Jump to content

ghodges

IPMS/USA Member
  • Content Count

    6,257
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    154

Everything posted by ghodges

  1. I have couple of ideas, that may or may not solve your problem. I just had a similar problem on my 1/48 Skynight. The vac canopy was masked with Tamiya tape for quite a time, due to the amount of filling and sanding needed to finish and also due to procrastination on my part, adding to the length of time to get the painting finished. By the time I pulled off the canopy masks, they'd been on there at least 5-6 weeks, and had endured at least 2 primer coats and a coat of interior green followed by another coat of gloss dark sea blue. I found the clear parts to be cloudy, which I too thought was tape adhesive, except it wasn't sticky. I think it was one of two things. The first possibility is that the multiple coats of paint (and I use enamels and lacquers) allowed for the seepage of some of the solvent through the tape and onto the Future coat on the canopy. The second was that the Tamiya tape DID leave a residue on the surface, but that its residue just isn't tacky like most tape residue is. I've had this problem on a couple of rare occasions, and I need to add that not only may time be a contributing factor, but also temperature. I model in the garage here in Florida, and during that build the temps in the garage averaged at leat 85deg each day, and perhaps that affected the Tamiya tape. I was afraid to try to use any kind of solvent on the vac canopy as I considered to too thin to sand and polish. I also didn't want to try to disolve the Future on the canopy. While this would more than likely solve the problem, it would require more masking and painting on an already decaled and painted model. My salvation was a chisel pointed WOODEN toothpick and the Future itself. The wooden toothpick was soft enough to scrape without scratching, and yet stiff enough (with the chisel edge) to chisel, scrape, and flake the cloudy areas until all of the clear parts were once again clear! I did have some of the canopy frame paint flake of too, but that was simple to touch up with a fine pointed brush. This is what I would suggest you try before attempting to strip the entire canopy. It's tedious, but should work. Take your time and apply enough pressure to flake off the Future, but avoid turning the toothpick so that its sharpest edges may scratch the plastic. When the chisel edge wears down, carve a new one. Best of luck! Gil
  2. Since I have no pride (it was destroyed in contests decades ago! :D ), I'll confess I have NO idea what the "sniper pod" looks like! Could you (or someone) post a pic of it? One of the great things about this hobby is the chance to learn about such things. Besides, I may need to know about it for a 1/48 model some day, and the pic could lead to suggestions on how to make one if it's not commercially available. Thanks! GIL
  3. Congrats to those guys! It's nice to have their talents recognized on BOTH sides of the pond! Telford looked very impressive, even if it was only because of the 463 F-4 Phantoms on the tables! I'd LOVE to have that knd of turnout in Columbus. Hmmm.....think I'll sponsor some tables with the theme: "More Phantoms than Telford!" GIL
  4. Nope, it's correct! You can find WATER SOLUBLE "oil" colors along with the rest of the tube type oils in the art departments at Michaels, Hobby Lobby, and most any other well-stocked arts/crafts store. Be sure to mix a drop or two of liquid dish detergent into water/pigment mix. I've found that these types of washes come closest to having the same flow and color capacities as the reguar oil paint washes, without the odor and risk of using a solvent based wash. You can even do some nice special efects by applying them to flat paint surfaces, which will cause the color to spread out a bit instead of hugging the crevices, making for a nice stained effect. The other advantage is you can buy about 3-4 tubes (black/grey/burnt sienna/tan) and have just about any color wash you'll ever need, as well as having the ability to mix them easily and create any in-between shades. And, each tube should last your for years since you use just a dab of pigment at a time. I mix the wash in left over soda bottle caps, mix it up with a toothpick, and then apply with a fine pointed brush. Another advantage to the "ws oils" is (like their oily bretheren) you can set the cap aside for a couple of days, add a bit more water to it, reconstitute it, and apply it some more! I toss it when the model is completely done, no clean up, no fuss! Cheers! GIL
  5. ghodges

    Rigging

    The "flat thread" sounds interesting, but how do you get it taut, and what do you glue it in with? Thanks! GIL
  6. That's a great demo! As RC, I forwarded it on to my clubs. I hope this is the wave of the future, as there are plenty more techniches I'd like to see! GIL
  7. Although I can't lay my hands on the exact announcement, it WILL be going back into business soon. The owner was very ill for a long whlie. He announced (within the last couple of months) that he's recovered and almost ready to resume business. I got the impression (IMO) that he planned on using this fall to replenish his stock and resume business early next year. In short, stand by for further announcements..... Cheers! GIL
  8. ghodges

    Su-15 1/48

    http://www.lindenhillimports.com/begemot.htm The above link will take you to the Begemot page with prices on their SU-15 1/48 decals. Hope this helps! GIL
  9. Good looking model Dick! Czech Model kits are not shake and bakes either! How did it compare to other a/c kits you've built? Thanks for posting! GIL
  10. Special Hobby (or some other short run Eastern Eur. co.) has had a 1/48 Hawkeye on their "to-do" list for almost 3yrs now. No one has seen a test shot so it might just be them stirring the pot to see what kind of a reaction they get to help them make up their minds. I have the Collectaire kit and it looks great! Still, if someone does a plastic 1/48 E-2 kit, then I can do one with the wings folded and one without, and hopeully the newer kit will have those new 6 bladed scimitar props! Chers! GIL
  11. I'll try to get around to that later this week. By the by, what ever happened to my B-24 walkaround pics? They were on the walkaround forum for a while, but now they're gone. Also, I heard a loud "round motor" sound about 1pm this afternoon while out on my route. I turned around to see it was the BT-13 heading home. Even at a distance of at least 5 miles that aluminum finish with the red nose and rudder made it easy to identify! Cheers! GIL
  12. ghodges

    1/32 Revell Ju88a

    I'd forgotten that option! I actually had a wall FULL of models (30-40) 30yrs ago in the 1rst 2 apartments my first wife and I had. It worked fine, except for the time she came home mad and slammed the door! My 1/48 Tamiya A-10 took a nose dive and crashed and burned......Then there were all of the holes to be dealt with when we moved.....but Colgate toothpaste did a good enough job to get my deposit back! Thanks for the memory jog! GIL
  13. And to finish.... As I said, it was a fun afternoon! Cheers! GIL
  14. Continueing... Cheers! GIL
  15. Went to the airshow today. Weather was perfect and it was a great afternoon. There were the usual F-16/F-15/F-18F/aerobatic demos. The most impressive flying of the day (IMO) was done by a guy in a STEARMAN (in yellow-wing/blue fuselage USAAC markings!)! This guy flew it around like a Pitts biplane instead of the old trainer it is. He was flying sideways/nose-up down the runway no more than 15ft off of the ground! You expect that out of those aerobatic types with light weight composits and a powerful engine, but NOT out of an old wood/fabric/steel tube biplane! There were also 2 P-51D's and an F4U-7 Corsair that flew. They were a real pleasure to see and hear! The static displays were a little sparse and along the usual lines, except for a very nice Vultee BT-13 in Navy markings. I took some pics and thought I'd share them with y'all. Now if I could only get a hold of the old Classic Castings BT-13 in 1/48! Anyone have one they want to part with?......Beuller?......Ferris Beuller?.......... I have 12 pics so I'll do this in 3 postings. Hope you enjoy! Cheers! GIL
  16. David is right, silver or aluminum is the best color to reveal flaws. That's why natural metal finished models are so tough to do right; you have to elminate every little scratch! I'd like to recommend the rattle can (spray can) Tamiya Very Fine Primers. It comes in gray or white; the white being slightly finer and smoother. Both go on smoothly, dry in 30mins or less, and are good for checking you seam work as well as apllying an even base coat for you finishing colors. Another need is a strong bright light. Hold the model up and sight along the questionable seam towards the light. Move the model slightly to get the light to reflect along the seam. This will help you see imperfections, even if you haven't applied any primer yet. Best of luck! GIL
  17. "I am not trying to open a can of worms here, but, our models are supposed to be scale representations of the real thing"..... Tom (and all): And I'm not trying to be cantakerous, but says who?? If that's your criteria, fine. And yes, there is a lot of debate, and a lot of aftermarket out there, and a lot of discussion on what's "right" and what's "wrong". (Go read my rant in the A/C section which discusses that). You're implying that your criteria should apply to the whole hobby of plastic model building, and THAT is what I disagree with. I build models to have a historical representaive on my shelf. If they're less than 100% "accurate" it doesn't matter to me. Other people build for their own reasons and to their own criteria. That's the difference between this being a hobby and a profession. Heck, even contests don't require accuracy! I'm sure that most of the very impressive models I've seen at shows are accurate but I can't judge that for sure. I've seen some REALLY nice models in the hypothetical and "what if" categories. Some of them had spurious paint schemes and others were products of the builder's imagination and spare parts! Those well built and well finished models in those categories were in NO way diminished or any less impressive because of their "inaccuracies". You asked a paint question. I tried to point out something I thought you might not have considered (scale effect), tried to point out that a LOT of accuracy is actually in the eye of the beholder, and then told you why I could not recommend any single brand over another. I wish you the best of luck in finding some paint that you're happy with. I too like Humbrol, but gave up on using it much long ago because of it's lack of availability, so I understand your delimma. Cheers! GIL
  18. I have the 3-ring binder book on Luftwaffe colors, complete with color chips. Lots of useful info on the colors and a VERY interesting write up on "scale" colors. To oversimplify it; you need to lighten all of your colors according to the scale you're building; and the smaller the scale, the lighter the colors. It has to do with the contrast issue that you mentioned. When you look at the real thing in 1-1 scale, the colors are spread out over a wide area and don't look as "vibrant". When you put those same colors on a smaller object, they tend to be too vibrant and contrast too much because your viewing them over a smaller area. You look at a pic of the real thing and you look at your model and they're just not the same; DESPITE starting with accurate colors! The book recommends lightening each color by about 25% on average. However, darker colors will show changes in hue easier than lighter colors, so you'd probably actually need to add less to dark colors than light ones to obtain a visual difference. You can use white or very light gray to do the lightening depending on your preference. I can't speak to the absolute accuracy of MM colors vs. Humbrol vs. anyone elses. Besides, the REAL Lufwaffe colors varied slightly from batch to batch (as our own camo colors did) and I'm sure that's true (to a lesser degree) for hobby color batches. "Accurate" color is a real can of worms and VERY debatable. As I said above, scale appearance plays a large part in perceived accuracy, and I haven't even gotten into the effects of weathering on the finish! The idea is to start with a color that puts you in the ballpark. You can then adjust it to fit your personal perception. I won't repeat my rant on accuracy here; you can go to the Aircraft heading and read it under the P-51 Colors topic question. It doesn't matter how you get to an RLM-72 that YOU like. You can start with an over the counter version or mix it yourself. I've just tried to point out reasons why something may not look the way you think it should right out of the bottle, when in actuallity it's probably closer than you think. In the end, I think the best guideline is: If it looks right- it IS right! If you're not satisfied with what you've found so far, experiment with IT before tossing it aside. You may be able make it work for you. Also, keep in mind what is easily obtainable for you. That (hopefully) is what you can make useful so you don't have to worry about a supply of a certain brand being dropped locally. I wish I could recommned a brand that has a rep for being perfect right out of the bottle, but I've heard criticism of EVERY brand from one builder or another, depending on their perception! Best of luck! GIL
  19. ghodges

    1/32 Revell Ju88a

    Someone will do it......but it'll have to come with an addition for your home to display the longer version! B) GIL
  20. Me likey! I don't know about the load-out....what would people find suspect about it? More importantly, it's a fine looking model. You've captured the essence of a 'Nam Wild Weasel. Thanks for posting! GIL
  21. ghodges

    1/32 Revell Ju88a

    One again, although it'll be imprresive, I just can't get excited about. That said, I hope they sell a TON of them! That way they may eventually release soemthing more up my alley. Just out of curiosity, what's the wingspan on that thing? It's gotta be close to 3ft! They better add a little table space in 1/32 prop in Columbus....... GIL
  22. I bought a 3ft twin-flourecent light fixture and hung it above the bench. It's plugged into a nearby ceiling light socket by means of an extension cord w/adapter. I've had it up for the 9yrs in this house and have yet to have to replace either light tube. You can get these fixtures at most any hardware store and they're not expensive. Hanging them can be a hassle...(I used a short length of chain I had). For close-up work on the bench I can't recommend too strongly a light/lamp (with extending flex arm) with a magnifyer. Just pick one with a light bulb housing large enough to take one of the smaller screw-in flourecent bulbs. They save energy, give a lot of light, and most importantly, don't give off heat! That's important as you'll have plastic parts in close proximity to that bulb as you work under the magnifyer. If you have a Harbor Freight tool supply place near you; start looking for lighting items there! You can find some unbelievable bargains on those and a lot of other nifty bench/tool items! Best of luck! GIL
  23. The extra large zip-lock baggies (gallon size) can be used to help prevent pe-parts being lost. Just put the fret inside the bag and cut your part off in there....if it does fly off the fret it'll still end up in the baggie! GIL
  24. THANK GOD! There's someone else out there who dares to challenge the "accepted" modeling habits and support the idea that there were variations in the field! In fact, my postion is that the exception was more the norm! Too many modelers are too concerned with getting their model "right". Why? It's not for contests, as accuracy isn't a criteria. I think it's for no other reason than percieved peer pressure. The one regret that I have since the creation of Detail and Scale, Walk Around Books, the internet and every other major resource center is that I feel they've done NOTHIING to promote the hobby of plastic model building. In fact, I think this emphasis on accuracy in detail and markings has actually led to less modeling. I think that most of us build fewer models AND build them at a slower pace than we did 25yrs ago. The biggest difference between now and then is the creation of the "Aftermarket" (pe and resin parts), designed specifically to address detailing and accuracy. The original reason for most aftermarket parts was to address a LACK of detailing in a kit. There were many kits from the 50's and '60's that had NO cockpit, or wheel wells, or were lacking in other items. You could scratchbuild them; but that took time and a degree of talent. Aftermarket parts were a God-send to those of us lacking in the time, ability, or desire to do that work. However, 25yrs later that same market is addressed to accuracy almost to the point of exclusion. Sure, one reason is that the kits are generally more complete these days. But, the main reason is that it's a method for competition between those aftermarket companies! Once there was a single resin interior for a 1/48 P-51, why would there be the need for another? Very simply, someone else wanted a piece of that market and the way to make the second one seemingly better was to tout it as being more accurate. In contrast to the above seeming rant, I have no problems with accuracy in model building. I DO have a problem with accuracy being touted as a criteria for model building; and THAT is where I think the hobby has evolved to over the last 20yrs. Model building has always been a solitary hobby. There have always been people whose standard of building has demanded accuracy (to one degree or another) in their own builds. I'm glad that it is easier than ever for those people to be able to find the info they need to meet their own criteria. What I think I see, however, is a LOT of model builders thinking that they also need to meet those same criteria even though it wasn't important to them when they started building. Just peruse some of the modeling sites and look at the questions and debates. What was the correct color of the canopy cut-out panels on the fuselage of the P-40 or the P-47 Razorback? Does anyone have accurate line drawings that show the panel line layout for the BF-109F-2trop? What was the color of the seat belts in a Fokker Triplane? All of can be very interesting on the academic side, but I believe it serves as a deterent to many builders even if it only gives the impression that there's a right way and a wrong way to build a model. After all, if there are questions about those items, what about all of the other things on the subject? There are times when acuracy can be demanded in our hobby. Personal criteria is one. Building on commission can be another as you try to satisfy the criteria of your customer. Building for a museum night also be that demanding. Outside of those, I can't think of any reasons to worry about it! There are people who build models who actually build "engineering miniatures". You know these models when you see them. These people cast and lathe things to correct and add detals even the best kit manufacturers miss. These are people to whom accuracy is personally paramount; and it shows in their work. It also has little to nothing to do with building plastic models! I contend that our hobby isn't about bringing a commercial kit up to "engineering" levels; it's about building a plastic kit to our own degree of satisfaction and not someone else's perception of correctness. In my opinion, we're a group of people who buy and build commercially available kits. We do it because we like the history attached to the subject. We do it out of admiration for the original engineering of the subject. We do it because we could never afford to own the real thing. We do it because we like to work with our hands. We do it to distract ourselves from our jobs and other stresses in our life. We do it to satisfy an "artistic" side to our personality. And, some of us also do it as a form of compitition in place of sports or games. The compitition side of the hobby has fed the need/desire to do more to kits than is provided in the box. That, in turn, has led us to where we are now. So what can we do as IPMS members? We can be VERY accepting of all types of models and of all the ways they are built and presented. If someone puts a month's research into a subject and details and corrects it to their satisfaction; good for them! And, if someone builds a model without all of that effort in detail and/or accuracy; good for them too! And by that, I mean that YOU do not walk up and say "you know that's not right"......Yea, I know you'd never do that, but how exactly do you think IPMS got its stellar "reputation"?? Sure, you were just trying to be helpful, but it plants a seed of "wrong" in the mind of the builder. I hope this rant doesn't really offend anyone. I expect several people to challenge the point. But, I'll stand by my premise that emphasizing accuracy does little to nothing to promote model building. I'm donning my body armor; toss your grenades if ya like! Cheers! GIL
  25. I built the special release "Gulfhawk" version of their F3F and it was VERY nice! You'd have less problems than I did since you wouldn't have any resin parts to adapt to the model. I do seem to remember some difficulty trying to get the gear assembly/gear doors on the model. I know the instructions cover this, and they swear that they'll snap into place, but NOT on my model. I eventually got them on, but I can't remember how I overcame the problem. Other than that, I remember how nice and easy it was to rig it with their PE rigging! It did just snap into place! All 3 of their F3F releases are superb kits, and very colorful additions to your shelf! Best of luck! GIL
×
×
  • Create New...