Jump to content

Radub

LSP_Members
  • Posts

    4,704
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    15

Radub last won the day on November 19 2022

Radub had the most liked content!

4 Followers

About Radub

  • Birthday 12/17/1971

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    West Cork, Ireland

Recent Profile Visitors

7,153 profile views
  1. Thanks again, everyone, for the birthday wishes.
  2. This is a Revell project and I hope you understand that they would like to be the ones who look after media releases. Revell will issue all necessary information in due course. Radu
  3. Many thanks for the birthday wishes! Radu
  4. Many thanks, everyone, for your good wishes. I am having a great day so far. Radu
  5. The datum line of the spar runs through the center of the spar, rather than the bottom or the top of the spar. In any case, Arthur's drawings have the correct angles. Radu
  6. According to data provided by Arthur Bentley and his drawings, the datum line of the spar is at 2.80 degrees to the horizontal. HTH Radu
  7. The dihedral on the top of the wing is actually 0.85 degrees. The "level" difference between the highest points of the outer and middle sections of the wing is 0.53 mm (or 0.02086614 inches) in scale 1/32. Because of the wing geometry, the wing angles change depending on the viewing direction. HTH Radu
  8. I don't think that any "difference" needed to be made. over the last few days I had some conversations with a few people about this press release from Revell and the general gist was that "Revell should have used better photos that showed the dihedral." Why? The model is the same, no matter what angle it is viewed from. One can equally say that these photos created a visual "trap" that tripped some people in their haste to issue a "hot take" and those kinds of personal choices made by others can't be blamed on anyone else. Radu
  9. There is no "horrible angle". To me the Hurricane looks great from any angle. Radu
  10. You do not need to worry about the correct configuration for the Mk.II. Everything is accounted for. As explained by Revell in their press release and by me in my posts, you are looking at test shots. Radu
  11. The model shown by Revell is built correctly. Due to the breakdown of parts it is impossible to build the model with "zero dihedral". Even if there was some way to build it with "zero dihedral" by accident or incompetence, there would be gaps in all kinds of places. How can one make angles in parts disappear without repercussions? As I explained already, what you see in the photos from Revell is an optical artifact caused by the camera angle. I have the model in hand now, I can replicate that "look" just by turning it in my hand. There is nothing wrong with the Revell model, it is all geometry and optics. Radu
×
×
  • Create New...