Jump to content

Snowbird3a

Members
  • Content Count

    997
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Snowbird3a

  1. On 2/15/2022 at 9:56 PM, rcaf*100 said:

    Gents,

     

    I realize the thread is a bit dated, but does anyone have info on when the lightning bolts would have been used? It seems they disappeared from CAF Rescue & Transport aircraft sometime in the late 1980's or early 90's, based on my hasty internet search. And yet they are back on the Cormorant/Otter etc present day... Any info on actual phase-in/phase out dates would be appreciated.

     

    Thanks,

    rcaf*100

    they have always been present on the Twin Otter and since the White scheme on the  Buffalo(SAR role)

     

    Tony

  2. On 2/5/2022 at 11:42 AM, sabre45 said:

    Hi John,

    Mmmm. Specific the difference between the F-86E and the Mk. 4 . And the F-86F and the Mk.5/6. I'm familiar with the wings. But there are some minor details on the fuselage, I think. I hope you can help me.

     

    Han

    the Canadair Mk4 was equivalent and identical to the F-86E-10 when from the factory.  Later in life they gained the 6-3 wing and became F-86E(M) .  All depends on the time frame

     

    see this for info on the Mk5/6;

     

    bT4sh4X.jpg

  3. 12 hours ago, Brad-M said:

    Tony, That hobby shop would have been Argus Hobbies near the base. It's no longer around.

     

    Brad

    my post was from 2010, and I think even then it was history for a while.

     

    Cheers

  4. On 1/15/2022 at 8:22 PM, Rob Arsenault said:

    By late 1960s they were painted FS 501-109 blue grey. 

    You can omit the ‘FS’, just 501-109, a very elusive colour but described well in the previous comments.

     

    cheers, Tony

  5. 1 hour ago, phantom said:

    3UwGxQ7.jpg

    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

  6. 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

  7. On 12/2/2021 at 8:33 AM, Dutch said:

    NIcely done, sir!  Would you recommend the Belcher Bits Tutor?

    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

  8. 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

  9. 10 hours ago, peter havriluk said:

    Dumb question....Would a AM P-51 (no 'A') be what OP is wanting?  I have no idea but AM sure made a bunch of variants. 

    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 above the rear quarter glazings.

     

    Cheers, Tony

  11. 14 minutes ago, Colin K said:

    Thanks, I'll keep that in mind!  At this point, I am needing to get a photo of the top of the horizontal stab and I know there are a few other things I need photos of.  If it were't for this damn covid, I could go down to Moose Jaw and ask for an hour or so with an aircraft, in the hangar.  HAHA

    check your FB messages 🙂

     

    Tony

  12. 4 hours ago, jonwinn said:

    I was looking at a Dragon or Italeri new kit but I was given an old and complete MPC kit.

    It is the old 1/72 Copper Chopper by MPC molded in 1976. It is for a police helicopter but

    it looks suspiciously like MPC's (Airfix) 1970 boxing for the Apollo recovery helicopter

    SH-3D "Old 66". It has all the parts molded in white plastic with a bonus of 7 extra figures.

    What do I need to do this as "Old 66" outside of a set of decals? Is it fairly accurate as is or

    does it need some help? Thanks-jon

    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. 🙂 🙂

     

    Cheers, Tony

  13. 2 hours ago, Charlie D. said:

    Ok, I’ll bite, what’s wrong with the Monogram kit, other than its age?

    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

×
×
  • Create New...