Peter s

A lot of them from that era are pretty respectable. I got a Westland Whirlwind (twin engine fighter not the helicopter) dated '77 and its not exactly many bits but its built up to a pretty decent model. The cannon barrels were beyond saving (I just used plastic rod instead) but no filler needed and a very positive undercarriage. I'll get some pics taken and posted ASAP. I did my first model about 1983 or 84 so your memory goes back further than mine but only by a few years.

Thats a great model.....it was this years Xmas kit from the wife. I started the 1/72 Heinkel 111 at the weekend. A bit simpler than the Wellington but went together really well. I WILL post that one.

Thats probably it.... it seems fine in isolation but you put it next to the new one and its a "hmmmmmm" moment. Some of the older kit was good. It sounds daft but I thought the tail wheel looked sharper. Main undercarriage was a little more positive when initially fitted too. The gap at the wing joints is probably more to do with old moulds than bad design.

Nice job. A couple of months ago I did my first 109 which didn't make me wince too so I know the feeling of success! Its harder than it seems getting the colours just right. An off shade of "grau" is all it takes to make a duff job... and thats before you try and do fuselage mottling.

That’s a really impressive post. I like the subject and the way you have created the period atmosphere, with appropriate posing, background, and the use of monochrome pictures. As this was a build to compare the old & the new, it was interesting for me to see how the ’original’ Hurricane compared to the latest one. I cannot say I am impressed by the nose profile. A few years ago I might have been happy with it, but not now. That’s progress..! Well done again, and thank you for posting. Dominic Thanks. Yes..... side by side the older Hurricane looks as if it has a different engine in it. So far so good. I've a few more completed to photograph but I'm onto the final two and saved the most complex for last. He 111 and Beaufighter back-conversion. The 111 went together wonderfully yesterday so almost mission complete.

I use Vallejo model air so I don't immediately recognise the codes you're quoting (Humbrol I guess?) but they may be right. For early war German planes using RLM70 and 71 (dunkelgraun and swartzgrun) the difference is pretty marginal so much so that at one point they were considered to be the same colour. Have a look at my "old v new stukas" post. I found a very nice original colour pic (from Signal magazine) of a Stuka and the difference between the two shades is pretty minimal. On a black and white photo it may seem one shade of green There's a toss-up with modelling as to "do you go for max accuracy" or "do I make the prettiest model". I fall in somewhere between so would have no qualms darkening or lightening one or both colours if the increased contrast looks better. I find even on preserved examples there's a range of actual colours. I recently posted some pics of Just Jane (Lancaster) next to a Mosquito. Despite being allegedly the same shade of green on both they were quite different. Add in scale colour effect and a bit of sun fading and there is a margin for each colour.

Technically the movie tank isn't a Tiger... its a T55 in a tiger costume but you could use a real Tiger easily enough or combine the Tiger upper hull with T55 running gear. I converted a 1/16 Sherman into Oddballs tank and that was fun.

A variation on the theme is the much delayed "vintage classics". I've had the savoia marchetti sm 79 & HS 129 on advance order for nearly 2 years now! They don't take your money until the kits arrive...... but even so.

That makes a lot of sense. I did one of the RAF SAR old tool versions and did a pretty good job. Thats why I was so surprised at the problems I had with the AEW version. Nothing fitted properly yet I'd had no issues with the previous one. I'd done both the Commando and SAR versions of the new tool and both are excellent. I heard helicopters don't sell as well which is a shame because I'd love a few more.

There's a lot to be said for styrene! Resin does have its place. Resin figures always look vastly more lifelike than styrene ones. This is my old website I still keep active (I don't model for money any more and 1/16 is too much like hard work) http://www.precision-panzer.moonfruit.com/figure-galleries/4528576400 Most of the tanks used resin conversation parts to turn a handful of 1/16 plastic RC toys into decent models. I used to find the quality of resin varied massively. If it was newly cast it could be quite durable with a slight elasticity to it. Old resin becomes really brittle. I guess there's variation in the quality of the individual resin too. One advantage it does have is that you can home mould. I have a friend who used to cast parts for me in his shed. Superglue can be a nightmare. A trick I learnt was to slightly dampen one surface (water speeds the binding which is why it loves fingers) and to only use the gel stuff. Breathe onto one surface (or have a wet sponge you lightly touch), put a little blob of superglue gel on a pallet, use tweezers to pick up the first part, touch the glue, touch the other part. Put it down on a teflon oven tray. I still get problems but not as many as I used to.

I've recommended it before but the BIG tamiya razor saw might look like you could cut Admiral Nelson's leg off in 30 secs (actually I think you could..... ) but you can do quite delicate work with it and it makes short work off resin plugs. https://www.modelsport.co.uk/index.php?product_id=393340&gclid=Cj0KCQjw0Mb3BRCaARIsAPSNGpV6XOZVhjVoHq2rjAJTzny19koA_7nuK3FvWPrdlpxowkkZf_wO2nwaAgD4EALw_wcB T2B is right. The resin dust can certainly induce nasty variants of asthma. Arguably any fine dust that penetrates deep into the lungs is cancer territory (my day job) if the body can't get rid of it again. Certainly sawdust has a significant occupational cancer risk, MDF dust because of the added formaldehyde in the glue is especially nasty. Most dust masks are pretty ineffective. If you want to be really safe I'd say go for something rated for organic solvent vapour (which may be difficult at the moment due to covid). That said don't panic too much.... I don't bother with a mask for small bits of resin like 1/72 pilots. I used to build in 1/16 with resin and really should have been more careful though.

I hate wheels 😢 even when they look good they're boring to paint. There's usually a few hanger queens on my shelf waiting for tyres and canopy lines to be painted.. Best I've found is to paint the discs first, then Tamiya rubber black paint with quite a bit of extra alcohol to thin. Let the paint flow around the disc almost by capillary action and you normally get a neat effect. It dries very fast too so doesn't stick when you put the model down. Newspaper adhering to the wheels via wet paint isn't a good look! (I don't paint on newspaper for this reason: Wilco oven trays are great) A thin dark wash on the disc and legs helps pull out detail too.

That looks so close to the real thing its not true. Really nice work. I had first hand experience with the ones based at Boulmer (same flying duck insignia) and their's were often very dirty. To second Dark Earth you've got the panel lines just right.

And post 3: Normally I'm not bothered whether my props spin or not but with some luck the prop on the new tool is a great spinner. I picked up a tip from Andreas Fey who posts amazing pics on this forum and used an airbrush to spin the prop while I took pics. To add to the final mix of pics I made some Czech masters resin pilots, scratched some chocks from left over styrene and used a mix of black and white, "vintage" and unfiltered photoshop pics. Enjoy! /media/tinymce_upload/df91c6adb04e2d23213865117349877e.jpg/media/tinymce_upload/422706e8dee3c276484fc7ffeb2dd912.jpg/media/tinymce_upload/91df72e01d43077955313b4312567d0c.jpg/media/tinymce_upload/631fcaa9786dca87ddeeb58322b988a0.jpg/media/tinymce_upload/b760e6c6fc2e55225565b46bbc959904.jpg/media/tinymce_upload/5b28144060f03089ffa2861683b1dba0.jpg/media/tinymce_upload/c99ee5849cee6d474e2727b87166bc74.jpg/media/tinymce_upload/5b8dbfafc4211791877a35f489ea0317.jpg/media/tinymce_upload/1558e1b7bb0b5948bed5405be4db5d6e.jpg/media/tinymce_upload/92afd286d04121ab353e2b77b9bb2d5d.jpg/media/tinymce_upload/109e6c5789fed9d0952e8a930999bee0.jpg

Post 2: The brilliant new tool 1/72 Hurricane has the fabric wing. Pluses and minuses to this. The big plus is that the surface detail allows for some subtle shading and detail work. It was a common export variant so lots of potential for Finnish and Belgian Hurricanes etc. Downside is that is a very early war version more Battle of France than battle of Britain. A new tool version with the metal wings would be a really good addition to the airfix stable. However, the starter kit version comes with Battle of Britain decals so unusually I built it with the Airfix decals rather than go down the xtradecal route. To team up with it I found a "50th anniversary of the battle of Britain" Hurricane II on eBay. That dates it to the mid-90s. /media/tinymce_upload/79bfb124823abed5ef51004af0e4cda2.jpg Box art shows an 8x .303 version. Whats INSIDE the box however is 4x 20mm cannon version with instructions to cut the cannons off. This kit does NOT come from the Golden age of airfix and has pretty minimal surface detail. That actually turned into a plus as once you cut the cannon barrels off you need to get rid of the cannon bulges too. These sanded straight off. I ended up with horrendous gaps between the upper wings and fuselage sides. Never in the field of human conflict has some much filler been squirted into a hurricane. It just kept eating and eating the stuff. In the end I gave up and used a bit of D-day stripe to make larger than average black none slip details on the inner wings and covered the cracks that way. That apart it actually built up OK and looks like a Hurricane. Here's the two side by side with the new tool showing its wing detail at the front and the older kit behind. /media/tinymce_upload/565981212849ff3afaf363bd5e5b08d6.jpg I'm a big fan of the 1960s movie Battle of Britain and one thing I like about the film is how dirty their planes are. Probably overweathered but its a great look and one I copied on these planes. A tiny amount of black pigment powder on your finger rubbed over the decals really dirties things up. Unsurpisingly the older kit decals were in a bad way but the grey fuselage letters and polish insignia were still useable so I teamed them up with new roundels from the spares bags.

Post 1: I rather enjoyed comparing the old and new tool Stukas last month so did the same again with two Hurricanes. I actually finished then a few weeks ago so I'm going to jump to the finished models pretty fast but post everything this afternoon. I've ALMOST finished the Battle of Britain project - just a Beaufighter and a Heinkel left to do. I'm more or less back at work though so progress has slowed while I crawl around on the floor with tape to mark off 2 metre bays..... and get interviewed by Sky news (really 😆 that was weird!) Here goes.... hope the mods approve the pics fast.

Hi David, I often use a few light coats of varnish as I go along. Partially I find it adds a bit of protection to the coats when masking off and partially it can even out variations in "shine" between different colours. Its not the first time I've done something like a spitfire and got quite a matt finish to the green but a more satin dark earth and I prefer them to both look the same when I shade/weather etc. Its not essential by any means just the habit I've got into. In part I used to use a nastier type of acrylic varnish and I had a few bad reactions between varnish and paint so I tended to get the varnish on early knowing if there's going to be a problem I find it earlier. I switched to Vallejo spray varnish and never had an issue again.

I bought this one by accident too. I've been tripped up by the new red box containing a very old kit several times. Most recently I posted one in my "old v new stuka" thread. TBH the old Stuka was still a great kit. I hate to say it but I TOTALLY murdered this one though. I just could not get the lower cockpit windows in. I bought the new tool RAF SAR kit but saved all the extra bits from the AEW version and combined the two to make a naval SAR version. I think the pics are still up for that one on the product page. If I was you (and this is merely advice) I do more or less the same. Buy the new tool and use the extra bits from this kit to make a new tool AEW version. I know you'll end up spending £20 more than you planned but the new tool is just SOOOOO much better you'll end up with a far better - and rare - final model.

Just jane: /media/tinymce_upload/c8784d00ccb510a63d6bf2ce03a4b961.jpg And the mozzie formerly at the Yorks Air museum now being restored in Lincs /media/tinymce_upload/3f256463afef3799389a38b3a2fa0c54.jpg A more olive green which looks better with grey.

The mods have been a bit slow approving pics recently but I'll post "Just Jane" and the mozzie pics as a 2nd post and you can see yourself. Its not a huge difference but they're not the same colour. Paul Brown makes a good point about Azure. The vallejo one is so dark its not true. I mix mine about 50/50 with sky blue to make a much lighter colour and find it much easier on the eye. Paints fade in combat so if you go a shade or two lighter its OK.

You can do very good work with reasonably inexpensive gear: I've had a few very expensive airbrushes in my time but do 95% of my work with cheap chinese double action ones costing less than £15. The only time I get my Aiwta out is for really delicate work like mottling late war German fighters etc. My compressor is similar to this one: https://www.everythingairbrush.com/product/ab-as06-mini-diaphragm-air-compressor-for-airbrushing/ That should pair up well with this sort of kit (which looks almost identical to what you have... I suspect the same factory makes a lot under different brand names). Your brush is a very good choice for a starter set. https://www.everythingairbrush.com/product/ab-180-professional-precision-double-action-airbrush-kit/ and give you a very competent set up for less than £100. You can find the same sort of things on eBay for less. "Everything airbrush" is a reputable company. The most recent models I've uploaded are the "old v new stukas" and a couple of 1/72 Bf109s. Both were painted with one of these: https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Professional-0-2mm-Dual-Action-Airbrush-Art-Paint-Spray-Gun-Gravity-Needle-Kit/401967339293?ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&_trksid=p2057872.m2749.l2649 £24 for an airbrush. I've described them as AK47s. Not the best around but cheap, tough and reliable. Also easy to clean which is maybe the most important thing if a 10 year old is using them. I generally use Vallejo paints and warm water and fairy liquid is just about good enough to clean it if you clean it quickly.

I've just bought vallejo aw set 71145 I think and it include a quite superb chart/poster listing of all as far as I can tell raf Colour schemes along with bs an vallejo paint codes I use model air but be careful with some of their shades. If you read the article I posted the guy makes a comment about the BS dark green shade varying. I really noticed this when I went to see Just Jane last Feb. The Lanc is painted in a quite green shade green which looks OK with brown. Behind her was a mosquito with a much more olive shade of green. Two very well preserved aircraft that both looked "right" but both clearly using different shades. The vallejo is similar to the Just Jane shade of darker pine green. It looks OK with dark earth but not right with ocean grey. I mix the Vallejo BS dark green 50/50 with US dark olive drab (71.316) and get a colour that looks "right" with both dark earth and ocean grey. My mix is identical to Tamiya XF-81 RAF Dark Green 2. Most of the rest of their RAF and FAA colours are pretty sound. The German ones however I don't trust. Their RAL71 dunkelgrun is very brown. I added 1 part in 5 grey violet for my "old ve new stuka build" & I think I improved on the original colour quite a bit. Their grau-violet and grau-green don't have enough contrast with each other and both seem very dark. The brown-violet is more like RAf dark earth than the shade I see on most German late war aircraft too. Again, easily fixed but its worth looking at as many real colour pics as you can and not totally trusting what comes out of the bottle.

Thats a gorgeous job. I often steer clear of all black because I think it looks too "simple" and also makes weathering near impossible. You've shown that isn't true at all. On a tangent where there any bits left over? The reason I ask is a US modelling friend recently bought a vac-formed 1/48 Beaufort (cheap.... too cheap.... ) and surprise surprise it lacks all detail. He need things like guns for the turrets, even undercarriage. I know the 1/72 Blenheim 1 gifts you 2 spare K guns and a .303 Browning. Is the same true of the 1/48?

I would guess that brush manufacturers either don't really want to be associated with the fur trade, or it's more difficult to obtain fur products because of increasing opposition to the fur trade (or both). I assume so... TBH I sort of agree with it too. The sable brush is nicer but I'd rather not support fur farms either. They're bad enough in Europe. God knows what a Far Eastern sable farm is like...... I got some "sable substitute" brushes from eBay the other day (000 for pilots) and they worked very nicely. I haven't tried reforming the point in hot water yet.

I found this the other day when trying to work out why the "heck" in Nov 1940 would the air ministry resume painting the port wing black (specifically Westland Whirlwind based search) What I found is an amazing resource for colour schemes: http://www.theworldwars.net/resources/resource.php?r=camo_rafww2 It doesn't answer every question but it suggests that generally spitfire wheel wells were painted in the underside scheme whereas generally Hurricanes weren't among other facts.