Jump to content

Tbolt

Gold Member
  • Posts

    3,253
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by Tbolt

  1. That's interesting, because the 109 is like that because it's done with Eduard. So are Eduard going to be boxing the P-36, or is this just the way SH are going? I would rather it was more like their P-40's as given a choice I prefer not to have rivet holes in 1/72nd.
  2. Tbolt

    MH434

    Better to just bump your originally post
  3. I know it's frustrating and there are a lot of inaccurate decals sheets out there. I've ended up buying other manufacturers sheets with the same aircraft on just to get something more accurate, though at least there's other aircraft on there I can build. I love the Thundercals decals, they do great research, I just wish they would do more sheets!
  4. The cowl flaps were painted in the camo colours, so mostly grey on the left and green on the right. Some of the Kits Worlds decals are a bit off on their research. http://147084544c678448852d-ddcc53207dce6036b290906311a424f9.r57.cf3.rackcdn.com/rfc/FRE_005549.jpg http://147084544c678448852d-ddcc53207dce6036b290906311a424f9.r57.cf3.rackcdn.com/rfc/FRE_005542.jpg http://147084544c678448852d-ddcc53207dce6036b290906311a424f9.r57.cf3.rackcdn.com/rfc/FRE_005581.jpg http://147084544c678448852d-ddcc53207dce6036b290906311a424f9.r57.cf3.rackcdn.com/rfc/FRE_005585.jpg
  5. If you hadn't already realised the exhaust panels along the belly, where the exhausts run, are made of different material, so they were darker in appearance.
  6. Looking good, love the cockpit. As mentioned do not use the 165 gallon drop tanks. As I mentioned in the other thread, I've seen pictures P-47M's with 150 gallon tanks under the wings, so I went through some of my references and this is what I've come up with. So far I can only find P-47M's with either no tanks fitted or 150's under the wings. If you've only got one 150, I would put it under the fuselage if you want something there, but if you have another Tamiya kit then stick one under each wing.
  7. Tbolt

    MH434

    Why are you asking again?
  8. Very nicely done. Well done on the third place
  9. Yes it does get a bit confusing as some tank do get called by slightly different sizes. The 150 tank had an actual capacity of 165 gallons, not to be confused with the 165 gallon tank! The 200 gallon tanks had a capacity of 215 gallons and Roger Freeman states that the 56th FG did receive them near the end of 1944 though I don't think I've ever seen a picture of one being used in Europe. I've seen them being used in the Pacific though I'm not sure if they were the same tanks. These tanks were commonly known as Brisbane tanks. Also note that the 150 gallon tanks came in either folded or welded type. The Tamiya kit is obviously the folded type and I modelled the welded type just by removing the fold. And the "Things" are sway braces.
  10. I think those tanks are 150's. The 200 was wider. On Darling Dottie I used Alclad II for the NMF then Colourcoats Insignia blue and for the lighter blue, Colourcoats Azure blue which I lightened with some white.
  11. I believe the N did have a relief tube, but so did the D. I've seen M's with 150's under the wings, but I don't remember seeing anything on the centreline. But it may have happened since it was possible to have another drop tank under the belly as well. I think the M looks just as good without anything on it.
  12. Yes like Paramedic said the Tamiya and the other kit manufacturers missed the fact that the cuffs are different on the M/N prop. Not difficult to modify the Tamiya prop, but it would take a bit of time getting all the cuffs to match. I wouldn't trying using the distributors and magneto block from the Academy kit as they are rubbish and using anything else would be better! Even the tail wheel stuck on there would look more realistic!
  13. The main difference in the wheels is the D had six spokes and the N had eight, though some warbird D have the eight spoke wheels fitted. The N style fillet is probably included in the kit because it was fitted to this specially marked up M. I recall seeing another M that looked like it had and N style fillet on as well. I'm not sure what the intermediate fillet is about.
  14. I should point out, though I modified the Ultracast wheels by filling in all the slots around the edge of the wheels, I only did this from photos that were not that clear, but I couldn't see the slots so that's what I went with. The True Details wheels have these slots also, so it may be me that is incorrect. I'm not aware of Academy decals being improved though I haven't used them for a long time.
  15. I would go with the Vector for the cockpit. I don't know if the Aires cockpit got redone but the older one I have isn't that great. You can either get the Vector prop (I think they are the only ones to do an M/N prop) or modify kit ones. I did use the Ultracast wheels on my build but I had to modify them as most of the wheels I've seen on N's were slightly differently. True Details also do a set of N wheels though they have incorrectly labeled them as D wheels (from the product pictures I've seen anyway).
  16. I guess it must have been on the right side, but I wonder how many aircraft actually used a camera there?
  17. I managed to get to my PC and pulled these of my hard drive showing the camera installations. Vertical cameras. Rear facing cameras.
  18. I'll be interested in what you dig up. I love PR aircraft and get a bit frustrated when companies like Eduard keep producing fighter version of Spitfires and ignore all the PR versions. At least they have given us an F-6D.
  19. Like you say they blanked off the side cameras position and just used the vertical one, but I didn't know there were two vertical cameras, I just though there was one on the left side just forward of the turbo as that what seem to be in the kit. Here's the left side vertical port. I'm guessing the right side camera was in the same place on the right side?
  20. Okay thanks. That wasn't clear when it translated to English.
  21. Eduard kits are generally easy to assemble, but some of their engineering choices do make you wonder why they produced a part a certain way that ends up making it more fiddly to assemble than it needs to be.
  22. I guess they are talking about lesser produced variants? That will be nice to see and would be also nice if they did that with their Spitfires.
×
×
  • Create New...