tropical vents. No through breakdown of Props and spinners, in particular spinners. Does not understand that a Merlin XX needs a bigger carb intake, and seems puzzled Does not understand the Mk. IID and Mk.IV, so no wing drawings, description of added armour, there is a near comedy moment when the armoured windscreen is mentioned with puzzlement. No understanding of Canadian production No detail on interior colours. Many incorrectly captioned photos. etc etc. As they don't understand the subject, the kit reviews are wordy, but pretty worthless. No real description on faults, or how to fix them. The profiles are rehashed from a 2007 book, and vary from OK to utter fantasy, and suitably lacking in actual useful detail so you can know what too look for in photos... As you might have gathered I'm not a fan! I got mine in a sale, and was not impressed. My error list is on a now not functioning laptop, and I going through the book usually gets me very cross and/or depressed in about 5 minutes so making a list is an exercise in frustration. If you have not found them on here, these are worth a read and bookmarking, as AFAIK these details are not in books. https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/234980181-hawker-hurricane-propellers-and-spinners-a-modellers-guide/ https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235128469-arma-hobby-148th-hurricane-iic-optional-parts-description-spinners-cannon-barrels-tailwheels-tropical-vents/ https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235005804-hurricane-p3886-uniqe-fabric-wing/page/2/#elControls_3735801_menu https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235087855-hurricane-mkiv-radiator-guard-another-lost-detail/ But there are more. Hence my interest given as "Hurricane data collation" ..... HTH