Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Brews

  1. Great work, gentlemen! Edit: I've resigned to the fact that I've probably thrown away my PE belts for the Eduard Albatros Dr.1, so I ordered a set of seats with belts from Barracudacast. While I was there, I ordered a set of wheels, too. We'll get this bird done eventually.
  2. I thought that the Glencoe kit was a repop of Aurora's. i'll dig out my Aurora DIII and take some comparison pics. Edit: I don't know if pics are going to help - the plastic is fairly featureless on the underside of the wings. The struts fit snugly, though.
  3. Thanks, John. I might take you up on that. If you've ever built a Pegasus / Blue Max / Silver Cloud kit, you know what this feels like for me. I'm not going to complain, but suffice to say that I can get the Revell kit for less than I could get this for, and it has all the parts of the Eduard (Weekend Edition, I presume). Still, this has the Arab cowling, so that's something. I've actually been enjoying fettling this thing together. I didn't start with the cockpit! I glued both nose halves and radiators together. I will not use the Eagle III nose, but it's nice to have it to hand. The nose sections have big seams to fill. Additionally, they will need putty to fair them into the white metal radiators. Both nacelles have some fairly large openings, but no engine or engine bay detail was provided for either version. Choosing the Arab, which looks similar to a Hispano-Suiza 8 (although different in key mechanical areas) may be a happy result - as the HS isn't a difficult engine to scratch, and its mounting is fairly simple, too. However, some black blanking pieces may be all that's really needed to prevent the see-through possibilities. The radiators have depressions for a prop shaft, but neither have open holes. The Eagle's radiator has circular depressions on the front and back, while the Arab's only has one on the front. The detail of the radiator is nice. You won't see it once the prop is in place - so a removable prop makes sense. The provision of two and 4-bladed props is handy. These could be interchanged on any particular machine, I'm fairly sure. The suggestions are to use the 4-bladed one for the Eagle, and the 2-bladed one for the Arab. t tried supergluing (butt joints) the wing pieces together. Apart from the centre-sections, the wings are identical. The centre-sections don't fit the outer wings in profile. They might, if the wings didn't have dihedral, but even after sanding the outer wing edges down to an angle, they don't fit anywhere near closely. I don't know how this can happen. Isn't a kit is built from the parts to test that they fit? If so, am I doing something wrong? I'm settling for the eventuality of a session with Milliput at a later date. At this point, a decision had to be made as to which surface fitted flush - the underside of the upper side. My decision was made for me quite accidentally, as it turned out. I drilled holes for pins in matching halves of the centre section and outer wings. On the lower wing, the upper surface mated better. On the upper wing, the lower surface mated better. That's not the way I would have preferred it, but it's the way it turned out. It means that I'm going to lose all the moulded surface detail on the most visible parts of each centre-section, but at least the final product should look ok. My next task will be to paint the insides of the fuselages in clear doped linen. I might use Tamiya Wooden Deck Tan or Deck Tan (the paler of the two). Xtracolour's CDL is nice, but takes days to dry. The timber structure is provided in white metal. I'll paint that in varnished wood colours. I think I'll use a Humbrol enamel for those - somehow I don't trust Tamiya paints to adhere well to metal - but it's worth a try. Painting these things is something I can do with a brush while watching TV with the beloved tonight. Here is the book that contains my reference drawings: Sample drawing: I made a crude jig out of a piece of stout sprue. View of the dihedral on the main planes. View of the fit between the radiator and the Arab's nose. Note the large holes! Comparison of the Eagle's nose (left) with the slightly less-aesthetic Arab's nose (no pun or offense intended) on the right. Remember, when the Blue Max kits came out, they were the only game in town for virtually the entire range - at least as far as injection-moulded kits go. Eduard and Roden have really raised the bar in 1:48 scale, let alone what Wingnut Wings has done for these birds, and the hobby.
  4. I've abandoned the CMR BE2c for the time being. Straightening the bent resin without breaking it proved beyond me this time. I mentioned to Chris that I'd started an Eduard 1:48 Albatros Dr.1, but I have lost the PE seat belts. I suspect I threw them out, if it was stuck to some masking tape accidentallyI do have a habit of forgetting where I put things down, so they might turn up sometime, but I'm fully thinking that they won't. So, I started a Roden 1:32 Pfalz DIII, and that's been coming along ok. Then, last night, I opened a Blue Max 1:48 Bristol F2b Fighter. I like this for the Sunbeam Arab option. The decals look as if they're cracked, though. I don't know what I'll do for those as I don't have any in my spares. I might have to print some.
  5. Matchbox/Revell in 1:76, too, with the Char B1.
  6. Finished washing my resin parts, and the upper wing broke while trying to straighten it. I've straightened it, though. The break was nearly all on the starboard side of the centre section (the centre-section cut out on the trailing edge was a stress concentrator). As there is a dihedral, I'll probably break the port wing on this line, too, either accidentally or deliberately, depending on how the re-bending goes. Wishing the bent parts weren't bent.
  7. Here's my unopened kit - a CMR 1:72 scale RAF BE2c Bag Artwork: Instructions: Drawings (on reverse of Instructions): Resin Parts (including a sheet of 2-part moulded items joined by common flash at the mould seam. Yay.): First job will be to wash the resin and re-bag it into the conveniently-provided Ziplock bag that the whole lot came in. The upper wing should have dihedral, but it has a bend in the port wing about mid-span, so I'll get some hot water and clamps ready later on.
  8. I've been pondering all sorts of things. I don't want to tackle the Dreadnought until I get something simpler under my belt. The last thing I need is an non-completed GB subject. Starting with 1914, then, I'm leaning towards either a CMR 1:72 BE2c or (if I can find it!) an Eduard 1:48 Sopwith Baby. Let's leave it at BE2c for the time being.
  9. I'll be in on this. What to do, though. Lots of choices, from HMS Dreadnought to Wingnut Wingz planes and Emhar tanks. Maybe I should start with something from 1914 ... a BE-2 or something like that.
  10. That's very nicely done, Ron. I dare say it's the best I've seen extracted from this very good kit that has been done by many modellers since its release. Cartograf made the decals, IIRC. Airfix finally did something after years of complaints about their decals which, to be fair, were made at Trun in France (Heller had a reputedly state-of-the-art decal machine which has never produced decent decals). The very old Airfix decals made in England were ok, the ones that came out of India and China a few years back (Brown backing paper) are reputedly useless, and so they went to what seems to be everyone's favourite decal manufacturer. They're not faultless, but they're very, very good. One thing that's apparent from your photos is that the inside of your carb air intake on the nose is unpainted. I would paint it RAF interior green, as even if it was not in that particular colour, it could pass for one of the many shades of ZCY.
  11. Thanks for the quick reply. My particular kit's ID is 6283.
  12. Brews

    P-40E Tomahawk

    I think the P-40D onwards were "Kittyhawks", while the ealier ones were "Tomahawks". Clive Caldwell was an expert Tomahawk pilot and proponent (he once shot down two Bf 109Es that had bounced him and left him smoking, spirally earthwards) ... Stocky Edwards was a Kittyhawk ace. I got this book for free at one time, when Amazon were offering it at that price. Edwards said in that book that the Desert Air Force didn't get air supremacy until the Spitfires arrived in theatre, sometime around the 2nd Battle of El Alamein. Bf 109s from Jg 27 weren't be so interested in going after Blenheims and other bombers as the fighters, which might seem contrary to what most other Air Forces would think appropriate, but their tactics worked for them. Model Master British Interior Grey-Green might be a closer match to the Du Pont colour that was used for machines built to Air Ministry orders. It's a bit lighter which, even if the US colour was used, may look better in the Desert environment, where sand got into everything. I think it's a test of the kit's quality if, at the end of the build, you think you'd like to build another. The moulding of the wheel wells on this kit looks particularly nice.
  13. Brews

    1/48 P-40N

    That's a very Bavarian-looking tail on that bird! Nice.
  14. Brews

    P-40E Tomahawk

    Nice build! Question 1: Would a P-40E be a Tomahawk or a Kittyhawk? Question 2: What colour did you use for your interior green? Question 3: Did you have fun? Question 4: Would you build it again?
  15. If you don't mind me asking what may be a stupid question ... what's wrong with the DML turret compared to Italeri's? My question is relevant, as I have a Dragon Easy 8 on the bench ;)
  16. It's good to get them done. I fully understand the relief of a quick build. This is also a good one.
  17. This is a simple kit, almost on the money for scale, but very simplified in some areas. OOB, the options are a D-5 flown by the famous/notorious and "high-scoring" pilot, Hans Rudel, and this one, a Nachtshchlacht "nuisance bomber" on the "Western Front". Unfortunately, the painting guide for this a/c was severely under-researched by Monogram, who had it in RLM 71 upper and 65 under. It actually would have had the ubiquitous Stuka splinter pattern of 70/71 on top, with 65 under, with some pattern of mottles or squiggles. The best-preserved photos of such machines are of NSchGw 9, based in Italy in 1944, and mine has a spurious camo loosely based on the photos of those, and on the instructions for Hasegawa's 1:32 kit. It is not, by any stretch of the imagination, definitive. I'd like you to think of it as "representative". The kit lacked much interior, so I scratched a bit, and used an MG81Z from a Revell Bf 110G after I lost the kit's MG when it came loose and rattled around somewhere inside before jamming itself somewhere. I had to scratch the DF loop and housing, as the kit didn't come with one, and all D-8s did. I also reamed out the exhaust flame dampeners. Apart from much filling and sanding, blanking off the rear of the radiator/engine bay, engraving panel lines, an aerial wire from Aeroclub rigging thread, and replacing the kit's SC50s with those left over from a Tamiya Fw 190F-8, that was it. One minor point - the kit instructions show two footholds to be placed. Only use the port side one, like I did, if you want accuracy. This kit first emerged as a G-2 in 1968 or so, and lost its big guns in exchange for a set of bombs in 1983. I bought this in 1987. Revell repopped this circa 2005. Same kit, same decals around the same time as they were repopping Hasegawa Bs and Rs of vastly superior quality. Gunze Sangyo Mr Aqueous Hobby Color for RLM 65, 66, 70, and 71. Squiggles in Lifecolor RLM 76 (Nowhere near my favourite RLM 76, or acrylic paint for that matter!) and RLM 65. Tamiya XF-1 for black bits, Vallejo Model Air for silver bits. Water colour pencils, Tamiya XF-19 for Smoke and panel line post-shading. Decals were mix of original Monogram, which stuck like mad and did not silver at all, but had a glossy finish and were a tad thick, and Tamiya (swastikas, and one wing cross, which replaced a Monogram one that wouldn't move after I'd noticed that I'd placed it a little crooked). I wonder if I'd have needed the Tamiya decals at all if I'd used Microset ... I was just being lazy, I guess.
  18. Great job. I can't tell for sure if you rescribed all the panel lines (but I couldn't blame you if you didn't!). The Thunderbirds flew the B, too, didn't they?
  19. Thanks for the kind words. It's been a lovely day today (after a rainy start, it was warm and sunny). I think it got up to about 19C / 66F.
  20. I'll let you decide, Chris. If you think it's worthwhile, then sure, go for it.
  21. This is the Tamiya 1:35 M4A3E2 Sherman "Jumbo" - one that was up-armoured to the thickness of a Churchill, and had a turret similar to the T-23 turret of the 76mm Sherman's. Tamiya got the turret badly wrong compared to Bradford's plans (which seem to be in error in some places themselves compared to photos). Too narrow, generally by about 5mm, but about the right length. The loader's hatch is too small, to fit the too-small turret roof. Also, the transmission cover isn't as well-armoured as it should be. Still a bit to do on it. The Transmission cover and the turret both need tidying-up. It won't be as good as a Tasca, but then, the Tasca costs a bit more. Not wishing to use ounces of Milliput to beef up the turret, I thought of using plastic card, maybe thermoformed ... and then it hit me. To widen the turret, I drew some pencil lines so that my cuts would be ok. I didn't want to cut something I'd regret later. Firstly, I isolated the bulk of the turret from the mounting ring, then I slit around the mantlet, and then bisected the turret roof. Here's the result: Compared to a plan by George Bradford - the outline now looks pretty good: Photos of the real thing - first, one that got hit by 4 88mm rounds at 800m - you can see the result of one that hit the mantlet and deflected down (I think this scraped the glacis, but some think that was another shot) - the one that got the tank was a "lucky" hit on the gunner's scope. You can see the big hole, where a small hole should be. What I'd like you to see here is the relative size of the mantlet to the turret (of course, I'll note the underside details that are otherwise rarely seen): Front and Side of one that was immobilised by an American mine, and was then hit by 8 "88mm"* shells. Note that the contours of the Tamiya turret aren't too bad in comparison: This one shows another angle of it. Drawings are useful, but I always like to corroborate the draftsman's impressions with photos of the real thing whereever I can: *I wouldn't be surprised if these were 75mm hits. The Pak 40 was often misrepresented as an 88, and the holes look to be about the same calibre as the Sherman's gun - mind you, we're only talking 1/2" difference. Evolution of the turret: After filing the upper part of the front of the turret, between the gunner's periscope and the mantlet (still need to attend to the near side of the front of the turret): After beefing up the nearside cheek: Transmission cover: ... getting there. Just need to add some more details: The colours are all Tamiya mixes, from XF-58 to XF62/60 mixes. Steve Zaloga's suggestion for US Army OD is two parts XF-62 to one part XF-60. I think the variations of the colours are, in themselves, a suggestion of weathering, but the thing probably deserves a smackering of mud on the undercarriage, and a few chips and scratches here and there. I also need to Tidy up some of the filler on the turret, in particular. One thing I found that I had to do, after enlarging the turret, was to move the whole thing backwards a little. On reflection, I probably didn't do it the best way. What I did was I used the drum sander on the Dremel and just enlarged the circular opening for the turret ring to the rear by about 2 or 3mm - just enough to allow the driver's and radio operator's hatches to open and clear the mantlet (if they were to open, that is - they're glued shut on my model). This then gels with Bradford's drawing, more or less. Of course, having made the opening bigger, I had to remove the sloppiness, which I did with some plastic card. It's a very crude and rustic way to do this, and I probably could have used a coping saw (or even drilled a number of closely-spaced, small holes) to keep the original "turret ring" intact, but I didn't think of it at the time. Besides, it works :) I took a few more photos after I'd painted the tracks and running gear a couple of shades of brown: I found a periscope guards (which I need) in a Dragon boxing of an Easy 8 (IP parts for which PE is also provided). However, I lost one, and then realised that the IP guards were too small (narrow) anyway, so I started fabricating some new ones from brass wire. The Dragon kit may, at some point, be useful if I ever choose to "up gun" this to a 76mm, as the Dragon has both IP and turned aluminium barrels. Many Jumbos eventually gained 76mm weapons. I have cut out Sommerfield matting from aluminium mesh for the turret, and made a turret "grab railing" for each side from brass wire. It goes against my grain to cover up a tank with foliage and stowage, but I might do it on this one, even if my finish is smooth enough to not need to cover it up, as I have some images of a tank with Sommerfield matting and much vegetation covering it that really appeals to me. I'd like to get this finished for the Vancouver Fall Show in October.
  22. Hi, My name is Bruce, and I've been modelling since 1970, with a short break between 1978 and 1981 when I was more interested in music and girls. I was brought up in Australia, I lived in New Zealand for 7 years, and I've been in Canada since January, 2007. I have modelled in most "areas" such as warships, sailing ships, ocean liners, tanks, cars, military and civil planes, helicopters, spaceships and figures but I'm not really expert at anything. I suppose I mainly make military planes and AFVs, but I usually just have fun building and painting things to scale. I don't believe in the concept of scale colour, although I do subscribe to the process of painting things the way they look. I'm a geotechnical engineer by profession (a of civil engineer specialising in how the ground reacts to loads - building foundations, roads, excavations, retaining walls, bridges, landslides, earthquakes - that sort of thing). Outside of work, my interests are spending time with my wife, and enjoying what the Pacific North West has to offer. I like to ski in winter. I haven't sailed for a long time, but it's something I'd like to do again eventually. There's a lot of water around here, and I think it would be fun to use it other than to travel to and from Vancouver. As far as models go, I like the challenges of some of the older kits, and I appreciate the effort that goes into the precision of fit and level of detail of the newer kits. Nostalgically, my favourite kits are the old Airfix, FROG and Matchbox, but I have fair smacking of Tasca Shermans Tamiygawa, and Dragon kits in my stash. One kit that I've been working on (on and off) for about 10 years is Dragon's original Nashorn (Kit No. 6001) which appeared to be so mind-blowingly good in the box, and which we now know is a pig of a kit, and not worth bothering with. Well, I've been bothering with it all this time. I'm not going to throw it away, and it will get finished sooner or later. I have, at least, managed to get things to fit, but it's been a Titanic struggle. I hope to meet some of you at IPMS shows. One day, maybe, the Nationals will be held somewhere near the PNW ... :) Regards, Bruce
  23. That's a really nice, clean build, as usual, Ron. What I liked about that kit as a youngster was that you could build it as an RAN Sea Venom, on board HMAS Melbourne. Melbourne was still in service when I was a boy.
  • Create New...