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. :)

sharkmouth

Members
  • Content Count

    223
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by sharkmouth

  1. Right before the eyes of the pilot? Before the pilot, looking where? Up, down, left, right, or behind? Looking up is the sky and the canopy with the central bar most models omit. Looking behind is the armor, headrest, and scalloped sides to improve vision of the sky. With peripheral vision, one can barely make out the landing gear horn and fuel port. Looking forward, the pilot sees the sky, the gun sights (one of which is the ring and bead), instrument panel, & gun butts. Looking left is the sky, port wing, throttle, belly tank release, and so on. Looking right is the sky, starboard wing, radio, map case, hydraulic hand pump knob, and other items. Looking down ahead are the rudder pedals, control stick, starter pedal, main fuel tank gage to the left of the central seam, reserve tank gage to the right of the central seam, shut off valves, and the emergency hydraulic pump. What is the central seam? The seam created when both wings are attached together (meaning it is the upper wing surface that one sees). All these items described are in the cockpit. The upper wing surface the pilot sees and has access when flying is his/her cockpit floor. Tom Cleaver, who actually was in the same model of P-40 as the kit purports to be, stated clearly that "In both cases the wing is the "floor"." In the end, that means that there is no separate floor in the cockpit. Anyway, to return to the model being released, it seems that Airfix will be the only one correct. Bronco can, at the last minute, make corrections. I would love to see what they do. Regards,
  2. I have received a reply from Tom: "If you look at a Tomahawk fuselage in profile and a Kittyhawk fuselage in profile, the Tomahawk fuselage is deeper (or higher) while the top of the Kittyhawk fuselage is cut down in comparison. This is why the later cockpit is more shallow. In both cases the wing is the "floor". Tom" Well, this is the Bronco thread which does share the same error as the Trumpeter. Regards,
  3. Well Óttar, unlike Tom Cleaver (who sat in a P-40B/C) my experience is limited to the later P-40 series (an E, a K, M, and N) and none had a cockpit floor above the upper wing surface. This is why the seat rail sockets are on the upper wing surface. The seat mounts to this rail and can be adjusted up and down as you might have seen in the paragraph at left whereby it states: "If cables seem too short, adjust rudder pedals to full aft position and seat to down position." This explains your pilot with the shoulders above the cockpit sill. Note that Troy Smith quoted Tom Cleaver's experience with the Tomahawk. What he explained was that the seat rails on the Tomahawk are vertical (the seat on aircraft are adjustable) so there is room to sit 'normally' while later versions of the P-40 have a cockpit which is ten inches shallower causing the pilots legs to be out in front, nearly horizontal. I've sent an e-mail to Tom Cleaver to ask for clarification. Regards,
  4. I'm well aware of the procedure to remove and install the wing but I can't find your quote in my quick perusal of pages 43-44. I wrote that the upper wing serves as the cockpit floor so each time you see "cockpit floor" it refers to the upper wing surface within the fuselage where the pilot resides. The cockpit still extends further forward and there is an area behind the rudder pedals (from the pilot's viewpoint) where the oil tank and (from the P-40C on) armor plate was found. This area can only be reached through the cockpit and is past where the pilot resides thereby making it the wing surface. The only way to make the distinction is to put it in context once I find that quote. Is it referring to the area forward of the rudder pedals, the area behind the back plate armor where the fuel tank is, or where the pilot is located during the operation of the aircraft? Regards,
  5. That is very nice, is there a photo of the actual aircraft Tulsa Redhead in Turkish service? If so, I may need to add this to my project pile! (aside from sharkmouth schemes, I love smaller air forces) Regards,
  6. It means that the pilot's seat is literally on the raised floor, the rear bulkhead is too short, the rudder pedals don't have enough room to hang properly, the ammunition box doesn't hang but goes through the floor... everything is compressed. Regards,
  7. Comparing a crew member sitting on the wing to the pilot on a seat in the cockpit is a flawed approach to proving your point as the latter sits on a seat, not the cockpit floor (which in the case of this aircraft is the top surface of the wing)... The seat is on rails which fit into sockets on the wing top which serves as the cockpit floor. Then believe the impossible. I have no idea who made the initial statement but my experience with working with these warbirds tell me that the wing upper surface served as the cockpit floor as it is where you can find the shut off valves, hand pump, and fuel gages. Occa, you are correct in that the worker has his feet on stringers to keep from falling through, note the position of his legs? There is a crouched factory worker in the second photo. Anyway, people won't believe unless they see so I fortunately have all the manuals and here are some scans from the erection of a Tomahawk: Regards,
  8. Vince, that was from Stevens Hobby, not Trumpeter. Trumpeter sent a blank sheet and Stevens Hobby asked me about the aircraft history (since it does have a sharkmouth after all). Please note that the person posting as "Trumpeter&HobbyBoss" on Facebook, states it is all new: https://www.facebook.com/TrumpeterModel/posts/600334090125188 Regards,
  9. Vince, ref. 02228 is 1/32nd scale and their is also the 72nd scale ref. 01632 http://www.trumpeter-china.com/index.php?g=home&m=product&a=show&id=1699&l=en Regards,
  10. Click image to visit announcement on Facebook: Regards,
  11. Thanks Vince, I didn't scan that far back before posting. Anyway, since the majority of Bronco's are armor related, and I had a relationship with them when I wrote AFV reviews, I will try to (again) try to get an early production kit. I may post photos and see it get ripped apart. I also plan to buy the Airfix kit. Regards,
  12. Not y Nothing yet but I have already placed a preorder. It would be nice to compare it to Airfix's upcoming release. Regards,
  13. Curtiss P-40C (Hawk 81-A2) Fighter AVG "Flying Tigers" for June US release! Kit 04006 MSRP - $49.99USD In 1937 Curtiss put an Allison V-1710-19 liquid cooled engine into a p36 fighter. The plane was the military project code XP-40. The aircraft first flew successfully in October of the following year and reached a maximum speed of 587 km. In April 1939, the U.S. Army ordered the P-40A to start production and type B and C followed over the years. The P-40C (Hawk81 A-2) improved the self sealing fuel tank from type B, effectively improving the comprehensive protection of the fuel system. At the same time it also increased the Ground Weapons. Two weapons including a 12.7 mm machine gun and 4 wing was on a 7.62 mm gun. After the outbreak of World War II, the British government purchased a large number of military aircraft from the United States, including 930 P-40C, called the Tomahawk MK.IIB. The United States Army Air force was also equipped with 193 P-40C aircraft. In early 1941 the Chinese Air Force purchased 100 aircraft from the British production of the Tomahawk MK.IIB, and all equipped the American Volunteer Group, known as the "Flying Tigers". Regards,
  14. I will forward it to the owners. You picked up some of what I saw and the rear fuselage may be separate indicating that the M3 may be on the horizon as well. This would be part of the sprue tree design which comes later as there is still a bit missing (such as canopy details). Regards,
  15. They are asking for input, perhaps they will make changes? Regards,
  16. I've written thousands of product reviews and many times parts were warped. This is why I created the tutorial in the link above. Regards,
  17. I would simply use very hot water, almost boiling, to soften the resin and let it relax. Resin has memory and should return to the state it was in the mold. This memory is far better at reparation than manual prodding. Here is a link to a tutorial: http://planetarmor.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4104 Yes, it is armor related but the technique is the same. Regards,
  18. Quite nice! I received my kit which is the earlier T-44. Now to get the T-44M! Regards,
  19. I don't see a transmission, only a motor... My kit is on its way so thanks for the build. Regards,
  20. Please note that the reference Friul tracks are for the PzKpfw V Ausf. D. Regards,
  21. Which Tamiya Panther A? If it is the original one prior to their later PzKpfw V Ausführung G, you may have a problem with tracks as it wasn't exactly 1/35th scale. Your best bet is the then the ATL-08 tracks with their AW-13 replacement sprockets to ensure they fit. Regards,
  22. I'm not aware of any new Tamiya Tigers from this decade. Which one is it (that isn't a re-release)? Regards,
  23. I prefer resin tracks from MasterClub as they are the most accurate and have the proper look to them. I only buy the pinned series. MasterClub are now releasing them in metal. LionMarc Model Designs (LMD) had a resin set but it is now out of production. Also out of Production but extremely nice (and a great value if bought as part of their detail set) were Anvil Miniatures resin tracks. They re-appeared as WW2 Productions but are gone again. Friulmodelismo makes metal tracks but they are too thick and it becomes obvious when comparing to actual photographs. Metal tracks are also available from Spade Ace and Karaya. Avoid the latter. Polystyrene tracks are available from AFV Club, ModelKasten and one more but I only have experience with the named products. The AFC Club tracks are delicate but assemble easily while the ModelKasten has you adding the teeth separately. Well, I stated I have build Academy, AFV Club, Dragon, Idea (a poor copy of the Tamiya kit), Italeri, Rye Field Model, and Tamiya. I have also had the opportunity to use many of the aftermarket items such as barrels, tracks, detail sets, design for each of the kits. If you stated a subject tank, then we can narrow the options to something less than three. Mention a budget and we can then discuss what detail sets, if any, to use. Regards,
  24. There are many good kits to choose from (AFV Club being one not mentioned). Look at the comparisons here: http://perthmilitarymodelling.com/reviews/subject/tiger.htm I've had the pleasure to build all. Feel free to ask. Regards,
×
×
  • Create New...