paul fisher

Yessir, with a little reshaping of the upper cowling and gun elimiation. I started it years ago and didn't finish it for years because I couldn't get the 'Smirnoff' logo perfected. I searched the internet alot during those years and finally found a perfect high resolution example in an old time Life magazine sold online for four bucks. It had Jane Fonda on the cover from her movie Barbarella, that's how old it was. I built it as a tribute to Mira Slovak who I met acoupla times back in the mid sixties. A very cool guy in person. It was the first winner of the National races at Reno in 1964. I saw it race at a small municiple airport just outside Lancaster California.
 
 
 

I must be about the only one in the world that likes to 2 seater Sea fury, I sure wouldn't turn one down either real or in kit form. For some reason I like the trainer 2 seat versions of a lot of aircraft, but that's just me.

I'm ALL about an IM F.3!!
 
I have a FM&P Sea Fury and have quite a bit of experience with resin kits so I'm GTG there, but damn.......
 
IF (REALLY big IF I know) they eventually decide to come out with a two holer Sea Fury I will have a good base for a project I have ALWAYS wanted to do ever since the Fisher Two seat Fury came out, but never ever dared hack into a model that expensive, and as this point very rare......
 
Critical Mass!!!!
 

 
It would take as much or MORE work than likely any model I've made, but it's a long standing dream of mine.
 

I'm still waiting for the medium scale Scimitar, hoping they might make a bigger one later.
 
Tony

Hi everyone
 
I wanted to present you my latest model, which shows a miniature of the PZL P.11 prototype no. V. This aircraft was presented in 1934 during the 14th International Air Show in Paris. I built it on the basis of a 1/32 scale PZL P11c aircraft model kit by IBG, or two such kits in fact. This was due to the fact that there are quite a lot of differences between the prototype and the serial P11c aircraft, despite the fact that both aircraft have the same marking painted on the vertical stabilizer. All these nuances, it would seem, are quite important and together with the occasional silver-red painting, they make this plane stand out from all the other PZL P.11c. These differences were meticulously picked out from the analysis of archival photos and documents and I decided to show them all so that the final effect was as close as possible to the appearance of the prototype. Below is a list of these differences, although it cannot be ruled out that this is only part of them and perhaps in the future it will be possible to expand it.
 
- The horizontal stabilizer had elevators with a larger area and a different shape.
- Chassis with aero fairings and Dunlop low pressure wheels.
- Elevator trim tabs of a rectangular shape with an external drive.
- Longer recess for the barrels of hull rifles, extending to the firewall.
- Different division of plating elements in the truss part of the hull.
- Larger side panels for access to hull armament.
- Different layout and form of the entrance steps to the cockpit.
- Hull hand grips in the form of openings with flaps at the height of the windshield.
- Higher windshield without rear view mirror.
- Another form of upholstery of the periphery of the pilot's cabin.
- Covering with corrugated sheet additional panels on the upper surface of the wings near the fuselage.
- Different location of the Venturi nozzle on the hull.
- No longitudinal ventilation holes in the engine crankcase cover.
- No ventilation holes, so-called. "gills", in the fuselage behind the engine in front of the firewall.
- No radio station.
- Missing access panel to the radio station in the semi-monocoque part of the fuselage.
- No antenna installation on the fuselage and wings.
- No generator drive cover on the right side of the hull behind the engine.
- Missing one of the rudder drive inspection holes in the rear fuselage.
- No bomb launchers under the wings.
- No bomb release lever in the cockpit.
 
During the conversion, I made a lot of components from scratch and used a lot of commercial add-ons (Archer, Bitskrieg, Master, Yahu, Part and Edurad). I put a lot of work into reducing the thickness of the trailing edges in the lifting and steering surfaces of the model. From scratch I made an imitation of the entire riveting on the fuselage and partly on the wings and stabilizers. A different layout of the prototype's hull panels required re-creating most of the dividing lines. I also made an imitation of small deflections on the fuselage and wings simulating deformations on the skin as a result of technological and utility processes. For the purposes of the presentation, I made a small base inspired by archival photos from the exhibition in Paris.
 


 
And the model looks like this:





















 
The model premiered last weekend at the modeling championships in Bytom. He received the first place in his category and the prestigious "Black Diamond".

 
Now a small collection has been created

 
Best regards, Marcin :-)
 

This is calm, wait until the first images of the kit are revealed, and the red lines come out...

For all the ink/pixels flying about this kit I have to say that looks superb.

hi all, 
Maybe it's not the right section, but having not yet started the construction of my mc 202 Italeri, and not wanting to invade the discussions already present, I'll try to write here. if it is not relevant I will ask the admins to move/delete it, if necessary.
well, having received my much desired kit, I was perplexed by it in many ways. so I managed to have a trip to the recently revamped MUSAM - Historical Air Force Museum in Vigna di Valle.
the last time I went there immediately before it closed in view of the expansion works for the centenary, now I found everything nice and clean, polished and definitely improved in terms of usability of the vehicles and general lighting. in this trio of aces we have a G55, an MC205 and an MC202.

 
we know that the 202 has several inaccuracies due to the restoration of the time, in particular the left wing is a mirror copy of the right, the only survivor, but of an MC200. therefore the left is the wrong size, and reproduces the features of that of a 200, whose leading edge was however modified to make it more similar to that of the 202. the spinner and engine cowl were also missing, for which those of the 205 were taken as a sample. while the front  upper cowls were actually interchangeable, even if with some characteristic differences between the two models, the spinners have nothing to do with each other. so let's say that what is there for sure (maybe) is the fuselage and the tail planes.
 
what I mainly wanted to understand, given the doubts I had and have about the surfaces of the newly released kit, was how the skin panels were actually joined. in the kit the joints are rendered with rather large negative lines, more or less like for the Italeri's Tornado and the F104, which is not very realistic on large modern ones, but really annoying, at least for me, on a small-sized fighter like the 202 . to make a long story short, and thanks to the kindness of the museum staff, I was able to take some close-up and hopefully understandable shots.

 
the panels were placed starting from the lower and rear ones, in such a way that the subsequent ones, as you go up and towards the bow, are overlapped and stopped with a double line of rivets flush with the surface.

 
the dark color doesn't help, so I also took several shots of the 205, where perhaps you can understand better, the construction technique is the same. and moreover, if I'm not mistaken, this 205 is nothing more than a 202 re-engined as a 205 for a supply to Egypt which then never materialized.

 
instead, at the attachment of the wings to the central body of the plane, a nice see-trought line is visible, the same one that separates the external section of the flaps from the internal one. the same can be said for all the inspection hatches and the retractable steps to access the pilot's seat.

 
same thing with 205. Here it's much more evident, it seems to me.

 
the wing of the 202 is decidedly smoother and difficult to read, especially regarding the rivets. However, as I said, half of it is a replica and the other half is a recovery/reinterpretation, I would trust more what can be seen on the 205 one.

 
another thing that doesn't really convince me about the kit is the rendering of the many openings in the various segments of the cowling. in this shot you can see quite well both the lines of the overlapping panels (and I think that the choice to make the fuselage with long longitudinal sheets is due to this particular type of assembly, almost like naval plating) and the various crescent-shaped openings.

 
again for the sake of better reading of these details, I took several shots at MC200, same manufacturer, same logic and technique:

 

 
for today I would stop here, the above alone gives food for thought to obtain a satisfactory model. then there are the canvas surfaces, the landing gear... but one thing at a time.
it must also be said that perhaps they are all my own fantasies, it is not certain that trying to improve these things will result in a better model than the one proposed by the manufacturer, but at least understanding it will help in taking decisions about what to do or not to do.
 
cheers, Paolo
 
 

Lukgraph's DH 89 Dragon Rapide models could be finished in Hillman's Airways livery a little easier soon because the De Havilland Museum's DH 89 restoration already sports Hillman's mid blue (lower half) and white (upper half) scheme on the fuselage. I do not know yet what codes will be applied. The wings' silver dope may have to wait to be applied until the weather warms next year.
 
De Havilland aircraft were the only aircraft Ted Hillman bought. He owned two dozen all told in the early thirties; 2 x Dh 60 Moths, 3 x DH 80 Puss Moths, 3 x DH 83 Fox Moths, 7 DH 84 Dragons, 6 x DH 89 Dragon Rapides, 3 DH 86 Express. All Hillman's aircraft wore Hillman's Airways blue and white livery except the DH 86s and perhaps the DH 60s.
 
 

Oh I so hate this “it depends” thing.  Keeps reminding me that I am an older American.

Hello everyone
As Wedell Wiliams 45 is slowly approaching the end of construction. So while the paint was drying, I started building a new project "Time flies".



 
I recommend :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawks_Miller_HM-1
 
https://www.efootage.com/videos/60380/frank-hawks-time-flies-speed-flight?fbclid=IwAR0P7FbX9LQlV6y6gZzPweJPrMi2_boDIXvjS3KZNgzis_FSXm_JUbk4QnE
 
https://www.gettyimages.fi/detail/video/frank-hawks-demonstrates-his-new-six-miles-per-minute-uutismateriaali/1B012258_018?fbclid=IwAR30O_4orS9FAF4lznnLYTlPGqsIRosmra7Czsk9LdUOoDrHCVQtvrS0rg4
 
 
 
For the project, I will use elements of other models that will be appropriate for processing and changing the shape. Such modeling scrap recycling. The hull from the old "Meteor" 1/32 is a good base for this model. Maybe because the Lindberg model is an extremely hopeless set that does not resemble "Meteor", nothing at all. The hull, however, required narrowing and improvement of the upper part. I also removed the wing nests because the HM-1 has wings lower. The wings come from the old Monogram P-61 set, after modification they fit well. I made a base for the vertical and horizontal stabilizer from scratch.




 
Now I have to fit it together.

 
That's it for now, the next part will probably come one day

Another great mash up!

That's kinda like saying "I don't need your Ferrari, I have some used tires".

Really an image hosting test, but, well, some might be interested! Scratchprint project.. Just for me this time!
 

Looks delicious! I had wanted to kit this up for many years but feared that it would not sell well.I think time have changed enough that it should do well, I certainly hope so.
These guys are doing some great stuff!
 

Looks delicious! I had wanted to kit this up for many years but feared that it would not sell well.I think time have changed enough that it should do well, I certainly hope so.
These guys are doing some great stuff!
 

Looks delicious! I had wanted to kit this up for many years but feared that it would not sell well.I think time have changed enough that it should do well, I certainly hope so.
These guys are doing some great stuff!
 

Looks delicious! I had wanted to kit this up for many years but feared that it would not sell well.I think time have changed enough that it should do well, I certainly hope so.
These guys are doing some great stuff!
 

The Phuccaneer gets its warpaint and ID.
 

Since photos seem to show the panel lines overlapped, you might try to fill the panel lines. Follow this with laying down tape along the filled panel lines on the lower side. After that is done, spray several coats of primer/paint evenly on the upper side. Once this dries, remove the tape. You can then assess whether this gives you the lapped panel line look you need. Repeat if needed.  Use fine sand paper to very!!! gently refine the edge.  I have done this with a Hellcat model, and it represents the lapped panel line well once final coats are applied. It’s just another way to approach the issue. I’ll plan on this myself. 

Just a quick note:  No matter what restored and/or museum airplanes show, I don’t think white struts were at all common in the fleet until the gray/white scheme became the standard.  Tommy says some GSB airplanes such as Avengers and Guardians had white struts but that was a safety issue to help deck crews realize where they were at night and not walk into the prop. White struts on a blue airplane might look cool, but they weren’t standard squadron issue back in the day.  Heck, even the Blue Angels’ airplanes had blue struts and doors up until they started flying A-4s.  And the main reasons you see white struts on just about anything with retractable gear these days is standardization across the industry and the fact that leaks and such are much easier to spot on a white surface.

I have a Fisher F9F-2 I haven't started yet, and had the same question. Like OBG said, there doesn't seem to be a definitive answer. Most active service pictures I have seen are black and white, and appear to show GSB struts and wheels, but don't show much as far as wheel wells or gear door interiors. Pictures of the wheel wells I have found usually show interior/zinc chromate green with green doors, but are from air museum walk arounds. Some of those show white or aluminum struts, while others show GSB struts. Then you get into model painting instructions, where most say either white or green interiors with white struts and wheels.
Best I can tell is that it's time and aircraft specific. 
I'm going to go with the best pictures of the aircraft I decided on, which looks to be GSB struts and wheels with interior green wells and doors, and an uneducated guess. 

And the answer is:  Anything you want it to be.  According to Tommy on his tailhook site, there was no universal wheel well color spec in the Navy back then and it was not until about 1956 that the Navy bothered to address this.  From the photos I’ve seen, the insides of the doors often were interior green while the struts and rims were anything from GSB to aluminum to interior green - sometimes with all the above on the same airplane.  Me?  I’d vote for green wells, blue struts and doors with NM wheels for contrast and looks.  But that’s just me.  Navy airplanes roll out of the factory painted however the contract says but as soon as they are NARFed, all bets are off and they rarely look the same ever again.