Rob de Bie

Wow, that's a great example! I'm not sure whether your statement 'there IS NO WAY' is in jest or serious (I don't see a smilie). If the latter, then the explanation is wing dihedral. Dihidral angles can be quite large, 4½° in case of B-17. Note that the horizontal tail has no dihidral, and therefore both sides have the same length in the photo. Rob

Thanks Gary, that's a great suggestion. I found just one on the whole internet: https://slot32.de/media/files/pdf/mrhobby/mrh-b515-gb.pdf But it seems to list only the solvents, not the resin material. The only hint of that is in section 1, where it is listed as 'Classification of Product: Acrylic Coating'. But maybe someone with a better understanding of chemistry (or MSDS sheets) can tell more? Rob

A variation on this approach is to use old wrecked models and unpainted models / figures to mock-up the diorama. The photo below shows our club's first attempt at doing a 'museum' theme at our Nationals. I provided the wrecked models to see what it would look like. Here are photos of the 2 out of 5 museums that we built: Rob

I'm a Thunderstreak weapon expert of some sort: I built all weapons carried by Dutch (RNLAF) Thunderstreaks in 1/48 scale. But I can't help with your question unfortunately. Rob

I think I use all types, in spray cans and bottles 🙂 Yours is an awful lot quicker, one hour, wow! But what I really would like to know what chemistry is going on - is there a polyester resin that needs to cure? Rob

My impression is that old-fashioned enamel will give you the best adhesion. I recently worked on a troublesome resin kit, that gave me lots of paint adhesion problems. In the end it was a Humbrol enamel, cured for at least three days (!), that solved the problem. You can test the paint adhesion with different grades of tape, and I always do a fingernail scratch test. Rob

I regularly use Mr Surfacer in spray can and bottle variants. But I don't understand the material well, and would like to know more. This is how I've experienced it so far: when you apply it, first the strong solvent evaporates. That maybe takes half an hour. Next, the polyester (?) resin starts to harden. This seems to take a long time, in my experience I need to wait a full day before you can start working on it, otherwise you can leave fingerprints in the layer you've applied, where you hold the model. This is what I know (or think I know), who can fill in some blank

Google Earth indeed works pretty well for shelter measurements, I've done that too for my TAB-VEE page. What more data do you need to build an AU-16? If you have 'Rote Platze' (congrats!) I think you already have the best there is, combined with the many many photos on the internet and Google Earth. The next step would be measuring one yourself, there still are plenty :-) Theoretically a MiG-29 should fit an AU-13 I think. If the diameter was 12.8 m, appr. 12.2 m is available in width at the wing tip level, so the 11.36 m span MiG-29 should fit. I remember quite a few a

I think you will enjoy this page: https://lothar-schlueter-modellbau.de/index.php/de/modellverzeichnis/21-bogendeckungen-und-schelter He built four different Warpac shelters, two Soviet, two East-German. You also need to check his build reports, that are separate from the articles above: https://lothar-schlueter-modellbau.de/index.php/de/modellbauablaeufe If you search on 'Bogendeckung' you will find lots more photos. Soviet shelters in East-Germany were designated AU-11, AU-13, AU-16 and AU-19, the number indicating the diameter. Whi

Thanks, great video! I think the colors shown fit in the consensus so far: 36231 or 36270. It's a 2015 video, and fits in with the photos found so far from that time frame. But for me, it still leaves the question of the lighter color seen in the 1999 (Yugoslav-era) photos. What I found especially interesting in the video are the missiles in the background! At 0:18, 0:42, 2:26 and 3:20 you can see a whole row of round-nosed AGM-86s, some with full markings, like the development missiles. I suppose they are for training, but I'm amazed that so many are left over. I made two screensh

Well, thanks for your contributions then. For the rest I'm not too impressed by your unfriendly tone. You almost sound like the thread-police that decides when a thread discussion is done. I don't think this one is done, since we still have two different grays in the 1999 and 2015 photos. Rob

Neither am I ! I'm especially caerful with colors, because I'm not sure that I see all colors correctly. I'm not colorblind or anything, but I once did a 'color sorting' test and didn't score well..Plus the male eyes vs female eyes difference - it all made me rather careful with color 'opinions'. Rob

Excellent! Now it fits (to my eye) in the 1999 series of photos (for lack of a better description), like this one. Rob

You seriously misunderstood what I was trying to do here! I was surprised that 'Andrew D. the Jolly Rogers guy' saw FS36270 Neutral Gray in that photo, whereas I saw a brownish color. That's why I took a color sample from the photo, and compared it to some FS colors. For me it showed that it was a brownish gray indeed. I was NOT trying to establish the color of all AGM-86s. Having said that, your suggestion that it was a photo made during very late in the day is a very good one. The background indeed shows long shadows. Maybe there's a technique in Photoshop to correct for the ligh

Wow.. that one is brownish to my eye! I copied the color of the side of the missile to another picture, and put three FS colors next to it, 36270, 20318 (the best match by eye that I could find in my fan deck) and 30219 (to see whether it really was brownish). I used this site to find RGB matches for FS colors, but I don't know accurate it is: https://www.e-paint.co.uk/Lab_values.asp Color matching straight from a photo probably violates all kinds of rules, but's it's the best I can do now. My conclusion: I still have no idea what color this missile was! But