Jump to content

Jonathan Mock

Members
  • Content Count

    629
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Jonathan Mock

  • Rank
    Run to the hills!

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Recent Profile Visitors

6,990 profile views
  1. Hamilton prop logos. Doh! Yup, I'll take the hit for that.
  2. I also spoke to him, he said that was Gould's Fiery Fred and that some people should not claim to love cheese if a strong cheddar has them crying into their plastic viking helmet.
  3. 1 - Good quality scanners do not cost a fortune. 2 - Show us your decal sheet, a phone photo will suffice. 3 - The insignia are supposed to have those washed out portions. 4 - They are printed by Cartograf, but someone could always ask the artist for 100% confirmation.
  4. Sounds like you’ve bought the old kit, A04005.
  5. I am led to believe that a leading visual effects company has been out and about scanning aircraft for an upcoming movie about the Korea War, including Sea Furys and MiG 15s.
  6. That would be almost everything forward of the main spar in this kit then. My impressions of seeing the test shots at Telford were that I'd hoped they correct some rather glaring errors with the engines, nose and canopy but the production kit hasn't. It reminds me of the FROG kit - not so much sharing the same errors, but just being almost as caricatured in the same areas. It's beautifully moulded, and I'm sure many will buy it, built it and enjoy it, but I get the feeling the HK kit was based on a duff set of drawings.
  7. The March issue of SAMI believes wrong. They are not the same kit.
  8. Can't wait for 2018? Then roll on 2016 because... Toho are making a new Godzilla film to bridge the gap! http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/film/film-news/11279206/Godzilla-returns-to-Japan-in-2016.html
  9. Other manufacturers models make no money for Airfix. The Sea King is one of their best selling kits of all time, in the top five I do believe. The Dragon kit? It's all over the place, the nose is awful and, depending on territory, it's also vastly overpriced. They did look into it but the differences between the Navy and RAF Merlins are substantial, it's not just a case of adding a few bits, it would require whole tooling for substantial parts of the kit. Sea King though is different, most of the variations are bolt-ons which can be factored around a core kit. I would wager, IMO, with i
  10. It is 100% all new, totally new, new tooling based on all-new research and LIDAR scanning of a real HC4. It is not a repop or retool of the old kit, but new, all new, nuevo, neu, nouveau, nuovo, nieuw, nové, новый, νέο, 新しい、新. Did I mention it's new?
  11. No, Heller did not own the Airfix moulds (Humbrol owned Heller) and this Revell/Heller deal is apparently nothing to do with Hornby, and Revell have not "bought" the tooling either, mostly these things are poly bag deals. Everyone write that down, there will be a test later before another uniformed rumour gets passed around as fact.
  12. I'm going against my normal routine by applying decals first, then weathering the model. But before that, a couple of coats of gloss. I decided to give Tamiya's X-22 clear gloss a go - lovely stuff, you thinned about 50/50 and sprays at low pressure, you can apply really wet coats and it'll flash off in seconds. I could have micro meshed this down a bit more, but I wasn't looking for a mirror finish, it's silky enough for decals and the matt finish will even it all out.
  13. The two blues came courtesy of the Mr Color US Naval Aircraft Paint Set. The intermediate blue went down no problem, the dark blue seems to have dried loking a bit rough but is smooth to the touch. I sprayed at low pressure and at around 50/50 thinner, weird. It also didn't quite dry gloss either! No problem, I can level it down with some Skotchbrite. I didn't preshade on this model but opted to leave the upper colours a but patchy so I can define panels with oils later. Time to leave this to cure off for a day or so.
  14. Yes, you posted a photograph - what are you trying to show? I think Andrew demonstrated that there is a variance in the wing root fairing, so are you sure those are mistake in the two recent kits, or perhaps a Spitfire quirk that you were previously unaware of?
  15. Demonstrate they are "mistakes". And by that I mean with data, rather than comparing kits. How do you know the other kits are actually correct?
×
×
  • Create New...