|
|
|
#41
08-08-2010, 02:31 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Hello All,
Janx has finished the texture job a little bit ago. I,m now getting round to building the hangar so should have some new progress to show later on. Have been working on several plastic models while waiting and an un-expected (and un-wanted) promotion at work has also cut into model time :( The project hadn't stalled just got slowed down a bit by life :P G1 
|
|
#43
08-13-2010, 06:27 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Man, this thing would look GOOOOOD if it were built out of that Red River metallic silver paper.
In fact, that's the ONLY thing that would make this any better! I have always loved those big Navy airships, and this is a magnificent build you're doing. Any chance of doing the Akron and Los Angeles? :D
|
|
#44
08-22-2010, 12:43 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Lancer Red River paper would make a big impact :D I got a can of silver paint for this so that should help when I get to that point.
As for the Akron I do have plans on it. I need to track down the Los Angles model. There was a 3rd project proposed for a double hangar ship that I'm tempted to make as well. Haven't been building like I normally do of late. Huge changes at work have me run ragged this month :( I've been working randomly on mostly plastic models but this weekend I found the focus to get back to the hangar details. Nearly done with that now. One big dissapontment to myself was the bridge structure was all built and I had a paint accident while edge coloring so I had to basicaly paint the whole bridge structure covering up all that beautiful detail Janx added :( I would re build it but I'm not up to cutting all those damn parts out agian at this time :P Got the spy car built but I can't seem to find out where it was stored in the ship. Hope everyone likes the pix. G1
|
|
#45
08-28-2010, 08:33 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Great work! Coming along quite nicely!
Don't you hate how work, and other things, take away from modeling time?:( Keep up the wonderful work! Cheers! Jim
|
| Google Adsense |
|
#46
08-28-2010, 09:59 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
G:
When you do get your hands on the Los Angeles model, let me know and I will work with you however I can to design/build the thing. Maybe we can turn out a kit like Ken West & Billy Leliveld do! Or at least turn one out. I don't know that I have remotely the skill that Billy does... heh
|
|
#47
08-28-2010, 02:57 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I am pretty sure that this model , like the model of the Hindenburg with the separate larger scale model of the passenger area, was designed and published by John Hathaway. John was the main source of paper models in the US in my youth (60's and 70's). He published them himself, and he would have retained the copyright. He died in the late 1980s'. His son has appeared on rare occasions on the old cardmodel listerv, and seems like an interested and friendly person. You could probably contact him there.
__________________
Rob Tauxe, Atlanta, GA
|
|
#48
08-28-2010, 05:21 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Rob, You may be right.I have "The Macon" by
John Hathaway, it's 1:350th scale, 27" long "With skyhook Fighter and Mooring Mast" It's on 9 Silver coated pages, one light blue cover page and one grey page with the plane and stars to be colored. Instructions say to locate The trapeze at the aft end of the hangar door, which is just shown as dark printing. Sound like it? Bob
|
|
#49
10-28-2011, 07:00 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Hey Getter!
Did you see these sister ships? In thread "Airship Los Angeles model" there's a link to a Los Angeles and an Akron! Free downloads! Only the Shenandoah remains! Looking forward to you finished work... The DC
__________________
"One does not plow a field by turning it over in his mind..."
|
|
#50
10-28-2011, 08:44 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Getter1, your detailing and work on this model is, as with your other models, superb.
A small note on the F9C Sparrowhawks. As regards the lack of undercarriage, it was intended that once deployed on patrol, the Sparrowhawks were without undercarriage in order to save weight, thus extend their range. The undercarriages were to be stored at the home airfield, to be attached to the fighters during maintenance periods, and removed again once the Sparrowhawks were returned to the carrier airship. Thus, an "operational" Sparrowhawk would not have had an attached undercarriage. During the trials phase, the undercarriages were left attached to the F9C's but would have been removed when going on patrol. Most documentation I have seen reflects this as outlined above, but goes on to say that the extended trials phase meant the Sparrowhawks were most often seen and photographed with their undercarriages attached. Naturally, in modern times, it has come to be (inaccurately) accepted that the undercarriages remained attached to the Sparrowhawks, while ignoring the intent that when operational the landing gear was removed from the fighters. Your work on the fighters themselves is a beautiful thing to behold, and what I see if the details in the airship itself leaves me in awe of your skills. This is another of your superb builds. Kind and Respectful Regards Getter1, Uyraell.
|
| Google Adsense |
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
