inkpen

I've recently taken to building AFV kits in various scales having been a largely military aircraft builder for some years. Aside from older kits or the newer ones such as the Airfix Sherman Firefly and Tiger (which feature a choice between 'one piece' running gear and multi-part 'wheels and track', many kits feature tracks which are multi-part assembles featuring tracks broken down by individual 'links' or a mixture of individual links and track 'sections'. I must admit to having difficulty with achieving a satisfactory result using these multi-part tracks, specifically in joining these assembles so as to achieve the look of continuous track. I find it difficult to avoid poor fit especially between individual links around the drive sprocket and tensioner wheels and from there to the generally horizontal upper/lower track lengths. My approach to fitting the running gear as a whole has been developing over time and while improvements have been made results are still barely acceptable. My current approach may be summarised as; to pay careful attention to teeth alignment or similar when assembling drive sprockets and tensioners - teeth or similar being aligned across the sprocket/tensioner to attach individual links to these assemblies before-attachment to the vehicle taking care to establish and maintain correct alignment of these parts in accordance with the previously aligned teeth or similar to dry fit the sprocket and tensioner enabling the 'multi-tracked' parts provided for [eg] the bottom/top of the track run, generally on a bottom to top sequence and once fit is established and necessary adjustment made then using liquid adhesive to affix the whole assembly However careful I try to be, I find it difficult to achieve a good result especially between the upper/lower track and the track on the drive sprockets/tensioners. I have not formulated an approach to tracks featuring individual links yet, but I have a few kits where an injection moulded 'straight edge' is provided to help ensure the track links are correctly aligned but it appears to me that fitting the assembled track, or more likely parts of the assembly, would need to happen before the liquid adhesive drys which presents the danger of the track falling to bits on fitment and/or unintended sagging or breakage occurring following placement. I'm sure there are 'tricks of the trade' which enable better results to be achieved and I wonder if any Airfix Club Members would care to share their approach - I'm certain there must be many!

Interesting thread this one. It seems to centre on the question of how 'accurate' are paints that are supplied with eg Starter Sets as well as those suggested in kits from the general range. I must say that today's Airfix kits make very good suggestions as to colours and generally make it clear where suggestions approximate to colours applied in real life. Of course as the Humbrol range of paints grows and reduces over time and/or research suggest different finishes to those suggested in the past but which may very well still be current in those older kits, suggestions change. It's up to the modeller what approach they'll take. Interestingly, there are many paint manufacturers who have reputations for producing paints which are said to be matched or based on original colours/finishes. But even the most cursory review will show differences between them. Producing a model is as much about what seems to the maker to be 'right' whether this results from individual research and interpretation, following the guidance of 'experts' or adopting the suggestions made by the manufacturer. At the end of the day individual choice determines colours used. In terms of authenticity or accuracy, you can choose from any number of luftwaffe colours all proclaiming 'authenticity' but for which no specimen of said colour exists eg 'braun violet'. I'm sure this isn't the only example. Choosing colours is part of the hobby and 'accuracy' may often be a debateable point! The key thing is are you happy with your finish.

i donate finshed models to a number of charity shops where, I'm told, they sell well.

This is one of my favourite Airfix kits. I've built a fair few covering the period from release in the mid-70s until now and I expect that I'll continue. I've always thought it to be a good kit, promising all levels of builder a good model. I've never finished one in the green, but the model fetured looks good in that colour. I think Airfix proposed an all brown finish too. Mine were/are sand and black. Was it one of those models that Airfix assimilated into its range back in the mid seventies - I can't remember the name of the original firm but do recall that the kits including Bedford Portees and US M3s were super to build and resulted in good models. I've recently got hold of the 1/32 Grant and am looking forward to building it!

I note the flexibility in colours used, although my preference is for the black! Thanks.

I've always liked the look of the Crusader, and this stems from having got the Airfix kit when it was first released. I've also bought it a few more times as an adult builder and I do still like the kit. But I've noticed that the colour scheme recommended has changed from a sand and black to a sand and olive. I'm not an 'experienced' armour builder, but would like to ask why Airfix have gone from a black to an olive for the camoflague - perhaps the change reflects a change 'in the field'? While looking for the answer on-line, I noticed that some kit manufacturers suggests a white turret and camoflage indicated a 'SOC 1 C' whatever that might be! I'd appreciate any knowledge about this so that I may adopt such advice in my latest attempt at the kit!

Generally speaking, the kits produced to current standards enable a proficient builder using appropriate tools, adhesives and paints and applying a methodical approach and patience to make good quality 'replicas' almost every time. But sometimes, I can find this a bit of a slog - almost like work! OK, what I put in is reflected in the finished model, but sometimes the enjoyment along the way is lacking. And I'm sorry to say the failure to complete a kit more coomon than I'd like to admit. But I do enjoy building the older, more toy like models produced in the sixties and early seventies. Aurora [now Polar Lights] were one of my favourite brands as the firm commonly produced much of the Irwing Allen programme hardware from series like Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea, Lost in Space, and Land of the Giants and the figures from the Universal 'horror' films eg Dracula, The Mummy, Frankenstein etc. I still get great satisfaction from [a] getting a complete kit at an affordable price from web-based auction sites [b] 'fixing it up' as we'd say when kids, and [c] finishing it! OK, not to very great standards of finish but the result is an enjoyable build tapping memories from years gone by and much interest from people who see the results. I generally donate the end products to local charity shops where, I'm told, they provoke much interest and sell well! I wonder if other kit-builders do the same and would be delighted to hear what subjects are made and/or which manufacturers favoured. I also enjoy the older Airfix and Revell kits too but I must say that I still regard FROG kits to be 'serious undertakings' just as I did when I was a lad! Don't get me wrong, I do appreciate and enjoy building and finishing the quite superb modern kit, but as I grow older the-older subjects push more buttons! I wonder what others think?

Interesting question. From experience, I'd say that it's down to personal preferences. I was a dyed in the wool enamel user until within the past three years. I decided to complete an Airfix 'Starter Kit' which included the small pots of acrylic paint. I found that if these were thinned using the same brand acrylic thinners, and successive coats built up, just as when using enamels, good finishes were generally achievable. Even whites, yellows and reds produced good results. I had no difficulty finishing clear parts eg canopy frames provided these had been washed prior to painting. I brush paint exclusively and found that you can paint successive colours without 'lifting' previous finishes both on a large and detail level. I generally don't mix enamel with acrylic and recall that you can't enamel over acrylic [or vice versa] as the top surface breaks up if not immediately then over time. When seeking a gloss finish, I find enamel preferable to acrylic as the 'sheen' is more pronounced on drying. I've found some acrylic metallic finishes present difficulties compared to enamel metallics, but this is infrequent. Some acrylic brands are great to use having good opacity even after thinning. Modern acrylics are so much better that they were even a short time ago, and many are formulated to allow satisfactory brush painting to. In short, modern acrylics compare well with enamels and with both a good result depends upon thorough agitation before use! I've an egg timer and agitate for five minutes with enamel particularly having been stirred to break up settling. A small coin added to the tin also helps thoroughly agitate too. Small metal ball-bearings can be bought to add to acrylics which help ensure the paint is appropriately agitated before use. The answer is to try them, perhaps using a 'starter kit' and see how you get on!

The 1/32 'Rommel's Half Track' kit suggests use of Humbrol Linen as the overall exterior colour with a Dark Grey interior and exterior camoflagued areas. The Linen is too light to represent the Dark Yellow paint used and the Dark Grey camoflague is simply wrong. My research indicates that the vehicle would have been supplied to the theatre in Dark Grey overall which was sprayed Dark Yellow in-theatre. The interior was left in the original Dark Grey. Wear and tear in the harsh desert environment lead to the original Dark Grey showing through the oversprayed Dark Yellow in places, particularly in those areas featuring sharp edges, as a result of sand erosion. I've seen lots of photographs of Rommel in or near his vehicle and have never seen what could be taken to be camoflague on it, although deterioration of the paint scheme can be made out as described above. My questions are: 1 what paint could be used to best represent the Dark Yellow/Dark Grey 2 is my research correct in that the Dark Grey should be used to represent a slight removal of the Dark Yellow through sand erosion, as above which would suggest a heavily weathered vehicle. Responses would be most welcome.

I bought this kit on release way back when. The external rivet approach to external detail was then on the way out but as an 11 year old I can't say it bothered me. I recall that the upper wing surface to fuselage join was anything but and almost provided my first use of filler. But wiping away all those rivets at that spot would have left too much of a smooth spot! The wheel well, being left 'open' resulted in a yawning great hole, but as this was underneath wouldn't be noted by me or onlookers. I remember even then that the canopy seemed too small, but what an improvement over the older Airfix Hurricane! I later moved on to the 1/24 kit on release which was really good then and having done one that I picked up at a jumble sale for £5 recently I was still impressed by ease of assembly of the chunky parts, but some areas were a challenging fit! Anyway, a pleasure to see the nicely finished 1/72 kit again! These older Airfix clearly are of their time and not really comparable to modern kits, but their assembly almost always provides me with a pleasurable build and often resurfaced memories of those times as well.

I do like the Mitsubishi Zero in all models and types. Although there are and always have been lots of kits of this aircraft, the latest 1/48 scale from Academy is the best of a good bunch. The previous best, the Eduard versions only just squeezed into second place. On to my question... Once upon a time wheel wells and cockpit interior colours were often called out as that metallic blue/green colour 'Aotake'. Well current practice is to colour the cockpit interior a green not that different to US Interior Green, with Aotake used behind the rear cockpit former. I can live with this as there are lots of internet images which support its use. But what about wheel wells? Aotake is often seen to be used by builders who make their builds available on YouTube for example. But the most recent kit releases suggest the amber-grey as used on the exterior. I suspect this suggestion is based upon extensive research, and I've read such on the 'web'. I myself tend to go for the amber-grey option as this could have been applied 'all over' at the end of an airframe build and the Japanese if anything kept colouration simple! What colour do you use and why?

Don't do ships, but got a Belfast kit from the charity shop for a 'shake and bake' build. I thought that for a kit of the early 1970s it appeared quite good - but I guess a lot of the detail was 'overscale'. From internet searches, it seems the kit is based upon a late 1930s fit, what with all the life rafts and the Walrus spotter aircraft. Were the stern lifeboat fittings a continuing feature of the ship? I've looked at many images and sometimes they appear and sometimes they don't. I guess they would continue as a feature until the first refit at least which from the Belfast website was around 1942. If I left these off of my model, would this be wrong? Otherwise it's out of the box!

being honest to myself, i get more from doing old(er) kits/models as they have less 'little bits', basic decals/transfers matching basic painting schemes, often need some research to overcome loose fit eg dihedral angles etc and much filling and sanding too! 'fixing up' an older model in my own time to my own satisfaction is an enjoyable pastime, and this includes (a) settling on my next build - currently, the 1970s Revell Ju 88 c-6 'Nachtjager' is nearly done (b) finding out about the aircraft and/or model © picking the final finish and colours/techniques I may use and (d) getting on with it! i enjoy the whole process and the finished item goes to the charity shop where a sale is guaranteed! don't get me wrong, i appreciate the 'new' kits available and enjoy building them to but the standards i aspire to achieve and techniques i employ are generally quite different. i don't treat my hobby like a job!

be nice to see a yellow moulding using the 'hard' plastic as once was

my mum bought me three airfix kits for my 6th birthday, as I recall they were the corsair, mustang and me 262. this was 1967 when kits were 'models' and considered 'toys' and 'one size fits all' no starter kits then!