#21
|
|||
|
|||
I was asking because I've built a couple of the older kits and the paper was really clunky. It was difficult to roll without it sort of making crumbly edges. I think your model looks very nice. I look forward to seeing that long tail assembly.
Carl |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Just to motivate you, Don - if you can pull off (or actually put on) the tail boom without loss of limb you wll skyrocket to the forefront of the "British WW2 Medium Bombers with Questionable Colors and Markings and Long Tailbooms" category!
...and yes - the "crumbly paper" syndrome is common to the 1980s/1990s eastern European models. I had several old Fly models fly into the trashcan and several old GPM models Go Purposefully Missing because of my frustration with crumblings and random creases. |
#23
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Regards, Charlie |
#24
|
||||
|
||||
Tail Booms and Color/Colour Confusion
The two parts of the tailboom are assembled and are NEARLY straight and true. Fortunately, there are two longitudinal stiffeners top and bottom that will hide any glitches in the long glue line.
Now, if I can just glue the whole shebang together in a straight line. Another problem with the paper is that it seems to contain hard spots that lead to some unclean cuts (sounds Biblical) and dulls knife blades quickly. Charlie -- Roger copy on the time zone. I actually meant "If and when you check in on this thread." The Hampton in the Wings Palette illustration you referenced (XA L) looks about right for the Coastal scheme, but I agree that the Sky undersides look rather too greenish. Needless to say, the deeper I get into the issue of RAF colors, the more tentative and confusing it all gets. To the best of my knowledge and belief, the OFFICIAL color for Coastal Hampdens in 1942-43 was actually temperate sea with black undersides (Air Ministry Order 664, Appendix I with Change A.1377 of 8 October 1942). The basic 1942 AMO said that Coastal Command landplanes would be in temperate sea scheme with Sky undersides, except that "Beauforts of Coastal Command are finished with night under-surfaces." The 8 October change said, "After "Beauforts" insert "Hampden T.B." [My reprint of the AMOs is in British Aviation Colours of World War Two: The Official Camouflage, Colours & Markings of RAF aircraft, 1939-1945, RAF Museum Series Vol. 3, London: Arms & Armour Press, 1976.] On the other hand, the evidence of photographs shows that some Coastal Hampdens definitely had light (presumably Sky) undersurfaces. Furthermore, there were some variations in Sky (as I am sure you know better than I). Not only the official variations of Camotint, Sky Grey, Sky Blue, Sky Type S, and Deep Sky, but also variations in the way aircraft were painted in the field due to misunderstandings of the AMOs and local substitutions. Tony O'Toole has a very interesting article on RAF Boeing Fortresses in the August 2007 issue of Model Aircraft Monthly in which he discusses the variations on Sky. For an aircraft that the RAF used in very limited numbers, the Fortress appeared in an astonishing variety of color schemes, with much of the variation being in the underside color. It's just as well that my airplane is going to be in whatever colors Maly produced it in. Don |
#25
|
||||
|
||||
Coming together nicely! I don't think I like the bulkhead to bulkhead assembly method, I think it would leave too much potential for bending. I haven't built a plane with this method yet, but joining strips give a little room for adjustment.
Quote:
__________________
-Dan |
Google Adsense |
#26
|
||||
|
||||
Wow Dan, this is really clean, good work.
I got the kit Saturday and thanks to my very nice wife (who went to the post office on her day off work), it went your way this morning |
#27
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
/hijack (isn't it amazing how often that happens around here)
__________________
-Dan |
#28
|
||||
|
||||
I don't like that it much either, and most of my models were made that way. Most of the time I have to choose if I want the skins to match, or if I want the fuselage to be a corkscrew. It's also prone to getting gaps, unless you make it perfect. The instructions always say to do a lot of sanding, both on the edges of the frames (to give them the right profile from the side view) and the bulk surface, to get rid of those gaps. Personally I never sanded, but I'll try it the next time
__________________
- Kuba |
#29
|
||||
|
||||
Good work so far Boosed. I built the Maly Halifax bomber and suffered all the difficulties you have so far mentioned. I had to add card in some places, trim off a whole bunch in others. Paint scheme was poor and very little of it actually matched up. I was contemplating throwing it out in the half built stage, but then I decided that it was not going to get the better of me and that I would give it away when done. Well, I did finish it and then repainted the entire model with acrylic paints and made some paper decals for it. It turned out well enough that it is now one of the oldest models in my collection that I have not given away.
Keep up the good work. |
#30
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
With my growing collection of Halinski's, I'd say I'm not likely to build a plane with this construction method in the near future (I've done enough research into the MM Beaufort to know it has joining strips), but if I did - I'd attempt that method.
__________________
-Dan |
Google Adsense |
|
|