Troy Smith

this is all relative. It's one of the better nostalgia kits, and does have some good features, but the fabric area is a bit of a disaster. There are better vintage kits to start with, the two best would be the Heller IIC and the 1978 Airfix Mk.I, though I think the ugly duckling of the vintage ones may the 1973 Airfix Mk.I/IIB kit.... but I maybe wrong on that front. But the fit has been excellent, I test fitted a tail plane and it was good, just the right tolerance, and the 5 piece wing fits together very well, even if you meddle... dreadful lumbering things, tired old puffers the Germans called them...Spitfires, Now that what you want.... Anyway, I got distracted by messing about, I think as I've not done any meddling, and I quite like a meddle... This was meant to be OOB... I went for a blanking plate of 10 thou, as it was just a gaping void, then added upper wings with tiny SG dots, added a back and front to the wheel well.... I didn't do pics as I was by this point talking on the phone to the daughter about various issues re school, and this went on and I carried on meddling while talking, and not also trying to take photos... in the end snapping wings off to and cutting out the sections of wing cutting through the well, and adding 10 thou card well sides, and getting them to fit... I'll leave it like this, as really it's a waste if time, though it gave me some ideas about doing this on other projects, I recall there is a classic Airfix GB in the summer. (eg the two mentioned above) Anyway, it's not just a gaping void, but I should of stuck with the blank plate rather than a couple of hours fiddling around. 2024-02-08_01-34-48 by losethekibble, on Flickr I didn't align the fuselage halves as well as I could have, and there was a little step, which I used SG with nail powder sprinkled on, I also used this under the nose, and with SG on a needle, added a tiny amount to the rear fuselage insert gap and sprinkled some powder on. I did also fix the wings with some MEK. The whole business took ages, but was pleasant to be in that 'flow' state https://positivepsychology.com/mihaly-csikszentmihalyi-father-of-flow/ where I had nothing more pressing than getting some food. Eventually hunger started to distract me. I almost glued the outer wing on, but now am thinking it will be worth see if some backing cannon barrel positioning later will help. Very impressed at the upper wing to fuselage fit, very neat join line, even after breaking it off and other indignities visited upon it... I didn't get round to trying some of audio books I got on CD cheap from a charity shop in town.... most of them round here are getting pricey, but one has a 50p CD shelf and I have been picking up various things, and thought audio book maybe a change from music, the radio is not happy, likely as my dormer windows are covered in lead sheet... Thanks for reading and commenting.

beautifully observed work indeed. maybe a Swedish thing, @tiking also produces very carefully observed dioramas.... Thank for sharing that. cheers T

Even in it's Novo form, it fits very crisply. Just a little clean up to get parts to bed. hope so. IREland not ICEland.... not sure what that means.... I'm not Icelandic or dead... yet. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnus_Magnusson Thank you.... not sure how exciting it will be. Thank you. Roundels should be fine, but numbers may help. Was that one of the sheets that came stapled into the magazine? I saw some Max Decals sheets, which oddly I thought didn't just have a selection of numbers. Well, as to what it's like shape wise, it's not too bad Frog over Bentley and AOTFP by losethekibble, on Flickr left is the Bentley plans, right is from Aircraft of the Fighting Powers, which was published in WW2, this courtesy of @Paul J It's a fraction short in the rear fuselage and wing tips, and like most vintage Hurricane kits, narrow above the nose. One oddity is they have done the internal rear fuselage frames as vertical lines, as per AOTFP drawing, which is why I checked it. It is basically a IIc, cannon wing, Mk.II nose. The UC is very simplified, and it would be a near full rebuild to make a really decent Hurricane, any Hurricane kit that gets the fabric wrong is going to have that problem though, but I think even OOB it will look OK from a couple of feet... we'll see. While it's very much of it's era, mid 60's, it also has a neat feature in that it has the Sea Hurricane cut out, (which does not work very well as it has not real location point) I think it's the first kit do offer a Sea Hurricane option plus option for bombs and rocket plates. I need to check if pre dates the Monogram kit, I think it does. if I had the codes I could have done one of the 760 Sq Hurricanes in a deck tangle on HMS Ravager with rocket plates fitted, or the other Sea Hurricane I have seen with them. So I put my unfinished Airfix Churchill tank away, which has been not really inspiring me, but is nearly done, to clear a bit of space. dug out some paint, these are all custom mixes, the grey green ended up with bits of about 6 Vallejo colours in it, but is as a dead on visual match to the RAF Museum MAP chips as I could get, as are the Tamiya Med Sea Grey and Ocean Grey. (these I did note the mix ration down properly) 20240206_202232 by losethekibble, on Flickr The Irish AC IIc's were all very late builds, so AFAIK are grey green internally, with Med Sea Grey wheel wells. the classic Frog pilot, skinny body big head, got a coat of Vallejo Light Flesh. I'm aiming for a basic OOB, one thing I did do was add little bits of Evergreen square stock to act as a support for the fuselage insert. I actually added the Evergreen with a dot of MEK and then eyeballed the insert and then did the other side. The cockpit is really cloudy so lack of internals is really not going to be an issue. Inevitably I did mess about a bit. 20240206_212236 by losethekibble, on Flickr I probably should have just gone for a brass rod and tube shaft, as it was I have a push fit to plastic tube, bodged into place with scrap plastic and superglue with nail powder. It is likely it would have been quicker to have done a better job, and the prop would spin too... I also shimmed the seat up so it is at the bulkhead angle. You can see the rear fuselage insert in place here as well. Not pictures is a bit more paint on pilot, and as I did a yellow lifejacket, I did the prop tips. I did thin the blades down a bit as well, making the back flatter for more of an aerofoil shape. And opened rear of radiator, as was a solid face. And fuselage is glued together and clamped with pegs and is setting. Also had a look at the 5 part wing, which fits together beautifully, very precise and the right flat centre and dihedral outer panels. Not sure to add upper wings to fuselage and then the lower, I'll see how a dry fit goes, plus I'll add a simple plastic card blank plate. I have plugged the rocket plate holes with some stretched sprue, though the kit plastic didn't really like heat, being a bit fibrous. It's also quite brittle. Hopefully the rest of the airframe assembly should be the next step and then onto paint.... Thanks for reading and commenting.

Eduard reboxed it, likely with added parts. You may want to check under that as well.

I posted this above, I didn't note it was stated as being with 275 Sq. Just checked Air Britain, they list it ending up 276. P8325 - 303/65/Digby/416/61 OTU/ 1 CACU/276 - SOC 16.8.44

the film is also on the British Pathe website, which also has a page of still, at 1 sec intervals here https://www.britishpathe.com/asset/stills/65680/ AQ-E is ??825, maybe 325, looks to be Vb poss P8325... Ah, Think this is it P8325 IIb CBAF MXII 12MU 14-4-41 303Sq 12-5-41 65Sq 15-9-41 416Sq 1-4-42 61OTU 18-5-42 Swung on landing u/c collapsed Hawarden CB 20-6-42 P/O EJ Cowan safe. Scottish Aviation 1CAACU 28-10-42 ops 14-1-43 1CRU 22-1-43 Cv ASRIIc 275Sq 5-5-43 ASTE 22-5-44 recat CE SOC 16-8-44 this could be P8131 P8131 IIa CBAF MXII 8MU 15-5-41 66Sq 6-7-41 CGS 23-2-42 e/f f/l in field Marholm Northants CB 23-3-42 P/O F Wiza (Pol) inj. recat CE ASTM 1-4-42 61OTU 21-9-42 1CRU 5-2-43 Cv ASRIIc 276Sq 30-4-43 Belly landed Warmwell AC 8-7-43 SqLdr BH Bowring safe 1AGS 18-2-45 10AGS 4-5-45 SOC 18-6-45 HTH

It's showing for me Jari.

No, while Japanese used a similar colour for cowlings, Night was a MAP(Ministry of Aircraft Production) standard British black colour used, from pre war with Night/White undersides to the main colour used by RAF bombers, as well as serial and stencilling. There were other blacks used, but the most used was Night. This is the official paint name, hence the capitalisation. Despite having being a mix of carbon black and ultramarine, it really looks black. In really bright daylight you can see a blueness. In model terms, black, though something like Tamiya XF-85 rubber black may work. Try some model black and add 20% ultramarine, you won't see the ultramarine unless compared to black in bright sunlight. HTH

Best guess is they were painted in Night, not dark sea blue. Oft debated. Profiles are just pretty pictures this is a period colour pic. long thread here https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/hyperscale/krys-lanowski-on-fb-group-says-61st-fs-p-47m-s-wer-t541884.html @lampie did a lot of research https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/234942075-p-47-color-question/page/2/#elControls_1425477_menu " I recently obtained some more microfilm relating to the 56th and the 61st FS in particular. The first P-47M's arrived at Boxted on January 19th. 25 aircraft. 61st FS Engineering report for that month tells how all "In four days all the planes were painted and acceptance checks accomplished" with the hanger turning into an "assembly line overnight". Primary source evidence there that the aircraft were painted in the Service Group hanger over a four day period in January 1945. This is further reinforced by entries in the 33rd Service group 41st Service Squadron monthly reports on the relevent microfilm stating that the imediate actions required on the new P-47M's were undertaken over a 2 day period.( 645 man hours) February's 61st FS engineering report is even more specific, as it talks about our "black" P-47'Ms. Of course, it doesn't identify the exact paint used. but what it doesn't say is our "plum" P-47M's,, our "midnight blue" P-47M's, our "P-47M's painted to match a dinner jacket lining", our P-47M's painted with whatever paint we could obtain from a local car dealers" etc etc. An interesting document relating to painting Spitfires emerged recently ( new to me anyway), specifying the paint colours to be used. ( The relevence being that its often reported that the 56th used RAF colours on their aircraft). For the stencils, wing walk lines etc that nobody would consider being painted anything else other than "black", the colour specified is "night". This further reinforces my theory that "night" was the actual colour used on the "black" P-47M's. Food for thought.. Nige http://56thfightergroup.co.uk/ Edited October 8, 2013 by lampie" and https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/234942075-p-47-color-question/page/3/#elControls_1426842_menu HTH

What Vallejo call a colour, and what is a only tenuously connected. The photos above appear to show a very slightly green hued blue, IIRC Vallejo Royal blue is slightly purple. IIRC 70.925 Blue maybe better. I'd need to check in daylight. It maybe just too blue and need a dash of black. 70.930 Dark Blue maybe about the right darkness, again, I need daylight. I have spent far too much time mixing and matching paint, mostly using Vallejo. From various discussions on here, while they do a large range of colours, I don't know they use many pigments. I'd still try asking on classic Ford for an actual colour match as that will give something to search for. Perhaps someone could send you a paint chip sample? I have no idea how good you are on colour, to an extent if it matches your memory then it has done the job. hmm more searching, more to find an actual comparison to the colour in something else, FS595, RAL, Bs381c.... how about this? so, Marine Blue ..... exactly what you said at the start!!! https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/280507207277 "FORD MARINE blue 71 Code G Touch Up PAINT SCRATCH REPAIR" £10 with post for 25ml, enough for your purposes. Based in Enniskillen. the N.I. connection made me think of @Black Knight who is a font of many bits of arcane information, including classic cars and may have an idea looking up the hex code gives a Pantone reference, https://spektran.com/pantone/2140-c It is a dark pastel azure color having an approximate luminance of 33%. It has a hue value of 217° indicating that this is a cold color. @Casey.... anything in the Vallejo range you went through that might work?

searched google 'britmodeller airbrushing vallejo" but there are more hits. Excellent tip from @flyboy2610 on the spoons and the video. @Casey is good on paint, and may have some tips. Note, while acrylics are touch dry very quickly, but they take days to properly cure. They also don't stick to plastic, more form a shell over it, and gets harder when cured. Be worth having a note book to keep track of mix ratios and pressure. On my brief play with some Vallejo model air and cheapy airbrush and compressor, I found keeping the pressure very low and getting in close, building up paint slowly worked well.

Vallejo have a special baboon, who is colour blind and to be sure has a bag on it head to pick out their paint names from a scrabble bag .... or so it seems. Vallejo Oxford Blue in nothing like BS105, the Vallejo being more of blueish purple. If you have a Halfords nearby might be worth seeing what they have in spray cans, also with a bit of google https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/100486635422527436/ "'71 MK1 Escort-Marine/Royal Blue? Hi guys hope your well. Just decoded the VIN on my mk1 and the colour is "G". Decoded this is Marine/Royal blue. " and using Ford Escort Royal Blue search https://www.kgfclassiccars.co.uk/vehicles/2522/ "The exterior of this stunning Mk1 Escort is simply superb in every respect having been professionally detailed. Finished in Ford Royal Blue (colour code G5)" 1975 Ford Escort Mk1 1300L by KGF Classic Cars, on Flickr If nothing else you could email kgfclassic cars and ask? http://www.turbosport.co.uk/showthread.php?t=110423 "From a book i have: Mk 1 > '70: Paint code A-Savoy black or Ebony M-ambassador blue AZ-imperial maroon AB/BA-ermine white BR-goodwood green BS-monaco red BT-aqua blue BU-platinum grey BX-tuscan yellow BY-glacier blue BZ-spruce green CA-sable CB-mignight blue CD-lombard grey CF-alcuda blue CG-malibu gold CH-purbeck grey CJ-lagoon blue CL-black cherry CM-alpina green CN-velvet blue CP-seafoam blue CR-blue mink CS-saluki bronze CT-venetian gold CU-dragoon red CV-silver fox CW-anchor blue MK 1 '70 > & mk 2 B-diamond white C-sahara beige D-carnival red E-olympic blue F-purple velvet G-royal blue H-astral silver M-modena green Q-arizona spring gold T-daytona yellow V-vista orange Y-special vehicle order 1-miami blue 3-aerosilver/stardust 5-jade green 7-copper brown" I suspect this would be the place to ask https://www.classic-ford.org Plenty of rabbit holes for you

I just added a post on your new members intro. It's what works for you, heck, a six inch brush and leftover emulsion is fine it get the results you want! ...it probably won't but if it did that would be the way forward. Airbrushing is not essential, have you any experience with an airbrush? If not that can be a learning curve, or off putting frustration.... Though there are plenty of members who will be able to advise on what works for them. @HoolioPaulio uses Vallejo Model Air a lot and gets on with them. Saying what you used to build and how is a good starting point. Anything recall fondly maybe worth revisiting? And, what works for me may not for you, as returnee, you may want to work on the basics, it's not glamorous, but they underpin any good model. Do a bit of research, find a subject you like that builds well, example some old 1/35 Tamiya armour can be found cheaply and they build well. Be aware that some modern kits are so well engineered that if you are not very careful in clean up if sprue nibs, seam lines or even a coat of paint that won't fit properly. I spent years on here, researching and collecting kits and waiting till I had the right set to airbrush masterpieces, in the end I realised I just needed to actually blinkin' FINISH something. https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235052380-hurricane-airfix-72nd-fabric-wing-mki-oob/ and some armour https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235071371-airfix-cromwell-been-a-long-time-since-i-did-a-tank/ https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235095700-matchbox-176-morris-c8-mk-ii-17pdr-gun-willys-jeep-set/ https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235104634-pk-78-m16-half-tracknow-with-an-added-p5002-american-infantry-figure/ I did try to document what I did and how. I'd kept brush painting skills I'd developed in my youth, but other techniques, oil washes and pastel chalks were new to me. The cheapy camera is more forgiving of aspects that a proper camera can make out every detail you could not see with the naked eye except with a magnifying glass and powerful light. Also, well worth having 'a mule' to practice out ideas on, old scrap kit, but even a toy will do, just to see how techniques work before you try them on your latest masterpiece. HTH

You can get great results with a brush, just question of getting used to how to get the technique. As a returnee, I'm guessing you used to use enamels many years ago? Acrylics are not the same, and Vallejo are quite fragile compared. Also depends what you are building. We are a helpful lot, doing a work in progress build will get you support and feedback, not the done thing on here to be demeaning to modellers whatever level that are at. It is very easy to get overwhelmed by fancy youtube builds and tutorials, many of which are thinly disguised adverts.... one point, the site search is not very good, but adding britmodeller into a google search term will turn up threads that maybe of interest, there is a vast amount of information on here if you search. re brush painting this is brushed Vallejo Model Color on a out the box build of a 70's Matchbox kit build here if you fancy knowing more https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235107668-pk-29-skyhawk/ HTH

Hi Mike Possibly. Maybe worth having a search about for a car forum, @cmatthewbacon may have some insights or suggestions. A car paint place may know anyway if you ask, or somewhere that deals in classic cars. Also, here @TonyW posted this so the info is out there, FWIW the colour above look a lot like wartime RAF roundel blue which is very similar to BS105 Oxford Blue. HTH

great work. Interestingly the box art is more accurate in the roundel placement than the kit engraving. There was a formula for upperwing roundel placement, 1/3 of wing span in from wing tip to roundel centre, span being from centreline. Typhoon was 84 inch span 41ft7in, or 499 in, /2 = 249.5 /3 = 83.2 so not quite 84 inch. diagram from https://boxartden.com/reference/gallery/index.php/Camouflage-Markings/Hawker-Tornado-Typhoon-Tempest which has all these monographs scanned which is Temperate Sea Scheme. Anyway, fantastic period build, details above as I know you like to know for other builds, you may well know the above but maybe of use to others. cheers T

And, this is in Hawker Hurricane - The Multirole Fighter by Philip Birtles, on page 51 2024-02-03_11-50-46 by losethekibble, on Flickr At this stage has a nearly straight wing, compare to prototype photo above.

The wells, yes, gear legs, AFAIK, yes. Problem is in most photos the UC is in shadow. the colour pic came from here https://www.flickr.com/search/?user_id=8270787%40N07&view_all=1&text=spitfire there is great bit of film of a USAAF PR XI here https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235073834-usaaf-spitfire-pr-xi-color-film/ in B/W pics you can see dark legs and the bright ring of the compression strut ones stripped back to bare metal had the legs done from https://www.asisbiz.com/il2/Spitfire/USAAF-7PG.html The colour pics are always good for getting a 'feel' of the airframe forgot this is a rare PR.X, but having D-Day stripes applied Applying Invasion stripes, 4 June 1944. by Etienne du Plessis, on Flickr it is real colour as well, @Etiennedup is careful in his research HTH

Worth asking on Hyperscale plane talking, (or I can if you are not a member) as Lynn Ritger posts regularly there. and this is his forthcoming book https://www.mortonsbooks.co.uk/product/view/productCode/15806/book-messerschmitt-bf-109-origins-and-evolution So he's in the bright red camp.... HTH

One a never did in my youth. I have a couple of Frog, a sealed box and bagged one, but got a decal less Novo one via ebay as builder at @Adrian Hills suggestion 20240203_141337 by losethekibble, on Flickr 20240203_141602 by losethekibble, on Flickr Had a test fit, and I even stuck it on the Bentley plans. Not the worst Hurricane kit ever. Been a bit mojoless recently, and it's really not worth trying to upgrade so will be OOB, may blank the wheel well to avoid see through. On quirk is the way they show the internal wood frames on the rear fuselage as vertical lines. I suspect they used the plans in Aircraft of the Fighting Powers, I'll have a look later. And be a good tester for some paint mixes I did a while back... I have a part Aeromaster Foreign Hurricanes sheet with an Irish Air Corps Mk,I, 105 The main markings are the same so I should be able to make up one of these I have seen it suggest the IAC planes had upper in Dark Green and Medium Sea Grey though, but photos, online at least are scare. the other well known pic is of Mk.I's Hopefully a simple fast build and an interesting paint scheme. Thanks for reading T

that would be @AndyL

the Fly kit is decent, just not an easy build. There were very few Mk.IIA in the BoB, the main user was 111 Sq, I've not seen a photo of one, so appearance is 'best guess' from how the Sq applied codes. the MkIIB at Duxford is painted as a IIA from 111 Sq more http://www.primeportal.net/hangar/mark_hayward/hurricane_iia/ AFAIK this is a reasonable guide to how Z2315 would appear. Pics of 111 Sq in the BoB are very rare. There are more when they ended up Drem in Oct 1940 but I don't think they took their Hurricanes up north Xtradecal do a sheet of 1/32nd 30 inch codes which are similar to the pic above https://www.hannants.co.uk/product/X32047 The link mentions 615 Sq having some IIA's, not seen pics of them either. Outboard guns and the tropical vents Tropical vents, let heat out the cockpit, they are standard fit on all trop aircraft, and became standard fit on late production, hence BBMF planes have them. Overlooked, and Hase and Revell moulded them on. And never said to remove them... Just in front pilots boot, below the footstep. Assume fitted for any Non UK Mk.II Hurricanes, and late production, so LA-LF , MW, and PG-PZ serials. HTH

The manual refers to 45 gallon tanks, both fixed ferry and drop tanks, see the image from the manual re the Mk.IV above. I've seen them noted as 44 gallon as well, but perhaps another oft repeated glitch? Something else too look out for.

erm, that's not the point, it's sold as 'Airframe and Miniature' and it fails badly in what it supposed to do. It doesn't add much to the author previous SAM datafile either. Hawker Hurricane and Sea Hurricane by Tony O Toole with Martin Derry and Neil Robinson (ISBN 10: 1473827256ISBN 13: 9781473827257) does most of what A&M16 sets out to do, the model builds are better and the profiles are mostly good, as in I know the reference image. Lack the detail and walkround images. I have been meaning to repost a more indepth critique for the A&M 16 book, I did add it to the site review and it got removed, possibly for length, as it went into detail. Stupidly I didn't save it, I on roll and just did it. All the online reviews praise it, and it does appear really good, well presented, good paper, clear photos and drawings, well written (as in spelling and general layout) but it's style over content. I just ran across a great term for it. A mug's eyeful. something which was made to look impressive with all sorts of superficial features but, not only did they have no real function, they disguised the underlying shoddiness of the product itself. It was in reference to hi-fi, but it seems to catch a lot of what really irks me. I have read critique of other publications by the same author, and have had personal conversations with published authors on this, without going into detail, they seem a 'sausage factory' that churns out product. And realistically you cannot do indepth research and produce that volume of work. Regarding peer review, they work to a schedule, IIRC they could not wait for 2 weeks to get their Boomerang book read over by an airframe restorer and expert. The resulting book suffered as a result, the in-depth critique was on the now defunct Aussie Modeller site. The Hurricane book is IMO particularly poor, though it's the only one I have, and now I just don't trust anything that they produce and won't buy them to find out if other are similar, and I don't have the knowledge or references to search through. Simply as it's full of omissions*, frequently wrong, particularly in photo captions, and is thoroughly misleading. The basic history section is OK, but it goes down hill after that. Here's an example of total fantasy. Sea Hurricane Ib RP - based on a well known photo of an airframe which pretty much everything is known except the code running order on the port side.. No publication I have ever seen has ever mentioned a Mk.I having rockets fitted. The book says photo of plane from unknown unit, but with clearly visible codes so they haven't really tried. How and why the think it's a Mk.I is puzzling, as you can't see the nose, or the leading edge of the wing. The photo in question first appears AFAIK in the PSL Classic Aircraft and How to Model Them No.4, (1974) small pic with a line drawing profile, but with the serial and unit and date. There is a photo of this book in the book section. It has also appeared as an option in the 72nd Revell Sea Hurricane and on an Aeromaster and Model Alliance decal sheet. The actual aircraft is in 4 photos from the incident. Here's a collage the image in the book is lower right. Note the clearly visible codes. 760 Sq was training Firefly pilots in how to fire rockets BTW, But some poor sod will be thinking there is a Sea Hurricane Ib RP..... The kit reviews are not very good, wordy, but lacking useful detail, like what's wrong and how to fix them, and mentioning they didn't have a 1/24th Airfix kit for review.... it's only been available since 1973 and available new for at least half the time since so tracking one down would be so difficult... The isometric drawings are a waste of time, as they don't really show the small details, which is where the difference are, and are confusing as they lump in various one offs. This approach can work well with some subjects, like the Spitfire, where they show well different noses and tails, but not in this case. The profiles and colour details are rehashes of previous work by the artist, pretty, often wrong etc. A few are some of the classic schemes only known from profiles... BE581 as per the profile, the orange radar calibration scheme, the A-A red Elephant. https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235009172-riaf-hurricane-with-elephant-nose-art-did-it-exist/ and https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235009172-riaf-hurricane-with-elephant-nose-art-did-it-exist/page/3/#elControls_4086834_menu specifically, the repeat of the A-A profile, and HV538 as a IIC as per the linked profile, or this, the profile, and a few pages later, the reference photo, no mention that they are both HV538/B, so.... how does the profile stack up against the photo? Edit - for ease of comparison, this is the photo of HV538 and the profile 2nd below (errors - wrong MK, wrong shape and position B, wrong position of serial, wrong fin flash, no ID bands, no nose art, black spinner, mostly likely if TLS) this garbage has a life of it's own, the top two being done, AGAIN, on a Art Scale decal sheet.... I already seen one Arma Hurricane ruined with the red elephant scheme... Oh, being very very generous, if HV538 survived long enough to get rewinged, nose art and SEAC bands....where's the ref photo? Oh, the Irish Air Corps profile above.... that's wrong as well... I can't recall if that one ended up in A&M16 as well, but the link shows the book the other are from. If you know the subject there are some good photos, (don't trust the captions) and some useful manual drawings. Try finding this in there, the omissions I mention Props and spinners? https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/234980181-hawker-hurricane-propellers-and-spinners-a-modellers-guide/ Tropical vents, not mentioned at all. Mk.II carb intake, understanding the IID and IV, internal colours. Nothing specific or just incomplete or wrong try and find the information in this link in the book https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235128469-arma-hobby-148th-hurricane-iic- optional-parts-description-spinners-cannon-barrels-tailwheels-tropical-vents/ . Some is mentioned is passing. Depressingly they don't really seem to found out the sheer amount of info available on forums. They evidently never had a look here, like reading this thread that has been going for years.... Occasionally it veers into near comedy, with the author noticing a detail in querulous manner, example are the wider carb intake spotted on a Mk.IID (when the fuselage and engine is basically the same on all Mk.II's, the drawings show the Mk.I intake as well) so ALL Mk.II's have the wider carb intake... and a comment about noticing added armour glass on the Mk.IV in Belgrade... and wondering what It means? Fine on here, but in a supposed reference book? Would that not spark an inquiries as to the reason? Perhaps a look through the Mk.II manual? In the addendum on the Mk.IID and Mk.IV , note paragraph 2 describing the changes perhaps? see https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235087855-hurricane-mkiv-radiator-guard-another-lost-detail/ there are threads here one the wings and other details or this, from summer 2020 https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235005804-hurricane-p3886-uniqe-fabric-wing/page/2/#elControls_3735801_menu All available on public forum. No mention of any of this. The above critique is from memory, as I'm not sure where the fuller annotated one is. (memory stick, dead laptop? ) I'm not about to pull the book out. It makes me very cross in about 5 minutes. There are more, like describing the one and two piece nose ring, when the rectangular starboard hatch came in, 5 vs 4 spoke wheels... what else the 72nd kit builds by Libor Jekl are good, the 48th and 32nd by Steve Evans are well done technically but have annoying mistakes in details of the markings. There is a list of aftermarket and decals, with no indication of if they are of any use or availability. Yes, I know that a list like this will inevitably be obsolete, and there is a book list, or a photo of various covers. Does fill the book out, adding to it's apparent completeness. And all this for only £25. Any positives? It does a have manual drawing of a Met Psychrometer, and Met Flight Hurricane in Northern Ireland and a page of radar experimental fit, these are worthwhile, and are some of the items that @StevSmar maybe referring to. There are some good walkround and detail shots, of museum and warbirds, but these need lack background info to make the best of them. This maybe why Steve is less damming than I am, it's my pet subject and I was sorely disappointed, and £18 poorer... I got it in a sale. Evidently it has sold well, so I can see this cobblers being the source of much that will irritate me for years to come. Best recent book for modeller use recently is Wingleader Photo Archive book which is excellent, really well captioned interesting photos, and does a good job of unravelling the complex tale of the Mk.I Hurricane, best recent non specialist subject (as in Czechoslovak pilots or Hawker the Yugoslav story for example) Hurricane book. https://wingleader.co.uk/books/hurricane-mki-wpa3/ has a pdf sampler. As I have mentioned before, the Hurricane suffers from 'not being the Spitfire' and also being overall consistent and straightforward, in many ways much of this is only really of interest to modellers and a few dedicated Hurricane buffs. And because most of the book don't have this, and the only place you will find much of this is on here, it's a bit buried unless you know to ask, which means knowing to ask questions you didn't need know you needed to ask...... HTH

I have that Bf109G, it's not good, but the Airfix Hurricane IIc they did at the same time is much worse, I don't think any of it correct in shape, or frequently in detail. Likely they used one of the many poor drawings and never looked at any photos...