Radub

As I said repeatedly, there is no point in going over the whole "slats are gravity+aerodynamics" controlled stuff. I said that from the very beginning that the operation principles were clear and beyond any discussion. Yes, the slats should move freely. However! As I said, when pushed back, when there is no other push, shake, vibration, while on the ground, the slats stay up. It makes sense to keep the slats up when the aicraft is parked on the airfield in order to preven them from slaping in and out in the wind and weather. When the plane is under power or in the air, the situation is different. I looked back over the photos I took when researching this model and I found why that is: at the trainiling edge of the slat there is a small "lip". That causes enough friction to hold the slat up (until disturbed). It is not a very strong "grip" and I imagine that when the plane is under power the vibrations will be enough to loosen the slats. I have photos showing this "lip" on the aicraft that was in Munich at that time (now it is in Oberschleissheim). The aircraft in Prague have the slats closed, so I do not have photographs of the inside of the slats. The aircraft in Cosford also had the slats closed, so I do not have photographs of the inside of the slats there either. To be perfectly honest, the only reasaion why these "lips" are visible on the aicraft in Munich is because the aircraft was partially stripped and has no engine cowlings. I am not sure if that "lip" would be immediately visible on an aircraft with the ful engine cowling in place. Here are some photos I took in Munich. I hope this helps. Radu

:-) ha ha ha "Vast majority"? Do you mean... that... maybe... there may be a... "minority"? :-) Not "always"? So, considering that even you agree that there may be situations when slats may be closed, what about those people who may wish to build models representing that kind of scenario? As I pointed out above, I understand the principle behind the slats and I am not arguing against it. Please read again what I wrote. Throwing photos and videos at me to "prove" to me what I already stated and agreed with says more about you than me. I explained the reason for the "lip" on the model. Do you want me to explain it again? ;-) Radu

Yeah... when you imagine that somehow I am "insulting" some unidentified entity, that is wrong... But when you are insulting me, that is right. Gotcha! OK, since you are so convinced that movable things can only be in one position, please clarify the following: - mug handles: left or right? - doors and windows: open or closed - canopies: open or closed? Can you envisage any scenario when one of the above can be one way, the other way or in-between? Go! Radu

Yes, I know the video, it has been used for decades as a "weapon" by the people fixated on the idea that movable things should move only one way, whatever way makes them look "smart". That is a well-known training video issued by the Luftwaffe. In that film the mechanic checks the free movement (which is actully more "buttery" than "free"), it sticks a bit, then takes a pliers and straightens something at the corner of the slat to make sure that it does not get "stuck". Of course it is of outmost importance that the slat moves freely - that is the very point of it. But that is no evidence of anything. My point still stands: if you push the slat back, it stays back. It will slide open when the engine starts anyway, so it makes no difference. It also does so on the Bf 109. There are a multitude of photos in print and on the internet that substantiate that, but they are conveniently ignored by those who only seek open slats. Radu

Well, as Ray pointed out, the "well" had to be created to accommodate the flaps on retracted position. If I were to have a choice, I would have left the slats retracted. I have seen five different 262s when this was designed. On all five, if the slats were pushed back, they stayed back. Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know, I know, gravity+airflow controlled slats and all that, but fact remains that on an aircraft resting on the ground, slats stayed however they were pushed. If pushed back, they stayed back. When the engine started, vibrations would "disturb" that "resting position" and they would deploy anyway. They are movable. For years I have seen people tearing into each other over this kind of stuff, yet all they did was argue over what they read on the internet, basically fighting over Google results. I had the opportunity to touch these machines and I am telling you what I saw, not some third-hand copy-pasted stuff. Radu

The "step" is caused by the tooling limitations. There has to be a minimum thickness of 0.3 mm at the trailing edge. Ideally the trailing edge of the slats should be sharp like a knife edge, but tooling limitations (and plastic flow limitations) preclude that. Incidentally, the same is the case with any trailing edge on any other kit out there, for example the slats on the Hasegawa 1/32 Bf 109. Radu

Actually, despite the obstinate refusal by the "fillet obsessives" to accept it, the D-5 is the most colourful and most "decorated" version of the Mustang bar none. To me, the D-5 is the coolest Mustang and it came to Europe around D-Day when there was a lot of fighting. There are so many beautiful colour (and I really mean COLOUR!) schemes, invasion stripes and impressive score boards, but they cannot be issued in Germany because the score boards invariably contain swastikas. Radu

"Frenesi" has a scoreboard consisting of swastikas. In Germany that is problematic because there is legislation regulating that. There is no point in going over "why", that has been hashed and rehashed multiple times on forums for years, but fact remains that they had to avoid any markings containing swastikas. Outside Germany that is not a problem, hence Revell USA can do that. Radu

I got very good results in the past with Gunze Aqueous and Tamiya paints using their own-brand recommended thinners. I also used Lifecolor acrylics and Xtracolor enamels with good results. I think that 0.2 mm nozzle may be a problem. That kind of nozzle is intended for inks. Paint pigments, however fine the grain, may not pass that easily through such a small aperture. I do not have a 0.2 mm airbrush, the smallest I have is 0.3 mm, and I was able to make very thin lines and small mottles. Even bigger nozzles can yield good results by adjusting needle travel and air pressure. Airbrushing is about flow of air and paint and such flow is easier to control when you have enough of both. Radu

In as far as I know, the kit is not "out" yet. It is expected to be available in the Volks shop in the last week of October. The official "worldwide" launch will take place in Telford in the first week of November and that is limited to the number of kits they can bring with them from Japan, so make sure that you pre-order yours. Radu

The seat used on the Ar 234 and the Me 262 was identical and it was a "bucket seat" designed to take a standard Sitzfallschirm (seat parachute). The pilot was seated on the parachute pack containing the canopy. The Germans tested a "streamer"-type parachute for high-speed aicraft, but this was also a Sitzfallschirm type. See this: HTH Radu

You are too kind... :-) ...but that was a lot of work. We still need a kit that can be built without much drama, cutting, chopping, kitbashing, resin corrections, etc. Radu

I agree that in 1/24, I would choose the Trumpeter Hurricane over the Airfix kit. We are still waiting for a good Hurricane in 1/32. Radu

Actually, the spars serve as a mounting base for a lot of components such as the landing gear, engines and control surfaces. The spars also make this a very rigid and strong model. Yeah, they are not like everyone else, but that is exactly their intention! ;-) Radu

- I have zero interest in this subject, I could not be bothered (but actually interested/bothered enough to spend time on writing about it) :-) - We want a Val or Kate! (no idea what they are but they must be good, I see them mentioned a lot... ) Radu