Jump to content

Tim Carroll

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Tim Carroll

  • Birthday 03/18/1959

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Melbourne, Australia

Recent Profile Visitors

848 profile views
  1. Earlier threat on this site has a picture of the test shot. http://forum.largescaleplanes.com/index.php?showtopic=66844&hl=taube
  2. Tim Carroll


    Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but now better that later, mate. If you get one of those really fine etch saws and cut between the plastic and brass until you hit metal. Then twist the cannon gently - the super glue may shear. Super glue is weak against shear - sideways movement. Here's hoping, as it looks like a nice build. Cheers Tim
  3. Tim Carroll


    Hi Adam, If those are the cannon fairings you are using and you are doing a "C" wing - they look to be a little short. More like the ones you would see outboard when two cannon are fitted. Cheers
  4. A6M2 colours is a real mine field to be sure. I am not aware of any correct colour for the Grey, they all seem different. I rely on the Mongraph the Nick Millman has put together - "Painting the early Zero-Sen" You can get it following this link http://www.aviationofjapan.com/2011/10/painting-early-zero-sen-pdf-e-guide.html Cheers
  5. Hi Kev, He may mean the skin panels did not change on the metal wing. I'm not too sure on that. The gun access panels certainly did. Mk 1 fabric to metal were different shapes. (8 gun wings) Metal wing had a large hexagonal panel centre with two smaller panels either side. The Fabric wing had a large cruciform panel. B wings(12 gun) wing had the addition of the 2 outer MGs, though the inner access panels were the same as the 8 gun metal wing. C wings (4 Cannon) had new panels, forward two had bulges to clear the magazine, aft two were oblong to allow removal of the cannon. D wing (1 MG and 40mm gun pod) As shown in the photo above. Obviously the under surface had different arrangements of ejection chutes depending on the armament. Cheers
  6. Hi Dave, 1. New nose as the Mk I is some 4 inches shorter. The wing - Fuselage fairing at the leading edge is a different radius due to the stretch to the Mk II. 2. The smaller radiator and housing will be needed, The Mk I does not have the prominent oil cooler in the centre and the forward opening is smaller. 3. The tail wheel was different as well. 4. Changes to wing armament from cannon to 8 machine guns. Different access panels on the top of the wing and below as well associated with this. That's all that comes to mind quickly. Probably better to wait for them to issue a Mk I Cheers
  7. A Little more on Jacobs triplane. It maintained the prop from the camel the engine was taken from. So the prop in the kit is wrong for his plane as well Couple of interesting pictures of what I believe are 2 machines or one has had it crosses repainted: From the side, a bit grainy - http://i50.tinypic.com/2zegw45.jpg From the font showing the engine and prop - http://i48.tinypic.com/2zfogna.jpg Cheers
  8. Hi Thierry, Thanks for the list. Another issue I see with the engine is that it is a Clerget. If you look at the second sprue you can see cylinder heads, valve push rods (2 per cylinder) and dual spark plugs. The only Triplane I am aware of with this engine was Jacobs all black machine with the winged devil on the side. (The original Dragon 1/48 Triplane kit had these markings but not the correct engine) His markings are not supplied in the kit so we will need a 1/24 scale Oberursel Ur II. to build the markings supplied. (I am not aware that Kempf had a Clerget fitted to his triplane) This thread on the Aerodrome provides some information: http://www.theaerodrome.com/forum/showthread.php?t=17522 Cheers Tim
  9. Hi Kent, There is a possible alternative. If you can find someone with a lathe you have them turn the rear part of the barrel down so that i would fit inside the LE mount. This is like the Master C type cannon, or the kit cannon which you could use as the pattern. Cheers Tim
  10. Don't for get the Prop and spinner http://barracudacals.com/prodimages/32123-Bf-109G-10-01.jpg Looks great.
  11. Hi All, Hyperscale has photos of a test shot build. http://hyperscale.com/2014/galleries/spitfireiia32dw_1.htm Looks OK Cheers
  12. Hi All, Here is a link to a thread with a built test shot on Britmodeller http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/234947838-132-supermarine-spitfire-mkii-by-revell-release-april-2014-test-shot-pics/ While you can see the rivets in the shots they do not appear to be too over the top under the proverbial coat of paint. Other things pointed out are that the oil cooler is the later deeper one associated with the MK V series. DH prop and pointed spinner, hopefully the rotol one will be included i the kit. Cheers Tim
  13. Hi All, Looks like a Spitfire to me :-) Some observations: The instrument panel in all of the pictures is wrong - it is reversed - simple note is the flap selector is on the r/hand side and the fuel and oil pressure on the left. (this could be the picture is flipped but I can't see part numbers to prove this) They have molded metal ailerons - they were still covered in fabric on the MK II The elevators pictured have the late balance, to be fair, the tail-planes are correct so either there is another set or they would have you cut the late bit off. This could indicate the intent to provide later MK V's and Seafires A disappointment is the flat underside of wing for the radiator - have a look at the Pacific Coast and Tamiya renditions, though we'd got beyond this. At first look the U/C mount is a bit simple but parts 119a,120a and 119b, 120b combine to give the look of the pintle. No picture of the underside upper wing or gear bay. Canopy looks to have the external armor added as per the Hobby boss kit. The pictures of clear parts are not complete as I cannot see the smaller rear piece. So from what is provide what can we say - nothing as reasonable pictures of the complete moldings are not provided and I'm Leary of basing dimensional accuracy on pictures any way. A lot of the pictures are enlarged so the rivets seem a bit over accentuated. There is certainly more detail in the cockpit than the Hasegawa kit. Given the price I think it will be a good basis for conversions of the early marks and Revell may even give us some themselves. Cheers Tim
  14. Hi Dave, Have a look at these guy's - Vector Cut. They have quite a range of small nuts, bolts and washers. Lint direct to the page: http://www.vectorcut.com/GenericParts.htm They might suit you need for a lot quickly. Cheers Tim
  15. Hi Ron, The only sheet I am aware of is the FCM Sheet 32-03. It has markings for 2 USAS aircraft one of which is Rickenbacker's. Have a look at this link: http://www.internetmodeler.com/2004/june/new-releases/decal_fcm-spad.php I have this set and it is really well done. The only other suggestion I can make is getting in touch with Rowan Broadbent of Pheon Models. He was going to do a sheet that included the S.XIII as well as the N.28 but that was some time ago and I have not seen anything yet. Cheers Tim
  • Create New...