James Venables

Thanks for the reply. I have the High Planes AU-23 in the stash but aside from the intake area, the Peacemaker's cowl is nothing like the Volpar Beech. The latter is a very slim, rounded cowl whereas the AU-23 tapers from the cabin down to the nose. Still looking for a donor...

Colorado sheet #7269 should be what you are looking for. Also have a look at the schemes offered by AML's new 1/72 decal sheets for the P-40B/C. I picked up some of these late last year and though I haven't yet used them, they look very good. Sheet #72034 includes some DAF examples. Alternatively, if you want a North African scheme that's a little different, check out the RAAF examples in Aussie Decals/Novascale sheet #72040.

I am not a figure modeller (not since my pre-teen days when I fought huge battles on the plateau of my bed with opposing armies comprising Airfix and Matchbox 1/76 scale figures!) and decided to peruse this sub-forum just out of interest... I am very, very impressed with both the quality of the figure and the quality of your work which has really brought out the detail and captured the essence of the moment! I think you have done the eyes really well, which compliment the expression moulded into the figure's face. Without taking anything away from your excellent work, the one thing I thought could be improved is a little more contrast between his boots and boot laces. I'm not familiar with the uniform, so perhaps in real life they are exactly the same colour (?) but I reckon if you can just make a tad of contrast there (perhaps paint the laces a touch darker?) then it will make them look less moulded-on. Well done indeed.

I can't imagine any reason why the colours of the RAAF Bulldogs would be any different to the RAF machines. They were built and painted alongside the RAF machines, so it is only logical that they would be identical in colour, positioning of markings, etc. The only logical difference would have been the "A" serial applied to the RAAF examples. Back then, being the same as the Brits had important implications of Britsh Empire brotherhood, etc, etc. In the era between the two World Wars, most Australians (especially those in government) still proudly considered themselves to be part of the British Empire. This facet of history was demonstrated in the mid 1930's when Lawrence Wackett was charged with investigating, evaluating and recommending a new aircraft design that would not only meet Australia's needs in time of conflict, but would also kick-start an Australian aircraft manufacturing industry. Despite strong pressure from his superiors and the government to "buy British", Wackett and his team eventually chose the NA-16, which went on to be developed locally into the Wirraway (and subsequently, some components ended up in the Boomerang). Apparently his decision to go with an American design was met with scorn and derision from some business leaders and politicians, who reeled in horror that we had not pandered to our British brethren. A little snippet of historical trivia there, but one that explains the reasoning behind my comments regarding the Bulldog colours.

My failing memory mustn't be as bad as I thought - I clearly recall the styrene being a garish bright blue and a creamy white colour. I also recall being very impressed at the interlocking cabane struts, which made their assembly SO much stronger and easier than all the other fiddly WW1 biplanes that I had been building back then, including some Airfix and a bunch of Entex kits. I don't recall the fit being too bad and it was a very strong little model once completed.

Not that I have ever heard of, though the white markings do appear (in most cases) to have been applied fairly neatly. Being the mount of Sqn Ldr Geoff Atherton, who was apparently fairly fastidious about the appearance of his aircraft, "Cleopatra III" was actually a fairly clean & tidy P-40N. Never mind; she's your model and you can present her however you choose. The weathering does look pretty effective.

Lovely work so far. Which PE set is that? I can just make out in the photo that it is specifically for the Airfix kit but I can't see the maker's name. I have to say that I am not a fan of PE (in fact, I loathe the stuff) but I'm very impressed with the improvements provided to the seat, seatbelts, instrument panel and cockpit walls by that set.

Check here: http://www.martin-baker.com/products/Eject...1-to-Mk--9.aspx And this may be useful too: http://www.ejectionsite.com/ Aeroclub bang seats were pretty good for their day. They don't contain the fine detail available on most resin seats that are available from the likes of Verlinden, Pavla, Aires, etc but with careful painting and some additional details (eg. handles) they can be made to look pretty effective, especially under a closed canopy. What I do like about Aeroclub seats is that they have a dual purpse as nose weight!

Not sure what scale you are referring to, as Trumpy has the F-100C in both 1/72 and 1/48 scale. In 1/72 scale, the only F-100C I'm aware of in SEA colours is Wolfpak Decals 72047, though I'm not sure if this example was actually based in SEA... could be a Stateside aircraft wearing SEA colours. In 1/48 scale, there's Caracal Models' 48003, which contains a Missouri ANG aircraft in SEA colours. These are the only ones I am aware of but there's probably more out there.

Mate, I e-mailed those pics to you - did you get them? If not, I'll try a re-send.

According to the Wolpak Decals sheet #72011 instructions, the blue used by Air America was FS15044. I have no idea if that particular FS number is covered by any hobby paint manufacturer. Interesting that you should ask about the Volpar Beech. I have recently been eyeing off one of the Hobbycraft Beech 18's in my stash and thinking of attempting a Volpar conversion. I have trawled the 'net many many times and found plenty of pics but cannot find any plans, 3-views, conversion sets, etc. I can't even find another aircraft that could be a possible donor for the engine cowls! It's probably therefore going to require home made engines, props, undercarriage and possibly windscreen (some Volpars seemed to retain the original Beech 18 windscreen while others didn't).

At least you didn't call me a princess!!! Mate, I actually have a few photos of the USN Simoun. I'm at work (here for several weeks) and can't upload photos here because of the company restrictions on the internet usage but if you send me a PM via the site with your e-mail address, then I should be able to send them to you. As I said, they're just B&W photos so you'll have to guess the colours. My guess is either dark blue or dark red (maroon?) with silver flying surfaces.

I have had a Badger 200 for about 18 years now. It is slightly different to yours, but this is probably just the age difference. It has been a very rugged and reliable unit. After spraying, I generally just run a cupful (that's an airbrush cup, not a drinking cup) of thinner through the airbrush on full air at a slightly higher psi/kPa than I use for painting. While I do this, I rotate the needle adjustment back and forth a little with my other hand, so that the amount of fluid going through varies up and down. I don't really know if this helps clean the airbrush but it makes me feel better about it. Then I remove the cup, very carefully remove the needle, and remove the nozzle. These get soaked in thinner for up to a few hours before being thoroughly cleaned with a cotton bud and tissue paper rolled into a thin point to get into the nooks and crannies. While those parts are soaking, I remove the air hose, give the body of the airbrush a wipe with a dab of thinners on a rag or tissue, and I clean out the paint inlet (where the cup attaches) with a cotton bud or two soaked in thinner. Every now and again, I'll also remove the little brass cone-shaped jet that sits under the nozzle and give that a soak in thinners too, followed by a good (but gentle) clean with a piece of fine wire folowed by another soak in thinner. I never allow thinner to go through the body of the airbrush. I always allow the parts to dry thoroughly before reassembly and I sometimes put a VERY thin smear of vaseline on the needle (keeping it away from the point) just to help keep everything lubed inside the airbrush. I always reinsert the needle very slowly and gingerly to ensure that it goes through the hole in the trigger and seats itself in the jet with minimal risk of damaging or bending the needle tip. Despite its age, my Badger 200 still looks and works like new. I have never had to replace any parts, though I do keep a spare needle on hand just in case I'm clumsy enough to bend the tip one day. EDIT: PS: I recently bought a set of tiny wire brushes (look like miniature bottle brushes) from an eBay store called "resin-kit". Although I haven't used them yet, I reckon they will be a big help in keeping my airbrushes perfect.

I have a B&W photo of the USN aircraft somewhere in my references. If you are interested, send me a PM and I'll e-mail it to you. Cheers, James.

I picked up the old 1:72 scale Aurora Jet Commander with intentions of back-dating it to an Aero Commander. This will be a massive job, but not impossible. It was only after I'd made the purchase that I read somewhere that Aurora also had an Aero Commander in 1:72 scale, though I've never seen one for sale, nor reviewed anywhere.

I won't enter the debate because I don't know the answer to the original question. Despite being a very interesting thread, some respondents are clearly referring to the colours of Sea Hurricanes, whilst others are referring to the "disposable" Hurricanes carried on board the CAM (Catapault Aircraft Merchantmen) ships, which may be causing some confusion. The original question asked about the colour of the CAM Hurricanes, NOT Sea Hurricanes. They are not the same thing (though I suppose it's possible that some tired Sea Hurricanes made it onto the CAM ships also).

Looks like you have two Academy P-51s there. The Academy P-51B/C kits are little gems and represent excellent value for the modelling dollar. They go together easily, have adequate detail to satisfy most (though it's easy to add as much extra as you please) and really look the part once complete. Unlike some other early marque P-51 kits (Airfix, Hasegawa, Italeri), they also have the correct wing plan for the A/B/C. The Academy P-51D however, is a very different beast and a little rough in my opinion. It still builds into an acceptable model with some work but has a curious combination of some detail overdone, other detail too light and some obvious shape errors. That said, most of these problems can be overcome without too much trouble. Main problems that I have noted are: - Over heavy detail around the cowl area - Very poor exhaust stacks (best replaced with Quickboost items) - Odd shape to the wingtips - a tad too rounded in my opinion (easily fixed with a few careful swipes with a sanding stick) - Much too rounded profile where the fin fillet meets the fin (also easily fixed with careful sanding) - Over heavy engraving on the wings, especially since almost none should be seen in this scale except for service hatches - Undercarriage leg detail a bit light on - Wheel hubs are poor and there are ejector pin marks on the rear side of the tyres - Wheel wells are a bit shallow, though this probably won't bother most folk - Radiator intake scoop lips needs thinning - Poor prop - the rear side of the prop blades are dead flat with no demarkation between the blade and cuff (best replaced with an aftermarket item or one robbed from a different kit) - Two canopies are supplied, one of which is presumably supposed to be a "Dallas" hood, though the shape is not quite right

Good information from Steve, but just be aware of one point: I have been told that if the undersurfaces were repainted in RAAF Sky Blue and the upper surfaces left in OD, then the aileron undersurfaces were masked off and NOT painted over with Sky Blue. Apparently the extra coat of paint was enough to upset the aileron balance, and it was easier to avoid the painting than go to the trouble of rebalancing. A RAAF Sky Blue undersurface would thus have NG aileron undersurfaces. But as usual, check your reference photos.

Huh? My eyes don't see that - the ribs and other detail looks raised to me.

That's a coincidence - I was just looking at my Willy Bros C-46 last night and thinking that I might move it up the "to do" pile. I have read many negative comments about this kit but it really does look quite nice on the sprue. Also, I wa surprised at just how comprehensive the instructions are in advising of how to modify the shape for the couple of different variants. The worst part of the kit that I can see while in the box is the multi-part prop, which I loathe. Luckily, I do have a Propmaster prop jig which helps make these jobs infinitely easier. I plan to do mine in Air America/Royal Lao colours using a combination of the Crosswind Hobbies decal sheet and some home-made markings.

Dry-fit the wing underside and you'll understand. Definitely DON'T attach the front of the wing underside to the lower engine cowl, then the back. This leaves a large "step" on the upper side wing root. Ask me how I know...

I assume you are referring to the old Corgi range of aircraft. I have to admit that I don't recall ever seeing a P-47, but I do recall the 1969/70 "Battle of Britain" releases of the Spitfire and Bf-109E to coincide with the release of the movie. I pleaded with my parents to buy me the Spitfire for Christmas and the persistence paid off. I still have the model somewhere and it is almost complete.

Wow, this is the first time I have heard this snippet of information. Interesting. If the seat was not made from Bakelite, then does anyone have any idea what the plastic material actually was? I know it's not a particularly relevant point, but I'm just curious. I remember from my university chemistry that commercial plastics would have been in their infancy back in the 1930's & 40's, so there can't have been too many options.