Jump to content
This site uses cookies! Learn More

This site uses cookies!

You can find a list of those cookies here: mysite.com/cookies

By continuing to use this site, you agree to allow us to store cookies on your computer. :)


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,159 Excellent

1 Follower

About stever219

  • Rank
    Very Obsessed Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

2,122 profile views
  1. stever219

    RAFs Big Cat

    Because at the time that this kit first saw the light of day slide moulding technology that would allow the undercut between the tailpipes to be moulded in with the rest of the fuselage halves was, at best, in its infancy as far as kits were concerned and was therefore considerably more expensive than “normal” tooling. It’s still not as inexpensive as normal tooling but it is now more common. Italeri couldn’t simply mould the entire engine door each side as a single part as the internal angle between hinge line and lower inner edge subtends more than 180 degrees and the doors have compound curvature over part of their lengths so, again, slide moulding would be required at some point.
  2. stever219

    Matchbox Meteors

    I’m not familiar with the Master parts but the barrel fairings (for essentially identical gun barrels) on the two aircraft types were differedpnt: those on the Firefly were circular in section when viewed end on whereas on the Meteor they had an oval section.
  3. There’s another one that was very acceptable at the root of the harbour arm below the west cliff that was our refuge one very wet and even windier lunchtime after committing my father-in-law’s ashes to the North Sea.
  4. Which chippy did you go to in Whitby? Hadley’s (IIRC) just up the road from the swing bridge on the abbey side of the river was usually good.
  5. stever219

    VC-10 tanker K3 and K4

    The K. 3s had the main deck cargo door on the port side.
  6. stever219

    Grump Britain.

    I share your pain: within living memory (2 years, max) I had to redecorate my (not yet teenage) daughter’s bedroom, a 9- by 11-foot box. It took me half a day to clear it enough to actually start doing something productive. She wants it “remodelled” next year..... Likewise gardening: I’m cr4p at it and I am sick to the back teeth of being perforated by rose thorns. Let me cut the grass and paint the fence and garden buildings (shed, daughter’s play-house) and I can be happy, but as for the rest I can’t tell a weed from the most priceless and unique horticultural specimen on God’s earth (or Fuller’s).
  7. I’m sorely tempted by this kit too, having already attempted three Mk. Is and a Mk. IV. The box art is the main driver, being so reminiscent of Roy Cross’ original but having it’s own darker aspect. One thing that Airfix have missed from their 1/72th Blenheim is the circular window in the W/OpAG’s ventral escape hatch on the starboard side just behind the bomb bay, as well as any indication of the hatch itself (nothing new here: every manufacturer to date who’s “done” a Blenheim is guilty of this little sin). Airfix’s new 1/48th scale kit does feature it, as do the drawings in Valiant Wings’ publication on the Blenheim. Thanks Tony for mentioning the Alley Cat transparency sets: I need to order some other bits from them, so I shall have to remember to include one or two of these too.
  8. stever219

    Opinions on ocean grey please

    Revell also do “Olivgrau” (sorry I can’t remember the number) which appears to be a not-too-bad match.
  9. stever219

    Neptunes, can someone enlighten me please.....

    P2V-5s were built with a twin-20mm cannon installation in the nose and tail positions, had a low-profile cockpit roof line that followed the line of the fuselage crown, small circular observation blisters below and behind the dorsal turret position and large wingtip tanks. The -7 introduced a clear-view nose, with a small trapezoidal window on either side, and deleted the guns and their turret. The cockpit canopy was blown, the transparency being hinged at the sides and opening along the centre line, giving a bulged profile. The ventral radome was moved forward around 3 feet, the weapons bay being lengthened forwards by thar much. The wingtip tanks were considerably slimmed down and a pair of J-47 gas turbines installed roughly half way from main engine nacelle to wingtip. The rear fuselage observation windows were enlarged and made square. A number of antenna fairings appeared on the lower rear fuselage sides and the tail turret and guns were replaced by a MAD (Magnetic Anomaly Detector) boom. Just to add to the fun some operators, for example the RAF, had many of their -5s modified to varying degrees. The RAF aircraft had the nose and tail turrets removed and replaced with the later “clear view” nose and MAD boom respectively but retained all of their other earlier features and did not acquire the J-47 installation.
  10. stever219

    Revell Victor K2

    Is the Norfolk Land Shark Tornado planned to wear markings for one of the Marham-based units?
  11. stever219

    Airfix Shackleton MR3...

    The way Airfix designed the sprues for the Mk. 2s suggests than a follow-up Mk. 3 wasn’t/isn’t high up their priorities list. Common parts (interior, tail surfaces, engines, props, antennae) are spread all over the existing sprues: to get an MR. 3 from that lot would require at least two additional large sprues for wings, fuselage, bomb doors, undercarriage and doors plus at least one smaller one for new transparencies. The cost of these would probably add another £10 to the retail price of each kit and leave modellers with a large pile of airframe spares. All is not lost however: Airfix have had access to original material from AVRO to enable them to produce the Mk. 2 kits so, hopefully, they noted anything pertaining to the Mk. 3 and filed it for future reference (either that or the design team are looking for an excuse to go to the SPT at Coventry and maybe get to play with WR963 again whilst conducting further research).
  12. We won’t tell if you don’t. Rule 1: Never trust a drawing or painting unless you’ve got a photo to support it. Doesn’t mean you haven’t produced a fine replica of an important subject: when it was introduced the night-fighting Beaufighter was a quantum leap over its Blenheim predecessor and it helped pave the way for the Mosquito to follow.
  13. stever219

    XM715 100 Squadron

    Thanks isaneng: I can’t understand why people are biased in favour of the VC10 either. I can recall one incident where a Super VC10 RAT was deployed in anger: G-ASGL (IIRC) was over the China Sea when all four engines ran down and stopped. The engineer had been feeding all four from one fuel tank and had been distracted, allowing the tank to be drained. Apparently the ensuing silence on the flight deck (even quieter than usual) was broken by the captain asking what was translated politely as “What have you done?” The drills were followed, the RAT deployed, a less-empty tank selected, alll four engines restarted and the flight resumed. Definitely not a routine occurrence.
  14. stever219

    XM715 100 Squadron

    RATs would be out at speeds below 200 knots IIRC as a precaution against loss of electrical power in the circuit or immediately after take-off (why didn’t the similarly-powered VC-10 and Boing 707 have to fly with RATs out at low speed?). AFAIK they were introduced on the Mk. 2 as a “get you started again” measure should the aircraft suffer total engine failure as the pressure wave from a nuclear explosion behind the aircraft passed the intakes and blew the fires out.
  15. stever219

    1/72 Meteor night fighter

    AFAIK Belgium didn’t operate NF. 14s.