thierry laurent

If you ever need parts such as clear canopies, John 'Tigger' Wilkes got the molds.

Quite simple: Do it yourself! Save a navigation map from the web (e. g. http://legacy.lib.utexas.edu/maps/onc/middle_east.html). Insert it in a Word page, re-dimension it and print it. Done! It is not even required finding one from one specific area as when folded, any map will look ok as far as the type is ok. Hth Thierry

Hi guys, No plastic picture today but some interested information. The digital world took all my available time but I won the fight with my old Cd-rom! This was far from easy: recreate an XP ISO boot CD, install a VM hypervisor, create an XP Virtual Machine, restore access of the App to the CD-DVD reader, solve driver issues, etc. etc. but I finally succeeded. The CD interface via the VM was crappy but at least I got the interesting parts. First, the battery that moved during the Mk.I production clearly stayed on the floor under the oxygen bottle up to the longer generation of Merlin-engined fighters (such as the Mk.VIII or IX). Second, the mystery bracket I built (that was used on some Mk.Is as the Hendon plane had it) was actually the IFF box tray. As the IFF was not used during BoB, I will not use it in my kit (I do not care as I have at least two Mk.IIs in my stash). It is never funny to build useless items but at least I will recycle the part and this resulted in learning A LOT of things regarding the evolution of the early Spitfires! The following picture captured from the CD is showing the IFF green bracket (in the red circle) and the battery location (in the yellow oval) in a preserved Mk.V. So, to summarize: The radio location never changed. Early Mk.Is Spits had the radio tray with the TR9D and the battery was located in a tray over the two gas bottles located on the port side. Late Mk.Is got the TR1133 in the radio tray and the battery moved to the floor starboard side. During BoB, TR9D or TR1133 were used in the same planes according to the circumstances. After the BoB, the Mk.Is got the IFF box. Note the use of both items had an influence on the presence of wires over the fuselage (for TR9D) and between the fuselage and the stabilators (for the IFF). However, during BoB you could have a plane with the wire antenna but using the TR1133 for some time. For a model, this is not really important if you do not open the radio hatch. Mk.IIs and Mk.Vs kept that configuration (TR1133 and IFF) but the radio progressively changed to the TR1143 and when longer Merlin Spits appeared the battery was moved to the rear fuselage to keep a correct center of gravity. The flare launcher system also evolved in the rear fuselage but this is a completely different topic! Last, I took all the measures to scratchbuild the battery. I should do that tomorrow as it will absolutely be impossible to paint (38°C in the shadow are foreseen). Ouch!

Hi, Here's the trick I used many years ago: 1. Save the image from the web, 2. Insert it in a Word file, 3. Reduce the image size to the one you want, 4. Print with a good laser printer, 5. Cut it with very good scissors or a punch and die, 6.Glue with CA glue, 7. If required touch up the edges with a little bit of paint, 8. If required spray a little bit of matt varnish. I never did it but just realized it is probably easier to spray a mist of varnish on the sheet before cutting the patches. The paper is giving the thickness and rigidity of the actual patches. Hth Thierry

Indeed! I got Japanese books from Fedex in two days! At the same time I'm still waiting for an Hikoki book purchased in UK more than a month ago!

Thanks for the information. I just ordered all the goodies and the RAF pilot. Note that set 32007 looks not yet available. I only saw it after having purchased all the available parts.

At last!

Hi Dave, I do not think the exhaust extensions had been repainted white. This looks like an assumption for Armycast whereas the pictures do not confirm it. The areas are in the shadow but to me there is another color line close to the shadow one. By the way, why would they have done that? We should not forget that they used Phantoms in SEA camo for years. The IAF had not the habit to spend resources for futile reasons... Hth Thierry

Indeed, some flying Warbirds were rebuilt from far worsely damaged wrecks!

Too bad for the Hanriot as this was one WW1 plane I've been waiting for ages...

Thanks Lothar, To me, the research part is really a major part of my hobby. I'm probably too worried by such a dimension as in the end those are just bits of plastic! However, I can't help but allocating time to that! I guess this probably came from the time I had spare time but could not allocate it to actual modelling (this was the time when I had hours of commuting in a train). Then, I started making tweak lists as I developed progressively an interest in airplane history and engineering besides the simple model dimension. This also corresponds to the time my library grew to become far too large! Just ask my wife. She's desesperately waiting for the 2021 house extension as I'm storing books everywhere in spite of the fact I've a dedicated small library room!

Thanks to a very kind LSP member, my build will restart quickly. If the pictures of the battery system are elusive, fortunately, there were some TM views. This does not mean that some elements do not stay a little bit obscure but at least I have a sufficient amount of information to add the battery. It is quite incredible we do not have any documented thorough analysis of the technical evolution of the Spitfire. This reminds me the huge problems I had to find information about the oxygen bottles in the PRXI, the landing gear bays of the Mk.XII or the cockpit or LG bays of the FR47! This is a pity as the Spit family is at the top of my favorite planes and I've been commonly stuck during builts by the lack of information...

Well, many WW2 fighters had a reco capability. Think of the Me109, Mustang or Spitfire. Moreover, most jets used from the eighties are using reco pods. So, the scope can be easily enlarged. And this can also encompass most WW1 two-seaters.

Well there are many possibilities. Up to now, I identified the following categories. Note some will possibly be too restricted: - Era (mid-war, cold war, etc.) - War (Korea, SEA, Middle-East, etc.) - War theater of ops (WW2 ETO, MTO, PTO, CBI, etc.) - Location (Africa, Asia, CONUS, Europe,etc.) - Function (fighter, bomber, trainer, reco, etc.) - Size (single seater, twin-engine, etc.) - Construction type (seaplane, biplane, etc.) - Propulsion (propeller, reactor, rocket, glider, etc.) - Speed (sub-sonic, supersonic, hypersonic) - Mark (initial such a Mk.I, GR1, A, etc. or final) - Colors ("black and white", "Silver paint, dope and NMF", etc.) - Aces planes (Olds, Galland, Epstein, MvR, etc.) - Deco or scheme specific feature (sharkmouth, stripes, stars, etc.) - Kit producer (WnW, Revell, etc.) - Kit type (injected plastic, vacform, resin, etc.) Hth Thierry

You know what was said by Oscar Wilde and George Bernard Shaw about the use of that common language...

Happy birthday Bob!

The problem with 1/32 F-4S is the fact they WERE available from various decal producers but obviously they disappeared for at least ten years...

Hi guys, It is true there are not tons of pictures showing F-4S with a warload. Most of the ones I have show the planes without missiles and even quite often without drop tanks! However, this does not mean there are none. For instance, the Midway F-4S were commonly loaded with AIM-7 and AIM-9 missiles. Here's a sample of what I found in my folders. Hope this helps. Cheers Thierry

This one exists as well but only as a vacformed kit. Out of my memory, Iain started one some years ago.

Yes, indeed.

A Romanian Pzl11C is also an idea... and the RAF Dominie is also another tempting option! This group build is an excellent idea as most of the planes were used somewhere in one way or another in a training unit!

Am I wrong or has the Master Details website vanished...?

An Italian Me109G12 or a Thai L-39ZA...?

I have no doubt this re-release will occur before long as this is an 'in-house' mold. I do not know how many Hawk kits were built as I have no crystal ball but I know that each time a survey was made by magazines years ago (before the current century), the estimated amount of built kits never exceeded a large maximum of 30% and it was really the exception. In most cases, far less kits of a reference were built (10-15%) and the larger was the scale, the less kits were built. I guess this was probably linked to the fact that children who assembled a kit in an afternoon rather built cheap and more simple kits. I do not have more accurate figures coming from a recent scientific research but I'm ready to bet such values are not far from reality. Modellers are squirrels! If we just take our situation on LSP, most of us have at least dozens of kits in a stash. They have been purchased but not yet assembled. And finally, have a look at the articles on LSPs. We have more or less 8000 members and even if only a single percent of the members got the kit, how many built Hawks do we have on the site...? Six! You get my point.

Simply because thousands of boxes have been sold and 90% of them have yet to be assembled! Moreover Revell is regularly re-releasing the 'old' kits.