Jump to content

RJP

Gold Member
  • Posts

    431
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About RJP

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Central Canada
  • Interests
    WWII in the air. Excavating the stash.

Recent Profile Visitors

3,444 profile views

RJP's Achievements

Established Member

Established Member (3/9)

271

Reputation

  1. That's right, two different toolings. Instructions for both are available on Scalemates and show a slightly different parts breakdown, Some of the Merit stuff was quite good. The Avro 504 I recall lusting for when my older brother had one. Fondly remembered as having some pretty scale thickness wings.
  2. I eventually realised that a museum item is a perfectly valid subject. There's nothing in the rule book says you have to make models only of service machines in service. Actually, there is no rule book. For me at least the satisfaction comes from doing the work. Scale Models ran a series many years ago around modelling RAF Museum aircraft as they are displayed. No weathering or staining, no mud, gunk or even squadron markings unless that is how the machine is displayed. I find the idea liberating, allows me to focus.
  3. The new Mustang sheet isn't showing up, the link on the website just repeats the image for #48020.
  4. Careful with the anti-glare panel on the camouflaged examples. If it was applied it would be unusual and unnecessary. 2564 certainly didn't have it when photographed. Also, the code letter D on 2564 should be rounded, not straight, style. Is there a plan view? If so, you can check to see if 2564 has B type roundels on the wing upper and yellow patches on the mainplanes and tailplanes. I tried googling 2564 for a picture, no soap. I have one shot in my downloads but provenance is long since forgotten. I could find nothing on AJ733.
  5. It was an experimental installation, not necessarily meant for the Wellington. Here's what William Green had to say: “Among the many experimental Wellingtons used during the earlier stages of the war, one of the most interesting was the prototype Mk. II (L4250) which was fitted with a very large dorsal turret mounting a 40-mm Vickers “S” gun, automatic predictor sight, and offset cupola. The turret had originally been designed for use by the Boulton Paul P.92 twin-engined fighter, and its flight trials in the Wellington were a part of the general development of the turret. As first flown in 1941, this aircraft retained the standard single fin-and-rudder assembly, but a twin tail unit was fitted in January 1942 to improve the field of fire. The twin fins and rudder were, in fact, the tips of two standard Wellington fin-and-rudder assemblies, and were mounted inboard on the tailplane and braced to the fuselage by a system of struts. The Vickers type number 416 covered the design of this aircraft which was provisionally known as the Wellington VII.” Green's book Famous Bombers of the Second World War (Macdonald & Co 1959) also carries a photograph of the later version, twin tails and yellow prototype undersurfaces. A very different beast and it should be eye-catching among the standard bomber schemes on the shelf.
  6. RJP

    Painting wheels

    What Space Ranger and Mike both said. If you are doing a tire moulded as a unit with a wheel (as on, say, the usual aircraft kit) it's wheel first, then the tire. A steady hand, braced against something large and immovable like a big old book is just the thing. Revolve the wheel/tire against the brush. A bit of practice and perfection awaits. I continue to be mystified by the use of an airbrush to paint detail items like wheels, especially big steel wheels on tanks. A standard hairy stick will do exactly what you need without the paraphernalia. All the setup, the masking, the overspray. Who needs it?
  7. Love the Lancastrian. If I'm not mistaken you are using the ancient (1963?) Revell kit. I have often thought the only way to fix the Revell windows and turrets was to remove them entirely. I'm looking forward to this.
  8. The roundel variations seem to illustrate the ordered but not instant change-over from A1 to C1 roundels and flash. Zooming in throws up more detail, eg evidence of local paint patching around the roundel of the nearest machine. Equally interesting are the oddly painted roundels on the second and third machines. Not so much having stopped in mid-conversion as one might expect on a busy operational unit with other things on their plate, it looks as if the blue portion also had wandered off circular. There are other odd edges to the yellow as it was reduced from the size it was on the 4th machine in line. Overall a delightful shot.
  9. There are pictures extant of near-serialled machines with the windows and it's a good bet that EE176 had them from the factory. They could have been overpainted but it's a stretch to think they would have been removed. Seems like a lot of effort for little gain. Of course documentation is unlikely. It's a mistake to think the date of a mod. introduction meant all previously-built machines received the mod., or that there was any proximity to that date if they did. And not all mods were necessarily made. You might well find the deep bomb aimer's blister alongside the original pitot location and needle blades on the props, or the shallow blister with the late pitot. The situation extended late into the proceedings. Have a google for EE182, just six machines later in presumably the same batch as EE176. After operational service it was flown to Canada for cold weather trials and there are some handy shots of this one having run off the end of the runway at Moran Michigan. The details are interesting - side windows in full bloom, squadron codes still applied, needle blades on the props, exhaust dampers removed. The best bet is, as always and especially with Lancasters, to believe photographs.
  10. Thanks, that's the kit I was talking about. It seems to me a consistent approach across a collection is a useful way to go, offering nothing to detract from the collection and allowing the subjects to speak. It sounds counterintuitive perhaps but it makes a pleasing overall effect. So while the idea of rivets sounds good they always come out far too big in 1/72. At even a moderate viewing distance they ought to just disappear just as if you are looking at the real thing. I've always simply got rid of them rather than endure again the heartache of acne.
  11. Airfix kits of that era were the reason I learned how easy it can be to work polystyrene. First a good scraping with a razor blade. That gets most of it, then on to wet 'n dry sandpaper used wet. When you've done all you can with 400 grit you can push on to finer paper though for a painted finish that wasn't necessary. The whole operation on a 1/72 scale fighter, say the Corsair, takes maybe 10 minutes. A swift wash in soapy water to get rid of the swarf and the finger grease and you're ready to start assembling. The only kit I didn't do that with was the original Airfix 1/72 B-17G and I regretted it. Testors rattle can silver paint emphasised them way too much. Still, if rivets are the only thing to complain about . . . One side observation about Revell kits of the era. Some, notably their Lancaster and B-24D had finer rivets (much nearer scale though not nearly near enough for 1/72!) and also finely engraved panel lines. Lose the rivets and you get a very nice surface to work with. Fond memories of the 1960s!
  12. It seems to me the reverse might be easier. Moving from light to dark ought to use less paint. That's certainly how I have done it since a bad experience with OD and Neutral Gray (on a Frog B-26?) many many years ago. I wandered through various pictures of Corsairs, Avengers and various 'Cats and it looks like that was common practice on the real thing - but that's a long way from actually knowing what they did. If you can't be sure in full scale . . .
  13. There is never a bad time to remember that! Not to forget the Lancasters, Hampdens, Hurricanes Catalinas and Cansos, and Fleets. Edit: And Tiger Moths and Chipmunks and more. Here's hoping Airfix will bring out a Canadian Chipmunk to accompany the British one.
  14. Is this recent price increases? I haven't been in the market for anything model-related in so long I've lost track. I wonder if it's lockdown-related. The massive price increases in lumber have been all over the news lately, a combination of restricted supply as mill operations closed down and increased demand as people spent vacation money on house improvements. I shudder at the cost of my current garden shed project. What had been a small weekend affair has had to evolve into serious construction technique to optimise payback on the material cost. The higher prices won't stop me but supply might become an issue.
  15. I don't use expensive sprue cutters, a cheapie flea market wire nipper does just fine for the first cut. The key is to use a really sharp blade for the finish cut. I still use a safety razor blade for that. Yes, you can still get them in drug stores though I haven't let one near my face for probably 30 years. They are cheap and flexible and don't require a handle. They make extremely smooth cuts and will not leave nubs so there's no need to sand or file anything to finish up.
×
×
  • Create New...