Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 05/19/2019 in Posts

  1. 2 points
    Two models completed in one year so far!! WooHoo!! 😁
  2. 1 point
    Another point ( I can’t let go of this thing!) all the kits either with trailers or on launchers are pretty good representation of the real thing. Dick’s model’s trailer does not look anything like that in any photo of the real Snark. I think the trailer does not belong with the missile. To solve the mystery, we need to identify the source of the trailer.
  3. 1 point
    Finished the Trumpy Vigi this evening. The build was more enjoyable than I anticipated, with the fit being a little better than expected. I used the Nautilus laser-cut wood re-enforcement set for the interior, since Trumpeter designed it with the traditional left/right half fuselages, which leaves the top and bottom center seams weak if not beefed up somehow. I also used a Black Box resin interior I had for it. It fit almost like a glove. The only adjustment to it was to make it mesh properly with the Trumpeter nose gear well, which had to be removed from the kit cockpit structure. The wing fold is a kit option, as are the deflected leading and trailing edge flaps. One of the major drawbacks to the kit is a lack of intake trunking....Trumpeter provides two complete engines, but they just "sit" in the fuselage interior with nothing leading into each of the engine fronts. I left the engines out and added plastic card intake covers. That meant I had to do so cutting and fitting of the engines to install the rear halves of the engine exhausts so they'd fit within the Nautilus supports; but that wasn't difficult, and also allowed me to paint and add the burner cans at the end of the build. I used MM enamels for the gloss white and 36440 Gull Gray. The metal leading edges were done with Alclad. The weathering was done with a wash made from Mig pigments dissolved in water with a drop of dish washing soap. The panel lines were done with a brown colored pencil. I used some Two Bobs decals that came with the very first issue of Aerospace Modeler magazine back in 2005. The markings are for a Vigilante based out of Albany, Ga @1970; just a few years before I lived there. Rumor had it that the Vigilante pilots would take back to back tours of sea duty just to avoid going back to small town "Allbenny"....Anyway....on to the pics! Now I have the recce RA-5C to go along with my A-5A Viglante bomber conversion I did years ago. Questions, comments, and critiques welcome as always. Cheers! GIL
  4. 1 point
    Thanks Bill. All the sub assemblies have been completed. The missiles took quite a long time to paint and apply decals. I got this kit at a swap meet from a vendor. After a closer inspection of the kit, I noticed that it had been subjected to a lot of moisture. There was actually a light film of mold on top of the decal sheet. With a damp rag, it wiped right off. The staples were rusted on the instructions. The decals were a challenge. I experimented with pre-shading on the rudders, and elevators. I did something pretty stupid. I assembled the wings with the leading edge slates installed , WITHOUT looking at the instructions first. When it came time to attach the wings to the fuselage, they would not fit. After using a few #11 blades to carefully remove the slates and some sandpaper, the problem was fixed. I'll never do that again. Regards Christopher
  5. 1 point
    This build is the 1/48 Hasegawa Ki-45 Toryu (nicknamed “Nick”) and the scheme is the Manchukuo Air Corps version. The Ki-45 is a twin engine heavy fighter and was used for ground attack and as an interceptor. Manchukuo was a puppet state of Japan in located Manchuria that aided Japan in their Indo-China operations and later intercepting U.S. B-29’s that were fire bombing Japan. For this build I will be using the CMK resin cockpit detail set. I started by removing all the parts from the resin casting. The cockpit tub required very little trimming to fit in the fuselage. After some detail painting and adding some photo etch accessories I started installing the cockpit. I then found some errors in the CMK instructions. The first was the instructions show the dashboard mounted too far forward and does not show the control pedals. I had to remove it then relocated it to the correct position and added the control pedals. The second issue is the instructions do not inform you that the top of the dash on the kit needs to be notched in order to fit the cannon gun sight. Once these minor issues were corrected the cockpit tub fit in without any problems. I am now moving on to the wings and engine/landing gear bays. You can follow along on my blog in the build log at https://davidsscalemodels.com/build-log/1-48-ki-45-toryu-nick/
  6. 1 point
    Inspired with a build started by fellow modeler Bill Dye a few years back, here is my rendition of the prototype RF-84F YRF-84F Build Thread And, here are the finished pics: Again, thanks to fellow modeler Bill Dye, who inspired this build. As usual, it's not perfect, but it's better than the one I had before... Ed
  7. 1 point
    Here are the final photos of my conversion of a Monogram F-105D kit into the prototype YF-105A, and here is the Build Thread And for a little comparison, the original Monogram F-105D alongside: If you check out the build thread, you will see that it was a long ride... Ed
  8. 1 point
  9. 1 point
    First an update. The Monogram F9F-5P Panther I had started suffered a fatal accident. It fell off my workbench & I didn't see where it landed. Rolled my chair back & heard the crunch everybody dreads. I'll keep it for airbrushing practice. So I started on the Kitty Hawk F2H-2P Banshee with plans to do it in VC-61/VFP-63 markings. The cockpit is almost complete so I started assembling the cameras. I'm not sure where Kitty Hawk got their information on what the cameras look like but, they don't look like any that I've ever seen. I spent 18 of my 22 years of military service working in & managing recce labs. I had the opportunity to get up close to the cameras in the RF-4, SR-71, & U-2. These look nothing like an aerial camera. The 1st photo is the camera set from the kit. The 2nd photo is CMK's resin set 4333 for the Tanmodel RF-84F. The RF-84 flew a couple years after the Banshee and would have had similar if not the same cameras. The kit cameras look like they have lenses on both sides in an oblique orientation. In normal operation, a mission might have had a left & right oblique and maybe a vertical camera. They would not have been mounted on the same station. If this is the biggest complaint I have about the kit, I'll be happy.
  10. 1 point
    Hi, Gil. I'm not planning to have the panels open. That would take a lot of work I'm not up to doing currently with the limited amount of time I have at the work bench. I bought the CMK resin camera set with plans to do something with an RF-4 or F9F-8P (which is also in my stash & I think has the same camera setup as the Banshee). The person who did the panel open model published in the D&S book on the Banshee did a very good job but anybody familiar with aerial cameras would notice the error. In addition, there's no reason to have 2 oblique cameras on the same side or both sides in the case of what's included in the kit. A mapping mission would have a right oblique in the forward station on the right side, a vertical camera in the center station & a left oblique in the 3rd station. I know; more information than you probably wanted. As for the windows, I'll probably use Krystal Klear or similar if the kit parts don't fit well. BTW the 3rd camera appears to be an infrared line scan camera. I haven't been able to confirm that from what is in the D&S book or what I've found online.
  11. 1 point
    And yet again, when some low performing modeler berates one of our members with the painfully monotonous myth of IPMS rivet counters, our knee- jerk reaction is to rend our garments, beat our breasts, and fall on our xacto knives in shame. People will believe what they want to believe whether it is written on a bathroom stall wall or on the idiotnet. Nothing we can say or do will change that! Nor should we change. All IPMS has done over the past 50 years is give credibility to a hobby that was not taken seriously, help plastic modelers increase their skills and enhance their enjoyment of the hobby, demand that kit manufacturers take this hobby as seriously as we do and organize competitions that are as scrupulously fair as human integrity will permit! We have NOTHING to be ashamed of or apologize for. My personal experience of the people such as those whose uninformed comments you had to endure is that they are poor modelers whose work will not stand up under the most cursory of assessments. What we should be ignoring is the whining of these cry-babies whose skill level is so low that they are simply not competitive when faced with the standards of excellence that IPMS encourages and rewards in it’s members. Let’s all show a little more spine! Why should we seek an association with such narrow, hateful little minds? Regards, Nick Filippone, Senior National Judge
  12. 1 point
    Thanks Gil. All i need to mask will be cockpit and bay area, engine. The bay above the cockpit will be added once all painting is done. I also use foam to mask.
  13. 1 point
    Thanks Gil! I have so many going right now, I do need to finish some. I am hoping to do that very soon. I was fortunate that the guns on the Austratt turret didn't need counterweights. They just needed the holes in the trunnions tightened up. Everything works perfectly now! Stay tuned, more to come.
  14. 1 point
    https://www.tested.com/art/makers/876367-adam-savages-one-day-builds-scratch-built-spaceship/
  15. 1 point
    I'm still at it with these old Aurora WW I biplanes. Found this one at a local show and it's bit rarer than others so I snapped it up. It's the Monogram boxing, so the decal locators were removed from the molds, which made life a lot easier. The only thing I did was add a basic interior and drill out the exhaust pipes and Lewis guns. The kit has a four bladed prop, which was only used on Brisfits with a particular engine. In addition, it has a dual Lewis gun mount, which the gunners did not like as it was bulkier and heavier and more difficult to bring to bear on a target. Anyhoo, here 'tis.
  16. 1 point
    The PC 10 was Model Master Green Drab. The linen was also Model Master, but i can't remember it's name. 'Course, Model Master Enamels are now out of production, but you can still find some on the interweb.
  17. 1 point
  18. 1 point
    This week’s update on the F-22 is a small one. Between my oldest son’s graduation from college and life getting in the way I was not able to spend a lot of time on the bench. However I was able to complete the main weapons bay doors. The small doors had 14 parts and the larger doors had 50 parts each. The braces are 1mm X 1mm styrene stock and the hinge shaft is 28awg wire. Next I will be assembling the photo etch replacement missile bay doors and then priming all the doors for paint.
  19. 1 point
    The more things change..... I've followed this toxic topic for, literally, decades. It have seen the same voices voice the same opinions with something between the same vitriol and the same calm, reasoned discourse. I came to the conclusion, years ago, that IPMS is not now nor ever will be in the least interested in a GSB system because (1) NIH, (2) it's the way we've always done it, and (3) the "real" IPMS long-time modelers don't want it. Some who have supported it have been told, on the predecessor forum, in writing, "If you can't compete with the very best (us and/or me), then don't bother to show up and compete. Stop whining." So, long ago, I shut up. And have increasingly not shown up. I've previously stated that I can judge either way. I have and I will. I do the best I can under the judging rules. But, I do think that 1-2-3 devalues the very, very good model that is not quite a very, very, very good model -- in one category -- whilst in another category a just barely good enough model competing against entries with multiple serious flaws is recognized with the same 1st as a very, very, very, very good entry. I also think that often, in judging three or four, entries which, for all purposes are identical candidates for third place, that each really deserves some recognition. But, on a wing and a prayer, we have to convince ourselves that one is somewhat, somehow, probably, maybe better. (And, please, though I don't expect my request to be honored, don't come back with the not unusual, "If you can't stand the heat, then get out of judging" comment. I've heard it before.) Makes no sense to me, but that is the way it is. HST, over the last decade, I've begun voting on this topic with my wallet. Where I used to attend every IPMS Nats and Regional that I could, I now choose to instead attend various figure shows that also have categories for plastics. I enjoy them much more, the spirit is much more collegial and must less cutthroat, there is markedly less chest pounding, and I feel that if I didn't place (the most likely outcome) then my entry was clearly not competitive. So, I have morphed from a regular Nats/Regional attendee/entrant to an occasional IPMS Nats/Regional attendee who seldom enters and am now a regular figure show attendee who always enters. I could well be alone in my metamorphosis, but no matter. I'm happy with my evolution and now figure I have only about 1-2 Nats left in me. All in all, I'm burned out on the topic of judging; I've moved on. So, as to this topic and this survey, in the immortal words of Monte Walsh, "You don't have no idea how little I care."
×
×
  • Create New...