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. :)

TonyTiger66

A 1/72 Amodel I-16 Type 5 Spanish Civil War (without a bucket of filler?).

Recommended Posts

Hello people :bye:,
This is my first WIP. I have really enjoyed reading and watching the WIP's of others and feel it is time to try to give something back.
I have a variety of interests in terms of modelling, but I always seem to come back to aircraft and AFV's of the Spanish Civil War. The variety of aircraft used is quite incredible and moreover, many were simply 1930's 'Golden Age' civil aircraft impressed into often quite bizarre roles; for example passenger Vultee aircraft and Fokker FVII/3M's becoming bombers.

Nevertheless this was a proving ground or test run for many new technologies. In terms of aircraft the I-16 'Mosca', (the subject of this build) and the very first Bf-109 'V' prototypes then A (or is it B1?) through to E series, saw their baptism of fire here.

The history of the conflict is well documented on the internet and in good old traditional books, and there are some simply splendid (albeit sometimes a little rare and expensive) books available on the aircraft involved in the conflict.

Controversy about colours and actual aircraft involved is absolutely rampant and in a way, quite liberating. Within the community of Spanish Civil War modelling enthusiasts I know (not many!) a great deal of encouragement and artistic licence is granted. There is so little that can be certain, from actual numbers/codes of aircraft involved (BF-109C for example) to types (was there really an RWD-8 and a Bloch MB-200?) to, well, just about everything down to the colour of a particular Republican pilot's socks, or the strength and lens thickness of a particular Legion Condor pilot's monocle ;).

OK. About me.

I'm currently not very good at making models. In fact I'm certain that I'm not as good as I was when I was 9 years old and high as a kite on polystyrene cement most of the week, making at least 2 models a week, with very high standards for a little boy.

But it was fun wasn't it?
My grandfather had been a career RN man (Russian Convoys and MTO in WWII) and encouraged me into modelling. My introduction to modelling is described on the intro post I made some months ago to BM and a little more in my 'about me' so I won't ramble on about my early abject failures. Needless to say I returned to models after a bereavement in 2003 and it really helped me, like a breath of fresh air. Then work and an illness prevented me from starting again until last year. I thoroughly enjoy it, but I keep on trashing my efforts. Perhaps time to lower my standards?

I think it would be far better to use this opportunity to probably demonstrate to the world at large that I am still highly capable of an abject failure....

Thus, onto this model.

Amodel. What a fascinating company. That's one adjective. Others can be used. Nearly all of their kits pose a challenge in one way or another, they are short run, yet often they are short run for so long that the very sprue runs, and we end up with nothing but flash from which to try to identify and carve our own components :banghead:. Nevertheless, they kit some wonderfully obscure subjects, and I love the wonderfully obscure! Thus - I feel I help keep someone, possibly in a cold dark cellar in Murmansk, with a scriber, some faded plans, some resin and a bottle of vodka, in a job.

Some of their kits go together beautifully straight from the sprue, but there are some, like this little, tubby, I-16 that can be exceedingly variable in terms of moulding quality. In this case, from production batch to production batch. Ask me how I know. :shutup:

I decided to post this as my first WIP because, frankly, this model can be a real pain in the derriere. I know it isn't just me; it is known for possibly needing a bucket of filler. Moreover it has some issues, probably the main one is the wings. They aren't really of the right kind for an I-16 type 5 of the SCW (as I will refer to that very 'uncivil' war from now on). Other issues I will discuss as we progress together into the build.

I have not completed a model since I started again around a year ago. To be honest they have all been rubbish and have flown directly into the dustbin. Often. Around 10 now.

I have tried to build this one 4 times now. Dustbin; 3 times out of 4. The 4th attempt is in the drawer of doom. This will be attempt number 5.

I am posting this, perhaps foolishly, because I had a Really Big Think™. I may, just may, have figured out a way to make this without the usually required bucket of filler. I'm sure I'm not the first, but I may perhaps be the most incompetent, so it should surely provide a little entertainment. I hope so anyway. :)

I'm not awfully sure I have this Photobucket thing worked out yet, so I will only try to post a picture of the box here. I hope it works.
I hope this WIP at least helps fellow modellers to see the fun a cheap little East European kit can give, even when it is utterly frustrating and maybe, together, we can find a way to tame this little beastie :confused: ?.

Best regards, thanks for reading and happy modelling
Tony

P1250157_zps83dd12b3.jpg



Edited for terrible spelling.

Edited by TonyTiger66

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I'm in - how could I not be? A great start to your first WiP Tony and I'm looking forward to more humour as you beat this one into submission! Third fifth time lucky! :D

interesting 'No to can' embellishment... I had a quick look on the 'net but nothing... perhaps it was supposed to be 'No to can't' and they ran out of space? Or perhaps it's Spanish? Hmmm.

Anyway, watching with interest :popcorn:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds good to me. No one ever became half decent at anything unless they had a bit of ambition about them. At Attempt No.5, it appears as though you do indeed have a measure of ambition. Good luck with it, I hope you got one from a "good" batch.

And, yes, we can see a picture of a box so post away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello again,
I'm not sure how to use the 'quote' function for more than one post - I'm learning quite a few new technologies here so any advice is very gratefully received. :)
I had a little disaster involving my iPhone and a bowl of salad with balsamic vinegar and olive oil dressing. :weep:

To cut a long story short, my screen now looks quite psychedelic and it is impossible to take photographs - the lens is full of salad dressing (on the inside of the phone).

What to do? I was quoted AUD $168 for a repair. That's not as bad as I thought, but unfortunately my phone will have to be away for 2 days - so what to do about photos for this WIP?

I went to a place known for bargains here in a land down under called 'Cash Converters" and bought a secondhand Panasonic 14.8 Megapixel little camera. It's actually quite lovely and has a Leica lens (wow!).

So, here we are two days after 'The Salad Dressing Incident', with photographs care of my new little toy :)

Thank you Ced, Rob, Martin and Ian for coming on board. It is really appreciated - I hope this is a little bit of fun for us all !

Ced - the 'No-to-can' thing. I have found one photograph of the aircraft in question and it was? - Not airworthy. It is on the ground with the colloquial Spanish 'Notocar' written on the side in what appears the be white chalk or simply brush paint.

It means 'Don't Touch'.

AModels box artwork is lovely, but it's a bit of a chortle, yet quite endearing, that they interpreted the writing as perhaps the same as the 'For Stalin' writing so often seen on the side of Russian/Soviet I-16's. I doubt 'Notocar' or 'Don't Touch' flew again. I 'm not sure if I can post the picture as it is in a book. The aircraft looks pretty derelict.

This is an early Amodel kit, quite inferior to the ICM kits of types 18+, but the only game in town, perhaps in my lifetime, for a type 5/6. I'm thankful to Amodel for having a go.

My next post will include some pictures (if all goes well!).

Best regards
Tony

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Righty-ho,
let's have some pictures of the sprue and see if we have a horrendously blobby/flash happy moulding, or a moulding so bad that we can't actually tell what aircraft has been boxed ;)

P1250158_zps19e445a4.jpg

P1250159_zps90c3cedb.jpg

Hmm - not bad, but the engine seems to be a little 'lost' to say the least...

Also all of the exhaust ports are blocked with flash, the propellor is, kind of, made of flash and the gunsight seems an imaginary object immersed in..you guessed it - flash.

So - this is one of the better mouldings of this kit. :shutup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, some more content shots.

All credit to Amodel for including a very comprehensive decal sheet with many, many options. I include a photo below.

P1250161_zps0oqnhtal.jpg

I should say (I guess) that some of these schemes aren't applicable to a type 5/6. I have read, but cannot verify the truth of accounts, that aircraft from CM-156 upwards were type 10's.

What is the difference? Quite a lot visually - the main difference being a pair of cowling/upper fuselage mounted machine guns. Other differences include canopy/windshield and wing construction.

No manufacturer currently produces a 1.72 I-16 type 10. This is a huge market gap and given the Russian market alone, would be a kit that ensured profitability. In the interim, conversion (in 1/72) of the ICM type 18+ kits is the only option.

Why do I mention this? Because this Amodel kit provides two very suitable decal/transfer options for such a conversion.

Edited by TonyTiger66

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And finally let's have look at the transparencies. These are extremely variable from kit to kit. What do we have here?
P1250160_zpsmgqmfmkz.jpg
I wish I could use the Jimmy Saville "Now then, now then guys and gals" but I can't as it turns out he was an absolute nonce.

Therefore let's just say that by the possibilities of moulding one can encounter in this kit, for these transparencies, this is a very good set. I Know they are thick and not very clear, but they are very good indeed compared to others I have seen - and there are absolutely no alternatives other than moulding your own (or others doing this for you).

Happy ;)

Edited by TonyTiger66

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a tiny aircraft. In 1/48. Good luck in 1/72.

Thanks John.

You're right. It is absolutely tiny. If it hadn't actually existed, it could be assumed it was a Disney/cartoon image of a monoplane in the 30's. It seems it's only recently that aviation enthusiasts have started to say what an amazing little aircraft this was.

It really is an 'engine with the bare minimum aircraft attached'.

Lovely :)

Best regards

Tony

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, what to build, what to build.
The instructions are, to my eyes, quite lovely. Very clear in what needs to be done at each step. Moreover for a 'limited run' kit, you may have noticed in my sprue shots that the sprue and instructions have....numbers!!
Unheard of in 'short run' but extremely useful. Thanks Amodel, please keep it up (they didn't :( ).
Anyway - here we go with some (there are more) options:

P1250162_zpsfna3keqi.jpg

P1250163_zps064c42e5.jpg

Hmm.

I'm going for simple number '33'. It may not be that simple. I intend to paint the red/yellow/violet republican stripes on the tail. The '33' is a tail tricolour decal - so some thought will be needed. :hmmm:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, what have I done apart from gaze in the box and ponder?

I have removed almost everything from the sprue and started an informed (due to past calamities) clean up.

It's close to bedtime here in QLD for me, but here's a start. The fuselage halves. The inner faces of the rudder need very careful sanding.

I have found that the best way to remove them from the sprues is by using a micro saw and allowing yourself quite a bit of 'meaty' plastic to sand down.

You will need the get rid of the remnants of the sprue locating lugs, and to make sure by doing this you don't lose rudder shape.

Here is how it starts:

P1250164_zpswvcixh6j.jpg

Those protrusions will cause a lot of heartache - trust me - get rid.

Once you have, carefully, 'got rid', use your preferred sanding method to thin down the inner surfaces of the rudder on both fuselage sides. It's a bit tricky as you will be right up against the fin edge, keep it that way ;)

P1250193_zpszkfkk0ix.jpg

More tomorrow friends.

Happy modelling

Best regards

Tony

Edited by TonyTiger66

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks John.

You're right. It is absolutely tiny. If it hadn't actually existed, it could be assumed it was a Disney/cartoon image of a monoplane in the 30's. It seems it's only recently that aviation enthusiasts have started to say what an amazing little aircraft this was.

It really is an 'engine with the bare minimum aircraft attached'.

Lovely :)

Best regards

Tony

It always reminds me of the Gee Bee racer. I built the Eduard 1/48 Profipac. Much less challenging. I have an Amodel Albatros in USCG colours currently stalled at the "fill and sand" stage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow. I looked at the first sprue shot and thought "not too bad" and then I saw the second. Awful.

You're doing a great job on the clean up Tony - let's hope the fit is better than the flash would imply. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm glad you like a challenge!

I've certainly seen a lot worse than those sprues (Merlin for example), I'm sure with some thought and the careful approach that you've adopted it will turn into a lovely little model!

Ian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It always reminds me of the Gee Bee racer. I built the Eduard 1/48 Profipac. Much less challenging. I have an Amodel Albatros in USCG colours currently stalled at the "fill and sand" stage.

Hi John,

I hadn't thought of that before but I Googled the GeeBee. Fascinating stuff :speak_cool: . I wonder if way back the the Soviet designers were influenced by the GeeBee R1? I noticed that Amodel make both the GeeBee R1 and R2 in 1/72...

I think one of these is now imminently going to find its way into the (frighteningly vast) stash - for quite prompt assembly!

The Albatros is a lovely aircraft. I'd love to see it and hope you can get it done - I've never seen an Amodel one completed (their 1/144 Lancastrian looks fascinating).

Wow. I looked at the first sprue shot and thought "not too bad" and then I saw the second. Awful.

You're doing a great job on the clean up Tony - let's hope the fit is better than the flash would imply. :)

Hi Ced,

Thanks :) You made me think about the 'progression' of my WIP. I want it to be useful to other modellers and I realised it would be good to explain just why, at such an early stage, I seem to be obsessing over the vertical stabiliser join. To this end, I've decided to include some shots of my 'failed Moscas' in the WIP(also known as Ishak/Rata).

I really hope my Really Big Think™ bears a little fruit, as I would like to see a lot more of these lovely little aircraft being built.They served in many forces, from Romanian to Chinese to Luftwaffe (captured). Tubby but likeable oldies - a bit like me :winkgrin: ?

I'm glad you like a challenge!

I've certainly seen a lot worse than those sprues (Merlin for example), I'm sure with some thought and the careful approach that you've adopted it will turn into a lovely little model!

Ian

Hi Ian - I hope your positivity (and mine) isn't ill placed thank you so much for the encouragement :)

This one isn't bad at all, you're right. I'm also really very pleased with the canopy as until now they've all been a disappointment. The engine here is possibly the most flash affected component and experience tells me it is almost 100% hidden unless cowling panels are left open, so no big problem.

I would like to try the open panels in a future build, maybe a diorama, but for now I'll keep it simple and just try to make a fairly 'clean' model.

Righto - next post - a little inspiration and a look at some of the failures! :banghead:

Best regards

Tony

PS - feeling quite pleased with myself - I worked out how to use 'Multiquote'! :)

Edited by TonyTiger66

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Tony :)

I (like others) use Multiquote all the time on my laptop but, on the iPad, not so much! Well done for sorting it out...

"You made me think about the 'progression' of my WIP. I want it to be useful to other modellers..." Me too. I sometimes look back at my threads and think they're a bit verbose and then something happens during a build that I think others would benefit from seeing; not just my 'techniques' but also my mistakes. Like your posts about the "vertical stabiliser join" they'll help others avoid the pitfalls - keep up the good work! :)

You've even made me think about looking for Spanish / Italian subjects... but their 'artistic' schemes do put me off!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I spent most of today doing research. In a different life I was a researcher and I have to say, this aspect of our hobby is something that keeps my noggin alive, if only for all the conflicting information :hypnotised: !

So, bearing that in mind, I have researched my way into a number of 'areas of concern'. If anyone can offer help/critiscism or advice - I would appreciate it.

Here we are with the things I have been researching, with some supporting pictures/images/plans.:

1: Nine cylinders and 8 exhaust outlets (on the type 5/6) ..how does this work? I think I've solved this one - and think many profiles may be erroneous in this respect. I'll address that one during the build.

2: I very much respect Massimo Tessitori's extensive research. http://mig3.sovietwarplanes.com/i16/i16painting/I16painting.htm

His information on the early I-16 type 5 suggests to me that there is a very high probability that the aircraft provided to the Spanish Republicans may have been in standard soviet paint schemes of the time. If that is so, I'm leaning towards profiles that show the undersides in grey/silver rather than blue. I feel this could open one of these :worms:

Here is a period black and white image of a Spanish I-16, with following images of Russian aircraft for comparison. If we are to assume the Russian aircraft have grey/silver undersides, does the colour/tone of the Spanish Aircraft look radically different? Hmmm. I don't think so.

The profiles also show that some may be in agreement with my leaning towards grey/silver - even in the direct case of '33'.

Spanish (Ooops!):

i16_1_zpsdzfjvbnj.jpg

Soviet:

i-16line2-3_zpsu3tfg9wu.jpg

Different coloured wheel hubs - that could indicate many things, but, overall - these aircraft look very similar in paint scheme.

Profiles:

IMG_0463_zpsypscmjd6.jpg

Looks like grey to me?

IMG_1987_zpsuoymvfcd.jpg

As did that.

IMG_1988_zpsfua7v9ud.jpg

But this one shows blue. Source?

3: Tiny windows in the undercarriage wheel wells. It seems to me they should be there, but if so, they could be either opioid (I had to leave it in, I meant to write 'ovoid!!!') :D or tiny and rectangular. I veer towards the former. I have no supporting plans or photographs at this stage - simply photographs of models made by other people.

4: Sliding rails for the canopy and tiny round windows on the fuselage top, in front of the canopy, to allow some illumination for the IP. This plan seems to support this, but profiles and images are inconclusive. The photo of a Type 10 cockpit shows the windows clearly. The plan is of a type 5 (skis).

i16_5_zpsnrcvf2w5.jpg

Tiny, tiny round windows on a type 5.

PolikarpovI-16Rata-9_zpscrlve4fv.jpg

Here they are on a type 10.

Well - there we go. That's enough research for now, and covers about all I want to look at for this build.

After all that brain work we need some fun, so here's a great 1938 soviet film showing 'Mosca's' chasing and saving a train!!



And here is the first flight of an I-16 in Spain in many decades. Wait until around 2.28 - it gets really quite inspiring!



Happy modelling and best regards

Tony



Edited for ludicrously funny auto-correct. Edited by TonyTiger66

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some modelling would help.. :whistle:

Most kits I have seem to go with the; 'build a cockpit, paint and detail it, install, close up the fuselage' linear construction method.

This one doesn't. There is absolutely no cockpit wall detail, no real floor detail. Just a seat, an IP (not bad) and a control column. The floor sits on top of the one piece lower wing. This all then fits beneath the two fuselage haves. This is better told in pictures. The absence of detail is not a great worry.

Once the early type 5 canopy is on, if it is in the closed position, virtually nothing at all can be seen. Thus, simply an impression of something there is just fine. :)

IP:

P1250174_zps71384bdb.jpg

Seat and control column:

P1250178_zpsc144c409.jpg

Cleaned up and shown with the cockpit floor.
I forgot to drill out the control column handle centre, but I did drill out the cockpit floor to enable the control column to be fitted. I used a pin vice and 0.7mm CSS drill bit.

P1250186_zpsekwyjacf.jpg

P1250187_zpswnvndinn.jpg

The seat has a big sink mark in the base/cushion area. I have filled this with Humbrol filler. I like this filler for quick and thick rectifications such as this. I use quite a few different fillers and we will probably see my favourite three used in this build.

Next post - past failures and the vertical stabiliser obsession.... :hmmm:

Thanks for reading
Best regards

Tony

Edited by TonyTiger66

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Tony :)

I (like others) use Multiquote all the time on my laptop but, on the iPad, not so much! Well done for sorting it out...

"You made me think about the 'progression' of my WIP. I want it to be useful to other modellers..." Me too. I sometimes look back at my threads and think they're a bit verbose and then something happens during a build that I think others would benefit from seeing; not just my 'techniques' but also my mistakes. Like your posts about the "vertical stabiliser join" they'll help others avoid the pitfalls - keep up the good work! :)

You've even made me think about looking for Spanish / Italian subjects... but their 'artistic' schemes do put me off!

Thank you Ced :) I will have to try to avoid being verbose. I don't talk much, but I can write quite a lot without realising it.

I know what you mean about the Italian schemes - I currently have absolutely no idea how to do them justice. I know it involves an airbrush, and I have one, but I have had zero success with it.

It seems to put me firmly in that lesser known Cotswolds village; 'Much Spitting' or even worse, the Bath and N.E. Somerset village 'Midsummer Blobby ' :weep: .

On the Spanish side, many aircraft aren't too bad - pretty nice schemes, especially the civil ones impressed into military service. The GAL Monospar (kitted by Azur in the gentleman's scale I think?) offers some nice options ;)

Thought you might be interested in this....

it sounds lovely! I know it's a different mark, but these may be of use too

http://www.kiwiaircraftimages.com/i16.html

Ian

By crikey Ian - thanks! :thumbsup: . Lovely video and yes, don't they just sound gorgeous. The write up is inspiring and the photographs are very useful, type 24 or not.

More and more the design of this aircraft strikes me as very 'Art-Deco'. Hercule Poirot would probably have liked it :)

The Wanaka event is an as yet unfulfilled life ambition. My wife is from NZ. Her late grandad is quite 'known' - a film was made about him called 'The World's Fastest Indian'. It was some years ago now - Anthony Hopkins played her grandad.

Beyond the aircraft, as a Pom in exile, and having lived in 'hilly and pointy bits' (Ced, do I get a fnar?) of the UK, I must say I really would like to visit NZ for the scenery. The video you shared really fuels this ambition. Stunning aircraft flown with finesse over a stunning landscape.

I bet Sergey Ilyushin never dreamed that 5 of his aircraft would be whizzing over New Zealand in the late 20th and early 21st centuries! :pilot:

Edited for syntax errors young Jedi I have.

Edited by TonyTiger66

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Tony - I don't think you're verbose; carry on Sir, very entertaining! :)

I looked up the film of your wife's Grandad - Burt Munro eh? What a character! She must be proud :)

The videos were great and reminded me of how beautiful NZ is. I spent three weeks in NZ about twenty years ago on business and I'd love to go back. Invercargill was amazing, from memory, about as far South as you can get. Very Scottish if I remember (one has to remember that NZ is 'upside down' compared to England, in more ways than one). I've always said that if I had to leave England then NZ would be my first choice, especially for the 'hilly and pointy bits' (fnaar!).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Righty-ho. On to the business of modelling.

I have kept two of my 'Drawer of Doom' models. I think it may be time to show some horrors. I apologise for the dreadful photographic quality, but here is what happens with this kit (and a clueless builder) when it all goes (really really) horribly wrong - this was attempt number two:

IMG_1976_zpspq0jhxah.jpg

:shutup:

IMG_1978_zpsn2nchqby.jpg

:poo:

Please, not this time....no more...make the bad man go....

Let's move swiftly on (please, let's, lets stop looking at those pictures hee hee, I'm all better now :guitar:).

In attempt number 4, I decided to try assembling the wings first, then inserting the fuselage halves one at a time to try to minimise wing root join problems (i.e. huge gaps).

It almost worked - but didn't. It nevertheless helped me identify two areas where I feel I was going wrong. Lets look at this almost successful attempt, without weeping inconsolably.

P1000213_zpsypf2cpmk.jpg

Looks promising, wonder how the Port wing root gap looks now? Bet it's just spiffing :)

P1000215_zpsjvbbzgmg.jpg

Hmm - I can live with it. Righto - let's dry fit the other fuselage half. Oh my, I've cracked it, this is going to be great! :bounce:!

P1000210_zps5smtfbpg.jpg

Oh ballcocks. The front bulkhead is lop-sided too. Maybe it's just this photographic angle that makes it look so bad? Let's try another:

P1000210_zps5smtfbpg.jpg

No. From this angle we can see that not only is there a 1.5mm fuselage gap, there is also a horrendous step between one side and the other along the join. Also referring to both photographs, we can see that one fuselage side is 'forwards' of the other, hence the fore step in the cockpit opening.

I had sanded down the vertical stabiliser interior surfaces to mate up the joins, but it seems this wasn't quite the full solution - so where do the alignment problems originate - what have I overlooked?

Now we can finally get going, I hope the mistakes here may have led to a solution. I also feel the kit may be potentially extremely well designed and that only the poor moulding technology leads to the build problems I have had. The top and bottom of it is: I just don't think I thought it through properly, nor realised the importance of thorough preparation in 21st century short run kits.

I hope the next photographs of the real WIP may show that a little more mindfulness seems to be paying off, so far :)

Edited for missing images

Edited by TonyTiger66

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I bet Sergey Ilyushin never dreamed that 5 of his aircraft would be whizzing over New Zealand in the late 20th and early 21st centuries!

Don't you mean Nikolai Polikarpov ???

Great work on the I-16 BTW :thumbsup: - I built two of them to go under my TB-3 bomber as an 'Aviamatka'.....

Zveno_31B.jpg

Not the easiest of kits - but then I didn't do all the improvements that you are tackling.

Keep it up.

Ken

PS Re the Wanaka I-16s - I read an article in a magazine where the NZ pilot said that landing the I-16 was very difficult! - In fact it was easier to ditch the plane offshore and then recover it than it was to land it :analintruder:

Edited by Flankerman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...