Dpgsbody55

So the old Airfix Hurricane has now been scrapped for it's internals. It is an ex plane. It is no more. This is it's engine I'm trying to mount in the nose of the Trumpeter kit. And this is the Trumpeter piece of resistance. See the errors and lack of detail?? It would be more obvious if I wasn't such a rubbish photographer, but some stuff should be obvious even in these two pics. What I've found is that the Trumpy engine mounts are 4mm wider at the front, and 6mm wider at the back, so my first task will be to add on to the Airfix engine mounts. Once I've made those two adjustments, I'll have a better idea if this conversion is possible. If so, I think I'm going to have to use the Trumpy timing case and prop shaft. If not, the engine just gets glued in place on the mounts, unpainted and cowlings glued in place too. In the meantime, I've started on the basic cockpit. I'll have to remove some of the detail on the left side to be able to use the Trumpeter etch kit, which I should have done before gluing this lot together, but it should be doable without causing further issues. I hope... The floor boards in the kit did have some detail in them, but this was filed off before construction and the etch pieces attached. I think they look more convincing. This will get a coat of Tamiya silver, then I'll start picking out details with RAF interior green. I'll also be adding a few bits from the Airfix cockpit which Trumpeter made a mess of. Or left out. That's it for now. Cheers, Michael

My kit is still on it's way. So I'm looking forward to seeing what you do with yours. Cheers, Michael

Another reason to wreck this old build. I've had the idea of fitting the engine into a Ki-61. But that's a while off at the moment. Cheers, Michael

Thanks to the still missing gun cowling, this project has stalled. I'm not yet ready to consign it to the shelf of doom, but the delay in obtaining the missing part is very frustrating. I'm presently waiting on a delivery from Hannants and I'm hopeful that they've included said missing part which they say they've received from H2K with that delivery. If not, we shall be having words........ I have made a tiny bit of progress, however, and the machine guns have now been installed, with a little extra wiring added. I used the engine cowl to set the appropriate alignment, and both can be seen directly through the apertures. As I've mentioned before, I have an old Hasegawa 109E and had visions of using the gun cowl from that. But there's an issue or three. Thankfully, I've had a very generous offer from a member here to cast a resin part, but I'd rather wait until I see what arrives from Hannants either this week or next. If someone is gracious enough to make such an offer, I'd rather not waste their time until all other avenues are exhausted. There's still a few more parts to add to the model before I can begin painting, too, but one way or another, I intend on finishing this. It's just a question of when. In the meantime, I'm starting a model for the Nocturnal Activities GB. Cheers, Michael

Congratulations. That's quite an achievement. What have you been flying?? One thing to remember. It is said that a good landing is one that you can walk away from. But remember, a great landing is one where you can use the plane again . Cheers, Michael

As my H2K 109E build has ground to a halt due to a still missing cowling, I'm going to put it aside for the moment (not yet ready to mention shelves of doom yet) and start another. I said I'd support this GB when it started and if I don't start now, it will be too late to finish in time. So here goes with a kit that has been a long term stash resident, which will be finished as a MkIIc nightfighter. I'll be adding these to the build. I've built the Hurricane MkI version of this kit seven years ago, which was the second model I put up on this forum. I said at the time that I wasn't hugely impressed with the model as it has some silly errors, and this is why the kit has remained in the stash all these years. I still think the Airfix MkI is better, and one of these has been swinging from my ceiling for a long, long time. I think this is about 30 years old. So now it will come down from there and in all likelyhood, it's place will be taken by the Trumpy MkI. I have thoughts of trying to fit the engine from this to the MkIIc I'm about to start, so to that end I've been doing some comparisons between the two. I will have to use the Trumpeter kit engine mount and bulkhead as the Trumpy kit is wider by about 3mm. I'll also have to use the Trumpy prop as the spinner is smaller in diameter by about the same amount. Then there's the question of how much of the cowlings I can cut away as mounting points are cast into the back of each rear engine side cowl. This is the look I want. ..... In more appropriate colours, of course. The exhaust positioning in relation to the Trumpy kit's exhaust opening is crucial, as is the prop shaft being dead centre of the very front opening in the fuselage. The Trumpy engine mounts are slightly longer which is correct as MkII Hurricanes were slightly linger in the nose than MkI's. However, they're not correctly shaped as the lower brace on each side mounts further out on the wing spar. So I've built up the Trumpy engine block and engine mounts just to get a start as to where the Airfix engine mill mount. I know the engine height is correct from experimentation with an even older Airfix Merlin. It's now a question of correct fore/aft placement. So my next step is to wreck the Airfix Hurri and see if it mounts as I hope. If not, then this idea will be abandoned and I'll go with the crude stock engine and engine mount, and simply close up the cowlings. Other parts from the Airfix Hurricane will be used in the build anyway, and spare parts are always useful. One other thing I did on the 2015 build was to fabricate some of the rear fuselage structure. This gives you the idea. So I've also fabricated the sides of the Warren trusses that formed the basic fuselage structure. I won't be going all the way to the tail as that part can't be seen. This pic is about life size, so you get the idea. Cheers, Michael

I've noticed the same thing with how my address in Australia is formatted on their site. However, orders get here reliably, and usually very quickly too. One more thing, if I can deviate from the subject a little. ZM's site is currently updated with a heap of upcoming releases and re-releases. I'll be lodging a pre-order today . Cheers, Michael

Curtiss were well known for the colour variations on the P-40. It was almost a case of them nipping down to the nearest hardware store for a paint re-stock. RAF Sky on Supermarine built Spitfires was a little more blue than anyone else's Sky. As to the Luftwaffe, as the situation there became more desperate, factories simply painted their planes in whatever they could lay their hands on. Cheers, Michael

Wonderful. Cheers, Michael

My own take on this is that it depends on where the planes were based. If we're talking about western Europe or the UK, fading and dirt would largely be light. Grass fields or airfields with paved taxiways and parking areas were not likely to see much fading and dirt. These sort of areas had good maintenance facilities so it's likely the the planes would be much less grubby and scratched up than a plane operated from dusty, sandy places such as the Western Desert or south west Pacific or some muddy outpost on the eastern front. Such places are likely to see a much greater rate of dirt and scratching from grubby boots clambering all over the machine, or faded paint in hot sunny climates. Paints were much more susceptible to fading back then as they weren't as UV resistant as today's offerings. Japanese paints in particular come to mind here. Also, red paints suffered more too. So in summary, I think the amount of wear and tear should be dependent on where your miniature subject was in operation, and how old or at what point in it's career the model is to be depicted. Quite true and you raise a good point. As an example, 1940 109E's were well built machines, as were most F's. Late war G and K models much less so as both production ramped up and more unskilled labour was used. Also, the quality of materials used was sometimes less. The armour glass in these later planes was often hazy and had a smoky yellow tint as these components could no longer be manufactured to the earlier high quality. Castings were substituted for forgings as these were quicker and cheaper to produce and unpainted areas became more common. The latter was also true of allied machines. Spitfire and Hurricane Mk1's were painted everywhere, but by 1942, only some areas had paint, such as the cockpit. However, only some of this can be replicated on our models. A restored warbird is by it's nature a labour of love and these photos prove that. But how you replicate declining quality on a model with a two inch long or smaller cockpit I don't know, other than to paint it thinly over a bare metal finish and maybe apply a dirty yellow clear wash to your 109's armour glass, for example. The same might be said for hurriedly applied exterior colours, but once the camo pattern becomes more complex, then I think this becomes harder to replicate. Well done to those who can. Me?? I'm too OCD and stuck in the "that looks like garbage" mindset to build my models anything other than as neatly I can. It's only recently that I've started weathering. Cheers, Michael

Just come across some really great photos during a flight sim search. The plane in question is an Erla built G-6 that was on display at this years EAA Oshkosh air show. The plane is said to be very accurately restored over a ten year period, and there's lots of photos that will be very useful to modellers, starting at post #5. Erla built Bf-109G-6 Cheers, Michael

Nicely done. I like your display too. Cheers, Michael

Nice build, and good to see an ME-410. Cheers, Michael

Some wonderful work here, and very inspirational. I think this needs another e-book to be written about this build. Cheers, Michael

Just one thing to remember if anyone is considering using this particular display case. Don't put it anywhere that catches direct sunlight coming in through your windows. This happens. Some types of clear plastic don't tolerate exposure to direct sunlight. Unfortunately, this gets the early morning sun straight through my computer room window. It's just that one spot. The display boxes above and below are all OK. Cheers, Michael