Jump to content

Pete Roberts

LSP_Members
  • Content Count

    279
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Pete Roberts

  • Rank
    Hooked For Life
  • Birthday 01/19/1958

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://

Profile Information

  • Location
    Melbourne, Australia
  • Interests
    Spitfires, RAAF a/c, Australian pilots and the a/c they flew

Recent Profile Visitors

215 profile views
  1. Fly make the better Hurricane Mk I in 1/32. The old Revell kit is not really a Mk I, especially around the cowling. I would strongly recommend you check out a few builds of the Fly kit. These suggest it is a 'challenging' build, mainly around the cockpit from what I've seen. PR
  2. I see Model Monkey have released wheel wells for the Airfix 1/24 scale kit. They look quite good. Link: https://www.model-monkey.com/product-page/1-24-p-51d-p-51k-and-mustang-mk-iv-wheel-well-inserts-for-airfix-kits $32 a set PR
  3. Maybe use some Blu-tak or similar, or a jig of sorts, to hold the pieces in position while assembling? PR
  4. Revised Spitfire Mk I optioned up to the standard of their recent releases, just in time for the 80th Anniversary of the Battle of Britain. That, or a 1/24 Lotus Ford Cortina - not a plane, but boy, can they fly! PR
  5. Ok, looks like several options for exhausts, but all pretty scarce. Sierra Hotel, Black Box, Mk 1, Lion Roar and Eduard have all done exhausts in 1/32 for the Hornet, either as a resin part or photo etch. (And Aires) Just secured a Black Box set so one very happy camper, but may also get the Eduard set - anyone had any experience with the Eduard set? Thanks again for a great thread. PR
  6. Great news about the undercarriage. I have an Avionix cockpit set coming my way- more good news there. Thanks for the heads up Rog. And D mold for the intakes. They look brilliant, especially like the split on the line of different colours. Now its just the exhausts. Looks like Eduard may have to come to the rescue here but not overly keen about bending etch.... Oh well. PR
  7. I have one of these (Academy kit) in the stash to do as an RAAF a/c as well, so appreciate the original post and all the informed advice here. Thank you! I see Avionix do a 1/32 cockpit and fin set for the F/A 18A - any info on how this compares to the Aires set? Looks like the G-factor landing gear and Mk I exhausts are no longer available. Any suggestions here for alternatives? I was a little surprised to see from my Google searches that the Rhino sets are alleged to be copies of others work - if that is the case I would rather not go that path. Finally, it seems the kit u/c legs can sag over time - ? Would pinning them with metal pins help do you think? Thanks PR
  8. I thought the ailerons were also a little different between the first three aircraft and those that followed - ? PR Edit - oops, talking DR.I of course
  9. Dean, you are entitled to your opinions, but frankly I couldn't disagree more with your comments about WNW. First, there is a WEALTH of information available for which to compare the accuracy of their kits. Have you actually taken the time to look? Obviously not. The reason their WW1 models haven't had such criticism is because they are beyond reproach. Second, I personally place WNW on a par with Tamiya - engineering and detail. Which is why I say in my earlier comments re: the Lanc, lets wait and see. The main thing putting me off is the amount of time a pedant like me will take to build it. PR
  10. One caution with the sets in smaller scales - the Spitfire wells are for later Marks and have slanted walls, while I believe the Mk I had vertical walls. I say this from photos I have examined - I haven't examined the actual aircraft (yet). Also, detail at the roof of the wheel well is different for the Mk I vs later Marks. PR
  11. I think that WnW haven't had such critiquing over their WWI stuff to date because it is so good, and seems to be pretty much above reproach. The difference here is that we have a controversial area of their kit that is raising differences of opinion - this hasn't been the case in their previous issues that I am aware of because they handled the subject(s) so well. I personally tend to agree with other comments here. The asking price for the Lanc will be hefty so I want it to look right. I am not sure I like the overall, consistent stressed effect. A bit like a uniform paint finish. And the effort of trying to alter that, after shelling out big money, and risking damaging the kit, is a bit of a put off for me. However, I am happy to wait and see it in the flesh, so to speak. Hard to believe that a company renowned for its accuracy could stuff up something like this. so maybe give them the benefit of the doubt? (I like Radu's post above) With regards other WW2 subjects, don't hold your breath. After pestering WnW (well, asking) for a decent Spitfire I was politely told there would only be WWI subjects explored, following the Lanc, as there are still too many subjects to do. And given the Lanc has apparently been 4 years in the making .... PR
  12. I can see four main issues with this kit. Price - well, it is a HUGE undertaking; the kit is very large, will have a huge number of parts, extensive detailing, and is the result of years of development, so a high cost is inevitable. You can either afford it or you can't, or are willing to go into hock to buy it Size - where do you put it when its built? Maybe move the car out of the garage ..... Stressed skin effect - Appropriate for a newly built plane? Photos suggest so, but applicable to the entire plane? Is it over done, in coverage and effect? Think we'll have to wait until the finished kit is available for closer examination, and then I'm sure there will be plenty of opinions, so personal taste will likely come into effect here. Is it applicable to the dambuster version? Aside from some stressed skin being present on newly built planes, these aircraft were subject to at least some stress in pre-operational training, so I personally think it maybe not be outside the realms of possibility. Time - not likely to be a quick build for most of us (ok, a bit presumptive here). I look at my stash and wonder, if I am ok with the above, when do I get to build it, and what gets pushed back? I am not sure this is a MUST have for me, but it is on my radar, if for no other reason than the pure challenge. Wonder if I can move the wifes car out on to the street.... PR
  13. Preliminary info up on WNW site - looks like Merlin (Mk I) AND Packard (Mk III) engines will be in the kit. With dummies, does that make 16 engines????? Or maybe 12, with generic dummies???? PR
  14. I too have petitioned WNW for a 1/32 Spitfire, Mk I variety, when they announced the Lancaster. The reply was very polite, along the lines of 'thank you for your suggestion, but we still have too many WW1 subjects still to do.' We DO have the 80th Anniversary of the Battle of Britain coming - But I wouldn't hold my breath either; I think we'll get a 1/32 pink pig with wings before something NOT WW1. PR
  15. Thank you for the review Kev - and another vote for a Mk I! A proper Mk I with accurate detail - lapped panels, raised rivets where there were raised rivets, recessed where recessed, with options for early through late Mk I. Ahh, sweet dreams.... The eightieth anniversary of the Battle of Britain approaches - one lives in hope. PR
×
×
  • Create New...