Archimedes

Thank you Michael, you are very kind. It’s not as well finished I had originally hoped but I learned a lot and I’m glad to get it over the line. I am pondering what to do next! Kind regards, Paul P.S. I stole your message format to put finished builds and work in progress in my signature line. A great idea!

Those parts look great! I am looking forward to seeing this one progress! Formidable! kind regards, Paul

Thanks for the additional photos Nenad. Well done on getting this one built!. Kind regards, Paul

Phenomenal Nenad! The look of the painted marking is so much better than could have been achieved with those decals. Great to see this one built! Kind regards, Paul

I’ll wait for Kotare too. Kind regards, Paul

HI Mike, Sweet seeing this one built! I like your approach. Kind regards, Paul

Thank you Mike - you are very kind. Each one is a learning experience and I am looking for the next one to be better!

Thanks Terry @fastterry, the floatplane version was apparently not even as stable as the wheeled version! Thank you for your kind words! Oh my @Jboldt007 ! I’ve not flown one but have flown a Cub and an Aviat Husky. They all have their quirks: both the Husky and the Cub need a short burst of power to control the tail as you land which is just what you don’t want to do as it settles onto the runway. I’d love to fly a Tiger to find out what its foibles are. Thank you Chris @Christa- you are very kind! Thank you Mike @MikeMaben - there is a good reason for that! Thank you @geedubelyer - much appreciated! And everyone was kind enough not to mention I had put the Venturi that sit either side of the cockpit on backwards…. Kind regards, Paul

Posted in RFI Mike!

Looking forward to what I am certain will be a far superior build to my effort!

Thanks Kev, this one was a long time getting finished. Much appreciated, Paul

HI All, I have called time on my build of the Tiger Moth floatplane. The build thread is Here should you want to take a look. G-AIVW was not always a floatplane and in fact was a King’s Cup Air-race winner long before she wore clown shoes. Once converted she was not described kindly in her floatplane configuration as she allegedly was not a stable aircraft and needed to be continuously flown. Sadly she was written off in an accident and no longer exists. My model depicts her in the late 1970’s when she was used for joy rides and to train neophyte floatplane pilots. Kind regards, Paul

Hey folks, Well, I finished G-AIVW at 04:30 this morning after wrestling the cabane rigging into submission. The stats are that I started it in June 2021, it has taken about 210 hours and, whilst the kit cost about 4.50 GBP, the new airbrush, compressor and spray booth cost considerably more. Still, by comparison with many other hobbies, this is still a very low cost way of enjoying yourself. It’s been an interesting journey. My primary objectives were to a) get a model finished, b) learn how to rig a biplane and c) do a bit of scratch building. All have been achieved. What have I learned? 1. That a 49 year old biplane kit is not the place to start for a quick build - even for a rigging mule. Matchbox’s PK-505 is a bit of a ‘curate’s egg’ - good in parts. The headlines are: The Good: - The wings and empennage have a very good representation of fabric effect and are nicely accurate in outline. The Bad: - The cockpit needs to be scratch built to be in any way accurate - especially the front cockpit which is a work of fiction as standard. - Almost all of the attachment points are either way out of scale (cabane strut to fuselage joints) or are weak (the float structure breaks a lot even with the reinforcing rigging I added. - The floats are good in overall shape but are mostly devoid of detail. That which does exist is grossly over-scale. The Ugly: - The nose does not fit around the engine and, even when it is shoehorned into place, it has to shimmed at the back of the attachment points at the firewall to get the line of the front fuselage correct. None of the panels have any meaningful attachment points which means one ends up with each error compounding the next in terms of nose shape. I don’t begrudge any of the above: it has been fun to build what is at challenging kit. I am, however, very glad to call time on it and to move onto pastures new. But what about my own capabilities?. my scratch-building of the cockpit went well but my traditional bette-noir, surfaced when painting the fuselage. I’d achieved a decent finish on the wings but both the fuselage and floats had to be repainted twice. A bad workman blames his tools and I am not going to do that. Instead I will blame my maintenance of my venerable Paasche VL for what became ever more patchy performance when laying down paint. The other things that affected the finish on it was getting the heating system in our home repaired. It is a blow-air system and the repairs caused dislodging of dust in the air ducts - each time I came to G-AIVW she seemed to be layered in fine dust and required a clean down before i could begin work. So I know this is not the build I hoped it would turn out as due to several things: i) the rigging got better as I went on but my first attempts look very clunky, largely down to me using the CA gel glue I had rather than using thin CA that I should have used. ii)There are numerous paint and glue smears (mea culpa) and finally iii) it has a highly variable paint finish on the fuselage and floats. For all that it is a reasonable ‘3-footer’ that I am happy to have called it a day on. Many of the Matchbox builds I have seen do not get completed and, given the challenges that the kit throws at the builder, it is easy to see why. I’ll do some glamour shots and send it over to “Ready for Inspection’ now. For me it looks a bit toy like but that’s OK; I have learned a great deal made new friends along the way and am (hopefully) a better kit assembler than I was when I started. One final point: I did the build here to ‘force’ me to finish. In the event it was the kind encouragement of all who took the time to take a look as it progressed. Thank you guys: I have learned so much from you all but especially Max Williams @mozart, LSP Kev @LSP_Kevin, Chris Woolford @Christa, Alain Gadbois @Alain Gadbois and many others. Thank you guys. Kind regards, Paul

I’m late to this party but interested. I read this with interest because in the Finescale Modeler article that you refer to @Gazzas, no one appears to suggest putting paint under the foil. Or am I missing something? Brian @Out2gtcha - nice P40! Kind regards, Paul

Kev’s publication shows off to best effect what a highly skilled modeller you are Max! Great to see this!

Neatly done on the bracing wires Mike! Kind regards, Paul

The second picture looks about right to me though I am no expert on the B5N. It is not everywhere (compare the top half of the wing to the bottom and you can see where it starts to appear) so it increases toward the centreline. For me they are doing a pretty good job of this and I suspect that for those who think it is overdone, that it would calm down under a coat of paint. Kind regards, Paul

Thank you Max! We just need someone to do a 1:32 Anson now… Kind regards, Paul

I think of it this way; Buying models and being a scale modeller are two different hobbies. Enjoy both. Kind regards, Paul

Cycling Guy, I think you are doing yourself a great disservice: you mottling, to these eyes, looks very convincing. As someone who struggles mightily with paint finishes, I tip my cap at you braving such a challenging camp scheme straight out of the gate and pulling it off so well. Bravo! Kind regards, Paul

A 1/32 DC-3 is a bit of a Holy Grail for me. What makes this kit such a bear to build? Kind regards, Paul

I don’t agree - Compare it with a clear side view of a real FW190 A series and they look to have it right. Sorry I could not get a dead-nuts side on view of the real one but its was as close as I could get. I have seen plenty of drawings that have side elevations that have the underside of the fuselage too flat. Kind regards, Paul

Hi Andy - yes I refreshed the page several times and it comes up blank each time. I’ve also tried it on PC and a Mac desktop to see if there is anything system related stopping it. The page does not load on any of those machines. Kind regards, Paul

Hi Max, I just tried to access your site via my iPad and it came up as ‘not secure’ and I could not access it. As you know I am in the USA. Sorry for your troubles! Kind regards, Paul

Thank you B-17!