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. :)

Graham Boak

Gold Member
  • Content Count

    9,512
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

5,914 Excellent

1 Follower

About Graham Boak

  • Rank
    Completely Obsessed Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Lancashire

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I hadn't noticed a problem with the backplate. I do have a feeling that the basic Heller G spinner (which also applies to the K?) is slightly oversize, but (again) better than the others until recently. I haven't tried comparing it with the Fine Molds or recent AZ examples. I still have one G and one K left to make, best not look too closely at this stage. What is needed to be known before buying (or not!) is inevitably different to what will actually be done to something already in the collection. One other point about the K, not known until fairly recently, is that the refined bulge should be much less prominent on the starboard side, so the kit benefits from some sanding.
  2. The Azur range included many of the types Heller "should have done", including the VG.33, but I feel they could have explored the interwar types such as the Potez 25/27 series, and the Latecoere used as a mailplane in St. Exupery's classic "Night Flight". If you want to get heroically over-ambitious, a Breguet Bizerte or the Farman "Jules de Verne" night bomber?
  3. It is worth pointing out that the Heller F was an early kit, and if you look at it closely it is really a G. The tadpole rear fuselage was a feature of all Heller kit of the later 109s ( I don't know about their E but it isn't true of their B/D) until the complete revision of the K. It was fairly easy to cut the tail off and add a couple of thicknesses of plasticard, sanding the entire assembly smooth, Given the other imperfections, you could accept the compromise and end up with a decent G - at least when compared to the alternatives on the market! The new K was a complete step forward in tooling, shame the prop went the wrong way round - though I don't recall anyone ever noticing. It took a long time before a better 1/72 109 kit appeared.
  4. Graham Boak

    Bedford qlt qld

    Milicast do a conversion of the Airfix kit for the short-wheelbase QL tractor, with 6 ton articulated trailer (and also for the QLB). Models of the other trailers are not known to me.
  5. Graham Boak

    Bedford qlt qld

    The Airfix kit does not come with any trailer.
  6. The RAF squadrons did not have spray equipment (I believe it was Edgar who pointed this out?) so I suspect that any front-line repaint would have been brush painted, However a Maintenance Unit can be expected to have had proper equipment, but in either case there'd be no desire go spraying paint around inside an internal structure that has moving parts. Or detachable/removeable parts: "Which idiot painted over these nuts?" However there are photos of other repaints showing that maintenance stencils were not replaced: this may indeed be a difference between those done on squadron and those in an MU - it seems very unlikely that the Squadron would have any stock of spare maintenance stencils.
  7. They would also have needed to modify the ventral strake (small job) and remove the wheel doors, fitting new blanks, and whilst they were at it modify the leg doors too. The hinge part needs cutting off and gluing into the wing, with much thinning on the doors themselves. The Astazou engine cowling are circular whereas the Garret ones are deeper. Not such a simple or easy change to the tools. However, I think this misses the point of rereleasing the old kits as "Classics" i.e. as they were. There are of course the A Model kits if you want to do a real Jetstream.
  8. https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/72nd_aircraft/az-model-new-tooled-bf-109g-14-as-t11556.html Comments I've seen have been pretty good. Previous 109 versions have suffered from a number of faults, but it seems that these have been progressively corrected. I've yet to see what the real mavens make of this release, but so far so good?
  9. Not in the factory - although sometimes that was true at least for late variants - but in the German equivalent of an MU in Germany. I think the colour is not blue enough for 65, but the photo makes it look like a simple white which doesn't make any kind of sense.
  10. The light blue should be the original desert light blue 78.
  11. I've seen it said on BM that the Mk.IVs never received the upgraded Merlins as they were saved for Mosquitos. I have some doubts whether that is true, at least as far as Merlin mark number are concerned, but it may be that production received a lower priority because of the need for more Mosquito engines. I don't know whether that is true or not - I do know that the Mk.IV in India would have been struggling with the standard Merlin XX.
  12. But not with the choice of markings. However, the various Dogfight Doubles sets rarely had historical combinations. There were worse examples.
  13. I suggest that there are a large number of photos of these early 109s which show considerable difference between the two colours, but it is very common, especially in b&w photos but sometimes in colour ones too, for the blue to appear considerably lighter than it really was. However it if really upsets you then tone down the blue.
  14. "most"? Certainly some do, perhaps influenced by the description of it as Graugrun. However, Ken Merrick described the green tinge as only visible in new paint, and then only if you looked very closely. The worst references in this respect were (to me) the Sq. Signal In Action series on the Bf109 and Fw190, which illustrated these fighters in what appeared to be the RAF Day Fighter scheme. I'm quite sure that this would have been mentioned somewhere in reports/histories from the British side!
  15. The waist guns were not on the H-3 as built. They may well have been added during the BoB, but are unlikely to have been carried on the night missions. Not exactly a great view for the gunner, better to save the weight of guns, ammunition and man.
×
×
  • Create New...