Jump to content

johnr

Members
  • Content Count

    29
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About johnr

  • Rank
    Glue Required
  • Birthday 03/09/1941

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Lindfield, England
  • Interests
    Jets - Early, prototypes and experimentals
  1. I have had trouble with the gloss black base. It doesn't seem to set properly for me and seems to bleed through the Alclad Airframe Aluminium or Polished aluminium. I now use gloss black enamel as un undercoat but BE CAREFUL. Lacquer over enamel can be trouble so spray gently and keep the airbrush moving. What scale is it, 1/72? Over here (UK) Whirlykits list one (for ££). I wonder if they are related. Anyway nice job on a rare bird. I would like one for my collection. John
  2. Panel lines...well its a sad story. The original kit had panel lines but over time they got lost due to numerous coats of paint and sanding the revised bits to shape. I had much trouble, most of it self-inflicted - details in here http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235017784-xf-104-starfighter-prototype/ I then had an attack of 'get finished-itis' and could not face any rescribing as I am not the most competent rescriber. It would have to be quite delicate as most photos show little evidence of them. I know the finish could have been better but this project had
  3. XF-104 in what I believe is 'first flight' configuration Created from a Revell F-104C that never got finished. Fuselage shortened, new back end from scratch, new intakes, new nose probe, nose wheel repositioned. Existing wings, tail and fin and u/c. Home decals for lettering. Quite simple really. Just took a lot of time and bad language. John (who is quite happy to hear about anything he has missed)
  4. Thank you - Rob. That was the 'light grey' I was thinking of using. I'm beginning to wonder if Alclad 'dark aluminium' might be a better bet X plane fan - Thanks for the photos. I have already seen them, and others, and the colour looks different in all of them. Obviously depends on the light. John
  5. Specifically the XF=104 but it probably applies to all versions John
  6. I went through this a few years ago when building the Hasegawa 1/72 version. The blue and gold decals were rubbish and had to be replaced by a paint job. The consensus was that the blue was from the Ford motor company but nobody knew which. I went with the easy option which was to match the blue to that of the decals. The 'gold' is actually gold and not some shade of yellow - which might give you trouble with decals. The Hasegawa gold went green when applied to the model although these did date from the 1970s so decal technology may have moved on since then. John
  7. There is a picture somewhere (NASA site?) which makes it look as if it had the squared off wing but of you look closely you can see that it is just distortion due the camera position. I, too, could find no evidence of such a wing being fitted. John
  8. I started the original version thinking that the only thing that needed attention was correcting the position of the actuators but asking a question on Britmodeller opened a can of worms that revealed that almost everything needed correction. The finished article and full story can be found here. http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/234940353-avro-arrow-a-correct-version-of-the-hobbycraft-172-kit-i-hope/ Someone described it as being 'scratchbuilt using the original parts as rough cut blanks' John
  9. Lavochkin La 200. Twin engined, two crew, all weather fighter. 1949 - 1952. Went through three major modifications, mainly to the nose, in an attempt to fit it with a working radar. This was the second version. It had many of the problems associated with the early jets as the designers struggled with high speed aerodynamics. Eventually lost out to the Yak 25 as a production item.
  10. Had some trouble since the last report. It was pointed out that Avis had got the underwing tanks wrong so I had to prise them off and reshape the mountings. There was then some trouble with the main u/c legs - they are not strong enough. One guy got around this by using a clear plastic prop. I use some packing pieces to stiffen the mountings and it seems to have done the trick but you have to make sure the joint at the front of the trailing arm is very strong. It may have been possible to drill out the legs and put in a stiffening piece of wire or tube but I needed the model for a show so I de
  11. Now painted and decalled. Forgot to say earlier that the canopy fits quite well - a relief after the other bits. Now for the u/c and pitots etc.
  12. New problem - Seats don't fit Had to trim the sides and front to get them in Assembled ready to prime. Canopy masked with Bare Metal foil
  13. Fuselage halves were joined without too much trouble but some mismatch between the rear halves. Fitting the heatshield around the front engine nozzle required some trimming and fiddling. Wings have been assembled. There are a couple of problems with this. To get a sharp TE the lower half has to fit inside the upper at the rear. This leaves a nasty gap in the control surfaces which has to be filled and means the edges have to be rescribed. The lower portion has to be thinned before it will fit. A similar problem occurs with the fin and tail surfaces. Now assembled and wing fences added.
  14. First flown in 1949 it went through several major modifications mainly due to different radar installations but never achieved production status. This is the second, with the 'Korshun' radar. I wonder how many people have even heard of it. Initial impressions were very favourable - nicely moulded without any flash. However building it is another thing. Almost nothing fits together without lots of scraping and sanding but I suppose that we must be glad that it even exists. first you have to assemble the cockpit tub. Then you are supposed to assemble the intake, attach the cockpit tub and i
×
×
  • Create New...