Michael louey

Hi Cookie, Great Spitfire! I have a couple of questions for you. I'm also building the Airfix Mk 24 currently though mine is in camouflage PK682. I've just been reading my Phileditions book and noticed this was a rebuilt Mk 22. Do you know if all Mk 24's had the long prop blades and updated undercarriage covers? I have a Special Hobby Mk 21 which has these spare parts so I can change them if required. Regards Michael

Great build of the Wingnuts kit. I've just bought a 1/72 Roden kit and it has the same marking options!

Great model as usual Tony, looks just like the real thing. Cheers Michael

Hi Aoshima produced a kit recently - http://freetimehobbies.com/1-700-aoshima-uss-wasp-cv-7-plastic-model-kit/ Notice the box art - Aoshima seems to like doing box art showing adversaries being defeated. A similar box art was done for HMS Hermes. I am sure the Japanese Sub wasn't wafting around on the surface after torpedoing Wasp. Cheers Michael

Hi J-W, Good luck getting a RotaChute - Though a dead end, it is cute. I got mine really cheap at the local Hobby Shop (I think it was about AUS $10 about half the price I've seen it online). I had a look at your FA 330 - Well Done! You've added more detail than me however it looks like you used my initial rigging technique with thread. I had real trouble with tension and replaced it with wire! Cheers Michael

Hi J-W, The Rotachute is a kit by "Fly" models. It is 1/72nd however "Fly" also produce this kit in 1/32nd where it is still not very large but the detail will be more visible. One of our club members has this kit. I know of the FA330, I built one alongside this RotaChute - Full details of the build here http://z15.invisionfree.com/72nd_Aircraft/index.php?showtopic=8975 Thanks for the info Dave. He sounds like the British counterpart of our Fred David, the Austrian Jew who designed the CAC Boomerang. He was interned at the start of the war and had to report to the police fortnightly while designing the Boomerang. Goes to show that immigrants who have experienced persecution show a greater desire to "do their bit" than locals who haven't experienced what they are facing. Thanks for the comments guys. Cheers Michael

So after finishing a couple of Spitfires, this came up on the Production Line. It was going from the sublime to the ridiculous. British inventors are great for innovative ideas and some are quite left field. A number of them have really advanced aviation - In Flight refuelling, Practical VTOL Fighters, mirror landing systems. Sometimes the ideas don't really take on though and this is one of them. The idea was a controllable machine to land agents precisely behind enemy lines. The more practical alternative used was dropping them off with STOL aircraft like the Lysander. I wonder how the agent would hide this thing after landing.... The kit is miniscule and other than handling very small parts, there were no real issues with the kit. There are a couple of items Fly wants you to "scatchbuild" which I found interesting. The main problem is how to stop this being a tail sitter as there is no place to put weights. The only solution is sticking it to a base which is basically the top of a jam jar with a cutout from a cardboard tarmac base. Cheers Michael

Hi Selwyn, Yes, the Blenheims were non operational. They were used as multi engine familiarisation training for the Beaufighter II's being taken up at the time (Previous aircraft were Defiants). The photo shows the airframe with a gunpack so it is possible it was also used for gunnery practice. ADF serials lists the various Blenheims attached to RAAF squadrons. Looks like I may have misread the book (rushing) and the timeframe may be late 41. http://www.adf-serials.com.au/blenheim.htm Cheers Michael

Now I've nearly cleared the deck of "committed" projects (other than one freestyle one), I'm thinking of going back to the Airfix Blenheim 1 I planned about a year ago. The main question I have is the colour of the numeric "20" on the airframe I planning to build. It is a 456 Squadron Blenheim in all black night fighter scheme L4907 and previously operated with 54 OTU. There is a Type A roundel next to it and the colour of the 20 is light off white. The original picture is in Fighter Nights by John Bennett on Page 40. Are there standard colours for the OTU markings during this time scale (late 1940)? The 20 is behind the roundel on the right side. Same for the left? Any help welcome. Regards Michael

Thanks for the comments. I didn't realise the kit was so rare these days. I'd be up to tackling a 2nd airframe with the fixed tail wheel but I think I can wait until a new kit arrives! Cheers Michael

Thanks for all the comments. Jean - As far as I know, I would have used the standard colour Humbrol calls Ocean Grey - It googles up as 106. There is a small chance I used an ancient can of Humbrol Authentics of which I have lots of stock of some colours but I doubt a commonly used colour like Ocean Grey would have lasted this long. I had a quick look at my RAF museum chart this morning and the colour chip didn't have much of a blue tinge - i.e. more like the Humbrol however it's only a small area. Strangely the photo of a Mk IX on the cover seems to show a bluer cast like the Model master Ocean grey but since it's a warbird and colour photography/lighting make judgements a bit of a mine field, it can be taken with a grain of salt. The undersurface colour would be similar - I would just google up Humbrol Medium Sea Grey. The green is not Humbrol. I used Testors Model master. In the past Humbrol's RAF Dark Green was too green and not olive enough. Cheers Michael

Hi Wooksta, Very nice build. I built the 1st Pegasus kit a long time ago. The main things I recall about it were - the really thick canopy, very thick props and radiators that needed a lot of work to open up their faces. I did have the Rareplanes kit at one stage too, not sure if I still do. I picked up the CMR kit a couple of years ago and plan to build it "as is". It belonged to one of our club members who passed away. He used to have 2 parallel themes to me - Spitfires and FW 190's and we used to compare our builds. Since you moulded your own kit - what's wrong with the CMR one? I have vague recollections that maybe it and the later (AZ?) kit may have nose profiles which are too slim in plan to fit a Griffon. Cheers Michael

Thanks for the info! I have a few Eduard Mk IX and Mk XVI's and I did notice they had a lot of spare optional parts. I didn't notice (or remember) that they had spare cockpit parts. As for too many Sptifires, I did think of going on to an Airfix Mk 24 but I had a few items I am "committed" to finish so had to delay that one. Thanks Michael

After building a Mk XIV, I felt like I was on a bit of a run and decided to break open the Xtrakit Mk XII. In general, the kit went together pretty well for a limited run kit. Only a few items to address - 1. The kit supplies some wing bulges to be fitted only to some airframes (including MB882 which I built) however there are no pictures showing these at all - I left them off. 2. Two sets of wheels are supplied - covered and spoked. I saw photos of MB882 with both and I think the "covers' are only temporary when at rest - I used the spoked ones. 3. The antenna is very blobby and I got a pack from Quickboost and used one as a replacement. 4. The sky of the kit decals looks a bit dark to me but the special font/size is pretty hard to find so I just lived with the kit decals. I experimented with a Model Master Ocean Grey compared to the Humbrol version on my Mk XIV. Looks a bit bluer in cast. Not sure which is more accurate as both seem in the ball park of my MAP chips. I noticed a post on "Aces shot down by Spitfires" listed this airframe as having shot down "Bully" Lang which was quite interesting to find out. I really only chose the subject as many of the photos (and this was a well photographed airframe) were taken when flown by Don Smith a RAAF 'ace'. I always try to model an airframe with an Australian connection where possible. Some consider the Mk XII the prettiest of all the Spitfires - Ventura uses it as their logo! Cheers Michael

Hi Rob, Thanks for reminding me. Yes the really odd u shaped cockpit in the kit must be Fujimi's idea of an "easy" fit for the kit though why they chose this and not a more plausible flat floor/rudder arrangement like many Hasegawa kits (even thought not accurate either) is hard to fathom. It was probably one of the reasons not to open the canopy even though I had a nice thin vac canopy. I wonder where I can 'borrow' a cockpit from to do the next kit. Maybe not to hard to scratch something a bit more realistic. Cheers Michael

With all the interesting discussion regarding 1/72 Spitfire XIV kits, I've decided to post the Fujimi kit I built last year. The subject is a RAAF 451 Squadron airframe based at Gatow Germany post war. When I went looking for a low back Mk XIV at the time (probably 2015) they were scarcer than I expected and I ended up buying one from Taiwan. Problems started from Day 1 when I found the brown plastic as brittle as eggshell. (I managed to snap both the wing and fin). The kit looks authentic (box, decals and all) but one of my fellow club members thinks there have been some lower quality counterfeits coming out from Asia. Luckily I also could get high back Mk XIV's relatively easily from a local shop, so I used the couple of low back unique parts (rear spine and some clear parts) from the Taiwan kit as conversion parts. Regarding the Fujimi kit - The main work is filling all the gun panel lines, removing the pressure intake in the cowl and cutting out the rear tail wheel cover. Not all of this is mentioned in the instructions. I also have an AZ kit but the Fujimi is a lot easier to do a good rear camera port option as in the FR version I built. Since then a new Sword kit has come out but I haven't got it yet - I managed to get a twin pack from Fujimi just before it came out, so I am 'right' for XIV's for the time being. The decals are from Red Roo and went down well. The stencils are from Aviaeology from memory. The only hard bit to do were the yellow cut out stencils for the pilot's door which are really prominent in the photos. I got these from a Vampire Xtradecal sheet but not sure where I'll find more of these. The Fujimi kit still looks find but filling the right panels and getting the rear spine to blend in was time consuming. I also eventually used a Falcon canopy as the kit canopy seem to have "crease marks" which I couldn't polish out after sanding them smooth (maybe another side issue with the Taiwan kit). One thing I immediately noticed was the low "sit" of this model compared to various other ones I have on display (Sword Vc, Xtrakit XII, AZ VII). The only other comparable kit was the Airfix Mk I. I wonder which is more correct or whether it is somewhere in between. Cheers Michael

Hi Graham, I used the Red Roo decals for my 1/72 Sptfire XIV last year and from memory, they have the Yellow component of the roundel as a seperate item. The corresponding 1/48th item is probably the same Refer this item in the forum.

Hi Tony, Beautiful model as usual. The Hasegawa kit is still nice after all this time. There was an article on this plane in the ADF serials newsletter with some photos in the last year. I guess the DK instructions didn't call out any medium green blotches on the Olive drab? Hard to tell from the photos in ADF serials. Which resin wheels did you use and where did you get them? The ones I've seen nearly cost as much as the kit when you include postage. Cheers Michael

Looks really great and clean! I have these 2 kits and hope to build a CAC Sabre at some stage too. By the way, there is also a High Planes conversion which I think has open air brakes (I have that one too). Would this have made the conversion easier? Cheers Michael

Happily the Jet Provosts have already hit the shelves here in Australia and I've picked one up to backdate to a A99-1 Jet Provost T2, the only airframe operated by the RAAF. Interestingly enough, one of our club members once owned this aircraft Cheers Michael

Hi Calum, I personally liked your diorama the most but I wasn't judging and I'd be biased since I'm a ship modeller more than a military modeller. The scene really makes me feel like a balmy holiday up north with the great colour of the ocean. I did have a chat with one of our clubs best diorama and figure modellers and he would have had it in the top 4 but he wasn't judging that category this year. Looking forward to seeing your next project Cheers Michael

Not sure about "No surviving Beaus" - The one at the Australian War Memorial looks at least externally complete, if not a lot more... I should get to Canberra and have a closer look at it. https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/REL/20173/ Looks like its been in static restored condition since 2003.... http://www.beaufortrestoration.com.au/Pages/RestorationChild/AWM_A9-557.html The one at Hendon looks pretty complete too. http://plane-crazy.k-hosting.co.uk/Aircraft/WW2-Planes/Beaufort/beaufort.htm Cheers Michael

Hi Callum, So it's you I have to thank for being able to purchase a ready to build Canberra rather than modifying a Juan Carlos! Are you bringing any of the dio's to the Melbourne Expo? I remember ushering you to the comp table with the 30's Cruiser dio and they are all works of art. Cheers Michael

Hi Ley, I think I just saw some plans in an old scale models last night. PM me and I'll see if I can mail them to you,. Cheers Michael

Hi Sean, My son and I are building 2 Fujimi Mk XIV's currently. I also have the SAM guide to Griffon engined spitfires with reviews/comments on all the then available kits. Both ours are XIVe's so you won't have to make quite all the updates we do. You still have to do the following (some Fujimi intructions have some of these notes, some don't) - 1. Remove the pressurisation intake below the exhausts - they are only applicable for the XIX 2. Fill the underfuselage photo apertures (back of wing root) 3. cut out the tailwheel covers - Mk XIV's had retractable tail wheels (This is tricky) and either fix the covers or make new covers from card. A tip to get the cowling to fit better - attach the upper cowls to the fuselage first prior to joining the halves. This should fit better than joining the cowls first prior to adding them to joined fuselage halves. Regarding the Heller Mk XVI. I built this a long, long time ago (twice - the first attempt looked really bad with the OOB Heller decals - They were some hideous green instead of sky. I only discovered aftermarket sky decals after the 1st kit) the main issues with this are 1. The underwing radiators are much too deep 2. The bubble canopy curvature is meant to be wrong (too bulbous?). The only real solution is to use an aftermarket vacform canopy. Best of luck with your build Michael