kopperhed Posted July 13, 2020 Share Posted July 13, 2020 That feel when the version you want is never the one released first. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homebee Posted July 14, 2020 Author Share Posted July 14, 2020 (edited) Here - ref. DW48029 - Republic P-43 Lancer https://dorawings.com/shop/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=89 In box reviews http://www.ipmsdeutschland.de/FirstLook/Dora_Wings/DW48029_Republic_P-43_Lancer/DW_P-43_Lancer.html https://www.cybermodeler.com/hobby/kits/dora/kit_dora_48029.shtml? V.P. Edited March 28, 2021 by Homebee 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homebee Posted August 31, 2020 Author Share Posted August 31, 2020 A - ref. DW48029 - Republic P-43 Lancer review in your favourite forum: https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235079376-republic-p-43-lancer-dw48029-148/ V.P. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wuger91 Posted September 3, 2020 Share Posted September 3, 2020 (edited) First Build https://www.modelingmadness.com/review/allies/cleaver/us/usaaf/fighter/tc43.htm Edited September 3, 2020 by Wuger91 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homebee Posted October 9, 2020 Author Share Posted October 9, 2020 (edited) Another boxing - ref. DW48032 - Republic P-43A-1 Lancer "In China Skies" Sources: https://www.facebook.com/1929101897320378/photos/a.1929107127319855/2852260155004543 https://www.1999.co.jp/eng/10731317 https://www.hannants.co.uk/product/DW48032 V.P. Edited November 4, 2020 by Homebee 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gavingav1 Posted October 10, 2020 Share Posted October 10, 2020 On 9/3/2020 at 9:36 AM, Wuger91 said: First Build https://www.modelingmadness.com/review/allies/cleaver/us/usaaf/fighter/tc43.htm i have not been able to access the modeling madness website for a couple of years, it always comes back as server not found . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sebastien Posted October 10, 2020 Share Posted October 10, 2020 19 minutes ago, gavingav said: i have not been able to access the modeling madness website for a couple of years, it always comes back as server not found . Have you tried changing your DNS? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gavingav1 Posted October 10, 2020 Share Posted October 10, 2020 3 hours ago, Sebastien said: Have you tried changing your DNS? Just learned how to do this and tried, it works now, thank you . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homebee Posted November 9, 2020 Author Share Posted November 9, 2020 Released - ref. DW48032 - Republic P-43A-1 Lancer "In China Skies" https://dorawings.com/shop/index.php?route=product/product&path=59&product_id=94 V.P. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homebee Posted March 9, 2021 Author Share Posted March 9, 2021 Source: https://www.facebook.com/dorawingsofficial/posts/2973870259510198 Release March 2021 - ref. DW48034 - Republic P-43B/C Lancer V.P. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homebee Posted March 28, 2021 Author Share Posted March 28, 2021 (edited) Release - ref. DW48034 - Republic P-43B/C Lancer Sources: https://www.facebook.com/dorawingsofficial/posts/2988597581370799 https://dorawings.com/shop/index.php?route=product%2Fproduct&product_id=101 And some pics from a finished model http://www.hyperscale.com/2021/reviews/kits/dorawingsdw48034apreview_1.htm V.P. Edited March 28, 2021 by Homebee 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maginot Posted October 15, 2021 Share Posted October 15, 2021 Thanks for posting this, @Homebee Regarding this RAAF variant... I reckon there might be something crook. The prominent blisters near the tail. Are these the camera blisters noted as being removed on the ADF Serials site? "The first quartet of RAAF P-43Ds in Australia was modified at RAAF Base Laverton by removing the camera blisters. The second RAAF quartet, all P-43Bs, arrived with the standard two lower K-24 camera fittings." The first pic on their site clearly shows shows no blister, instead an aluminium plate in the shape blanking the void. Where were the "standard two lower K-24 camera fittings"? I've just ordered the variant in ROCAF service, cos it was on special, and intend converting it into RAAF guise. Investigating this further. addendum: Investigations suggest the K-24 cameras were fitted in the rear cockpit with ports on the underside either side of the exhaust trunk just forward of the turbocharger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tbolt Posted October 15, 2021 Share Posted October 15, 2021 1 hour ago, Maginot said: Thanks for posting this, @Homebee Regarding this RAAF variant... I reckon there might be something crook. The prominent blisters near the tail. Are these the camera blisters noted as being removed on the ADF Serials site? "The first quartet of RAAF P-43Ds in Australia was modified at RAAF Base Laverton by removing the camera blisters. The second RAAF quartet, all P-43Bs, arrived with the standard two lower K-24 camera fittings." The first pic on their site clearly shows shows no blister, instead an aluminium plate in the shape blanking the void. Where were the "standard two lower K-24 camera fittings"? I've just ordered the variant in ROCAF service, cos it was on special, and intend converting it into RAAF guise. Investigating this further. addendum: Investigations suggest the K-24 cameras were fitted in the rear cockpit with ports on the underside either side of the exhaust trunk just forward of the turbocharger. Like you say they blanked off the side cameras position and just used the vertical one, but I didn't know there were two vertical cameras, I just though there was one on the left side just forward of the turbo as that what seem to be in the kit. Here's the left side vertical port. I'm guessing the right side camera was in the same place on the right side? 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maginot Posted October 15, 2021 Share Posted October 15, 2021 Thanks a heap, @Tbolt Most interesting. The K-24 cameras referred to were American, manufactured by Eastman Kodak, developed from the British F24 designed in the 1920s. They were versatile cameras which use included being paired together to produce stereoscopic negatives. It seems they were mounted very closely together but aligned slightly differently to provide a lateral overlap of 10°. So I wonder if they shared the same port? From the ADF Serials site, here's a pic of a pranged A 56-5 showing part of the belly on RHS forward of the turbocharger. There is no sign of a second camera port corresponding to the other side. photo credit ADF-Serials I think this is a K-24 camera being installed or removed from a Lancer. Looks quite spacious in there, doesn't it? Room enough for the two K-24s required for paired stereoscopic photography. Here's the single camera port LHS bottom and erroneous rear fuselage camera blisters on the Dora Wings Lancer RAAF version, taken from their Farcebook page: Solved? Well, maybe... not sure that belly port looks big enough to accommodate two K-24 lenses. Lots of further reading is required to inform my limited knowledge of the equipment and methods used in this period. I'm fascinated by photo reconnaissance (PRU) aircraft and I much prefer to model them without the nasty guns and bombs that mess up an otherwise clean airframe. But I must say that those camera blisters on the rear fuselage are weird. What an odd spot to carry cameras. The ports seem to be facing aft and it's not a good place on an airframe for weighty equipment. No wonder we Skips gave em the flick. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tbolt Posted October 15, 2021 Share Posted October 15, 2021 24 minutes ago, Maginot said: Thanks a heap, @Tbolt Most interesting. The K-24 cameras referred to were American, manufactured by Eastman Kodak, developed from the British F24 designed in the 1920s. They were versatile cameras which use included being paired together to produce stereoscopic negatives. It seems they were mounted very closely together but aligned slightly differently to provide a lateral overlap of 10°. So I wonder if they shared the same port? From the ADF Serials site, here's a pic of a pranged A 56-5 showing part of the belly on RHS forward of the turbocharger. There is no sign of a second camera port corresponding to the other side. I think this is a K-24 camera being installed or removed from a Lancer. Looks quite spacious in there, doesn't it? Room enough for the two K-24s required for paired stereoscopic photography. Here's the single camera port LHS bottom and erroneous rear fuselage camera blisters on the Dora Wings Lancer RAAF version, taken from their Farcebook page: Solved? Well, maybe... not sure that belly port looks big enough to accommodate two K-24 lenses. Lots of further reading is required to inform my limited knowledge of the equipment and methods used in this period. I'm fascinated by photo reconnaissance (PRU) aircraft and I much prefer to model them without the nasty guns and bombs that mess up an otherwise clean airframe. But I must say that those camera blisters on the rear fuselage are weird. What an odd spot to carry cameras. The ports seem to be facing aft and it's not a good place on an airframe for weighty equipment. No wonder we Skips gave em the flick. I'll be interested in what you dig up. I love PR aircraft and get a bit frustrated when companies like Eduard keep producing fighter version of Spitfires and ignore all the PR versions. At least they have given us an F-6D. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tbolt Posted October 16, 2021 Share Posted October 16, 2021 16 hours ago, Maginot said: Thanks a heap, @Tbolt Most interesting. The K-24 cameras referred to were American, manufactured by Eastman Kodak, developed from the British F24 designed in the 1920s. They were versatile cameras which use included being paired together to produce stereoscopic negatives. It seems they were mounted very closely together but aligned slightly differently to provide a lateral overlap of 10°. So I wonder if they shared the same port? From the ADF Serials site, here's a pic of a pranged A 56-5 showing part of the belly on RHS forward of the turbocharger. There is no sign of a second camera port corresponding to the other side. I think this is a K-24 camera being installed or removed from a Lancer. Looks quite spacious in there, doesn't it? Room enough for the two K-24s required for paired stereoscopic photography. Here's the single camera port LHS bottom and erroneous rear fuselage camera blisters on the Dora Wings Lancer RAAF version, taken from their Farcebook page: Solved? Well, maybe... not sure that belly port looks big enough to accommodate two K-24 lenses. Lots of further reading is required to inform my limited knowledge of the equipment and methods used in this period. I'm fascinated by photo reconnaissance (PRU) aircraft and I much prefer to model them without the nasty guns and bombs that mess up an otherwise clean airframe. But I must say that those camera blisters on the rear fuselage are weird. What an odd spot to carry cameras. The ports seem to be facing aft and it's not a good place on an airframe for weighty equipment. No wonder we Skips gave em the flick. I managed to get to my PC and pulled these of my hard drive showing the camera installations. Vertical cameras. Rear facing cameras. 2 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maginot Posted October 16, 2021 Share Posted October 16, 2021 Thanks very much, @Tbolt. That's outstanding! Hmm... those twin vertical cameras are not sharing the one port. So where is the second port? Must be RHS. And that rear mounted camera is... crazy. It's a sort of semi-oblique position. Some great weathering hints. Love the shoes the pilot is wearing. Great pics. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tbolt Posted October 16, 2021 Share Posted October 16, 2021 1 hour ago, Maginot said: Thanks very much, @Tbolt. That's outstanding! Hmm... those twin vertical cameras are not sharing the one port. So where is the second port? Must be RHS. And that rear mounted camera is... crazy. It's a sort of semi-oblique position. Some great weathering hints. Love the shoes the pilot is wearing. Great pics. I guess it must have been on the right side, but I wonder how many aircraft actually used a camera there? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maginot Posted October 30, 2021 Share Posted October 30, 2021 I received my Dora Wings Lancer a while ago and yesterday, a Special Hobby Buffalo in 1/48. Both types served concurrently in No.1 Photographic Reconnaissance Unit RAAF, which is how I intend modelling them. In light of our discussion above, @Tbolt, I thought it worth noting the camera layout in Special Hobby's Brewster Buffalo 339-23 in RAAF service. It would appear the three cameras (see below) are as per the original modification by No.1 Aircraft Depot RAAF, documented on the ADF-Serials Republic Lancer page. Two cameras are paired in the stereoscopic installation similar to the one in the Lancer pictured in your earlier post. But just to chuck a cat among the pigeons, the Buffalo camera fit was reduced from three to one after deployment to north-west Western Australia. 1AD RAAF also modified the Lancers. Did they similarly fabricate a second camera port to accommodate the "standard two lower K-24 camera fittings"? Special Hobby Buffalo 3 cameras and camera ports; note the stereoscopic pair Dora Wings Lancer single camera port I'm thinking it likely and it's a straight-forward modification. BTW, nice kits these two. 4 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alt-92 Posted October 30, 2021 Share Posted October 30, 2021 2 hours ago, Maginot said: Special Hobby's Brewster Buffalo 339-23 in RAAF service Thanks for pointing that one out - weren't those the ex-ML-KNIL late orders? I knew those were appropriated by USAAC in 1942 after the fall of NEI and then redistributed, but wasn't aware they were used as PR birds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julien Posted November 23, 2021 Share Posted November 23, 2021 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now