mrp

I have recently built the 1/48 version of the Psychedelic Monster . I used the Draw decals , which helped the process. I certainly looked for internal shots for the build. The only shot, I found a picture of the mid fuselage showing with the camera set up. The main camera in the nose was mounted a large C shaped bracket that the camera was mounted on. There are a number of photos in the various books on the making of the Battle of Britain film of the B-25. There was a good article on the B-25 in Aeroplane , September 2018. I kept the interior as fairly stripped out. There was a wooden door put in place just in front of the rear camera position to reduce the wind tunnel that was created by the open position.The paint scheme is also not correct in the Draw Decals sheet as the demarcation between the colours varies between what it was actually was.The bright colours faded almost overnight and you can tell when the pictures taken due to the degradation of bright colours to faded and washed out. There are a number of pictures of the rear camera position, which was fitted after it came back to the UK from the initial filming in Spain.

Here are a couple of shots of the project. Here you can get the basic idea of the conversion. You cn see the difference between the front windows on the unfinished kit and what they look like finished.

I have recently completed building a 1/32 Mosquito XX, combining the Revell fuselage , few HK parts and the Tamiya wing and associated parts, including engines and propellers.Yes,it is entirely possible to create a better looking bomber version using this combination. I do have pictures, but I will have to sort out my picture hosting to put them up here. I didn't buckle to the hold of photobucket I used the Revell fuselage, essentially just the 2 pieces, combined with a Paragon cockpit set and the Falcon vacuform canopy set. I also used the internal framework for the canopy from the HK kit. Again , I bought the HK sprue on E-Bay. I also used the Eduard set for the HK kit for the cockpit. The radio fir for the MKXX is also a bit different than the standard radio fit, so I had to create the set up from scratch. The Revell front side windows are not at all accurate in shape, and require some modification to look more like the real thing. The real work on getting the fuselage to fit the Tamiya wing requires some cutting, but the fit isn't that bad. I essentially tackled the build like the original air frame, where the wing slots up into the completed fuselage. I cut the bomb bay doors and piece above it, using panel lines as a guide. . Given that the Tamiya wing is also depicted just as the real wing as one unit. The wing will fit the fuselage quite well, and is very strong, even without using the screws that the kit has I assembled the fuselage with the Paragon cockpit and had a completed fuselage. I also cut out the tail plane area, again so I could use the one piece Tamiya tail plane. The wing can built as per the Tamiya instructions . In my case I didn't use the Merlin engines, so its essentially just the cowlings, undercarriage and propellers. I finished the aircraft as a No 8 OTU aircraft which was based at RCAF Debert in Nova Scotia. I used an Aeromaster set for the codes and serial number and I painted on the roundels. This may seem a little expensive to do, but I do feel that the end result looks pretty good and captures the shape of the bomber version better than the HK kit, which I think has some issues with the nose profile.. There are a couple of things, that I did that helped may this easier. I bought most of the sprues for the Tamiya wing off a seller on E-Bay. I had a Tamiya 1/32 kit in my stash, so I had the instructions and had figured out what pieces I needed to pull it off. The only items I used from the Revell kit was fuselage, and the control column . Having the Paragon cockpit set , helped, but it also had to be modified, and I ended up using some Tamiya cockpit, including control panel and other controls, like the throttle. In my Tamiya kit, it came with a set of clear engine panels. I used these , as I would never build the kit that way, and they were surplus. A coat of paint and there is no noticeable difference between parts. A couple of things also helped, including having had complete access to a full size air-frame on a couple of occasions, and having a good archive of photos of no 8 aircraft . I will hopefully share pictures at some point, as I think the pictures tell the story better than the words.

Glad to be a help, I do have a large number of photos in my collection of Canadian Lancasters, including a number of "Sugar's Blues". Most of these photos are going to be used in a forthcoming book project on Canadian wartime Lancasters, so I would prefer not to toss them out into the wind of the web quite yet! Send me a e-mail address via PM , and I am more than happy to share that way.

The Picture of the Lancaster nose in the bone yard with the children , isn't "Sugar's Blues". Its a 420 Squadron aircraft. I have a couple of similar colour photos of this particular aircraft. A number of 420 Squadron (Snowy Owl) painted the names of the crews , in this large style. The names were added by the Squadrons , prior to the return flight to Canada. Some aircraft even had a nice set of whitewall painted main tires. 428 Squadron painted the nose sections , rear of front turret forward with a gloss black paint. This tends to be seen mainly on 428 Squadron aircraft .The Canadian built Lancasters were painted with a better quality paint than most of the UK built ones. The paint tended to not weather as much as the UK built ones. Some of the returning Canadian Lancasters had some paint loss on the forward nose section. Canadian Lancasters sub-assemblies were also painted prior to all the sections being put together. Sometimes the camouflage pattern on the top wing, doesn't quite match where the sections meet. Weathering is a divisive subject to the modeller, and it is always a personnel preference as to how far you want to go. The aircraft were mainly left outside, in all weathers. The fuel tanks filling points across the top wing, would be well worn . Lancaster engine exhaust staining and patterning is a stand alone subject, not to mention fluid leaks and general dirt. Mark

It appears from my research on Canadian Lancasters, only KB700 actually had the windows fitted. Certainly "Sugar's Blues" didn't have any windows or cutout for windows. To be truly accurate the windows should be filled and covered for this aircraft.. The central panel on the FN120 turret was removed in operational service, depending on the requirements of the rear gunner. I am pretty sure that "Sugar's Blues" left the production plant in Toronto, without the rear turret , which was fitted at a Maintenance unit in England , just prior to being issued to Squadron service. A wooden fairing was placed in the front and rear turret positions for the ferry flight from Canada to the UK. The Martin mid-upper turret was fitted for the flight as it was built in North America. The Fraser Nash turrets were built by Parnall in England and the supply lines were still requiring shipping across the North Atlantic. The pictures of FM213 , flown by Canadian Warplane Heritage, show windows that were put in during the restoration and there is a number of seats in that position for paying passengers to enjoy one of life`s great experiences , a flight in a Lancaster bomber. Only 422 Bomber versions were built at Malton. There were 8 XX-P mail planes,( which had some different window configurations).built along side the bomber versions to give a total of 430 built by Victory.

I suggest that this Lancaster is R5727. The picture was probably taken at Dorval Airport in Montreal Canada, after it had just flown the Atlantic , August 1942 ,to become the pattern aircraft for the then National Steel Car plant at Malton Ont . In November 1942 the plant would become Victory Aircraft Limited after it was taken over by the Federal Government. This airframe had relatively few hours operationally before it was flown across the Atlantic. The exhaust staining is from the 16 hours of flight time it took to get to Montreal. All that to say, that this picture viewed without the above context, becomes an assumption that this airframe is on active service, when in reality it isnt. Understanding the airframe and its access points will always help influence weathering/ wear and tear. On the Lancaster, main fuel tank fueling points are on the top of the wing. On operational Lancaster Squadrons, typically the ground crew would be clambering over the top of the wing , with their mud soaked hob nailed boots . The fuel bowsers would be backed up close to the fueling points and fueling hoses would be drapped over the leading edge back to the fuel caps. This would lead to the wear and tear seen on operational Lancasters as well as the exhaust stains from the Merlins. It didn't take many hours to show significant staining. Also there were differences in paint quality as well as the flatness of the paint used. Early built Lancasters tended to exhibit a very flat finish, almost chalk like. Certainly later built and the Canadian built ones would not be as flat. The Canadian Lancasters (KB700 -KB999, FM100-FM229) had an almost satin like finish. The number of operations and service life would also play a part in the weathering of the chosen subject airframe. All these variables do play a role in how you attempt to recreate the finish and weathering on a large scale model , as well as any other subject one is trying to recreate. Mark

Here are a few shots I took of the Sea Fury in the Canada Avaition Museum. I was looking for a shot that shows the rivets are present and can be seen. This particular airframe was taken directly from from RCN service and has not been touched since then, this being the issue with most other Sea Furies which have been repainted . As an aside, the Sea Fury T20 is very heavily riveted around the second rear cockpit. There are a number of restored Sea Furies T20 with a single seat , the rivet pattern gives away the origin of the aircraft. MRP

Ok lets try the picture again ! It works. This is the most original Corsair cockpit in the world. This is the only Corsair with an untouched (restored) cockpit left. It was built by Goodyear in 1944 and it remained that way. MRP

Hopefully, here is a picture of the FAA Museum's Corsair. The armament boxes on top of the cockpit are a little different from the ones used by the US Navy, but they do look similar. There are a number of other differences between the FAA and the USN cockpits, including radio placment (TR9) map case and signal flare cartridge holders also the throttle is a little different, for the radio button . I am presently building the Trumpeter Corsair, but as a FAA bird, from HMS Formidable. I will also get around to putting a few shots of it up. MRP

Hi all, In my quest to build the ultimate Corsair , I purchased both the Black Box set as well as the Aries set. I was a little disappointed by the Aries set. In comparing the two sets, I prefer the Black Box set, and this is the one I am using. The Aries set is a scale up of their 1/48 set. The main cockpit section is modeled in a u shaped, with the bulk heads attaching to it. (this could lead to painting challenges) One obvious error with the Aries set, is that the head rest is too small and looks out of place, as well, the level of detail seems less than the Black Box.The side walls and throttle quadrant are also simplified in look and detail , in comparison. However,I do think that the Aries set is easier to use than the Black Box set. The Black Box set does require a bit of skill to line the sidewalls, bulkheads and floor all together. They are both however, an improvement on the Trumpeter cockpit. The wheel bays, in my opinion, are not a huge improvement on the orignals. The Trumpeter kit does suffer from mould release marks, and this is what you are trying to fix with the set. Mark