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. :)

Spitfire addict

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

140 Excellent

About Spitfire addict

  • Rank
    Very Obsessed Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Oregon, USA

Recent Profile Visitors

3,368 profile views
  1. I would recommend the documentary, it is on YouTube so just enter Sea Hurricane and you should find it. The aircraft had quite a labyrinthine path to its present state but it is a legitimate Sea Hurricane I think converted originally from a Mk I Hurricane in Canada and sent over as a Ib, I would need to see the documentary again because there was so much information presented that it was hard to keep track. How the researches found all the information on this unique aircraft I don't know but they did a splendid job gathering and fact finding. The prop spinner could have come from Canada or who knows? The aircraft went through all sorts of maintenance and retrofitting that by the time they finished with it the Mk II spinner was the only one available? Anyway, definitely watch the documentary, one of the best yet on an individual aircraft. Cheers
  2. Just saw the trailer and it is just Pearl Harbor 2.0 so be warned. The same computer graphics where aircraft that usually flew below 300 mph are zipping around at about 500 mph. I would expect that the USN would have loved their TBD's and other aircraft to fly at those rediculous speeds. It looks full of non historical embellishments, (as was Pearl Harbor, a cinematic historical atrocity) and from the looks of it contained other non related events that if they had occurred are no doubt still out of context to the battle itself. With the new wave of WWII movies that are primarily computer generated, this one, as were the others created for the Millenial generation who grew up as gamers, is more game than movie. I guess we can say that at least the younger generations are being introduced to major events of WWII, but at what cost? It seems in my humble opinion that the historical aspect is important but what they will see is highly innacurate and over embellished. It will be interesting to see what the box office is on this this cinematic catastrophe in comparison to Dunkirk, a movie that attempted to get the history right without rediculous farcical misrepresentations that Midway presents, as well as a host of other CG infused WWII movies over the past ten to fifteen years. Save your money and watch the original Midway, at least they tried to be accurate, and the acting, I wager, is much better. I know many will watch this movie, and more power to ya, just remember "Caveat Emptor." Cheers
  3. Thanks guys, I reckon the smaller spinner and DH prop would be the call on my Sea Hurricane build. Regardless, Z7015 is absolutely gorgeous despite the minor innacuracy. I absolutely love the Spit but there is just something about the Sea Hurricane, and the Hurricane in general that sets it apart. Let us hope that Z7015 will be around for many years. Cheers
  4. Hello, I just finished the brilliant Timeline aircraft documentary on the Z7015 Sea Hurricane and had a question about the spinner. According to the documentary the aircraft eventually was issued from Canada as a Sea Hurricane Mk Ib which is basically a navalized Hurricane Mk II, which to my limited knowledge had the smaller spinner, (and please feel free to correct me on any of this, I'm just looking for accuracy.) What stood out to me was the spinner, it looked like it belonged on a Mk II Hurricane, and because I was going to make my 1/48 Sea Hurricane the same aircraft wouldn't I require the smaller spinner as was used on the Mk Ib/Mk I Hurricane at the time this aircraft served. One additional question: wasn't the oil splash guard behind the prop only added to the Mk II? Is it possible that over the years with all the Frankenstinian machinations that some parts were just thrown on because of availability? Well, those are my questions for now, so any suggestions, corrections, etc are surely welcome. Cheers
  5. Thank you, and yes I forgot about the SEAC thing, kind of important I would wager. Cheers
  6. Hello gentlemen I know its been a while since I was last on this site, it's great to be back on and I am ready to build a Spitfire after my long hiatus. I am planning on building the Hasegawa CBI Mk VIIII (I know some of you are thinking "why build that kit when there is the Eduard kit", well I got about ten of them from way before Eduard made their excellent Mk XI) and found that the decals were atrocious, I mean Academy and ERTL decals are better than what Hasegawa put in the kit. I expected more from them but it could have been a bad batch, regardless, where is the quality control, but I digress. That all being said, can anyone recommend some good quality decals for a CBI Spitfire Mk VIII? And, does anyone make a good set for the Mk XIV FR? Thanks for your time guys. Cheers Spitfire Addict
  7. Hello all, I'm getting the mood to build a Thunderbolt but after looking over my Hase kit I find that in comparison to my Tamiya kit the Hase canopy for the bubble top looks squashed, much lower in profile, and it just basically doesn't look right. I have seen plenty of bubble tops and have even sat in the cockpit of a D-30 and the canopy in my kit sure doesn't look like and real canopy. Is the Squadron vacu-form canopy the exact copy? I have noticed over the years that the canopies from Squadron tend to be no improvement shape wise. The other problem is that prop, just not right, reminds me of the prop in the Minicraft F4U-4 kit, kind of warped, but I can fix that one easily. Anyway, an suggestions for a good canopy replacement, the Hase canopy is just killing me, can't force myself to put it on the kit. Cheers
  8. Thanks for the input, that will be the best option for my first try at acrylics. I just checked out the White Ensign/colorcoat enamels and will be using them for my Japanese subjects, their colors are supposed to be very accurate, and I haven't yet seen acrylics with such a large variety of colors for such a complicated paint system. I don't know if the Japanese had the equivelent of an RLM or MAP to overlook and maintain some kind of color consistency. For now, it's time to build a nice glossy dark sea blue Hellcat, even I can't mess that up right? Cheers
  9. Thanks Greenshirt, and as always, Troy comes to the rescue with abundant sources. You would be my first choice for an appointment to Scotland Yard! As usual I manage to find a new can of worms to open up whenever I post a query. My local hobby store is Brookhurst Hobbies, our version of Hannants so to speak, which is fairly well stocked but not quite the level of Hannants I imagine. For me the cost of shipping, especially from the UK is a major deterrent but I will check the paint sets suggested by Troy from US sources. I really should give acrylics a try regardless, I might even like them better if I gave them a chance, seems to be the future anyway, besides, I get complaints from family members about the paint smell, even when I use a thinner that has no smell at all. What if I experimented and used the Tamiya colors and tried putting in a drop or two of gloss black? I am not concerned with extreme accuracy (the Testors version always seemed close enough) but I really like the very dark blue that the Flying Heritage Museum -5 is painted in. I have noticed that most the War Birds, i.e. Corsairs, Bearcats, Tigercats, Hellcats and some FAA are using a very dark glossy sea blue that is almost black, like English Racing Green which my Blackpuddlian dad assured me was almost a black green. Anyway, if I can get close to that I would be pretty happy, although the Tamiya color at first look seems just a little to light for 1945 schemes. Were night fighters painted a darker blue, or was it the same. Well thanks again guys, I am rambling on. I'm one of those guys that if you asked me for the time I would build you a watch! cheers
  10. Spitfire addict

    Color help

    Hello friends havent posted in quite a while but need some advice. Now that Testors has for the most part eliminated their MM line of enamels I find myself in the land of acrylics, where my problem has been the fast drying time for an old man who paints slow and deliberate. Anyway, my question is what Tamiya color is closest to MM dark glossy blue, or 15042 if I remember the FS number correctly. I want to do a nice dark glossy sea blue on a circa 1945 Hellcat. If I have to start using acrylics then a basic spray job is in order. Are acrylics ever glossy, or is a gloss coat necessary? I know that the vast majority of you guys have been using acrylics for years but this old dog needs to learn a few new tricks out of pure necessity. Well, any help would be much appreciated. Cheers SA
  11. Spitfire addict

    SBD Aces?

    Greetings Gentlemen . Hope all is well with my Britmodeller mates. I have been on a bit of a Pacific War kick lately. I just ffinished up reading about Fighting Fifteen and Mc Campbell's Heroes, and additionally an interview with "Swede" Vejtasa who flew SBD's before being posted to the Grim Reapers as a Wildcat pilot. Another source was Queen of the Flat Tops by Stanley Johnston, and all three sources mentioned the use of SBD's for interception and carrier defense roles as fighters, with one pilot scoring as many as 7 kills. This really intreagues me since I am preparing to build the Hasegawa 1/48 SBD-3. I know many of you like to research your modeling subjects as a means of enhancing your enthusiasm for a good build. Does anyone have any sources they can recommend on the subject of the SBD used as a fighter? We are talking about the Dauntless attacking from behind and not shooting down aircraft which are in persuit. Any information would be helpful. Cheers
  12. Thanks Garry, the Japanese color thing is quite the conundrum, even tougher than the Luftwaffe color conundrum. Maybe I will just spray all my Japanese IJN green with IJN grey undersides! Cheers
  13. Thanks gentlemen i had read a review on the Monogram/Revell P-47 and the aforementioned problems were mentioned as well as a need to dared the lower lip, too straight, but a little sanding takes care of that. I have two Tamiya kits (forgot to mention all kits that are compared are indeed 1/48.) At the Plans of Fame museum there is a model kit display of about 25 built and nicely painted 1/48 T-Bolts behind glass both bubble and razorback. Just by looking at them I could tell the manufacturer, and it was interesting finding the differences in detail. I looked especially at the cowling on each model, and other less significant details, and had found that the Tamiya kits were clearly the winner all the way around, followed by the Hasegawa (I found the detail to be a little soft in comparison), then the Academy kit (not bad, but I would get a Falcon replacement, the bubble canopy is a little fat in comparison to the Tamiya and Hasegawa version) then the Monogram razorback (the wings on the bubble top are too far back, (I wondered why it seemed a little funny), followed by the Arii and old Testors kit (with the exception of the cowling doesn't look too bad shape-wise.) Anyway, that is my take on it but I just wondered if anybody else had the same or different take on this whole thing. As for the Tamiya P-47? I would have to say that of all the kit reviews out there the Tamiya P-47's have received the highest praise of any kits I have read about. Now, if only Tamiya will quit making kits that are already made by numerous manufacturers i.e. the Sturmovik, Hurricane just to mention a few and get around to making....oh let's say......a nice Spit Mk14? Cheers
  14. I have seen a few Japanese warbirds, basically a Jack, Judy, and Zero, the Aotake used on all much more green than blue. Is this a misinterpretation or could it be that the Aotake blue the correct color. Any ideas or info on this? I got quite a few Japanese aircraft kits and would like to get this sorted before painting. Cheers
  15. Hello and Happy New Year to all! i have been threatening to build a T-Bolt as my first aircraft of 2018 and upon inspection of various kit offerings it has become appearent that the shape of the lower lip or portion leading up too the intake on various cowling are different. In comparison between the Academy, Araii, old Testors/Hawk (the least accurate IMHO), Hasegawa, old Monogram, and Tamiya offerings I find the lower portion/lip is either too pronounced as in the old Testors kit, or not offering enough upper thrust as in the old Monogram kit. I am not adept enough to post pics and do comparisons like has been done for the Spit Mk 9 for instance. I guess my question is......has anybody noticed the differences as I have? Which of the manufacturers is most accurate? It's not a big deal but when kits are displayed next to each other then the differences become more pronounced. Anyway, I am curious to see your thoughts. Cheers SA
  • Create New...