Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Snowbird3a

  • Rank
    Commander of the obvious
  • Birthday 02/10/1960

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Comox, BC
  • Interests
    Flying and building Airplanes, modelling Aerobatic teams and Canadian aircraft. Welsh corgis

Recent Profile Visitors

13,038 profile views
  1. A lot of folks use ‘deck tan’ cheers, Tony
  2. Snowbird3a

    CP-107 Argus

    You can omit the ‘FS’, just 501-109, a very elusive colour but described well in the previous comments. cheers, Tony
  3. Be aware that this is a Downsview aircraft and may not have the same colours as a machine from Pat Bay, Wasn't Shearwater colours different, too. I'm scouring my references to see if anything pops up. does one of the Pat Martin books cover this question ?? Cheers, Tony
  4. having built a few Eduard kits and have a couple of WNWs in the stash; no comparison. WNW all the way for fit detail and engineering. The size is only detriment that I can surmise. You may get more opinions if this thread was moved to the 'Classic" pre '39 Forum where it truly belongs Tony
  5. I highly recommend the Belcher Bits Tutor if you can lay your hands on one. The two areas that bug me are the intakes are too large, hence the intake covers that I fashioned; and the nose is a bit too curved on the top(not a deal breaker). The kit includes Snowbird tanks (correct shape, not like the HobbyCraft useless tanks), and the long external fuel tanks that adorn some Big2 aircraft. cheers, Tony
  6. Nice clean work. Between yours and my Tutor post, it is interesting to see the relative strengths and weaknesses of both the HobbyCraft and Belcher Bits kits. I have yet to build a HC version, having built two Belcher examples. Cheers, Tony
  7. used the J-Bot decals for the 'Big 2' 50 Years NATO scheme 1995. I bought this kit, started, from EBay many years ago. the canopy was glued closed so I didn't bother opening and fixing anything in the cockpit.
  8. got my recent order from Above&Below graphics yesterday. Great , fast service. Tony
  9. yes, the P-51 kit or the F-6A kit involves less converting. Depends on what the OP has on hand or availability of other kits. Tony
  10. the P-51A has a wide 'bulged' carb air scoop while the Mustang Mk1 has the narrow straight sided carb air scoop. Other differences include; P-51A has port wing landing light only the Mk1 had a landing light in each wing; the Mk1 had a gun camera opening outer leading edge of port wing; ; different openings in the wings for the different armament; the Mk1 did not have the three ID lights under the stbd wing; the ventral air scoop was fixed on the P51A and the Mk1 had hinged doors front and back . not usually modelled, but the Mk1 had little backward facing scoops just behind and abo
  11. I tried using Microscale Liquid Decal Film on old Leading Edge decals. Tried two coats. No such success so the decals went into the bin. YMMV Tony
  12. check your FB messages 🙂 Tony
  13. Disclaimer; not a SeaKing expert here; But'........... well, accurate here is a relative term. Yes, you can build a SH-3D from the old Airfix kit but be prepared for some horrible fit issues with the cockpit glass. Any other SeaKing kit (except the Lindberg) is way better in all respects to the ancient Airfix offering. The best researched decals I have seen for 'Old 66' is the 2010 release by Apollo Decals; it covers the choppers gradual livery changes from Apollo 8,10,11 & 12. But if your concerned with accuracy, you won't be using the old Airfix kit, right. 🙂 🙂
  14. the canopy frame is out-to-lunch horrible, landing gear is way too thin, gun bay is ill fitting, horizontal stabilizer shape is off; to add to previous comments but nobody will mistake it for a Sopwith Camel Tony
  15. Well, I wouldn’t go that far, the Airfix kit’s shape is waaaaaaay more accurate than the Monogram’s Tony
  • Create New...