Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About rowin

  • Birthday 01/02/1984

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Lublin, Poland
  1. John, I was sure before you asked. I checked this once again. I have the same book as you from Jerry Crandall, this is the best source in my opinion. You are right, the port is highly visible. But if you look on the pic from Holand (war period photos) there is no port on them. The same is on the restored D13 as you said. If you look on the D13 cockpit photos there is no flare port on the main board as well. I saw that Jerry is active in your topic so maybe he could help. But if I am wrong sorry for the mess.
  2. John, look at the pictures of the real D-13, there is no flare tube on the starboard sideof the forward fuselage. Simmilar sitation is on the most D-9 (late production). Great build!
  3. Great job! Miloslav, could you take a close up photo of the rivets? I am still considering to buy them for P-47 so I hope your photos will help me to take a decision. Thanks
  4. John, google translator said that means "additional panel line". I found this pic in JaPo book, this additional line is visible:
  5. Magic! Great reference material for future model build. Thank you!
  6. Chuck, Those rivets are mushroom head rivets (snap head) and the are used to join rear area of the fuselage in early version of Spitfire (from Mk.I to Mk.V). As you said this Spitfire on the pictures is early version. Later Spitfires versions (from Mk.IX) had countersunk head rivets. So rivets in your model (Mk.IX) won't be so visible. Regards
  7. Hi My friend is working on Ju-88C-6 C9+AE model now.Camuflage scheme is nachtjager pilot Prinz zu Sayn Wittgenstein. He has a problem with colors of stains on the fuselage. He show me this photo: http://4.bp.blogspot...ory marking.jpg there are a lot of stains on camuflage. What kind of color these are? Many publications write that this is the same color RLM 74 or RLM 75, main color under the stains was RLM 76. But I found a plastic model where the stains are RLM 74 and 75 together: http://www.facebook....84350370&type=3 What do you think about it? Which scheme is good? I will appreciate if you can help me. Best regards
  8. Hi thanks a lot, for your comments. I know that paper modeling is a little exotic for you AceofClubs I wrote a few things about wathering in my other topics: http://forum.largescaleplanes.com/index.php?showtopic=36079 http://forum.largescaleplanes.com/index.php?showtopic=36078 as i said, I use the same techniques wathering like plastic modelers: oil paints, postshading, wash etc. Paper shapeing is not so simple, a lot of paper modelers. many modelers learns that throughout their life, me too. We are watching a lot of build raports and learn from them. Just as plastic modelers! Each of us has his own technique of shaping paper, for which he could write a book! it is a matter of training! Regards Peter
  9. I forgot about pictures of cockpit. Here was all painted, because I added many elements
  10. retro photos Thanks for watching, I hope you like it!
  11. Hi, I want to show my next model, it is a Messerschmitt Bf-109 F-4 from Libya in 1942. Halinski Publishing 1:33 scale like always. Model is not painted of course, just wash and marks of use, typical for this aircraft, suggested by images of II World War.
  12. Hi Matt I think that Tomek showed you this gallery, but it is worth to other users to see the end result building of the model to which it is modeled. Paper Helldiver by pawel_k: http://www.papermodels.pl/index.php?topic=8693.0 Regards Peter
  13. It is exactly as OldTroll says. I dont paint the whole model, I do it inside the fuselage and cockpit, but only if I add something, like wires or more instruments, which did not provide the model designer, and I found them in the technical documentation or photographs. I-16 is nowhere painted (only the white edges of elements formed from paper cutouts), the Hawker Hurricane is painted the entire interior and cockpit. The whole camouflage and markings in both models are printed by the publisher. I think that painting the entire paper aircraft models is pointless, because you are painted imitation rivets and sheet metal division. Diferent situation is painting paper tanks or ships, there is quite appropriate. So when I finished the model, based on pictures do service marks and exhaust etc For me the most important is that the end result most resembled the real object For example, here are the same two models built by other modelers: Built by Jackyl building report http://www.kartonwork.pl/forum/viewtopic.php?t=12344 Built by Sicore building report http://www.kartonwork.pl/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6131 My, and these two models are the same models built by different people. None is not painted, camouflage is suggested by the publisher. As you can see the final result depends on the vision of the modeler and "the last touch". I hope I have explained the essence of paper modeling Regards Peter
  14. Thanks a lot for the worm welcome to the forum! Jack all parts in this model are done from paper. Only supporting truss and wires are done from steel and cooper wires. There is no plastic part. Unfortunately I do not have any photos that showed the interior to the model before painting. But I'm working now on the Supermarine Spitfire Mk 1:33 the concept of construction is the same as the Hawker Hurricane, and it looks like that before painting: and after painting and wash: To build all of this I use a scale airplane drawings, pictures from books and the Internet. Then I draw everything in CorelDraw, I print on an inkjet printer and glued. And that's the whole mystery. Regards Peter
  • Create New...