thierry laurent

7 and proud of it!   All I really knew is that the leader was Guy Gibson. 
 
Cheers,
Chuck

Close to but not fully as some parts are still missing such as the very typical type of side gunner windows.

More than 15 Phantoms but covering all existing Revell and Tamiya boxings. And I have probably a similar amount of Me 109s. Then, close to 20 Spitfires of all available marks and brands!

April 11/24
 
Here is the problem that Niels has pointed out.  Also, after looking at many pics I have of F-16’s, I couldn’t find one with these panels on any of them either.
 

 
Although the lens is a bit too deep, the real fit culprit is the diameter, so I carefully sanded down the outside edge to get it to fit into the hole without removing the fastener detail, but also the depth quite a bit.  These are position lights that are clearly red in Jake’s book (P 21), but the red color is almost at the surface.  By making the lens thin and painting it red from behind, the red is shallow like it should be.  There is also a tiny InfraRed Emitter light at the front of the light (left), which I will likely add later as a decal.  Once the lights are cemented in and painted, you will only see red from the area covered with liquid mask on the right.
 

 
Since I was on to lights, I decided to attack the little navigation lights on the wingtips as well, which are part of the launchers with rods holding them in place.  As Pete mentioned earlier, the lenses are not tinted red and blue/green like those on the intake, but have a small bulb in each with those colors instead.  To accomplish this, I usually just drill a small hole from behind, then place a dab of the corresponding paint color in the hole as a bulb replacement.  Unfortunately with these lights that are almost directly on top of each other, a hole from the bottom interferes with the other light, so as a compromise I just drilled holes from above, filled them with paint, then sealed them with clear CA glue.  Not very accurate if you want the bulb look, but a lot better than a painted lens.
 

 
The Kopecky LAU-129 launchers need a notch cut out and holes drilled to fit the wingtip, so I used the kit parts as a guide for exact width and pin location.
 

 
A view from the side, showing that the top light is always a bit offset to the rear.  Not exactly the true bulb look, but this still looks better than painted lenses.
 

 
More lights and more detailing options.  The rear navigation light is red, but only at the very back with the side’s painted fuselage color.  Here I painted just the insert that goes into the tail, which is slightly scratched from repeated insertion.  I'll fix that later....
 

 
From the side, you won’t see any red when the tail is painted.
 

 
But from the rear, like a fiber optic, you can clearly see red.  Above that light is an oval recess for 4 more tiny InfraRed light emitters where Tamiya placed an outward oval instead, that many modelers just cut off.  Here I dug a small recess and added outside fastener detail, where I will again add a small decal inside later to replicate the lights.
 

 
The anti-collision strobe light for the top of the tail has a silver light housing for a white light bulb.  After drilling a hole from behind to replicate this a bit, I just left a used drill bit in the hole and glued it in after trimming it for size.  I then painted the insert silver so that you can see some of that from above, much like the rear navigation light.
 

 
I had to be very careful about how deep I drilled the hole, because the lens at the top is tapered and very thin at the top.  This about is about all I could do without risking ruining the part.
 

 
Recall that I was looking for something to sort of replicate all those small “No Push” placards that are on the engine nozzle petals.  What I found is a compromise of what I knew would work, but a bit too shiny for accuracy.  Since you can’t read what the placard says on 80% of the P&W nozzles, even at 1/1 scale, I wasn’t too worried about 1/32 scale.  I ruled out paint masks because you can’t fix flaws and paint bleed without making a mess, so I used some Aluminum ANYZ decal film that I’ve used many times before, but in other colors like black, red and yellow.  While I was at it, I bought some new hose clamp film that will come in very handy with my next build, which is likely the 1/24 Airfix Spitfire Mk IX, if my new JetMads 1/32 AJ37 Viggin doesn’t call me to another jet! 
 

 
After carefully cutting the aluminum decal film, applying the “placards” and spraying a dull coat, this is what you get.  Like I said, the placards are a bit too shiny and pronounced, but I think the overall look is still an improvement on overall accuracy.  I’ll see if I can dull them up a bit without wrecking them, but at this stage I’m really getting tired of showing this nozzle time and time again, which is entirely self-induced!
 

 
On to other things….
 
Cheers,
Chuck

Surely not the cup of tea of most LSP members but for the ones who also like AFVs, I had at last the opportunity to get the new edition of the Son of Sherman in 2 volumes! This limited edition is a pure treadhead delight!!! Far from cheap but each edition was noticeably thicker than the prior one and we get now 942 pages of perfect historical, technical and modelling reference about the Sherman tank. I don't think they will go further as the crazy thing is the fact this thick and heavy reference only focuses on the US tank versions whereas the Sherman derivatives and the foreign use and versions are simply not covered. Alas, I'm afraid the already expensive price will explode in some months to reach unattainable summits... Highly recommended while still available.

Has to be Spitfires.
5 x Hasegawa Mk.Vb
3 x Hasegawa Mk. VI
Matchbox Mk. 22/24
Tamiya Mk.IX
Tamiya Mk. VIII
Tamiya Mk. XVI
Revell Mk. IX 2017
PCM Mk. IXe plus one built
PCM Spitfire Mk.XIV
Spitfire XVI, Cammett conversion PCM32009 and PC32006
Kotare Spitfire Mk.1 early
 
And Hurricanes
Fly Sea Hurricane
Fly Mk.IIc Trop
Fly Mk. IIc
2 x Revell Mk.IIb
PCM Mk.I metal wing
 
And because I like the look of them
21st Century Toys
4 x Macchi C205
 
Cheers
 
Dennis
 

More than 15 Phantoms but covering all existing Revell and Tamiya boxings. And I have probably a similar amount of Me 109s. Then, close to 20 Spitfires of all available marks and brands!

More than 15 Phantoms but covering all existing Revell and Tamiya boxings. And I have probably a similar amount of Me 109s. Then, close to 20 Spitfires of all available marks and brands!

More than 15 Phantoms but covering all existing Revell and Tamiya boxings. And I have probably a similar amount of Me 109s. Then, close to 20 Spitfires of all available marks and brands!

I looked at that monstrous kit at least twenty times but there is one aspect I really dislike even if it may seem minor to many people! This is the fact the submarine tower has the transparent side opposite to the hull one. So you can not either show the sub fully in "normal mode" or in cutaway mode. I've yet to understand why they made such a very weird design choice!

Actually very close to a He-111/Fi-103 (V-1) combination!

By the way, standard oil paint brands such as Windsor & newton also have similar products.

Good tip, many thanks. Didn't know anything about that

No idea short of guessing someone made a terrible mistake confusing left and right
 
That said, that acrylic side is not great for a look through. It's quite thick and you get a lot of diffraction. 
I plan on solving the issue by cutting it. So I'll cut the acrylic side on the hull and cut the plain side on the conning tower.
and paint the rest.
 
Initially I wanted to have this beast surfaced but in a transparent resin box to simulate the ocean.
This seems to be overkill and present too many challenges (experience with large volume of deep ocean water resin, costs and a high risk of not seeing anything inside after all. 
I would love to have a resin box that I could add or remove the sub from. But that's something I can hopefully give some thoughts at the last stage of this project.

Terrific project Olivier!
 
By the way do not forget some brands released oil paint drying accelerator products that can be used like turpentine but divide at least by ten the drying time! For instance Uschi has such a medium.

I looked at that monstrous kit at least twenty times but there is one aspect I really dislike even if it may seem minor to many people! This is the fact the submarine tower has the transparent side opposite to the hull one. So you can not either show the sub fully in "normal mode" or in cutaway mode. I've yet to understand why they made such a very weird design choice!

Ahem.  I discovered recently while reading highly redacted documents found in old boxes in a garage next to a Corvette with four flat tires that the development and employment of this particular airplane during the Great Unpleasantness included a very classified night interdiction version that evolved at about the same time.  It met with no press but considerable success.  USAF boffins rerouted the exhaust system from the engine through a series of mufflers in the area where the old turbocharger used to be, significantly reducing engine noise.  In hopes of reducing prop noise, at least one was modified to use an experimental five blade propeller that was said to have been stolen from a Sea Fury parked on the ramp at Reno.  Affectionally called Blunderbolts because they flew low and slow at night hoping to stumble onto a target, these airplanes sported a distinctive SEA over black paint scheme and often worked in pairs.  One would carry specialized pods of parachute flares while the other had a more typical anti equipment/anti personnel load out.  The airplanes carrying the flares were called either Sunderbolts or Lightningbolts because they turned the night into day so that the guy flying the armed version had some hope of actually hitting something besides a water buffalo out for an evening stroll.  The jury is out as to whether these two versions of the airplane you are so ably modeling were as successful as legends tell us because none survived the war.  Or at least none survived that anyone will admit.  In the last few years, there have been several unconfirmed reports of at least one pair of Blunderbolts operating at night out of Area 51, working with a similarly camoed, nicely restored B-58.  And a decade or so before that, an oddly painted, much modified P-47 raised eyebrows when it arrived unannounced at Oshkosh only to be immediately covered with a fumigation tent by several fit young men with crewcuts and sunglasses then flown out in the wee hours of the night before anyone could actually see it.  It was said to have won several awards for authenticity, but did it?  Obviously, there are no known photographs of any of these airplanes so you will have take my word for it.  I would cite my sources, but I doubt you have the clearances necessary to see them, being a double foreigner and all.

Why do I have the strange feeling you are depicting me ...? 

Which camo are you going to use? Grey over white? SEA scheme colours?

Well, I only got 10/20 but I'm not really surprised considering the last questions... I have several books about them but I never tried to remind some serial numbers, the name of some crew members or other similar mundane information... Actually I was somewhat disappointed about the type of questions. So huge congratulations to all of you who got 15 or more! I'm impressed!

@thierry laurent  and @Iain we have a quorum!
 
Kind regards,
Paul
 
 

Seconded - really worthwhile reads - and from a source/eye I trust!
 
Iain

I didn't even bother. Zero for twenty would be depressing.

Why do I have the strange feeling you are depicting me ...? 

Which camo are you going to use? Grey over white? SEA scheme colours?