Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Kev wrote:

Thanks Mike, but you're placing way too much confidence in my airbrushing skills! Still, the third option is just greens over 65 and looks a little boring compared to the other two options on the sheet, so I'll probably be giving the mottling a go. I've got a problem with my compressor that prevents me spraying much below 20 PSI, so that limits what I can accomplish a little bit.

 

Kev, the thing is not so much the airpressure, as the amount of paint your'e spraying. Matty and I were looking at some pics where you can see the sprayer just leaned over the wing to shoot paint, with a classic "hard edge" nearest the wing edge, and tapering off to a classic"soft edge" towards the field of the wing. Basically showing how the guy sprayed as he walked around the plane. This was a DAK Me-109E BTW. Certainly not IPMS material!! :lol: So, me thinks, try to vary how much you open the aperature when spraying, and you'll get little mottles( not liddle models) Looking at BoB pics, focus on just the spray techniques on the 109s sides. As an aside, you can use RLM 70,OR 71, with 02, as this was experimantal cammo early on in the BOB. There is a definite transition from 70,71,65, to lighter colors, as the Luftwaffle became less concerned with being caught on the ground, as opposed to seen in the air. If you have Squadron signal 109 v. 1 look on p. 36, 40, 41 bottom, maybe these will help illustrate what I'm saying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The fuselage has the right length, but the proportions seem not quite right.

I must disagree with you there, Hans. All real '109 fuselages were the same between cockpit and rudder post, aside from their radio hatch doors and a few small access panels. If you mate a fuselage half from a 1/32 Hasegawa '109 E kit to one from a Matchbox '109 E or from any of the 1/32 Hasegawa '109 G kits -- all of which match reliable 1/32-scale drawings -- you'll see that the Hasagawa E's rear fuselage is nearly a scale foot too short between its cockpit and rudder post.

 

Charles Metz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are right Charles; when you take the rear of the moving part of the canopy as your reference point, the rear fuslage is too short by about a scale foot (11 mm metric) and the area in front of that point about the same distance too long. When I made that statement I was referring to sketch 6 where the author of the article, dr. Peter Tuzin used exactly this reference point for his kit reviews. Perhaps I should have explained myself more clearly: "seem not quite right" was meant as an understatement.

 

Hans

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You are right Charles; when you take the rear of the moving part of the canopy as your reference point, the rear fuslage is too short by about a scale foot (11 mm metric) and the area in front of that point about the same distance too long. When I made that statement I was referring to sketch 6 where the author of the article, dr. Peter Tuzin used exactly this reference point for his kit reviews. Perhaps I should have explained myself more clearly: "seem not quite right" was meant as an understatement.

Hans,

 

Thanks for your very clear and courteous reply. I must admit that I didn't know until now that the Hasegawa kit is too long ahead of its cockpit by an amount that causes the kit's overall length to be essentially correct. Perhaps the rear-fuselage error captured my attention because it's more obvious to my eye and is easier to check against drawings and other kits, due to the way the Hasegawa kit is engineered..

 

I consider any day in which I learn something to have been well spent. Thank you for making this a good day!

 

Charles Metz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the enlightening discussion Charles and Hans. So it seems that this kit is too short in the rear and too long in the nose. I was prepared to tackle the rear fuselage, but it seems if I do so, the entire fuselage will then be too long. I don't feel I'm up to fixing the nose issues, so it seems best to leave it all alone. This will give me a detailed but dimensionally inaccurate model, which I can live with. Still, it gives me a good excuse to search out the Matchbox kit and save up for the upcoming Eduard one.

 

Any Aussie LSP'ers out there wanting to part with their Matchbox Emils? :rolleyes:

 

Kev

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for the enlightening discussion Charles and Hans. So it seems that this kit is too short in the rear and too long in the nose. I was prepared to tackle the rear fuselage, but it seems if I do so, the entire fuselage will then be too long. I don't feel I'm up to fixing the nose issues, so it seems best to leave it all alone. This will give me a detailed but dimensionally inaccurate model, which I can live with. Still, it gives me a good excuse to search out the Matchbox kit and save up for the upcoming Eduard one.

 

Any Aussie LSP'ers out there wanting to part with their Matchbox Emils? :rolleyes:

 

Kev

Hi Kev,

I would if I could. The Box Hill swap meet is on 2nd March, you might just get lucky there if you can hold on that long.

Also, you could try a post on http://www.aussiemodeller.com/

 

Cheers

Tony

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Kev,

I would if I could. The Box Hill swap meet is on 2nd March, you might just get lucky there if you can hold on that long.

Also, you could try a post on http://www.aussiemodeller.com/

 

Cheers

Tony

 

Thanks Tony. Yep, I'll be at Box Hill. You? If so, we should catch up. I'll check with Matty about him attending too.

 

I still intend building the Hasegawa kit, but I'd love to build the Matchbox one too. However, it has no bearing on this build so I'm in no hurry. Still haven't started this one yet - too busy flappin' me gums about it...

 

:rolleyes:

 

Kev

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks Tony. Yep, I'll be at Box Hill. You? If so, we should catch up. I'll check with Matty about him attending too.

 

I still intend building the Hasegawa kit, but I'd love to build the Matchbox one too. However, it has no bearing on this build so I'm in no hurry. Still haven't started this one yet - too busy flappin' me gums about it...

 

:rolleyes:

 

Kev

 

I think swap meets are my favourite modelling thing to do. I've got a couple of challenges for this one...my wife's birthday the day before, and the kids footy team that I'm assistant coach for might be starting training that morning. I'll let you know closer to the event.

 

Cheers

Tony

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Any Aussie LSP'ers out there wanting to part with their Matchbox Emils? :rolleyes:

 

Kev

Kev

Only just caught up on this thread. I think I've got two Matchbox E's in the stash, so I could afford to lose one.

See how you go at Box Hill this w/e. If you strike out drop me a line and we'll work something out.

Cheers

 

Ian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kev

Only just caught up on this thread. I think I've got two Matchbox E's in the stash, so I could afford to lose one.

See how you go at Box Hill this w/e. If you strike out drop me a line and we'll work something out.

Cheers

 

Ian

 

Thanks Ian, I expect I'll be in touch! Postage from WA might be steep though...

 

Kev

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks Ian, I expect I'll be in touch! Postage from WA might be steep though...

 

Kev

It's all relative, mate.

Keep in touch. I'll work out the postage as an exercise in the mean time. I'll send a PM.

Cheers

 

Ian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's all relative, mate.

Keep in touch. I'll work out the postage as an exercise in the mean time. I'll send a PM.

Cheers

 

Ian

 

Hi Ian, no luck at Box Hill - did you manage to work out what the postage would be from WA?

 

In the meantime, some actual modelling! I've finally started this thing and, despite the plethora of AM parts I've manage to collect for it, I still hope for it to be relatively quick build. I've got the engine assembled already:

 

post-3071-1206333867.jpg

 

At this stage I plan to display the engine panels open as a way of masking any visible issues with the nose length or shape. We'll see...

 

I moved on to the cockpit, cracking open the True Details set along the way, only the discover that my sample of the cockpit tub had a broken back:

 

post-3071-1206333885.jpg

 

post-3071-1206333876.jpg

 

You can see the beginnings of some repairs in the first photo, but I don't think I'll be able to hide it altogether. I'll never get the resin top part to fit back on cleanly, so I'm going to scratch one from sheet styrene to ensure the mating surfaces are both flat.

 

More soon...

 

Kev

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice to see you off to a start Kev!

 

I'm sure that bit of scratch building shouldn't be too tricky. Shame about the resin being damaged though...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Dave. I've fixed it, but in my haste I cocked up the alignment between the parts:

 

post-3071-1206342255.jpg

 

It's not actually as bad as it looks in the photo, as the harsh overhead lighting is accentuating it, but it's definitely out of whack. Will I ever learn? :rolleyes:

 

Kev

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've managed to sneak in a little more work over the last couple of days, and here are the results.

 

post-3071-1206649176.jpg

 

I can't say I'm really that impressed with the True Details cockpit set. It's my first go at using a complete resin update set, so perhaps my inexperience is to blame for the problems I've had. The set doesn't strike me as overly accurate either, but a vast improvement over the kit's offering. In the photo above, I've mixed True Details resin with some items from the Eduard PE set.

 

post-3071-1206649227.jpg

 

I've been experimenting with thinning Gunze acrylics with lacquer thinner, and it seems to be working well. It definitely seems to flow better out of the airbrush, giving a smoother, more even coverage, with none of the dusty look that acrylics can take on. I'm also hoping the finish is more durable when cured, but I doubt what you thin it with has any impact on that.

 

post-3071-1206649239.jpg

 

The photo above shows my attempt to start detailing the engine, but I'm not sure I'll persist. For a start, the engine itself looks positively anorexic compared to photos of the real thing, and I'm not sure a few bits of PE and some lengths of copper wire are really going to improve it much. The Eduard PE is also driving me nuts. Someone said (I think it was Brian Cauchi) that it's almost easier to scratch-build a lot of this stuff than wrangle with all the PE and resin sets, and I'm beginning to agree after this lot!

 

Still, I'm hoping it will all look OK after some detail painting.

 

Kev

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...