quang

Failing the MC.202, they can give me the MC.200. I wouldn’t mind

Start with the human factor.

Sooo… Max, when can we expect to read the first post of your WIP thread?

No doubt you can also use poster paint on the new Border Lancaster

Here’s the main difference between the two types of cutters: The ‘regular’ sprue cutter (Xuron et al.) has two blades and cuts with a pinching motion (like a nail nipper) and therefore leaves a mark on both sides of the sprue. The more expensive side-cutter like DSPIAE /Meng has a single blade on one jaw with the other jaw acting like a cutting board. The cut on the sprue is flat and even. Choosing one or the other depends mostly on the result you’re expecting. HTH Quang

I don’t know about you but these belts look rather ‘festive’ to me (like Xmas ribbons?)

I wouldn’t know Mark. Unless you have a photograph of the plane you intend to model. In any case, it would be simple to use the stock kit propeller and swap it with another when you get more info (or not). At least it’s what I’d do Cheers, Quang

@Juggernut said it just a day ago.

Contrary to general belief, the stock kit propeller (and cone) is accurate despite its anemic look The problem is that that model was seldom used and therefore rarely seen on photographs. The 500 and 501 used a variety of propellers from different brands: Levasseur, Ratier,… The easiest way is pick a period photograph with the model of your choice and do the research for the suitable propeller. There are many sites with vintage propellers for sale with clear, usable descriptions. Cheers, Quang

…and also its companion volume, the manual for maintenance and repair HERE. I agree that these purely technical documents (in dated French language) are hardly digestible to the layman but the drawings can be helpful if only to add some life to the cockpit. HTH Cheers, Quang

GOOD NEWS for the many of us who bought the Dora Wings kit and complained about the lack of documentation about the Dewoitine D.500. A few rare period photos have been unearthed by the Provincial Archives of the South-West region in France and published today on the internet. They are original glass photographic plates of exceptional clarity. Check ‘em HERE Enjoy! Cheers, Quang

Looka HERE for the Yankee extraction system.

Don’t get me wrong: despite the slight chubbiness (which only the more enthusiastic die-hard Spad fans would notice) the Trumpeter is a fine and pleasurable kit and would make a worthy replica as you can see many on this forum. IMO the only AM that would make it even better are a new propeller (the most noticeable improvement), a good cockpit add-ons (Eduard or Quinta,…) and a new set of resin wheels (if using vinyl bothers you). Happy modelling

Yes indeed. On the real-life Skyraider, the rear part of the fuselage aft the cockpit is slab-sided. Furthermore there’s a pronounced ridge on the spine. The Trumpy looks more like a P-47. The SPAD is by no means a stubby aircraft. I tried to correct it by shaving off a good part of the plastic but it’s still too fat. What you see in the photo is the modified Trumpy compared with the stock ZM. It was the main reason I stopped building the Trumpeter and switched to ZM. The ZM has good contours and possesses a real Skyraider vibe but is a dog to build. The over-engineering took much of the fun away. Should the ‘old man’ offer a simplified version of the kit at a cheaper price, he would sell tons and tons! Cheers, Quang

First thing to check is the Yankee extractor seat. It’s the big difference. Otherwise the USAF cockpit is mostly the same as the Navy version. The Aires resin cockpit is a waste of money. Contrary to what can be read on the internet, it adds nothing to the stock cockpit. The Eduard is a much better deal. Don’t ask me how I know. I’ve built both the Trumpy and the ZM. If you have questions, don’t hesitate. Cheers, Quang left: Trumpy right: ZM ‘