Troy Smith
-
Posts
12,618 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Events
Profiles
Forums
Media Demo
Posts posted by Troy Smith
-
-
8 minutes ago, mindenroses said:
My thanks for any advice on HMS Wellington’s camouflage colours as worn in the photos and drawing! Also, can anyone point me to a source for plans or drawings of Grimsby class sloops with their wartime fit [As & As]?
-
5 hours ago, AdrianMF said:
Ah, good job I have a PM and a FROG Sea Fury in the stash too
. I will have to dig them up and compare to plans.
Regards,
Adrian
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
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
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, AdrianMF said:
Does that mean the whole shorter wingspan with no centre section?
Yes, but the Fury fuselage was entirely new as well.
-
1
-
-
9 minutes ago, AdrianMF said:
building a range of Tempests; LA610, in its Sabre-engined configuration, is the most beautiful and also the fastest Hawker propeller fighter to fly; LA610, in its Griffon guise, just to show what an ugly duckling looks like;
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?
-
1
-
-
On 11/04/2024 at 22:29, kelly9mm said:
Today the Brewster Buffalo is frequently considered one of the worst fighter planes ever made.
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.
On 11/04/2024 at 22:29, kelly9mm said:But achievements of pilots like Ilmari Juutilainen, Hans Wind, Eino Luukkanen and other Finnish aces proved otherwise. In competent hands and under right circumstances the Buffalo turned out to be a really vicious killer.
Ilmari Juutilainen had been flying the Buffalo BW-364 until 1943 when he was transferred from LLv.24 to LLv.34 armed with new Messerschmitts Bf 109G. He concluded his “Buffalo adventure” with 34 victories
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.
-
1
-
-
48 minutes ago, Mike Starmer said:
Monty's car in Italy was repainted in gloss pale cream and bright green when KG VI made a visit in 1944. The image is in the IWM collection. I have it but cannot post.
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."
-
34 minutes ago, AdrianMF said:
I've decided to go for: grey and green topsides rather than brown and green;
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
34 minutes ago, AdrianMF said:no guns (but ejector chutes still); later positioning of air intake; a replacement bubble canopy from the Falcon set; flatten the tailwheel doors
5 hours ago, AdrianMF said:The tailplanes on the plan are smaller than the kit ones too - I will read up and check some other sources before wielding an axe!
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.
4 hours ago, AdrianMF said:It would be nice to build it flying because (1) it's such a graceful design and (2) the FROG kit undercarriage will be a bit poor.
and looks very ungainly with the UC down too!
but sleek when airborne!
HTH
-
7
-
-
On 07/04/2024 at 18:17, AdrianMF said:
moving it into punch and die territory** for me***.
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.
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Lee Howard said:
Always useful to check all sources. However, while there's clearly been a lot of work put into compiling it, I think it worth pointing out that there are a good number of errors I've spotted in what I've checked so far (an obvious example being a RNZNVR pilot - listed as RNZVR - whose date of death is wrong) and abbreviations for which there are no explanations - even in the abbreviations list. And the abbreviation 'RNAS' being cited as 'Royal Naval Air Service', which grates enormously...
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
-
2
-
-
56 minutes ago, NG899 said:
Now if only there was a good photo to hand…? 🤔
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
HTH
-
1
-
-
On 31/01/2024 at 11:24, Aeon said:
Hi,
Anyone knows a colour equivalent, of camouflage green, from Mr.colour, Tamiya, or Ak real color?
Thanks.
AFAIK not made by any of them.
A Tamiya mix is this
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.
35 minutes ago, Selwyn said:The colour used in British Deep Bronze Green
Selwyn
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.
21 hours ago, Geoffrey Sinclair said:For comment. http://www.airhistory.org.uk/Hurricane/home.html Version 1, a few disclaimers and mark definitions to come.
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
-
13
-
20
-
-
3 minutes ago, JackG said:
or was a blank plate fixed in place
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.
10 minutes ago, Geoffrey Sinclair said:For comment. http://www.airhistory.org.uk/Hurricane/home.html Version 1, a few disclaimers and mark definitions to come.
wow, just wow. Stunning, needs a separate announcement, not burying here! Thank you.
-
2
-
-
On 07/04/2024 at 09:51, SashaGrace said:
The orange is a funny colour to match, this is RAL2008, the easyJet orange hue listed in their brand guide and matches nicely with images I have of the real plane and many other easyJet A320 family aircraft (my daughter loves aeroplanes so we are regulars at the Manchester Runway Park and I have snapped loads of reference pics) but looking through this forum it seems most easyJet liveried models have a more red tint to the orange. Interesting.
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.
On 07/04/2024 at 09:51, SashaGrace said:I’ll cross the weathering when I get there, just thinking some very mild effects as these aircraft are usually quite clean so no going overboard.
Good plan, some subtle weathering can really help a model look less toy like, but does require practice. Again, refer to photos.
On 07/04/2024 at 19:31, Skodadriver said:I was flattered and a bit embarrassed to be referenced by @Troy Smith. I'm glad he did otherwise I would probably have missed this thread.
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.
On 07/04/2024 at 19:31, Skodadriver said:Turbofan, Viking, Alex1978, Malair, Einar, CTModeller, Challenger350Pilot, NorbertBu and Back in the Saddle.
@Turbofan @Viking @Alex1978 @Malair @Einar @CT Modeller @Challenger350Pilot @NorbertBu @Back in the Saddle
-
1
-
-
21 hours ago, Robin-42 said:
Does anybody have any technical drawings showing the radiator flaps on the F22/24?
this is a nosed over PR XIX, but AFAIK same radiators
-
1
-
-
21 minutes ago, wmcgill said:
Formation-keeping lamps control, #33 in the March 1940 Hurricane Mk.I Pilot's Notes.
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.
2 hours ago, Tom R said:I suppose if I had more time I could print off every useful britmodeller article and make it into a book!🙃
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
covers internal colours.
The cockpit remained basically the same, with just a few added controls, mostly added later for radio, and armament additions.
HTH
-
2
-
-
On 09/04/2024 at 21:01, Stratto said:
Ah ok so if I was to paint an ejection seat then paint it with a base colour I use Vallejo Model Air for airbrushing then I can use Model Colour over the base coat with the multiple colours of the ejection seat. I also use Tamiya paints but prefer Vallejo
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
-
1
-
-
7 hours ago, Tom R said:
Is there any book that comes even close to distilling it all and helping the sort of advanced but not really top-line modeller.
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.
7 hours ago, Tom R said:I have about 8-10 Hurricane books but it is quite tedious to trawl through them looking for answers to modeller-type questions as they are not laid out in that form.
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.
7 hours ago, Tom R said:There are some modeller guide books like the "Airmark" series and some good Brett Green books on the Spitfire and Mustang and also some Kagero books. I am surprised there is not one on the Hurricane.
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.
7 hours ago, Tom R said:In the absence of such book I will get the Richard Franks one although I have seen some rather disparaging comments about some of his earlier books.
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.
But there are more. Hence my interest given as "Hurricane data collation" .....
HTH
-
3
-
-
36 minutes ago, PatG said:
but unsure about the whole 'shark mouth' thing so hopefully someone can clarify please.
https://boxartden.com/reference/gallery/index.php/Camouflage-Markings/Boulton-Paul-Defiant
37 minutes ago, PatG said:I'm looking to build the aircraft as flown by P/O Bodien (N3387) when he claimed to shoot down three aircraft between Feb and May 1941 but not sure what the individual aircraft letter would have been and more importantly whether it had the 'shark mouth'?
@AndyL ?
-
3
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Rabbit Leader said:
Besides nose glazing and possibly turret fairing changes, whats more different about an L or M version that would discount these versions from the base fuselage parts being offered? I’m not suggesting it can, rather I’m not aware of whats so different between a H, J, L or M.
Cheers.. Dave
It's a nightmare in detail, like Sherman tanks, the book title Graham refers to below is not a joke.
58 minutes ago, Graham Boak said:I refer you to the book Consolidated Me4ass, which goes with considerable detail into all the variations of the nose-turret Liberators. They were built in several factories, with differences in each separate production batch from each factory. Then you will be aware of what discourages anyone attempting to actually get all these variations into a model.
If the base kit is as good as it appears, I forsee various bits of AM catering for the specific bits and pieces if Airfix don't, and I suspect they won't even try, but does look set up for some variations.
@Colin @ Freightdog Models? Gap for you
-
3
-
-
Battle of France wrecks
Rotol prop
These look aluminium, compare to inside of fuselage and engine panel
Meanwhile, these are Black/White, and I think it's a Rotol prop, does have the standard aerial
and these look white, centre maybe aluminium, Rotol prop.
-
1
-
-
Some wrecks in France, the only ones showing this are one that look to be P serial, all the L and N (Hawker built) don't show this
Hard to tell what serial, but look to have a dark square in the right place
This is P serial, I have the details elsewhere
Again, Rotol prop, so P27** on
and before I forget
@Bigos @GrzeM And posts above, regarding a possible side formation lights on P**** and onto early Mk.II Hurricane.
-
3
-
-
43 minutes ago, PeterR said:
So if similar to the Spitfire, incorporated into production around November 1940 and deleted in August 1941.
Considerably earlier, the pic P3166/VY-Q and VY-R are taken in July 1940.
43 minutes ago, PeterR said:However, I don't understand why there seems to be a lack of this light in photos of Hurricane internals, where these panels have been removed (?)
There is a square plate with a circular hole on the photo of P2617 at Hendon above, and the internals looks unrestored. It maybe that the bulb is naturally in shadow, and in the ones where it would be visible, there are people in the way.
One place you see a lot of the internals of Hurricanes is in wrecked ones in France, there look to be a dark oval in this shot, and P2647 was delivered on 21 Feb 1940
more photo scouring to do then!
-
1
-
1
-
-
15 hours ago, SashaGrace said:
I never considered super glue before,
It's very good for seams.
I have used it like tube glue for assembly, but you need to make sure it's in the right place! Very small dots can be used to 'tack' parts in place, easy to snap off, or the line bits up and then use the capillary action of liquid glue to fix in place.
3 hours ago, SashaGrace said:I’m not sure about weathering,
work from photos of the real thing, the rise of the superficially impressive youtube tutorial has led to model based on other models!
Usually less is more, and on airliners is more in the nature of leak streaks and a bit grime which gets cleaned off regularly.
Subtle weathering though breaks up the flatness of a model and makes it look less toy like, see here and the following posts for my take on a pretty clean airframe.
3 hours ago, SashaGrace said:let’s all cross fingers that bandana is OK and the paint hasn’t bled
As I use kleer as gloss coat, I will seal tape edges with it.
I don't know how viable a mist from a rattle can of the white would be to seal the tape up?
The tail masking has come out well.
Our civil aircraft section is not somewhere I often look, but this is an interesting thread
https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235130437-question-on-windows/
Seems @Skodadriver would be a good member for airliner modelling info as it's one one of his listed interests 1/144th civil, and may have a few tips and tricks specific to the genre I know nothing about, which reminds me, the site search is poor, but adding Britmodeller into a google search works a lot better, and there is a staggering amount of information on here is you can find it.
HTH
-
1
-
-960.jpg?m=1608580732)
1/72- Consolidated B-24H Liberator by Airfix - 3D renders+box art+schemes+sprues+test build - release in May 2024
in The Rumourmonger
Posted
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.