SEARCH FINESCALE.COM

Enter keywords or a search phrase below:

The group build to end all group builds - THE GREAT WAR

141868 views
1091 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    April 2006
  • From: ON, Canada
Posted by jgeratic on Monday, April 25, 2011 1:26 AM

ruddratt, Thx for the link -  I have bookmarked it for future reference.  The D.III is pretty much same aircraft as the first mark, except for an extra 30hp and balanced ailerons and elavators.

regards,

Jack

  • Member since
    April 2011
Posted by discordian on Monday, April 25, 2011 6:24 AM

Ooh - count me in for my first FSM forums group build.

I have an old Matchbox 1:76 Char b.1 bis/Renault FT-17 mini diorama kit.

The Char B1 is post WWI but I can do the FT-17 and diorama portions for this build and the Char B.1 after.

 

  • Member since
    June 2010
  • From: Austin, TX
Posted by DoogsATX on Monday, April 25, 2011 7:14 AM

Pupdate time!

She's now officially a monoplane!

Also finished the leather padding, I think.

One thing about this kit - actual fit is proving WAY better than test fitting. A lot of the pieces don't "hold" together very well, so it's very hard to test more than one piece at a time (the idea of taping up the whole basic plane give me chills). Thankfully, it's all fitting, and fitting well.

The only challenge so far is going to be the cowl, is having problems joining the rest of the plane over the engine. It's like the engine is protruding by 2mm too many. Need to decide if I want to try to mess with the mounting post, or just shave around the tops of the cylinders (which are invisible anyway).

On the Bench: 1/32 Trumpeter P-47 | 1/32 Hasegawa Bf 109G | 1/144 Eduard MiG-21MF x2

On Deck:  1/350 HMS Dreadnought

Blog/Completed Builds: doogsmodels.com

 

  • Member since
    March 2007
  • From: Michigan
Posted by tonka on Monday, April 25, 2011 11:24 AM

That Pup looks ready to bark!!  Great work!!  The cockpit and wood struts really stand out!

]

  • Member since
    August 2003
  • From: Connecticut, USA
Posted by Nachtflieger on Monday, April 25, 2011 3:35 PM

Very nice job on the cockpit, and the wood sections of your Pup Doogs. Looks great.

Nate

 

 

 

  • Member since
    October 2009
Posted by PANZERWAFFE on Monday, April 25, 2011 6:45 PM

DOOGS - That cockpit is excellent Yes

MARC - Did you get those spark plugs gaped yet?

I dont build AC but I am tempted after seeing some of the work and detail you guys are starting to put in.  Keep up the good work.

JGERATIC1 - The figure is awesome!  The second wash on his mug really did it.  I really like the base and the name plate, looks great.

TD4438 - Great job on the MK I.  Did not realize it was 1/72, very nice.

SMEAGOL - Your little MK I is also very nice.  Two MK I's down, motivating me too start my IV soon.

Here is the long awaited sprue shot of the MK IV.

Not many parts in this kit but there will be a few corrections too make here and there.  Comes with four sprues and two additional track sprues.  The biggest down fall I see is the tracks.  Do not like them at all.

Thanks too you guys sending me that link with tracks for these things, I will be ordering a set for this build.  Updates will be coming in the next week or two, just going to try to finish up the Panzerjager GB i'm in.

Everyone keep up the good work.

Rob

  • Member since
    April 2005
  • From: Piscataway, NJ!
Posted by wing_nut on Tuesday, April 26, 2011 8:15 AM

discordian... welcome aboard.  I've added you to the ever growing list.

Doogs, I am 2 pup-dates behind but day-um that's nice.

Rob, looking forward o seeing what you do with that.

Marc  

  • Member since
    February 2010
  • From: Berkeley CA/St. Paul MN
Posted by EBergerud on Tuesday, April 26, 2011 5:12 PM

Des at WWI Aircraft had his "hiccup" on the WNW Pup joining the lower wing. Course you didn't have any trouble with the LA-5 birdcage that drove me bats: maybe you should be a surgeon. Plane is certainly looking nice.

Eric

 

A model boat is much cheaper than a real one and won't sink with you in it.

  • Member since
    June 2010
  • From: Austin, TX
Posted by DoogsATX on Tuesday, April 26, 2011 9:22 PM

EBergerud

Des at WWI Aircraft had his "hiccup" on the WNW Pup joining the lower wing. Course you didn't have any trouble with the LA-5 birdcage that drove me bats: maybe you should be a surgeon. Plane is certainly looking nice.

Eric

I'll be honest, the lower wing is a shockingly poor fit. Seems like I'm encountering a lot of kits lately that just can't be bothered to provide decent, positive location of parts for even rudimentary test-fitting. 

Fortunately the Pup is working pretty well on faith. Things fit better once the preceding parts are locked down.

The fuselage still didn't really want to lay down flush with the wing, but a little Tenax and brute force go a long way (and would make me a terrible surgeon!).

Have crazy respect for Des and anybody with the cajones to PAINT THE WHOLE FRIGGIN' WING before attaching it. I am just not that confident in my abilities...but it also gave me a few options I guess Des didn't have (i.e. brute force + solvent).

On the Bench: 1/32 Trumpeter P-47 | 1/32 Hasegawa Bf 109G | 1/144 Eduard MiG-21MF x2

On Deck:  1/350 HMS Dreadnought

Blog/Completed Builds: doogsmodels.com

 

  • Member since
    January 2003
  • From: Denton, TX
Posted by gnsnow on Tuesday, April 26, 2011 9:59 PM

I put some work into the A7V - I'm well aware of the glaring inaccuracies in the interior, but I'm not too concerned about it as it won't be noticeable after the hull is all sealed up. I'm going to do some more work on the running gear before I call it a night, although I haven't quite decided how to deal with some of the issues in that area just yet ... I've seen the info on landships and have read a couple of other things on the net, but I'm open to any help or info you guys could contribute.

"Artists who seek perfection in everything are those who can attain it in nothing."
   - Eugène Delacroix

  • Member since
    April 2005
  • From: Piscataway, NJ!
Posted by wing_nut on Wednesday, April 27, 2011 7:42 AM

Slowly getting closer to buttoning up the fuselage. Need to put in the controls and wiring on the left side of the pit.

 The formers for the front of the fuselage that hold the engine mounts was a girl dog and a half.  If you look at the slots in the mounts and the notches in the formers as separate pieces you get a mental image that they will, or should, go together in a certain way.  They don't and it take some finagling and test fit, test fit and test fit again to get them just aligned so the engine will sit perfectly centered so the there will be an even space around the spinner.

Extra wiring was added for various cockpit controls and instrument.  The glass instrument faces and bezels are made wire wire wrapped around a punch the same size as the instrument decal to make a ring.  Then the same punch is used to make a clear plastic disk that will be a perfect fit in the ring.  Glue the ring to the panel, apply the decal then put the disk inside the ring.  A drop of future fills the space between the decal and disk making it crystal clear.

Marc  

  • Member since
    February 2006
  • From: Smithers, BC, Canada
Posted by ruddratt on Wednesday, April 27, 2011 9:38 AM

DoogsATX

Have crazy respect for Des and anybody with the cajones to PAINT THE WHOLE FRIGGIN' WING before attaching it.

Doogs, just be thankful you're not working with lozenge camo. Wink The 'pup is looking real nice in spite of the lower wing issues. ....and to be honest, if you get the struts set up properly and all necessary tweaking done before attaching the upper wing, it actually goes quite smoothly.

 

Marc, jaw-dropping work! Yes I should have chimed in earlier about the engine formers. What I did on my Alby was assemble them before any paint was applied anywhere, dry-fitted the assembly inside the fuselage, and taped the halves together while they set up. Made 'em tougher to paint down the road, but a breeze to install when the time came.

Rob, now I can see why you've opted for AM tracks! Wink

gn, definitely looking forward to your build! Yes

Mike

 "We have our own ammunition. It's filled with paint. When we fire it, it makes pretty pictures....scares the hell outta people."

 

  • Member since
    April 2005
  • From: Piscataway, NJ!
Posted by wing_nut on Wednesday, April 27, 2011 1:34 PM

jaw-dropping work!

1st... thanks or that.

As for the rest... NOW YOU TELL ME!Surprise  Someone on another forum mentioned...also after the factCrying, said the cabanes fit into notches in the mounts so they need to be perfect.  Why do I get the feeling I am going to be cussin' like a sailor soon.

 

I did sort of do way you said.  I ended up sanding some of the paint off and getting things lined up in the 2 sides of the fuselage.  Logically since the mount have the engine sitting square and the space behind the spinner is good I think I may be OK.

Marc  

  • Member since
    February 2006
  • From: Smithers, BC, Canada
Posted by ruddratt on Wednesday, April 27, 2011 9:00 PM

Marc (said in my best Maxwell Smart voice), "Sorry about that, chief."  Wink

When I was scouring over all the reviews on some of the WnW kits, they did mention a few instances where the fit was so snug that the thickness of the paint alone could throw it off (happened on my Pfalz cockpit / fuselage assembly). Just an FYI buddy. Yes

On the SE.5 front, got the fuselage halves buttoned up and the lower wing installed. There are 5 separate panels on the upper fuselage that have required some careful fitting, filling, and sanding to get right so far (I'm 3 for 3 with two to go). Should have some pics up soon.

Mike

 "We have our own ammunition. It's filled with paint. When we fire it, it makes pretty pictures....scares the hell outta people."

 

  • Member since
    December 2002
  • From: NYC, USA
Posted by waikong on Wednesday, April 27, 2011 10:28 PM

Ruddatt, Doogs, Marc - just fantastic looking builds so far - those cockpits are gorgeous.

I've started on my 1/48 Dr 1 - a bit smaller than I had expected, so had to break out some serious magnification. Hopefully some pics this weekend.

My website: http://waihobbies.wkhc.net

   

  • Member since
    August 2003
  • From: Connecticut, USA
Posted by Nachtflieger on Thursday, April 28, 2011 3:35 AM

Looking very good Marc. Are you planning on leaving the cowling off to display all the engine detail?

Nate

 

 

 

  • Member since
    April 2005
  • From: Piscataway, NJ!
Posted by wing_nut on Thursday, April 28, 2011 7:07 AM

Thanks Nate,  the two panels are removable so it just depend on my mood that dayStick out tongue

Marc  

  • Member since
    February 2006
  • From: Smithers, BC, Canada
Posted by ruddratt on Thursday, April 28, 2011 9:25 PM

waikong

I've started on my 1/48 Dr 1 - a bit smaller than I had expected, so had to break out some serious magnification. Hopefully some pics this weekend.

I'm definitely looking forward to this one. Been seriously thinking about picking up this kit, so I'll be following your build closely.

Mike

 "We have our own ammunition. It's filled with paint. When we fire it, it makes pretty pictures....scares the hell outta people."

 

  • Member since
    February 2010
  • From: Berkeley CA/St. Paul MN
Posted by EBergerud on Friday, April 29, 2011 11:37 PM

Normal 0

I just finished my first biplane, an Academy Sopwith Camel. Anyone wanting to hear my tales of woe while building this thing and see more pics can check out my entry in the aircraft section. (I did forget to note that I was inspired by Doog’s praise of his old airbrush needle to create a very useful gadget. I have some medical Q-tips that have tight cotton on one end of a 6” wood handle. On the wood end I drilled a hole and inserted a healthy needle which I kept clean with a little jar of acetone. I used the cotton end to moisten with Zap CA “kicker” so I could dab on a very small bit of CA with the needle and instantly apply a kick by flipping the thing around in one hand. Then clean off the tip in the acetone. Helped a lot when rigging.) Instead of going over kit things again, I thought I’d pass along a few observations concerning WWI air warfare. Those with better things to do may want to skip this.

 

First, any notion that aircraft were either unimportant or ignored during the war is simply nonsense. This rubbish was peddled by airpower enthusiasts (especially Billy Mitchell) in the interwar period who honestly believed that bombers could replace armies and navies with the technology of the 1930s. In reality, all armies immediately saw the incalculable value of air reconnaissance and each had over 100 frontline craft in operation in August 1914: French flights probably saved France as their planes traced the unfolding of the Schlieffen plan. For the next four years, attackers considered access to the front as a necessity – without it nobody had a clue concerning the location of enemy strong points especially artillery positions. In the event, this knowledge was inadequate, but without it campaigns like the Somme would have been even more grim or futile than they were. A good army could hide the exact location of an offensive, but nobody could hide their trench line. So it was the importance of the recon aircraft, which proliferated tremendously from day one, that led naturally to a weapon that could shoot them down. Enter the fighter, fist very crude, quickly very deadly. Late in the war when “strategic bombers” and attack planes became important, the need for fighters increased. And, in a war when “success” was largely measured by attrition, the great pilots of the respective sides became heroes in a way that our world can barely comprehend. The Kaiser, in a rare lucid moment, said Richthoven was worth two divisions. When Richthoven’s body was returned for burial in Berlin in 1925 the event was a national holiday and witnessed by tens of thousands Berliners. (The World War I aces have not lost their allure. I doubt many Americans could recognize the name of Richard Bong. You’d get better luck with Eddie Rickenbacker. World War II, unlike World War I, was a general’s war: the brass got the press.) The importance of airplanes was so obvious that the poorest participants in the war, like Russia, Turkey or Serbia, did everything possible to beg borrow or steal airplanes. There wasn’t a theater of war that lacked aircraft entirely.

 

Fighter combat took place largely in the last year and a half of the war. It really took two years to get proper air forces organized. When festivities at Verdun and the Somme showed the importance of airpower, each nation reorganized its forces and greatly increased it’s efforts. It was in mid-1917 or later that the planes we associate with the war arrived (Albatross V,  Fokker Triplane, Fokker D7, SE5, Sopwith Camel, Spad XIII among others.) As the numbers grew so did the size of the combats. The “Fokker Scourge” of 1915 resulted in a few dozen allied losses. “Bloody April” 1917 cost the RFC about 350 planes: later they lost more every month. And the dogfights that began in 1916 with clashes between a couple of squadrons (perhaps twenty planes) developed into some of the most massive air battles in history in 1918 as hundreds of planes entered and left a running battle that could last an entire day. Losses are always hard to track, but certainly over 50% of combat losses in the west took place in the last year of fighting. There were approximately 120,000 aircraft built during the war – perhaps two thirds for training or secondary service. (Half of America’s 400,000 planes built in WWII were trainers, couriers or communication planes.) Some 80,000 were lost, most due to accidents or simple wear and tear.

 

Front line casualties were nevertheless very grim. The Germans usually had the upper hand because they played defense and would rarely engage unless in a good position to do so over their own lines. That also meant a German pilot that survived a crash could come back to service. By and large the French were willing to play a similar game and fought it out when protecting their recon flights or engaging the Germans while they escorted theirs. The RFC (late RAF) had a policy of active pursuit and engagement whenever possible. The results were predictable: very high losses. When the Germans went on the offensive in 1918 the shoe was on the other foot – it was no accident that Richthoven died over allied lines during this period. Front line loss rates were indeed very high. German losses are the best documented and they lost 8,000 men at the front killed, missing or in accidents. (They lost a further 1600 in training.) Yet at the end of the war, there were 2700 German aircraft ready for action. The allied air forces had equations that were very like these. Each had lost considerably more men than there were aircraft ready at Armistice. Anyway you cut it, being a fighter pilot was a bad career move in that war. 

 

Naturally everyone learned a lot from the war, much of it wrong. (Because it was so hard to down bombers, governments worried that bombers could not be stopped in a future war. Things developed rather differently.) The German Army was shredded by allied fighters and attack aircraft during their retreat in late summer 1918 – in the next war the Germans were determined to have a powerful air arm to cause similar havoc. In this they succeeded until the industrial might of their enemies passed them in 1942. The Americans might have learned the most. There was Mitchell and his baloney of course. However, the American Navy (and the RN) saw immediately that aircraft were a “game changer” and this led to a very serious development of carrier aviation in the 1920s. The US also had egg on its face. In 1917 American industrialists promised Wilson and the allies that we would employ Henry Ford’s techniques on aircraft and build a massive air force. After the big talk it dawned on business that a WWI aircraft was largely built by craftsmen and were very poorly suited to US style mass production. The result was that American pilots (many very good – Rickenbacker’s “kill ratio” of victories per mission was arguably the highest of any major ace) all flew foreign aircraft. This humiliation led the US Army to keep modern aircraft in action throughout the lean budget years of the 20s and 30s. It wasn’t quite enough in retrospect, but the US had excellent aircraft by early 1943 – quite a contrast to WWI.

 

I’ve talked with a number of today’s fighter pilots about WWI. Almost all of them admit that they envy their great-grandfathers. As a honcho of the CAF told me (he owns a Triplane replica), WWI aircraft didn’t really fly, they lumbered. This meant they could and did stay in visual contact for much longer than was the case in WWII. A dogfight was a “mad man’s night out” but fighter pilots are a little nuts and I know that many of them enjoyed the experience, at least in retrospect. Mixing it up in WWI and living to tell the tale would have taken skill and luck. You had to be close to a victim to hit him and you had to hit him often. That meant you were always vulnerable to attack from another quarter. It was literally true that a kind of “conga line” of fighting aircraft formed in these huge melees with one plane following another, following another, following another. Of course the dance never lasted long, but tense while it lasted. And, let’s not forget, allied pilots rarely carried parachutes and German pilots had a very unreliable variety only toward the end. (Balloon observers had chutes attached to the basket and only wore a harness: not a solution for a moving aircraft.) Naturally self-sealing fuel tanks were unknown and everyone used incendiary ammo by late war. No wonder that fire was the overriding fear of the WWI airman.

 

As for the Camel, it was British to the core. As is well known, it was a tricky beast to fly because of the intense torque. That same torque allowed it to turn on a dime as long as you were banking to the right. It wasn’t a very good aircraft over 12,000 feet – it’s rotary just didn’t have quite enough juice. In 1918, the Brits started flying mixed formations of SE5s on top (or Snipes after September 1918) with the Camels down a bit. However a big WWI dogfight was like every big dogfight. It went from high to low and from order to chaos. So at some point German pilots were facing Camels at 5,000 feet – not an enviable position for any aircraft wearing a black cross. If an inherently unstable aircraft that was vicious in a dogfight reminds you of another British plane from WWII that was inherently unstable and vicious in a dogfight, it was not an accident.

 

Eric

 

 

A model boat is much cheaper than a real one and won't sink with you in it.

  • Member since
    June 2008
  • From: Iowa
Posted by Hans von Hammer on Saturday, April 30, 2011 4:51 AM

I doubt many Americans could recognize the name of Richard Bong.

I'd argue that, unless you quantified it by saying "not many Americans under the age of 50 could recognize the name of Richard Bong"... Those of the "Greatest Generation" would probably score pretty high in that area, as well a fair number of us Boomers... I recall some studies in high school in which the names Butch O'Hare, Richard Bong, and Eddie Rickebacker came up, as well as a few others...

But our kids likely would score dismally in that area of study, to be sure...  Mine wouldn't miss that one, but that's because they were both brought up in the Army, joined the Army and became officers, and also had a Grandpa that was an Army fighter pilot ( and later, USAF) as well... My daughter's also an Army Aviator, so she's an exception, having learned just about as much as her Old Man knows about military aviation history...  Seems that part is just about required when you fly for the military, lol..  Myself, I got lucky, growing up in the fighter pilot community, with people like Chuck Yeager, Jack Broughton, Bob Johnson, and Robin Olds being friends of my Dad's...  

 I dropped the ball on flying for the US Military, but it wasn't for lack of enthusiasm..  It was myopia and red/green color discrimination, lol..... Damned eyes...  Jumped from a lot of military aircraft though... Even made a balloon-jump with the ROK Army, lol.....  THAT was different, and not at all unlike the blloon observers of WW1... Just didn't have a burning gas-bag chasing me down...

While I'm on the subject of color-vision,  I have fun trying to mix & match colors sometimes too.. Looks right to me, but some others will say, "WTF were you thinkin' when you picked THAT color, Hammer?"Stick out tongue But I get to live vicariously through the CAF at least, and have flown in (and actually flown) some of the greatest combat aircraft of all time...

As for WW1 in general, and the Sopwith Camel in particular, I think most young folks' knowledge of the two subjects would be limited to Snoopy's involvement with them... Pretty much think that the only real association they'd have with Bong is that it's an implement for smokin' dope... Same for the Bong State Recreation Area in Wisconsin.. I know that, when I lived in Brenham, TX, the general consensus was that "Gay Hill" and "Gay Hill Road" has something to do with homosexuals, and not the fact that it was named for Ensign George Gay, a native of that area...   Call me cynical if ya want, but you can't say I'm wrong, lol...

 

  • Member since
    February 2010
  • From: Berkeley CA/St. Paul MN
Posted by EBergerud on Saturday, April 30, 2011 12:38 PM

I understand your point about the difference between generations - you might throw in countries. (I daresay a lot of young Brits have heard of the "Camel" and as something more than Snoopy's plane of choice. Although the fact that Charles Schulz picked a WWI fighting ace to be his favorite character's alter ego says much about the lingering fame of the Ace.) I do stand with my assertion that WWI aces had fame that dwarfed those of WWII. To begin with, airplanes were almost miraculous to people of the early 20th century. And the static nature of WWI (not to mention censorship) led the press to look for heroes. During WWII there was an avalanche of news almost every day and individuals got lost in the wash. (Spend some time at a library checking out newspapers from the era - it's amazing how much the war dominated the news and how accurate the main points were presented - newspapers had been disgraced by WWI censorship that even Goebbels decided that truth was better than outright fiction. That doesn't count Stalin natch.) 

As for the aces that did get recognition much depending upon the publicity machine and the timing. I'd wager the most famous US ace was Joe Foss because he tied Rickenbacker's record. He also was fighting in a period when little else was going on (at least until Torch) and Americans eager for heroes. Generals MacArthur and Kenney were very press conscious and did everything possible to publicize the deeds of the 5th AF - they were near the bottom in the resources game and would do anything to get attention. Hence the efforts to "pad" the scores of Bong and others with the "fat cat" flights. Aces from 8th AF got famous after the war via memoirs - their generals didn't need publicity to get resources and discouraged what the Reds would call the "cult of the personality." As for Rickenbacker, he wrote two memoirs both best sellers. Foss did one that is much better than its reputation but was published long after the war. Madge Bong (whose face adorned her hubbies' P-38s) wrote a charming book a few years back. 

Oddly I think in WWII it was the airplane more than the pilots that got the reputation. There may be few people that know George Preddy, but I daresay quite a few would hear a recognition bell at "P-51 Mustang." Ditto with the Spitfire or Zero. The CAF and the modeling industry helped that trend along.

Germany did its best to forget WWII. Inside the Reich Goebbels had a kind of hero of the week club, hence none of the great LW aces got anything like the fame of Richthoven. (I think you could argue that the U-Boat aces got the limelight until 1943 - after that there wasn't much limelight.)

But let's face it, the "Red Baron" in some form is with us to stay. And quite a number of people could even put a name to him. Testimony to the immense fame of the WWI fighter ace.

Eric

 

A model boat is much cheaper than a real one and won't sink with you in it.

  • Member since
    April 2005
  • From: Piscataway, NJ!
Posted by wing_nut on Saturday, April 30, 2011 4:45 PM

I had been eagerly waiting for some Lion Roar brass tubing to arrive.  I pick up a few different sizes.  The 1MM tube worked perfect for the wiring.  Just a little reaming at the end for all 6 wires to fit and hole drilled for the plug connectors.  A couple of pipes were made from solder using the photos in the kit instruction book as a guide.

Marc  

  • Member since
    August 2003
  • From: Connecticut, USA
Posted by Nachtflieger on Sunday, May 1, 2011 6:32 AM

Oh man, does that look good Marc!

Nate

 

 

 

  • Member since
    December 2002
  • From: NYC, USA
Posted by waikong on Sunday, May 1, 2011 7:12 AM

Holy cow, beautiful engine!  Can't possibly hide that away in the fuselage.

My website: http://waihobbies.wkhc.net

   

  • Member since
    June 2010
  • From: Austin, TX
Posted by DoogsATX on Sunday, May 1, 2011 7:54 AM

Dude.

Just...dude.

Even the weathering on the casting looks stunning!

Great job! Don't hide that one away in a plane!

On the Bench: 1/32 Trumpeter P-47 | 1/32 Hasegawa Bf 109G | 1/144 Eduard MiG-21MF x2

On Deck:  1/350 HMS Dreadnought

Blog/Completed Builds: doogsmodels.com

 

  • Member since
    April 2005
  • From: Piscataway, NJ!
Posted by wing_nut on Sunday, May 1, 2011 11:04 AM

Nate, Waikong, Doogs... thanks fellasSmile

Marc  

  • Member since
    October 2009
Posted by PANZERWAFFE on Sunday, May 1, 2011 11:07 AM

That engine looks AWESOME!  You could just enter that as your build and be able to get away with it but want to see the rest of it.

Well I ordered individual link tracks yesterday for the MK IV and they should be here within the next few days.  Taking the kit out and starting to set up but any major construction is waiting for the tracks.  From my understanding there will have to be modifications or deletions of the sprocket and idler in order to except the new tracks.  These are the ones I ordered.

Rob

  • Member since
    February 2006
  • From: Smithers, BC, Canada
Posted by ruddratt on Sunday, May 1, 2011 11:36 AM

Marc, seriously man..... Bow Down Bow Down Bow Down !!!! Gotta go with the others - that sucker just HAS to be visible!

Ed, great work on the Camel! With all the rigging needed on that bird, it's an ambitious project for your first bipe, and you pulled it off nicely! Yes

Rob, those AM tracks are miles ahead of the kit ones. Can't wait to see some progress pics!

Mike

 "We have our own ammunition. It's filled with paint. When we fire it, it makes pretty pictures....scares the hell outta people."

 

  • Member since
    October 2009
Posted by PANZERWAFFE on Sunday, May 1, 2011 11:43 AM

ED - Your Camel looks great!  As said the rigging is nicely done and I like how the framing in the fabric around the cockpit shows through.  Did you do that by drybrushing or airbrush?

Rob

  • Member since
    February 2010
  • From: Berkeley CA/St. Paul MN
Posted by EBergerud on Sunday, May 1, 2011 2:41 PM

I know Ed and he's a great guy. Unfortunately I'm Eric and opinions vary. Thanks for nice words about the Camel. Not sure whether I should be congratulated or not for finishing an airplane in less time than it took wingnut and Doog to build engines. (Of course there were probably more parts in the cockpits and engines in a WingNut kit than an Academy aircraft by a factor of two. And they know what they're doing and I don't.)

I did indeed shade the frame. On the khaki rear fuselage I used Des' technique shown on WWIaircraft.com. There were dark brown lines preshaded and covered by very thin pieces of masking tape. When the khakhi/green was sprayed over them, you take off the tape and the brown is visible but very subtle. (I also used his shading techniques for the linen wings and thought it worked great: unfortunately, I didn't really capture that well in any of the photos.) On the grey portion I preshaded with a light brown but painted over it and then drybrushed with a lightened base. The colors were from Coat d'Arms. I used their "linen" straight up and created the green khaki and greenish grey myself. I was very pleased with the colors. I also shaded underneath to recreate the castor oil stain that had to be there. These paints with artist acrylic mediums were really sweet on fine detail work at low psi. I'm looking forward to doing panel shading with them on a tank.

Eric

 

A model boat is much cheaper than a real one and won't sink with you in it.

JOIN OUR COMMUNITY!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

SEARCH FORUMS

FREE NEWSLETTER
By signing up you may also receive reader surveys and occasional special offers. We do not sell, rent or trade our email lists. View our Privacy Policy.