jfgesquire

That 190 Dora is the OLD Revell kit, right down to the decals, isn't it? That looks pretty darn good. Did you do any scratch building on that one? I also like your Doyusha/Tomy/Swallow Frank in NMF. One of these days I'll get to mine. What is freaky is that your collection reminds me alot of my collection - mostly old Revell stuff. This is part of my 1/32 collection showing you the old stuff. There is only one new build in that picture - but even that is the old Revell 109. The rest were all built AT LEAST 20 years ago.

Then I have just one word to say about the painting of that 109: Wow!

Chris, I have one question and one comment on your 109's: 1. I love the camo effect of the spots on the over-all light blue one. How did you get your airbrush to do that? 2. All my references (and someone please correct me if I'm wrong) show that the "gust lock" for the elevators is in the up position. I like the fact that you use the old Revell 109, too. I think that it's surface detail, for a kit as old as me, is absolutely incredible.

I would like to see a 71/02/65 109E in 1/32 scale! So after you practice on this 1/48 scale kit, you still should do one in 1/32! As for other sites for information, there is one called the 109 Lair that is devoted to all the incarnations of, well, guess! As for a more accepting forum, there isn't one, although there are 3 other modeling websites that are not devoted to just large scale planes (1/32 and larger) like this one. They are modelingmadness.com - aircraftresourcecenter.com and hyperscale.com. But I'm sure the consensus here is that you should go out and get the 1/32 Hasegawa or Matchbox 109E and build it with that 71/02/65 paint scheme and become a devoted LSP junkie like the rest of us

The Matchbox "E" kit came with Galland decals, but my set is absolutely awful. The decals are very blurry and not really useable. My version was the Asian release, so I don't know if different releases have better decals or not. It does give you the Mickey Mouse, but I don't know how accurate it is, as I don't have any good pics of Galland's 109E in my reference library yet - I don't plan on getting to that kit for a while yet.

I found a much higher res photo of that blue and white checkered one, if anyone cares: http://koti.mbnet.fi/mruonala/lennokkiseta...09G-6racer2.jpg

Ron, Don't give up! This is a great time to be modeling. There surely will be someone to step up to the plate, either with correction sets or multimedia kits, like JR was doing, or full injection kits like Hasegawa, Trumpeter and AMTech. (I thought I would NEVER see a 1/32 P-39, and now that dream may become a reality!) Just a couple years ago I was sulking at the proposition of building the same kits I built 25 years ago, simply in different schemes. Now I can't keep up with all the new releases and I have enough new kits to last 5 years, not counting everything that will be released new in that five year period. Trumpeter just came out with a new P-38 and someone will come out with the stuff you need for the 110. That is one kit that Revell hasn't re-released in a while and if they do, I'm sure some resin goodies will come out for it.

Denie, You did a good job of blending the "flat" Hasegawa gun insert into the rather "round" Revell gun cowl. Are you going through the trouble of rescribing all the little hinge detail on there? I just acquired a "free" digital camera, the best kind! (Kodak 6230 2.1mp with "close-up" mode. My sister bought a Dell and camera was free - she already has one.) 2.1mp is PLENTY for this application - in fact it's TOO good! Now I can see all my mistakes on a 17" screen at 1024x768! This is my first attempt at posting a pic here. Let's see how this looks. It is the Revell cowl. I made a resin copy of the the new G-4 insert, and had a dickens of a time blending it. I'm doing this for my brother who didn't have the patience for this mod while doing an old Revell as a Molders "F". I think the wheel wells will be enough to test his patience! This is more involved than I have done before.

What I like to do sometimes is get a good 1/48 scale kit, and use that as reference. The ICM 1/48 Spitfire IX can be a tough build and has some mold problems with sink marks and short shots, but it is VERY accurate (more accurate than the 1/48 Hasegawa IX) Also, some versions of the kit come with all the various parts to make a typical LF, HF, "c" and "e". Because of its mold problems, some modellers gave it a bad reputation and it can be had for about $10. Not a bad price for reference material.

Thanks guys! After my basement flooded, it just felt like the hobby (general characterization) was turning against me, or "leaving without me" sums it up better. Now for a question on JR's Ta-152 - since you all have seen it and I have not - Does JR have the shape of the cowl correct, since Jerry Crandall has made corrections for every injection molded long nosed Dora for that reason?

Dear Tony, LSP Chris and LSP Mark, Can you read this? I am not being rude, I just feel totally ignored! In my post, I clearly stated the JR's kit was multimedia, and even included a link for the review. Just checking.

Well, I'm not Mark, but I thought I would throw my two cents in. I would say that less than 40% of the parts for a 190D would be compatible with a Ta-152 because the wing joins the fuselage in a completely different place. Jerry Rutman makes a multimedia kit of the Ta-152 that is worth the money if you break it down. Hasegawa 190D for example is $35, plus correction set for cowl (see Eagle Parts), plus cockpit set, plus photo etch, and you are at about the same price as his Ta-152. Here's the link: http://www.largescaleplanes.com/reviews/Je...utman/TA152.htm

Do you mean Testors liquid glue, tube glue or clear parts glue? If it is liquid glue or tube glue, you can try to pry it off and hope that the glue did not melt the plastic together too well, or that a layer of paint is what got glued and the paint will break away. If it is the clear parts glue, soaking it with water will soften it up enough to just pop the windows off. As for a vac canopy, you are SOL as the Squadron vac canopy does not include those quarter windows.

You are not going to like the first part of this answer. The decals from different companies react differently to setting solutions. Not all decals react the same way. Sometimes solutions have little or no effect. Other times just a little solvent will cause the decal to shrivel up into a worthless lump. To summarize, you have to break a few eggs to make an omlette. After a few models, you tend to know which decals will fail and which ones won't. Read alot of articles and you will see that even the BEST model builders get surprised when a decal they are applying either has no reaction or disintigrates. On some Revell/Monogram kits, it may even say "not compatible with setting solutions" This "usually" means that setting solutions have no effect on the decal. Now for procedure. Decals are best applied over a glossy surface so the carrier film does not "silver" . In other words, that beautiful flat finish you painted was all for naught because you need to gloss coat wherever you are putting decals! German RLM colors are great because they are semi-gloss (or at least should be) and therefore are probably glossy enough to not need a clear coat. Future brand floor finish is one of the best products for gloss coating because it is very thin, water based, self leveling, and when dry is very durable. Once the Future has dried, the decals can be applied in the traditional way. Then the decal is blotted dry with a cotton cloth or a paper towel. Then with a paint brush, apply the setting solution. I use a brand called Micro Sol and am very happy with it. Some decals need multiple coats to get the decal to snuggle down over and into the surface detail, other decals"melt" into paint and when dry, look like they are painted on. Because of this phenomenon, you must be VERY careful to not touch decals that have been treated with solvent. ***NOTE**** Micro SET and Micro SOL are 2 different things. My experience is that the setting solution makes a decal more flexible, and less likely to crack, but does not "melt" them into the finish. Micro Sol is a solvent that actual "melts" some brands of decals right into the finish. I learned this best when building NASCAR models using SLIXX decals. Micro Sol turned them into paint! Absolutley the best decals I have EVER worked with. If they produced aircraft decals I would be in heaven! Anyway, when all your decals are applied, then spay some brand of clear flat finish over your model where appropriate. This usually means leaving the masking on your canopy until all the decals have been applied and sealed, otherwise your canopy won't be see through anymore! Hope this helps. If not, just ask again!

I just love this paint scheme, I had to post the picture - Blue and Green stripes!

My records also indicate that Revell listed a J-35 in 1/72 as well. The kit was in their 1976-1977 Catalog (which I still have and am looking at right now!) Page 20, kit #H-131. I found one at an internet vintage plastic model sight listed as 1/71 scale and a price of $12. 1/71 makes more sense for that era of kit (apparently originally released in the mid-late '60's) If it is really 1/71, then you would NOT want to use that one for scaling up to 1/32. [off topic] That catalog is one of my favorite as it lists 18 different 1/32 scale aircraft for sale!

There is an article here at LSP where Brian Cauchi built the two at the same time and basically had to scratch build everything on the Revell kit to bring it up to the accuracy of the Hasegawa kit, in his opinion. http://www.largescaleplanes.com/articles/article.php?aid=550 Brian was very critical of the Revell kit with these types of sentences throughout: The Revell model has a very sparse and inaccurate interior which was totally scrapped and The Revell canopy was obviously discarded and where even the basic element of contour is completely wrong His statements may have a grain of truth to them, but it sounds like if the cherry is not on the EXACT top of his sundae, he won't eat it, but then he'll never tell you exactly why he didn't eat it - you have to guess. He must have jabbed his finger with the x-acto knife while working on the Revell kit for that review! As for MY opinions and mini review of the two kits: Revell: The only MAJOR problem with the Revell kit is the lack of the lower "gull" wing center section. The panel lines and rivets may not be in the right places, but I think they are some of the best of ANY kit (fine lines and barely there rivets opposite, say, Doyusha). It has a very basic engine, moveable surfaces, separate tail wheel, very good fabric detail, but open wheel wells and poor wheel/tire detail, some incorrect interior detail. The earlier editions were better as the later releases showed that the molds were getting old with some lost surface detail in spots. Hasegawa: The new "A" wings are mostly beautiful. Something bothers me about the ailerons. The wheel wells are boxed in but too shallow. You may be able to sand and rescribe the fuselage, but you will never replicate the beautiful little rivets on the fuselage that they put in the lower wing center section. There is no engine. To a person (not a modeler) who has a casual familiarity with Spitfires, built Out of Box, the old Revell kit has better "ooh and ahh" factor with moveable surfaces, retractable gear, beautiful surface detail, etc. For anal retentive modelers who can't stand if a fuselage is 0.5mm too narrow, the landing gear retraction mechanism is toy like, the engine only vaguely resembles a Merlin, the "gull" isn't there (actually that one does bother me), and the wheel wells aren't boxed in, the Hasgegawa kit doesn't have any of these problems and really is more accurate. Either kit can be improved with Warbirds stuff, and if you are not building them out of box, both would probably require equal work to acquire accurate detail. So after all that, I really didn't recommend either one yet, did I? I think the Hasegawa kit has as many flaws as the old Revell kit, but the good surface detail of the Revell kit doesn't outweigh the wrong center section. And if you are going to cut up the center section to install a Warbirds correction piece, you may as well super detail it. Recommendation: Out of Box: If that center section bothers you, get the new Hasegawa/Revell kit. If it doesn't bother you, get the old Revell kit. It bothers me. Detailed: Probably the Hasegawa kit, even though both kits need fixing here and there, the Revell kit requires major surgery to fix the wing. Hope this was what you were looking for. To Brian Cauchi - Please don't be offended - I couldn't come close to the beautiful work you did on those two Spits., and I was only kidding about the cherry and the knife.

Wow - what a selection. I've done enough Guillows balsa stuff with vac, but never a full kit. I'm going to have to try ONE of those. How are the Roberts Models bits and pieces? The prices seem quite resonable for resin, but it isn't very clear "which" bits and pieces you get. Yak 9, SB2C Helldiver, OS2U Kingfisher, AT-6 Texan, Airacobra - Any one of these would be a great injection kit, but will never happen, (well, maybe the P-39) so this may be the only way. Even the N1K1 Rex would be neat to get for the different cowl, tail and floats to turn the Revell kit into the float plane. Is it OK to cut up a $(insert latest ebay price) kit and bash it with vac parts? #> Nobody has picked up the Scratchbuilders line, have they? Oh well, if anybody has info re: contents of the Roberts Models' accessories, please advise.