Jump to content
ARC Discussion Forums

72linerlover

Members
  • Content Count

    432
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About 72linerlover

  • Rank
    Tenax Sniffer (Open a window!)
  • Birthday 06/01/1956

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Cremona - Italy

Recent Profile Visitors

6,605 profile views
  1. Hi, Curt. I'd add to previous suggestions a consideration regarding the kind of NMF paint. In my experiences I always used Testors enamel gloss black with good results. If you are going to use a lacquer based NMF paint as Alclad2, the enamel base is a must. Acrylics gloss are not suitable to be tinted with that stuff, but also for enamel based NMF. Acrylics NMFs are OK on almost any kind of base. Note: Acrylics paints make a strong barrier on the surface and (even if hot) lacquers don't stick on them and this way is how lacquers work; just tinting and not painting. Always, as we speak about paints, I miss the opinions and the tips from @Triarius that I don't see posting since years. Best regards Euge
  2. Hello everybody. Thank you Underdog and Ray for your comments. I've managed to get some work done in preparation for painting. Well, the painting stage is not behind the corner, but I have to do some things now, otherwise such works could damage the painted model. First the landing light. The transparencies in the kit are quite nice and fit perfectly into the leading edge. They are too much clear, so it is necessary to put something inside. Closed the rear part of the lamp with a piece of polystyrene. Made 2 little bulbs with stretched clear polystyrene. Still to be glued. Like most of the prototypes, also the Caribou had a big nose probe with many sensors. Difficult to tell from the pics I have, how really they are shaped, but the main tube is there. In this web page there is an interesting photo of the DHC-4, revealing a sort of inspection panel on top of the nose. Not quite a good fit, we should say, but an interesting detail. In the next pics the process to make that rised panel. A contour of vinyl tape to give the shape. Filled inside with white putty. Here the panel. Still needs to be sanded down a little. Onto the rear end now. Unfortunately the fit of the tailplanes is not tight enough. So I have enlarged the two mounting tabs and put inside the fin a little plate to get things straight. Really not visible in the pic, but it is there, just above the tabs. I have spent some hours reading the maintenance manual, just for fun, but that way I discovered how tailplanes and rudder work. Very interesting how, as always, DHC designs are an example of "robust engineering" So I discovered, f.e. that what I thought were only 2 trim tabs each side, actually have different functions. The inside one is called "spring tab" the outer "trim tab". The spring tab, when the control column is in neutral position, is deflected upwards by 5 degrees, while the trim is at zero. Long story short, these are the tailplanes with the tabs aligned as per the manual and the rudder. It is a bottom view, since the actuating brakets are on the underside. Thanks for watching. Regards Euge
  3. Ray, that Herc looks really great. Love those walk ways and your recovery on them. You know there is a legend about how was discovered that "Future" was a good stuff for models: apparently a not closed bottle spilled down from a shelf in a garage on a painted model... Great finish. A lesson for detail hunting. Euge
  4. Hi, everybody. I've got some progress to report on the Caribou. Also the kinematic of the main gear doors is really complicated. In fact, the leg acts on some leverages that move the doors and make them close. It took long to understand from the photos and the manual how it actually works, but at the end I did. Doing something that looks like the real thing requires to work on the model sitting upside down on the jig. I had to do it now, absolutely before the painting stage. There are not great details, but quite visible on the finished model. So, you can see the doors with some added elements. Here a first test fit on the aircraft. Some more elements added and a first bit of paint. All the doors painted inside. Some views of the temporary assembly. Thanks for watching. Regards Euge
  5. Perfect said, Dutch. That matches with my knowledge. On the modeling side, I'd say that is always easier shortening than stretching, so if you like the Authentic Airliners engines, you'll face an easy task. Bye Euge
  6. Dutch, Actually the inboard long pylons feature is typical of the 707 and it could be that Kurt has a single mould for both models. An other point is that the Kurt's long (wrong) pylons of the TF33 are for the outer engines, as you can see in your second pic, where there are also the TC humps. Bye Euge
  7. Hallo everyone. Sometimes come up questions in the forum regarding finishing and painting problems and I was use to wait for a post by Triarius (ARC member), a very expert in the filed of chemicals and a very kind person. I sent him a PM but no answer. Has anyone news of him? Best regards Euge
  8. Hallo everybody. Thank you for your words, mates. Interesting, but I don't understand how a Caribou can inspire a C-119, beside to be both transport aircraft. A friend of mine asked me to prepare a sort of sample for the mechanical part of a testing instrument. Back to industry modeling after decades. Therefore I have to clear the bench and temporally stop the Caribou project. As last update of the year, I post a pair of pics of the painted gear legs in test fit. Thanks for watching Euge
  9. Hi, gents. In the last days there have been on the forums several conversations regarding new kits, specially regarding aircraft, in particular civil aircraft and in 1/72nd scale. Now I don't want to enter in detail of the news and the comments, but just want to share my thoughts about accuracy and the way to get there. "Short run” producer do make this kind of kits, since they require a minor investment to generate the molds and don't need zillion of sells to reach the break even. My asking now is: why some of these producer don't care about accuracy in a modeling world that nowadays is so “accuracy demanding”? I think that most modelers require two main characteristics that are: correct dimensions and correct shape. The smart engineering of the parts separation or the surface details drop in background and the modeler is prepared to a tricky assembly or improve details. In some cases, some short run producers asked the community for suggestions and constructive critics, showing what they have in mind to produce, involving their future potential clients in a project of which they feel part. And the results were more than good. Of course this habit reveals the future plans, the release of a new kit is no more a surprise and this situation leads other producers to try to make the same subject. Nevertheless it as happened that a low quality 1/72 short run was produced and (obviously) not appreciated by the modelers. In few years, a mainstream factory released the same airliner and had a full success and still has. So the low quality short runs have an already written destiny and run the risk to be overtaken by others. That said, the risk to see the idea copied by other in the drawing stage exists, if the producer shares his projects, but if this leads to a hi quality short run, the risk is mitigated. I think that there is no need to make filigree details in a short run, thus making the tooling very expensive. It is better, in the developing stage, to contact the aftermarket producers and ask them to become partners of the project. If not, these cottage industries will nonetheless produce some correction and improving parts. So, some modelers should buy a hi priced, low quality kit and the relative aftermarkets. Many, me included, won't (and the sells drop). Let's not forget that we are talking about modeling and not of national affairs and keeping a secret is often counterproductive than reveal the plans. Just my two cents. Best regards. Euge
  10. Jenshb, I agree with you. The Airways VC-10 has its issues, but you may consider how much you paid for, comparing with the Mach2 cost. When you start a challenge with a vac kit, you exactly know what you are facing and you hope not to find the same problems with an hi priced injection kit. Just my 2 cent. Eugenio
  11. Hi guys. I have already spent too much money for the Mach2 Viscount and the Caravelle. Trust me I think I'll have more fun to scratchbuild those airliners than try the Mach2 way. Perhaps at half the price I would by one, but at 100 US$ is a nonsense. Who has the Airways Vac is a lucky guy. Sure they use CAD? Cheers Euge
  12. Here I am with an update regarding the landing gears. I totally rebuilt the legs, because in the kit they were very simplified and not so much realistic. Metal paper clips, styrene tubes, some putty. A dry fit into the nacelles to check the high on both sides and that the model is aligned Here the almost complete legs And here more finished waiting for the paint to dry before some tubing. Hope you like, if you can see the pics. Regards Euge
  13. Hi guys. I have a new hosting site for the images. I have updated the posts from September on. I hope that they are visible now. Next week end, if all works, I'll post new progress. Thanks for your patience. Euge
  14. Hi, Ray. Cleared all what was clearable, tried yesterday at home and now at the job, with Avast Secure Browser, Chrome and even Internet Explorer with no result. The region issue is the most likely reason, but it is fun to search the web for HTTP ERROR 418. Thanks. Euge P.S. Now I'm stopping auto hijacking my thread and boring you with this problems until they will be solved.
  15. Thank you for your feedback, sirs. By the way, Ray, what happens to ACAM forum? When I try to visit it, I get HTTP ERROR 418 - The page is not working. Regards Euge
×
×
  • Create New...