Jump to content

Troy Smith

Gold Member
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by Troy Smith

  1. 8 hours ago, Mycapt65 said:

    Unfortunately my -5 donor kit is missing the port fuselage so I would have to donate a complete late model Hasegawa F4U kit. I'd be willing to cut up my F4U-7 if I thought it was possible without much strife.

    Ah, now I know why you have a -5 to play with.....  


    8 hours ago, Mycapt65 said:

    The contours of the Hasegawa -4  belly don't look too squared off to me enough to cut off and fix. It's a lot of work to fix something that doesn't really jump out at me. I'd really like to find some scale drawing to see what the actual dimensions and contours are. I don't necessarily trust either Tamiya or Hasegawa to be correct. Both companies are not beyond reproach and have made dimensional accuracy errors in the era these kits were produced.


    Indeed.  Though I have never seen an wailing or gnashing of teeth over the Tamiya F4U-1 kit, and I can't see any major problems looking at photos.

    the Hase/maina and it's copy the Academy, do have a too deep fuselage, and it's also the wrong shape. 




    This factory line photo  clearly shows the fuselage shape, and it's the same shape as the Tamiya F4U-1 seat bulkhead. 


    if you sight up the Hase or Academy fuselage from a similar view point the shape problem is clearer.


    If I knw where my Corsair box was (apart from being with all the other boxes.)  I'd supply more.


    For what you are doing Ron, and your stated intent,   it's not really worth the effort.   



    I ever do find the boxes and do some photos,  I'll tag you if I remember.   Looking at the linked thread, I know subsequent to that after another age of staring at photos that I took segment out of the front cowling. 


    if you look at this pic of the Academy fuselage,  the cowl flap below the exhaust, parallel to the black line, is deeper than the others, this is where the same 2mm sections needs taking out, and then the wing fits.    What I can't recall is how I dealt with the cowl ring. 



      I know I did spend ages doing all the comparisons and no-one has said I'm talking complete rubbish.... well, about this at least! 


    And, whatever,  I'm sure you will have an F4U-4B model before 2030 unlike me..... :banghead:




    • Like 3
    • Thanks 1
  2. 2 hours ago, dogsbody said:

    Thanks Chris.


    But from my personal experiences with Tamiya and mixing and matching,  it's cobblers. 




    Tamiya XF-21 is 'muddy'  , . Nothing can fix the muddiness,  Sky is a very pale yellowy green,   I used something like XF-59 desert yellow and X-23 clear blue plus a lot of white.  the pigments in real Sky were yellow ochre and ultramarine, which is why I tried those paint.


    I used XF-82, which is a blue hued grey  as a basis for both Ocean Grey,  xf-82 plus white and small amount of yellow, which is blue-green hued grey, and for Medium Sea grey  XF-82 plus more white and really tiny amount of red which just shifted blue into a purple blue.


    XF-83 as I have said has a slight yellow-brown to it.   It is impossible to 'shift'  this into MSG. 


    Brief aside, and this is simplified, as in these are theoretical 'pure' pigments that don't actually exist.

    Primary,  blue, red, yellow

    secondary, green (blue+yellow) Orange (red+yellow) purple (blue+Red) 


    secondaries mixed togtehr will always go browny,  as will a primary mixed with a secondary not containing that primary.

    Given the model paints are complex mixes, far to often they will go 'brown' or 'grey' 


    As these these  theoretical 'pure' pigments that don't actually exist, actual artist paint has a several paints with different pigments, eg slightly green yellow and a reddy yellow,  a green blue and a purple blue,  etc plus white (and you get hued white as well)  and black and these allow most colours to be to made with about 10 paints.  



    No combination of XF-49 Khaki and XF-52 'Dark Earth' will get Dark Earth.

    XF-52 is too red, and more crucially has too much white.   Like the brown problem,  you cannot un-grey a paint.     


    Dark Earth is a green hued brown, and has been very difficult to match from the Tamiya paints I have.   


    as has been stated by @Casey  the Tamiya range has a limited range of colours,  but crucially the available range are complex pigments mixes,  and small amounts of pigments can make it very difficult to mix with things getting muddy or greyed out.

    What you start to find out in a mixing sessions is what the subtle sub pigments are. 


    I use a palette and a drop system,  do a basic mix, brush out and note paints used, add a drop, brush out, add a drop, brush out.

    Let dry, compare, and refine.  

    Some pigemst are very string and can shift a mix way out with a tiny quantity....  And, yes, it's is a long winded and slow process.



    And this is why @Casey make mixes using Golden Fluid acrylics,  , which from what I can see come in a range what are basically single pigment paints, using some complex math.


    I'm now considering going down the full rabbit hole and getting a spectrometer,  as mixing and matching requires a clear day to really check the results properly.     And lots of strips of plastic card with  ranges of mixes...... 

    And a viewing card. .....     and then tranquilisers and a dark room with no sharp objects.... :mental:




    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1
  3. 9 hours ago, Bonehammer said:

    One minor point: the Soviets painted red stars on the wing uppersurfaces of Lend-Lease airplanes, arguably to prevent friendly fire incidents with these less familiar types.


    AFAIK, no. 


    The vast majority of Lend Lease types supplied to the Soviet Union has red stars applied before delivery.  There are photos of this being done in Iran to Sp[itfire Vbs. and careful study of photos shows the profiles with patches on VVS paint on them to mostly be wrong.


    There are photos with patches of a different colour, but the repaints were not always carefully done.   There are colour pics of a ex RAF P-39 with the underwing roundel painted out with black and a red star applied.


    The red stars were applied in in the normal place for British and US types, fuselage, upper and lower wing, in comparison the standard VVS placement was  fuselage, fin, underwing.   


    You see plenty of types retain the markings on the upperwing.      The VVS may have asked for them on the upperwing, but if so, why not on the fin? 


    I suspect there is some kind of agreement that exported warplanes should be supplied in the end user markings,  certainly all the examples I can think of are (eg Hurricanes to Finland, Romania and Yugoslavia,  the USA factory applied end user markings to Lend Lease types.)


    As for friendly fire,  well the axis forces used high visibility markings for just this reason, yellow wing tips, fuselage band and undercowl. 


    11 hours ago, Ed Russell said:

    My initial cynical thoughts of The Dog Ate My Homework were perhaps unjustified as a very well respected and knowledgeable colleague said he had actually seen a photo in a former VVS pilot’s log book. He was not allowed to copy it but described it as probably OD/NG with some winter camouflage.

    arrrrgh.  which begs the question why....    I mean, apart form folks on place like this, who cares!    What is really sad is this may then just get lost, or sold to a collector and disappear. 


    I know of one Klimov P-40 photo,  though I have seen other 2 seat VVS P-40's.    IIRC there was one with very much 2nd line decorative paint job.


    The one know Klimov P-40 photo IIRC shows OD/NG with some winter white.


    Neat work on what look like a trying kit... 

  4. 5 hours ago, PhantomBigStu said:

    probably going to try the AK interactive shade,

    As in the one in the dropper bottle like Vallejo? ak-interactive-ak2013-raf-medium-sea-gre


    I got this set



    It's not very good, but AK like other Spanish paint companies don't seem very good at this. 

    Medium Sea Grey in this is like many, slightly muddy, a subtle yellow brown,  which many seem to  while it should have a very slight purple-blue hue.

    I need to do some comparison images. 

    It's better than  their USN/USMC set which doesn't even understand the subject..... 


  5. 20 hours ago, Mycapt65 said:

    I do this for fun. General fit and finish is most important to me. If it looks good from a few feet away, I'm happy.

    Good Philosophy Ron.


    I went down a bit of a rabbit hole on the F4U-4 as it an odd omission in the available kits, plus far more than I realised were used in WW2.  

    see here



    A question, do you have the Hobby Boss F4U-4,  or just seen reviews of it,  just from your basic philosophy,  a few tweaks may well have made it a reasonable -4.


    Anyway,  be good to see how this one develops.    One thing you may want to have a play with, since you have already chopped up the -5 kit,  you might want to experiment seeing if you can cut at the back of the engine compartment and attach the Minicraft -4 nose and see how that looks. 

    You might even be able to make 2 F4U-4's  from this.







    • Like 2
  6. On 29/01/2023 at 20:53, AdrianMF said:

    Sadly, this is the picture that's keeping me up at night. It clearly shows stripes under the fuselage - to your point, it may be that they had less striping than cross channel aircraft,


    from http://www.airhistory.org.uk/spitfire/p096.html

    RM619 XIV EA G65 33MU 9-4-44 91Sq 12-7-44 130Sq 'AP-D' 4-10-44 350Sq 'MN-D' Hit by flak nr Aachen Germany and abandoned 16-1-45 FLt H Smets PoW


    so this is after Sep 44, from another squadron.  No sign of previous codes, so has been carefully repainted.    



    also, re anti Diver operations



    "The Wehrmacht first launched the V-1s against London on 13 June 1944,[6] one week after (and prompted by) the successful Allied landings in France. At peak, more than one hundred V-1s a day were fired at southeast England, 9,521 in total, decreasing in number as sites were overrun until October 1944, when the last V-1 site in range of Britain was overrun by Allied forces."





    • Like 3
    • Thanks 1
  7. 2 hours ago, Zephyr91 said:

      I can convince myself that the aircraft has the 'B' scheme. 

    this is a GR-U, note the 'U' under the nose.

    50379856411_6465f1e292_b.jpg92  Squadron 02 by Сергей Кривицкий, on Flickr



    On 26/03/2020 at 21:29, NG899 said:

    the photo of P9434 GR-U with the three pilots shows 92 Sqn's Blue Section, L-R - P/O Bob Holland, Flt/Lt Robert Stanford Tuck, P/O Allan Wright. It was taken at RAF circa 7 June at Hornchurch / Northolt. The GR-U which was in Paris (N3290) had been shot down and replaced by this aircraft which Tuck flew a lot from 7 June to 11 July.

    from https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235069194-robert-stanford-tuck-new-questions/



    so this is N3290

    50379160928_19faaf71ef_o.jpg92  Squadron 05 by Сергей Кривицкий, on Flickr


    The research rabbit hole can be a tricky one! 

    • Like 2
    • Thanks 1
  8. 16 minutes ago, Donivanp said:

    and selected insert image URL and pasted and nothing, I get just a pink URL screen. Any inputs would be nice, purity sure I'm making it hard.

    you should just paste the Flickr text in here, as it then automatically post the picture.    

    It's that easy.


    • Thanks 1
  9. 31 minutes ago, Gondor44 said:

    so probably had the ejection holes covered up as it could well have not needed any guns or to fire any if fitted.

    It is seen on operational types, the is a Spitfire Vb in the desert.

    15225937513_56972cb278_b.jpgRCAF Spitfire Mk V,  1943. by Etienne du Plessis, on Flickr


    This looks to be paper.   May well be more common in the desert due to sand/dust,  but it's a simple way to keep dirt of of the guns.


    The Canadian Hurricane may well have them to keep out cold and snow(look at the ground)  as guns were fitted and used,  note the image above with 'loaded' chalked over the muzzle patch. 



    • Like 2
  10. 24 minutes ago, PhantomBigStu said:

    Ill start with Dark Green as its the only one I've got sorted, 


    MAP Dark green 

    Research suggests Tamiya XF81 is the best, though no use to me as brusher, Vallejo 888 has also looked good, though my third pot was awful the first two I've used are excellent for MAP Dark Green and heard from others the same 


    BSc241 Dark green 

    Xtracrylix have got this one nailed, though less so for others in the range and indeed they are not the MAP shades 


    Oh boy  :worms:


    At this point I'll @Casey  @Jamie @ Sovereign Hobbies   to add in as to what is different between wartime MAP and BS381c  


    AFAIK, wartime MAP and BS381c Dark Green are same.  I maybe wrong,  the tagged members will know more.


    27 minutes ago, PhantomBigStu said:

    MAP Dark green 

    Research suggests Tamiya XF81 is the best, though no use to me as brusher,

    Tamiya brushes wonderfully, as long as thinned correctly with a little water, and ideally a tiny dash of flow improver.  I get a mini syringe, draw up 95% water (I used de-ionised) and the 5% flow improver. Shake, add a drop at a time to some paint in a palette.  use a small flat brush. 


    Tamiya paint.   Hmm, I have a ghastly feeling they are not batch consistent.

    As for XF-81,  it looked too brown to me, but both pots I had were slightly different.



    27 minutes ago, PhantomBigStu said:

    Vallejo 888 has also looked good, though my third pot was awful the first two I've used are excellent for MAP Dark Green and heard from others the same 


    I don't know how batch consistent Vallejo are either.


    37 minutes ago, PhantomBigStu said:

    My main aim is to find what paints are the best out there so us acrylic users can pick up fairly accurate colours

    I think the answer so far is you need paint chips and the ability to mix.

    And by eye mixing is a chore.   I have got several mixes for Tamiya,  but if they are not batch consistent, then they are not really much use for sharing.


    It's possible there are more vallejo matches,  I have a quite a range, from buying paint sets from the days when Creative Models regularly ran a weekly discount page.

    The only vaguely local shop does stock Vallejo, but the only way to check further would be with a MAP chart and a sunny day and indulging the shop to take paint outside to squint at the colour in the bottles....


    I did last year make inquiries about actually making some accurate acrylic paints,  I'd be interested if there was actual demand,  I was doing it because it is a right pain doing the mixes... 



    • Like 1
  11. 1 hour ago, harrison987 said:

    While one of the "O" is painted the standard white...the other one (presumably, the other side of the aircraft) was ORIGNALLY painted white, but overpainted in a light blue.

    White was not a standard colour for RAF squadron codes, Sky was, which was a very pale yellowy green,  and can look like white with age

    Sky codes

    3545139357_a93809c9dd_b.jpgMosquito line-up by Etienne du Plessis, on Flickr



    note in this picture that where the light blue is scratched off the letter, the under colour look like Sky.




    Sky Blue was used on occasion,  i was going to say white was not, but this turned up,

    16292746102_900154a6a2_b.jpgMosquito FB Mk.VI, May 1945. by Etienne du Plessis, on Flickr


    but this is Coastal Command in 1945. 


    but note,  this is not in fighter colours, and the fabric parts look to be in the nightfighter scheme, of overall Medium Sea grey with a Dark green disruptive pattern, which is what the fabric appears to show.

    26351032248_72c6f289dc_b.jpgNew Mosquito, 1944 by Etienne du Plessis, on Flickr


    4 minutes ago, harrison987 said:

    This has been 100% ID'd as Mosquito...

    The photos look to be taken indoors under artificial light.     From the photo URL  I take it this is not something you have personal access too?


    Without any more information,  eg the German pilot, which might give a date, and a possible tie up with a Mosquito loss,  I don't know if there is much else to go on.


    Anyway, fascinating artefact. 




  12. On 02/02/2023 at 22:30, PhantomBigStu said:

    May well end up sticking with XA but as per the now deleted thread and the exchange with Troy medium sea grey is the one I'm least happy with,

    Not sure why you wanted that deleted, as it was of wider use? It also deleted my comments which was annoying.

    I'm not impressed by Xtracrylix colour matches, far too many are really poor to RAF museum MAP chips,  including Sky, Dark Green, Dark Earth, MSG, Ocean Grey  Azure Blue, EDSG, are some from memory

    I got them as the consensus was they were good matches, Xtracolor maybe  the acrylic frequently are not.   Since I did get a response from Hannants when I mentioned an error on a forthcoming decal sheet, might be worth while... 




  13. 8 hours ago, Mycapt65 said:

    And no the Hobbyboss isn't a nice dash 4. I'm starting with sadly the best looking (IMO) dash 4. The Hasegawa rebox of the ancient Mania kit.

    It's a complex subject.  Ages ago I got a cheap Academy -4,  to see what could be done.  The main fault seemed to be the too wide upper fuselage spine.  That wasn't to hard to fix, but when I did comparisons with a Tamiya -1, I found the entire fuselage was too deep, by about 2mm, and kinda square at the base, the Corsair is a like thin triangle with a round base.  


    Now at this point because it was obvious the fuselage had a load of errors,  and EVERYONE says the old Hase/Mania is basically sound, I got one. 

    What I found is this.Academy copied the old Hase kit, but added the upper spine error. So the Hase has the same too deep/too square fuselage, and it is noticeable once you know, as the wing is 2mm too low.  OK here's the relevant pic, the black area is to be removed  though  this needs to also be taken out of the cowl, then the fuselage scoring and bending into the correct shape.



    You can just see the stress lines in the mid fuselage from the internal scoring  and bending.


    Given the Academy is engraved rather than raised line, it has its uses  as apart from the spine problem, it the same as the Hase/Mania, otherwise they are the same.  

    If you have a Tamiya -1 , you will soon see what I mean. Try fitting the seat bulkhead inside the Hase fuselage.

    The solution is to take a 2 mm section out and reshape.

    In the end I realised it needs to be trimmed out of the cowl as well.

    This was an on/off project, and has been in the off pile for quite a while....


    The Hobby Boss fuselage is better on this, but has It own faults.


    My suggestion for an accurate-4 by cross kitting would be an Academy nose (cut down) and wing added to a Tamiya -1.  You still need an engine  the 4 blade prop can be got from a Tamiya P-47, they all come with multiple props.  The early -4 use the same canopy as the F4U-1D,  later have the flat screen. 

    If you want a folded wing, you can use the Tamiya parts.

    If you really like surgery you can fix the Academy kit.....

    I eventually picked up the CMK -4 conversion  and have pair of Tamiya -1 kits I got cheap off a chap on here as some clown had tried to fit resin wheel wells, and had wrecked one centre section and mangled the other.....


    But, yes  it's amazing that there is not a decent -4 in the scale, or any scale I believe.


    Back to your kit bash,  since you are chopping up the Hase -5 kit, you may want to see if you can use more of the fuselage and add the Mania nose to it?  The -5 has a raised section behind the canopy that would need adjusting.  


    Anyway, hope of interest/use,  always good to see someone  try to fix the problem rather than just moan about it! 











    • Like 4
    • Thanks 1
  14. 2 hours ago, Graham Boak said:

    But if you are looking into modelling in this period, get Paul Lucas's book.  Other than in specific details, there has been nothing before or after to match.  The Ducimus booklets will do as a lesser guide.



    these are all scanned here



    Note the RAF ones are still some of the best primers available, dealing with what changes occurred when and why,   they were published not long after the declassification of various wartime documents in the late 1960's  ISTR

    • Like 1
  15. 2 hours ago, nheather said:

    Eau De Nil - when was it used - is it simply a colour before Sky, was it only used on certain aircraft types?

    as has been mentioned, it was not aircraft paint.


    the book by Paul Lucas examined remains of aircraft in a couple of museums and visually matched the colours.   

    This says nothing about where the aircraft remains were found or when (wartime, or dug up 30 years later, 

    eg had they been buried, what kind of soil  and it's worth noting that paint binders can yellow, so a pale blue in time could become a deeper green... .like Eau De Nil....


    the Wingleader Hurricane photoarchive book has this in the sampler



    On 6 June 1940, with the Battle of France drawing to a close, a major decision was taken to do away with Dowding’s black and white undersurfaces on fighters and camouflage them as effectively as possible from underneath. This involved the removal of all roundels and painting the entire undersides in ‘Sky’, a pale duck egg green/blue. Supplies of this paint were in very short supply so many squadrons mixed their own. One groundcrew member recalled starting with a carefully measured mixture of blue, white and yellow, but about halfway down the line they started running short of blue. This meant that Hurricanes at the beginning of the line had a good match for the Sky colour whereas those at the end had a very pale green, almost white. The factories were officially informed of this change around 11 June but it was emphasised that the change should not hold up production, so existing airframes would remain in the black and white scheme. The effective result of all this is that June 1940 saw a mixture of old and new schemes in the skies above the UK, and right up until September 1940, the ‘Sky’ undersides could be any shade from off-white to a turquoise blue/green. The background photo shows fragments of fabric from the underside of the fuselage of P3966 which left the factory on 10 June 1940. It probably had the Sky undersides applied at 10 Maintenance Unit before being delivered to 85 Squadron on 13 July 1940. You can clearly see the Sky paint which has been applied over the original Aluminium paint. The red paint is the dope that was applied to the fabric. Incidentally, this red dope was the same that was applied to the gun port covers, so it’s worth noting how dull red it is compared to restored aircraft flying with shiny bright red covers.


    I did an experiment in a (stalled*) build


    I got some Vallejo Prussian Blue and Yellow,  as RAF bases would have had White, (for the B/W undersides, and Roundel Blue and Yellow.

    And added small amounts ....

    In the image below, over the MAP paint chips,  the main Spitfire wing is Xtracrylix Sky,  and the Hurricane wing has various test patches, the wing in the right shows near white and the effect of adding small amount of blue and yellow.  the left wing shows more intense shades. 

    The right Spitfir wingtip has 3 shades, note the middle blob is pretty close the Sky Blue chip under it. 



    Pure supposition, and not very scientific,  but the above was just to demonstrate how easy it to make a range of colours with available paint that then also could "match" things like Sky Blue, Eau De Nil, and other such postulated paints,  which due to the things like Xtradecal and poor profiles have become 'fact'  but not how easy it is to make a range of at the same time similar but quite different colours with small  changes in paint rations, as was also observed with mixed grey, and that's just two colours... 


    And a story, a while back at The Aviation Bookshop, on one of their sale weekends, I got chatting to a chap looking at the models, and in the course of this Hurricanes came up, and he said he'd been involved in crash digs, and how he'd been in the team that dug up the first hurricane lost in the BoB, 

    P3359, http://www.bbm.org.uk/airmen/Clenshaw.htm


    Anyway, as a modeller colours came up, and he said, looking at the wall of kits boxes,  "Sky is like this",  points to box with Skyish colour, but the belly panel of P3359 was more like this, points to a much more turquoise shade (and AZ box maybe) , the point here the the chap had seen real parts, of known Hurricane, and mentioned and could give an idea of how the shade varied from standard Sky,  benefits of being a modeller...  


    Now, a light turquoise is not really like any of the "substitute" colours,  but is very easily possible from an infield mix.


    He wasn't really friendly, but maybe that is just the world of poor social skills, so I didn't talk a lot more, which I regretted. (plus the bookshop is a completely and utterly distracting,  something like 2000 aircraft books and a wall of interesting kits....)  but at another sale weekend a year or two late I saw him again, and asked some more, the belly panel is in a private collection though. 


    If this is of interest,  I suggest having a go an my experiment above,  just start with white, an add a little of each colour to change the shade, and brush out, and it does not take much (see the brush outs)

     I found the colours also dried darker,  but this is with tiny amount of modern acrylic.

    While I'm typing, I'm wondering how the now colour was specified, is there a lost of of how to make a 'Sky' mix with existing common paint perhaps, Sky was already around as Cotton's Camotint,  so did they send out chips...


    Note how easy it is easy to make shades like the ones in the drawing posted by @dogsbody by the white/blue/yellow combinations.


     One final point, the place you really want Sky paint is at the factory, so I'd suggest by the end of June 1940 new aircraft were in in Sky. 

    Dates for Spitfires were given in the 1982 Ted Hooton Spitfire article.


    in the case of Hurricanes, 


    P3870 was taken on charge 21 June 1940


    P3112 delivery 21 June 1940


    which gives an idea of when this may have been coming out of the factories,  and Maintenance Units would also have been repainting aircraft as they came through.



    *build stalled as I found out how poor available Acrylic "matches" for really obscure RAF paints were,  uncommon paints like Dark Green and Dark Earth for example....  which were hardly used on anything.    For those not getting the sarcasm,  these were standard upper surface colours.

    • Like 3
  16. 8 hours ago, PhantomBigStu said:

    Seems I'd fogotten to fill the underside when I did the top so whilst it dries I painted the rocket and rails 15794-C3-B-148-C-43-EE-8-F64-2-B692-A340

    The XVIII did not carry rockets IIRC, it was already carrying a 6 pdr  gun with ammo feeder! They may have carried slipper tanks.  I have Tse Tse monograph so can check later.

  17. 7 hours ago, Whitewolf said:

    Migammo do a UK interior green - A.MIG 219 FS34226 (BS283) Interior Green

    This sets alarm bells ringing.

    If it listed BS283, with the FS595 in brackets....   but a look at epaint




    34226 Nasa Primer is listed as "noticeably different"  in the link.


    Anytime I now a see a paint being listed with FS595 for a WW2 RAF colour I'm wary.   to have a BS381c/FS595 is also a a cause for concern.


    7 hours ago, Whitewolf said:

    which pretty much looks the part.

    It may well be fine.  Some of Mig Ammo 'matches' were seriously wrong, the pics have not gone.    


    This is what was used in this build, and it look OK. 








  18. On 31/10/2022 at 20:35, Casey said:

    RAL color matches

    Matched with RAL K5 color fan. I've matched most of them and they all are pretty close matches, here are some examples

    A question,  you list 36186 Olive brown as RAL 7008.


    RAL 7008 is listed as Khaki Grey



    RAL 8008 is listed as Olive brown



    the Revell  sites does not list a RAL code



    I ask as RAL8008 is the colour used by  the Israeli AF in the blue/brown scheme of the late 1950's to late 1960's  , so  which is 36186? 


    Thank you


  19. 4 hours ago, Zephyr91 said:

    So I got some new Humbrol 56 Aluminium and you can see the results on the nose, fuse and tailplane.      Looks a bit dark to me.  In digging around for pics (and again this BM forum is amazing) the only similar schemes I can find seems to be somewhat lighter.  Any thoughts?

    try mixing some H 11 silver in, or white.  Or both.  or add some pale grey or white to silver 11. 


    Pre war period colour.  This is what you are aiming for 

    5420569821_51e3e332bd_c.jpgEarly Spitfire at Hornchurch  1939. by Etienne du Plessis, on Flickr

    2527522818_8d96956cd5_b.jpgSpitfire  Mk. I by Etienne du Plessis, on Flickr


    4 hours ago, Zephyr91 said:

    I use brushes.

    Good. if it works for you,  I have an airbrush, but as that's another learning curve, I use brushes.   For acrylic I have found a small flat brush works well,  no idea about enamel but maybe worth trying. 

    careful thinning and multiple thin coats.   Some colours are just hard work to brush, like white and yellow, which you may need a primer for.



    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1
  20. 16 minutes ago, TonyOD said:

    And I had planned to stick exhaust/cannon/oil staining over the top of everything. We'll see how it goes.

    I'd suggest you idea of a practicing on a scrapper first is wise, it's what I do to get an idea of how it works.   

    Just to note, I was trying to make the Jeep and truck look like they had a good coating of summer dust that had been rainwashed off at points as well in Normandy, aiming for chalky dust,  Normandy is part of the same band of chalk the South Downs is,  so I had an idea of what the dust should look like, the soil here in the summer dries out to a light grey with a very subtle brown purple hue...   I probably should have just used some real dust! 


    In the case of you Spitfire, I'd go with the less is more approach,   photos of the model before and during can help here as give a different perspective to what on the bench.




  • Create New...