Jump to content

Robertson

Members
  • Content Count

    301
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Robertson

  • Rank
    Tenax Sniffer (Open a window!)

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Fantastic and totally convincing paint job. I rarely comment on models, but this is just something else...
  2. Having gone into this further now I can say that the Eduard MG opening are tiny and awful, a real kit disqualifier, as well as the poor/non-existent Eduard depiction of the cowl fasteners (completely absent in the upper middle of the cowl!!!) and I replaced the Eduard gun openings with far better Airfix equivalents. All 3 cowl tops lack a slight flat area behind spinner, but fixable. Airfix has generally the best depiction of the prominent cowl fasteners, and takes to the Eduard windscreen like a champ, even canopy closed. Much better sliding canopy frame thickness on Meng and Airfix. Best str
  3. Canopy and cowling are not even close. See the Eduard Model 21 which is dead on, although the new tool Tamiya Model 52 canopy is very slightly better than Eduard in side slope (same canopy in real life on both). Tamiya has a too long tail by 3 scale inches, Eduard dead on. This Academy kit is something out of the 1950s.
  4. My God... Compared to the Eduard, accuracy looks just laughable... Trumpeter on a bad day.
  5. And a glass nose that pinches to about half the size that is should... (Monogram got it dead on, and that nose section will fit the AM fuselage perfectly). OR prop blades too skinny by half (Monogram again on the mark there) OR tail hinges that are just engraved lines when they should be a semi circles meeting a recessed area (Monogram again dead on, but you get the picture)... Accurate Miniatures were so impressed by these moulds they delayed the kit's release for an ENTIRE two years (1997-1999, test shots builds seen, unchanged from final 1999 release, in 1997) while they sued in court the K
  6. This B-25 discussion was really funny. I looked at built up examples of the 1/72 Airfix, and all I can say is I wish the 1:48th Accurate Miniatures kit was half as good (or even one tenth really)...The accuracy of the cowling, props, and especially the canopy is miles ahead of anything in 1/48. The panel lines looked quite nice, and, if not the smallest I have ever seen, they are not out of line with just about anything made in 1/72. The decals looked superb on the model. Having wasted months on resin After Market cowls, mix matching Monogram parts (nose, props, vertical tails)
  7. Understood. Meng is much better with a metal finish, but for a painted finish, the deeper surface detail, better cockpit and undefinable "likeability" of Airfix might show up better. Meng feels bland, but I can't say why, as it is generally better. Airfix landing gear leg is bulkier/better.
  8. The Eduard kit is better still, but sits too tall, with too thin sliding hood frames. I use Airfix legs, Meng or Airfix sliding hoods, which fit even when closed, though Meng has a center seam to erase. Eduard is the only kit to have the windscreen side windows bite deep enough into the fuselage, which all other kits are shy on. Airfix would look best with a painted scheme, not a metal finish. With a metal finish Eduard is better. All 3 newer kits are miles ahead of the old Tamiya and its dreadful prop, though the Tamiya gear would help the Eduard...
  9. I've always hated the Monogram D with the nose glass having curved sides instead of flat sides: Now I finally see the shorter nose glass on Commando did have curved sides! So the Monogram nose needs to be shortened 3 feet to be accurate! This does not stop there: The Monogram has an inaccurate sloped spine making the rear fuselage shallower by 4-5 inches, exactly as early B-24s. But the kit does not have the raised fuselage fairing just under the tailplanes... That raised "fin support" fairing was on all shallow tail early B-24s (which is easiest to see on photos of the currently flying LB-30)
  10. Tamiya kit, (not distorted). I used screen photos as I had a minor technical issue. I could upload the photos directly, but did not bother...
  11. http://soyuyo.main.jp/p47/p47-1a.html Here it is. Note that his fix involves widening the front of the cowling to make the sides straighter, as well as narrowing the swell of the fuselage, but for the Tamiya cowl part this is wrong. At the first panel line, the width of the Tamya cowling is correct from actual dimensions (which I forget), so it is the rear of the cowling which should be narrowed, not the front widened... This implies a more massive narrowing of the entire fuselage, which might be why Yoyuso avoided doing it this way... When I attempted it I, preferred
  12. If these are the shades based on the old Soviet book with paint chips, they are likely too dark. (The book of which only 3 copies exist in Russia I mean) Eric Pilawski saw one copy, and said the book's colours have darkened over time. I believe him, because pieces buried face down or otherwise protected remnants always show lighter more vivid colours, despite never facing the sun. If Russian aircrafts were that dark, they would not have lightened in photos when the shift from black and green to gray and gray happened. But they do look lighter, including the green of the black and green...
  13. I think the freshness (or dust?) of the fuselage paint is the culprit, making the fuselage colour look darker than the older (or less dusty?) factory black green spinner: The older spinner colour is probably polished by handling (and air friction!), or faded, and the fuselage very fresh. A fresh matte texture will not reflect ambient light as much compared to a less matte spinner. I feel this might be more prudent than assuming an oddball colour on the spinner. It does indicate a fresh paint job was very matte, somewhat at odds with some depictions.
  14. The Tamiyas all have inaccurate too tall clear parts (not fixable easily in my view), and a swollen fuselage in plan view, when the sides should be straight... See yoyuso wings of Pegasus for the fix... I always found them to be poor in accuracy. New P-47s are much needed.
×
×
  • Create New...