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. :)

RichG

Members
  • Content Count

    120
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

114 Excellent

About RichG

  • Rank
    New Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    High Wycombe
  • Interests
    Royal Air Force (post-war / cold-war... mainly)

Recent Profile Visitors

1,794 profile views
  1. RichG

    Airfix 2020

    Not sure you can draw that conclusion, just because the Duxford example is a Bolingbrooke in origin. As was already said Airfix were well aware of this, hence the need to visit the Finnish Air Force Museum when planning their new 1/48th kit. I don't actually have the kit so not sure whether it would lend itself to a Mk.IV issue with appropriate parts; however the actual example Airfix examined / photographed in Finland was a genuine Blenheim Mk.IV. So I would imagine the Airfix designer would have been well aware of all the differences between a Mk.I and Mk.IV. Given Airfix policy of releasing different marks from a single kit, it has to be a reasonable assumption that an option for a Mk.IV was considered (and possibly planned for) at an early stage of the kit's design. Whether one will emerge... who knows! More background information on the Blenheim kit development in this Airfix Workbench Blog. Rich
  2. RichG

    Airfix 2020

    Always interested to hear news of what Airfix are looking at... will it result in a kit? When the report is credible my feeling is "no smoke without fire" and yes it often does... eventually. I am sure someone will be along to say this is absolutely not the case or that Airfix look at 100's of subjects Not sure I subscribe to the idea that Airfix deliberately lay false trails; that would just be cruel! Rich
  3. Hi If anyone is interested it is currently available on Amazon UK - Hasegawa 1:72 Eurofighter Typhoon - for £27.89 and free delivery (UK). Reduced from the RRP of £39.99. Rich
  4. Well I've had me micrometer out to check things out. In fact examination actually spots some variation in porthole sizes visually - to my eye at least. Taking, for example, the main row of 10 on the starboard side starting from the bow - the first is marginally smaller (4.3mm) than the next three (4.75mm) followed by the next 2 smaller the next 2 bigger followed by a smaller and finally a bigger one - if you get my drift. I know to some this will represent nit-picking (is nit-picking hyphenated by the way? ) and whether with such small sizes it matters a jot; but there is something about the eye being able to spot patterns like this... Perhaps framing would reduce the size and restore consistency. The decal sheet contains two variations of D type roundel, one is in the brighter colours and the other with the same dull red (and blue) as the C type. On the wing of the 230 Squadron Berlin Airlift example the C type is combined with the type D fuselage roundels in the bright colours. On my sheet and to my eye, the Type D roundels in the duller red actually look the more realistic! Should'a gone to Specsavers Rich
  5. Matt What they all said above! +1 beautiful model. Rich
  6. Hi Alan Many thanks. Very helpful advice which I will certainly follow. The portholes also look a little large in comparison with these photos. The porthole frames look quite visible in the last photo so I was thinking of adding frames - either using photo etch or scratch built - to reduce their apparent size. Cheers Rich
  7. I have the kit but not yet tested the fit. Only fondled its beautiful plastic... I have to confess I am no Sunderland expert but it looks to be an exquisitely detailed model, hopefully with accurate dimensions and overall shape. The kit has finely engraved panel lines (nothing like the Italeri Sunderland - think current Airfix standard). The decal sheet is flawlessly printed by Cartograf and includes stencilling. Marking schemes for 2 RAF machines which flew in the Far East in the support of anti-communist insurgent missions in Malaya and Korea, another RAF machine which took part in the airlift during the Berlin blockade and a French machine based at Lanvéoc-Poulmic Naval Base in 1951. I like the fact that there are RAF "Type D" roundels in differing shades of dark blue - subtle but different. The mid-upper turret and its transparency and finely moulded ASV masts are included (not directly referenced in the assembly instructions and crossed-out on the parts plan). In fact I think parts for different Sunderland variants are there in the box. However there is only one set of engines, mounts and props included. And I know these were different on the Mk. V. Whether they represent Pegasus or the correct PW engines and fit for the Mk.V I am not sure - I would say they are PW R1830's going by the cowling flaps. It is not something I personally would be able to tell without references. Maybe SH plan a different engine sprue for different boxings? Incidentally I note the small PE fret is marked "Sunderland Mk II, III, V" - so a bit of a clue there... I am sure someone will be along to give a more learned critique of the kit - but for me it looks the part and will doubtless form the basis of many fine models of this charismatic aircraft. It has certainly kindled a personal interest in the subject - I lived at RAF Seletar where the last Sunderlands flew with the RAF (albeit 5 years after their retirement). And coincidently a few years later at RAF Gatow in Berlin a few minutes walk from the Havel Lake where these Sunderlands operated during the Airlift. Perhaps I need to order another... Provided any fit issues that emerge are within my ability to correct, then I think in my terms anyway, this is a fabulous kit. Here is a link to the instructions so you can see what's what Sunderland Instructions and the Special Hobby page with the markings Short Sunderland Mk. V Hope this helps - I don't think you will be disappointed. Rich
  8. Of course the Airfix of 2007 (Nimrod era) was effectively a different company then. The Britmodeller thread of the day makes interesting reading The excitement of the pending release of the long awaited Nimrod kit is almost palpable with people discussing how long they had it on preorder and how many copies they were going to buy, options for what if's etc. Any manufacturer reading that thread would have rightly believed they had struck the mother lode - a sure fire winner. There was debate that the 'Limited' label attached to the Nimrod kit was actually misleading. Essentially the Airfix product run being set to meet the demand registered by the retail outlets rather than a specified amount, so the hysteria that followed the previous TSR.2 might not be repeated. It was suggested Airfix would be producing in excess of 23000 - so if that was based on retail orders (perhaps already inflated by retailers themselves to catch the enthusiastic demand on release) was actually doubled by mistake... Well as i say makes interesting reading in the context of this thread's original post. Rich
  9. Well the flaps do actually appear to be separate parts and I assume these can be positioned down. So it looks like the difficult cutting bit / after market part is not required. Tha aileron droop would need to be set at its maximum deflection for a carrier launch so the ailerons need to be separated from the top wings and set at the required angle - hopefully not too difficult. Similarly for the tailplane droop also I think. It does seem slightly odd to have flaps but not all the control surfaces separate. I do wonder whether this might be Airfix reacting to adverse comments from some about their Phantom FG1/FGR2 having too many options or being over engineered / wasteful. Consequently they made the difficult flap part separate and the rest modifiable with a modicum of care. Interesting to see if this is an option in the instructions. Rich
  10. An interesting point, thanks Alan. Those of us used to our own "home English" acquire many new turns of phrase, and we get used to even more. But for most of us, some phrases just never sit right and I wonder if the term "screwed-up" used in this thread a few times about this kit, is one. I suspect to English speakers outside the UK (in Australia or NZ, and possibly the US... not sure), it simply means "made a mistake"; whereas to those of us in the UK the term does tend to imply something very much stronger along the lines of "to make a total mess of something," or "to completely ruin something". And as such has the potential to cause some strong reactions. Just sayin' .... another case of divided by a common language? Rich
  11. Now this might have been coincidence or a slow internet connection at my end but out of curiosity I did try logging on to the Hornby website during the programme... it was sooooo sloooow loading - just like at the time of the Airfix 2019 range announcements earlier this year. Could this have been the result of significant increased traffic to the website generated by the programme? As I said could be coincidence, but it would be fascinating to know if the programme has generated significant extra interest and subsequent incresaed sales for Hornby... Perhaps we'll have to wait for Series 2 to find out... Rich PS always fancied an A4 Class, 4-6-2, 4464 'Bittern' in LNER garter blue... no stop...
  12. Missed this yesterday but thanks for the heads up Jim. I'm halfway through on i-Player - work beckons... But really enjoying it so far. James May's slightly sardonic commentary - whilst gently affectionate & enthusiastic is well suited I think - although others might disagree. The visit to Jim's model club was possibly predictable, but still made me laugh out loud "for some reason our cameraman missed the other table full of young women..." Rich
  13. RichG

    desert pink paint

    I understand that the temporary paint for normal airframes ARTF - Alkali Removable Temporary Finish - "desert pink" colour on RAF Aircraft in Operation Granby was actually the same as / matched to FS30279 Desert Sand and not to a British Standard shade, as may be supposed. Although I also understand there was some variation in the colour ("pinkieness"? ) observed on RAF Tornado's; seemingly down to where they were despatched from - with RAF Germany having to mix their own paint, there being none of the ARTF paint available in RAFG stores. So there is the potential for some further latitude. There are now actually quite a few model paint options for the FS30279 shade including from Hataka, AK Interactive Real Colour, Vallejo Model Air, LifeColor etc in addition to MRP and old favourites from Humbrol and Xtracolor as "desert pink". The colour used on the larger RAF aircraft of the period (Victors, VC10's, Nimrods & Canberras) predated Operation Granby and was originally British Standard shade (unofficially?) called "Hemp" ( BS4800/10-B-21); which has subsequently become officially "Camouflage Beige" (British Standard BS381C 389).
  14. It's quite interesting to read that earlier thread and hear people who worked on them say that's the term they used all the time whilst others swear they don't recall it ever being used. I think it must depend on where based and period of time. As to origin, I suspect its nothing more than typical shortening a formal name into an easier word that someone coined at some point and it stuck. Brits (and Aussies too) have a tendency to shorten lots of words in the English vocabulary - wimpy, mozzie, sarnie, defo etc. I guess we'll never know...
×
×
  • Create New...