Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Sabrejet

  1. I'm always amazed that more modellers don't tackle resin; it generally has sharper/more detail, smells lovely and gives more modelling per buck than plastic. I built my first resin kit in 1986 and rarely build anything else now.
  2. I'd go for something esoteric: that way you won't be diverted by the possibility of an alternative injection-moulded version. I always expect to scratch-build items (part of the attraction for me) and so long as shape is accurate and the main parts are workable then the choice is enormous. I've built many Rareplanes vacs and never been disappointed; Contrail are good too but some kits (TSR.2) are a bit 'off' in terms of shape. Eagles Talon did some more extensive kits with resin and metal parts and I've also done a few kits which had no obvious branding - including a lovely 1/72 Wilga - so those can be had too. One that always get good reviews (aside from those listed above) is Koster, though I understand that prices can be a bit steep. I'm currently doing a Rareplanes Ryan ST and have commissioned some decals for it, which is another expectation for vacforms.
  3. Success (or not) is never a criteria for me when it comes to buying kits. I love the '177 and I think it was that box art that did it!
  4. 1940 shot of N3277, with not much usage but exhibiting skin panting, especially aft of the fuselage code letter. It's not always dependent on gravity or service use - depending on the method of riveting or even the ability of the guy or gal on the rivet gun, you will get a similar effect regarding rivet row depression and/or panting. You can also get a similar effect on rivetted trailing edges, depending on the riveting method. Ditto if there is a soft substrate such as sealant or (in olden times) felt or asbestos insulation/isolation layers being applied. It's often most apparent (visible) before any primer goes on, when a reflective surface will enhance the irregularity. But since the primer goes on pretty quickly, it's difficult to see that and on a painted panel you need a raking light. The key then is the scale of representation on a kit: as with the photo below, it's visible (as are individual rivets) at a fair distance and from what I've seen of it on the 1/24 F6F, I'd say it's not overdone. Remember also that rivet application was subject to a lot of variety in manufacture and service. Some manufacturers applied a dimple or countersink to the skin prior to riveting and no final working; others did a similar thing but with a shallower countersink followed by milling of the head. Supermarine did the latter in later years and the as-manufactured skins of some of their products were an absolute mess from milling overrun on countersunk rivets. Note that this is "as-manufactured", so straight from the factory they were not always what you'd expect.
  5. SAC parts are just copies of the kit parts and in my experience no stronger than the plastic parts. I'd save your money.
  6. There is also a chap doing a B-17 nose section in the UK: seem to recall seeing a YouTube vid of it.
  7. Further to my last, the flap config can be extended to include the XP-86, which used the initial flap shape/size from first flight, including the range of movement. Only changes to flap config during XP-86 development related to internals such as rate of movement and bungee forces etc. For info the flap 1:1 dimensions are: NACA slotted Span 80.36 in Chord 29.62 in 38 degrees of movement
  8. F-86 flap size remained the same from P-86A-1 thru F-86L. I've never noticed in issue with the Hasegawa kit.
  9. I'd say no. People claim to be 'in the know', but I'd doubt it. Hearsay won't do anything more than raise false hope, but second-hand prices don't look too bad at the moment. However the FJ-3/3M seems to be rare as hen's teeth. That one would be worth a quick turn-round because it's a lovely kit.
  10. Not 'how do they print it?' but 'how do they manage to so adeptly design it all in 3D?'. My son has a resin printer and he printed out a 1/43 scale race car for me (from a purchased file). The detail was amazing. In Japan, MFH has been doing 3D-printed chassis for a couple of years and they are also works of art. The early stuff you could see layering (even if it was probably .1mm or less) but more recently they've gone into 3D-printed wire wheels and they are probably better-scaled than the individually-spoked metal versions. The point for me is that I still want something I can put together and paint. I want to take my time to do it too. So there will always be a place for kits (in the old sense) and I think these 3D-printed masterpieces can sit alongside our 'ancient' type of kits rather than replacing them.
  11. Some expert work has gone into that. How do these folks do it?
  12. Does look like ADC Grey, but a number of types were painted silver in the early '60s (ANG F-86Hs, some F-86D/L etc) so this makes more sense.
  13. I use the trusty RP Toolz RP-HPD hexagonal punch set. Used with plastic rod, you can then make bolt heads or nut/bolt tails in any size you want.
  14. +1 to that. The folks at Yeovilton were way ahead of the game when they conserved the Corsair. I think 'Flak Bait' (B-26) is another candidate. But it's really sad to see how many warbirds have in the intervening years lost their originality. The airworthy machines in particular are an example of this cultural vandalism. And yes I know that many airworthy P-51s and Spitfires are replicas, but an equally large number claim the identity of an original example which has either been scrapped or denied public display. It's a dark side of our hobby which hopefully has a finite life.
  15. Not sure if he's still around, but David Watkins was my go-to Vampire/Venom expert. He published a number of books and articles on the type.
  16. This aircraft also has the tail of a Fiat G.91 (!), so I'd say it's not a very useful source of historical reference.
  17. A number of folks don't wish to see wish-listing on a discussion page. Maybe better off in a dedicated 'wish-listing' forum? But overall I think you misunderstood my response, and missed the key parts. I certainly didn't say anything about 'positive contribution' (or negative). I'm having a lovely day thanks.
  18. Trouble with all these excuses is that they ignore the point that the site is becoming dragged down by threads that don't contribute anything. This one isn't a wish list either - threads on the Kotare Spitfire (and subsequent wish lists) are posted elsewhere here. Another issue for me is that if I see "Kotare...announcement...Christmas" I'm still interested enough to take a look in case it really does contain something about Kotare's forthcoming 1/48 Boulton-Paul Overstrand. Sadly not.
  19. Well hopefully not. In the meantime I do agree that this type of thread should be in an area where you can select 'ignore'. I think few other subjects cause annoyance like these do.
  20. My favourite one is (excuse the spelling): "Many a mickle meks a muckle, y'ken?"
  21. We get these pointless navel-gazing threads every time some creatively moribund manufacturer says it's going to announce 'something' on a certain date: It usually turns out to be nothing to get get excited about. But this one is worse than that, it's a thread about something that hasn't even happened.
  22. The Italeri (Kinetic) kit gives you an RAF 112 Sqn option but the serial number font is incorrect and the sharkmouth is the wrong colour!
  23. F-30 kit can be done as the '6-3' wing RAF Sabre. The F-40 kit would take a bit of work but could eventually do either 'early' or 'late' but only with extensive wing mods.
  24. You can make an RAF Sabre, but it takes effort: I did it many years ago using the Hasegawa F-86F kit. I removed the wingtip extensions and filled the slats to get a '6-3' wing, then modified the dorsal intake/vent panel and added the fuselage side vents. Removing the wingtip extensions and narrowing the chord will more-or-less give you the early wing (RAF Sabres were fitted with a mix, depending on when they left the factory and which squadron they were assigned to and when). The Hasegawa kit features the landing gear in 'weight-off-wheels' configuration so it will look stalky unless you shorten the oleos. The Kinetic kit is a bit clunky but does give you the '6-3' wing out-of-the-box. From what I've seen it looks OK shape-wise but features a few inaccuracies such as the nose leg being the wrong shape etc. The rule of thumb for configuration is always go with period photos: both F-86D and RAF Sabre 4 were subject to modification throughout their careers, so even cockpit colours can be different for the same aircraft at different points in its life.
  • Create New...