Curt B

I'm really glad I saw this thread! While I already have 2 of the F/G version, and am SOOOOO hoping for a J/L version to show up soon (I already have the decals for "Marge", Richard Bong's aircraft), I am a P-38 'junkie' and just already put an order in for this 'H' version with MegaHobby (as a result of this thread), just in case it won't be available 'everywhere', though I have gotten things from MegaHobby previously.

Hi All, I'm getting ready to start paining my Hurricane Mark 1 "Tropical" plane, and I have a few questions. First off, the instructions show that the bottom was Azure Blue, while, in most (all?) of the builds I've seen others do were painted in either Sky or some other greenish/grayish tinged color. Does anyone have an opinion (based on SOME fact) about what color the bottom of this plane should be? Next, I've read in another thread that the Britain-based Hurricanes were Dark Earh/Dark Green, but that the Dark Green was field overpainted with a "Light Earth" or similar color once relocated to North Africa. Is there any evidence to prove this? If true, I guess I'd like to do my 'chipping color' for the "light earth" color to be a dark green. Further, the instructions show an aluminum color on the leading edge of the wings. Was this painted on, (i.e. aluminum paint) or was this natural (bare) metal/aluminum? Lots of questions, I know, but anything you can tell me would be greatly appreciated!

I just looked at the Tamiya website.

They've been good to deal with. In fact, I have to replace a lost clear part for my P-38 canopy. The customer service person said that they don't have any actual replacement sprues for that kit, yet, but that he thought they had some extra parts from 'cannibalized' kits, and was going to try to find some spares for me and send them along. My prior experience has been equally good.

I agree with the points being made here that no exposure to any chemical, even the 'non-smelly acrylic' paint is good for any of us. However, you must also take into account that each of us is an individual, and as such, we all have different sensitivities to varieties of things. For example, my wife is exceedingly sensitive to things like pain medications, whereas I have a huge tolerance, and it take a lot more for me to achieve effective pain relief than it does for her. I hope that MIchael Rinaldi won't be upset with me passing on what he has written to me about his experiences with lacquer paints. Michael, for those who don't know, is a world renowned armor paint and weathering guru, with many books/publications to his credit. He does spectacular work. But, we have corresponded about various different paints, and he has told me that some experiences he has had. specifically with Mr. Color lacquers, and Mr. Paint (MRP) lacquer paints, had a very negative impact on both his personal health and other modelers he knows. And this was only for a short duration and a few models. Because of this, he does not use ANY lacquer based paints, and has become a fan of Mission Model Paints, which he says work as well or better than lacquers, at least for his purposes. without the potentially debilitating effects of the lacquer fumes that accompany spraying such paints. For myself, I've never experiences any ill effects from lacquer fumes, and I spray, like others have said, in my kitchen, without any forced ventilation. However, I do not spray when my wife or my dogs are present, and I have purchased, and use religiously when spraying lacquers, a 3M respirator with organic filters. My experience is that those filters do a fabulous job of taking care of lacquer fumes, and I smell absolutely nothing when wearing that respirator. Of course, lack of smell is not an indicator that the filters are catching 100% of the nasties, but I think it is at least SOME indication that the filters are doing at least some good in keeping those fumes and particulates out of my lungs.

Agree with that. I think I've mentioned, if not on this thread, then on others here in ArcAir, that many of the paint colors that used to be available only as 'sets', whether they were armor or aircraft sets, are now available as individual paints, but I have yet to find a dealer/distributor in the US of those 'former set colors'. The only option I know of is to go EBay, and usually from China. Too bad, but it's a fact.

This is the same bottle I've used before, several times on other projects, and never encountered this. And again, the finish at the end of the color cup was perfect, it was just the first few pieces that were 'gritty', while I did absolutely nothing different in terms of pressure, distance, volume of paint, or anything. Everything was exactly the same between the beginning and the end of the volume of paint in the color cup. I can't figure it... The airbrush was perfectly clean at the beginning, so it's not contamination. I didn't need to thin the paint...it's perfect right from the bottle. This is metal Aluminum...so no thinning required.

I think I would rather show tape over the gun tubes rather than attempt to drill them out and make a mistake. I think simulated tape is the way to go! Thanks guys! Now...anyone have any opinions on the thickness (or thinness) of the wings trailing edges? They can't have been as thick as this airplane is showing them to be ...

Interesting, and thank you! So, was that tape typically applied prior to each sortie, after the guns were reloaded, to protect the barrels from foreign objects? Obviously, once the guns were fired, the tape would be blown off. If I am modeling an aircraft just returning from a mission, the tape wouldn't be there, correct? Presuming that the guns had been used during the flight. In that case, I gather I would need to drill out the holes. If I am modeling a plane just getting ready for its next flight, then I guess I should have the tape in place, right?

Hi All, I started working on my Airfix 1/48 Hawker Hurricane Mk. 1 Tropical (AO5129) airplane, and I have a few questions. First off, the 4 gun ports in the leading edge of both wings are indented, but not open, just solid plastic. I am not planning to open the wings to show the machine guns, but regardless, it seems to me that those gun parts need to be open (i.e. holes drilled). I don't understand why Airfix molded them as solid, unless I'm missing something. Secondly, the trailing edge of the wings on this model seem extraordinarily thick. It could be that there is a reason for this, but I don't know. Were the flaps metal or fabric covered, and would that make a difference in the thickness of the trailing edge? I haven't yet gotten to the flaps, and maybe the flaps themselves have a thin training edge, but the wing edge is really thick. I'm guessing that a significant amount of sanding will be needed if the wing comes to a fine/thin training edge as most wings seem to. Thoughts on this? Other than these two things, the airplane seems to be going together well, but certainly doesn't have the super ease of fit like a Tamiya kit. This is my very first AIrfix kit, so I'm learning my way around. Thanks for any help.

Yes sir, no sharp angles, flat planes.

Hi All, I just sprayed parts of my 1/48 Hurricane with AK Xtreme Metal (AK 479, Aluminum), and for the first time, encountered a less than perfect finish. The first few parts have a rough, gritty appearing finish, while the rest of the parts have their usual perfectly smooth 'polished metal looking' finish like I have always gotten in the past. I mixed thoroughly, used the same pressure for all the parts, and sprayed from the same distance for all the parts, just that the first few have this gritty finish, that you can feel in addition to see. I am in Las Vegas, the humidity is very low, and it's in the high 80s. I've never encountered this before. By the way, all the parts were sprayed from the same color cup, the earlier parts when the cup was at its most full, the later when the cup was closer to empty. I'm using a CREOS Mr. Color PS289 (0.3mm needle) airbrush. The brush was pristine clean when starting. Those are all the parameters that I think are relevant. It's not the end of the world, just puzzling. Thoughts?

I took a look at the owner's manual for your camera. It doesn't look like there is an option to select a focus point, but it does say what I pasted below (note the bold, underlined text in particular). You should be able to move the camera around so that you get focus lock on the spot you want to be the most in focus, and even if that isn't in the center of the image, by holding down the shutter button after you get focus lock, you should be able to recompose while keeping the focus on that point, and then fully depress the shutter button. I hope I didn't make that sound too complicated. One-Shot AF for Still Subjects You can select the AF (autofocus) operation characteristics suiting the shooting conditions or subject. In Basic Zone modes, the optimum AF operation is set automatically for the respective shooting mode. 1 Set the lens’s focus mode switch to <AF>. 2 Press the <Zf> button.  [AF operation] will appear. 3 Select the AF operation.  Press the <Y> <Z> keys or turn the <6> dial to select the desired AF operation, then press <0>. 4 Focus on the subject.  Aim the AF point over the subject and press the shutter button halfway. The camera will then autofocus in the selected AF operation. Suited for still subjects. When you press the shutter button halfway, the camera will focus only once.  When focus is achieved, the dot inside the AF point achieving focus lights up briefly in red, and the focus indicator <o> appears in the viewfinder.

I just found this thread and tried to read all the posts, and I may have missed a reference to a technique called 'focus stacking'. From what I've read in this thread, the original poster's biggest concern is the 'blurry' spots in his close-up photos. Many of you have written about stopping down the lens as a means to increase the depth of field, and reduce the blurry areas of the photos. This will work, but only to an extent. The closer you focus a given lens, the narrower the depth of field, generally speaking. In addition, if you are critical about your imaging (which I doubt would be the case for model photos), stopping down the lens does begin to increase lens created artifacts due to diffraction, and the amount of diffraction depends to each lens' design. But stopping down to a lens' smallest aperture is no a panacea. So, to get the ideal situation of sharp focus across an entire image, use this focus stacking technique, whereby you take a series of photos from exactly the same location, but focus on different areas of the image, and then the technique 'blends' the sharp parts of the multiple images into a fully 'in focus' final image. There are plenty of places where you can read about the details of how to perform the technique, and perhaps it's more involved than you want to get, but it is the only technique I know of to get a fully in-focus frame, outside of a bellows which has already been discussed and is way too involved, in my humble opinion. Using a tripod certainly helps, and is necessary for this technique, too.

The point is not how high your standards are, but just what keeps you satisfied that you did well enough at the time you did the build! The very first model I did when I started back into the hobby in 2010 was the Tamiya Desertized Challenger 2 (by the way, if anyone has one of the brand new Rye Field Challenger 2 TES kits that they don't want, PLEASE send it my way!!!!!!), and looking back on it now (I still have the Tamiya Chally 2) I wouldn't even consider it for a show. But it wasn't too bad for the first kit back after 40 years out of the hobby. So I keep that one. When space gets too short, though, that one will end up in the space that I haven't defined yet...the spot where the 'not the best' models will go. I know I'm all over the place with my definitions in this thread, as even this topic is kind of a work in progress. My latest build, which is complete except for the antenna wires, is the Eduard 1/48 F6F-3 Hellcat (in the original post, I incorrectly wrote that it was an F6F-5) , and I spent a lot of time on it. Even when the day comes that there is no more space left in the 'good model' area, I won't want to trash it. I'll want to find another spot for it, where it can live out the of its life in the warm glow of "models that could have been". And by the way, guys, the ideas about what to do with unbuilt kits at a certain time is good stuff, just not what I had originally posted about...