One-Oh-Four

MMMMMKAY?......

But you DID finish the thing Jeroen! Am I correct or not?... I can't make chocolate from the jungle of wires depicted in WnW's instructions... Oops, another Dutchism...

Hi guys, Looking at Wingnutwing's instructions for their E.III I get a bit confused. Are the cables to warp the wing only attached to the control stick at the underside by the moving bracket on the U/C framing? Or also from the upper side at the pulley? See the front/rear schematic to see what I mean; in this case if warping is only induced at the bottom side of the wing and the opposing wingtip is pulled up because the top wires slip over the pulley by the tug of the downward warping wing:

Thanks for your input, guys!

But on a serious note: the tread on the tires looks a bit too off-road to me. I don't think they had "noppenbanden" just then? Would it be an idea to sand 2/3rd of the blocks off?

Wuhahaha! That hanky under his knee... Someone should include that with a figure with this model... lest his uniform becomes soiled...

Thanks for your elaborate review Rick! It's very helpful! Keep up the good work!

Hi guys, Just wondering; what forums do you frequent for your 1/48 and 1/72 builds if you also dabble in those scales? Cheers, Erik.

BTW; it's better than finding an elephant rotting away in a DH.9 shed..... :/ Nice vid!

Me 163; the FartFlea? Or the flea that had Indian take-out yesterday...... Undergoing Gandhi's Revenge right now....

Cees, Radu Brinzan has a resin conversion to make the PCM Mk.IX into a Mk XIV. According to his website, it can be used with a Hasegawa/Revell Mk.I/II/V fuselage too. Just to make the build less complicated http://www.radubstore.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=3_85&products_id=302

http://www.themodellingnews.com/2013/10/new-bulit-up-test-shots-of-italeri.html

Mk 21 (type 356)[edit] By early 1942, it was evident that Spitfires powered by the new two-stage supercharged Griffon 61 engine would need a much stronger airframe and wings. The proposed new design was designated the Mk 21. At first the Mk 21 displayed poor flight qualities that damaged the otherwise excellent Spitfire reputation. The wings were completely redesigned with a new structure and using thicker-gauge light alloy skinning. The new wing was torsionally 47% stiffer, allowing an increased theoretical aileron reversal speed of 825 mph (1,328 km/h). The ailerons were 5% larger, and were no longer of the Frise balanced type, instead being attached by continuous piano-hinges. They were extended by eight inches, meaning that with a straighter trailing edge, the wings were not the same elliptical shape as in previous Spitfires.[42] The Mk 21 armament was standardised as four 20mm Hispano II cannon with 150 rpg and no machine guns. The Griffon engine drove an 11 ft (3.35 m) diameter five-bladed propeller, some 7 inches (17.8 cm) larger than that fitted to the Mk XIV. To ensure sufficient ground clearance for the new propeller, the undercarriage legs were lengthened by 4.5". The undercarriage legs also had a 7.75 inch (19.7 cm) wider track to help improve ground handling. The designers then devised a system of levers to shorten the undercarriage legs by about eight inches as they retracted, because the longer legs did not have enough space in which to retract. These same levers extended the legs as they came down. The larger diameter four spoke mainwheels were strengthened to cope with the greater weights; post-war these were replaced by wider, reinforced three spoke wheels to allow Spitfires to operate from hard concrete or asphalt runways. When retracted the wheels were now fully enclosed by triangular doors which were hinged to the outer edge of the wheelwells.[42] In other respects, the first production Mk 21s used the same basic airframe as the Mk XIV. The first true Mk 21 prototype, PP139 first flew in July 1943, with the first production aircraft LA187 flying on 15 March 1944. However the modifications over the Mk XIV made the Mk 21 sensitive to trim changes. LA201's poor flight control qualities, during trials in late 1944 and early 1945, led to a damning report from the Air Fighting Development Unit: "...it must be emphasised that although the Spitfire 21 is not a dangerous aircraft to fly, pilots must be warned...in its present state it is not likely to prove a satisfactory fighter. No further attempts should be made to perpetuate the Spitfire family."[43] Supermarine were seriously concerned because Castle Bromwich had been converted to produce Mk 21s, and more were coming off the production lines daily. Jeffrey Quill commented that "The AFDU were quite right to criticise the handling of the Mark 21...Where they went terribly wrong was to recommend that all further development of the Spitfire family should cease. They were quite unqualified to make such a judgement and later events would prove them totally wrong."[43] Spitfire F Mk 21 of 91 Squadron. After intensive test flying the most serious problems were solved by changing the gearing to the trim tabs and other subtle control modifications, such that the Mk 21 was cleared for instrument flying and low level flight during trials in March 1945. An AFDU report on LA215 issued that month noted that the Spitfire 21 was now much easier to fly; General Handling The modifications carried out to this aircraft have resulted in an improvement of the general handling characteristics at all heights...Conclusions The critical trimming characteristics reported on the production Spitfire 21 have been largely eliminated by the modifications carried out to this aircraft. Its handling qualities have benefitted to a corresponding extent and it is now considered suitable both for instrument flying and low flying. It is considered that the modifications to the Spitfire 21 make it a satisfactory combat aircraft for the average pilot.[44 ] Spitfire 21s finally became operational on 91 Squadron in January 1945. 91 Squadron had little opportunity to engage the enemy before the war ended, but scored a rare success on 26 April 1945, when two Spitfire Mk 21s shot up and claimed to have sunk a German midget submarine which they caught on the surface. With the end of the war most orders for the Mk 21 were cancelled and only 120 were completed.[45] In 1946 40 Spitfire 21s were delivered to Shoeburyness; once there their leading edges were removed and destroyed in "lethality" tests. Some aircraft had less than five hours flying time.[46] Mk 22 (type 356)[edit] The Mk 22 was identical to the Mk 21 in all respects except for the cut-back rear fuselage, with the tear-drop canopy, and a more powerful 24 volt electrical system in place of the 12 volt system of all earlier Spitfires. Most of the Mk 22s were built with enlarged tail surfaces, similar to those of the Supermarine Spiteful. A total of 287 Mk 22s were built: 260 at Castle Bromwich and 27 by Supermarine at South Marston.[47] The Mk 22 was used by only one regular RAF unit, 73 Squadron[48] based on Malta. However 12 squadrons of the Royal Auxiliary Air Force used the variant and continued to do so until March 1951. The Mk 22 was also used at Flying refresher schools. In May 1955 the remaining F.22s were declared obsolete for all RAF purposes and many were sold back to Vickers-Armstrongs for refurbishment and were then sold to the Southern Rhodesian, Egyptian and Syrian Air Forces.[48][49] Well, I'm not Edgar, but if the above from Wikipedia is correct, I'd conclude that the Mk.21 used the original horizontal tailplane from the earlier marks with the enlarged mass balances.

I agree! Although those wolves must be the bravest ones EVER! Most would run with their tails between their hind legs when an Fw 190 comes crashing down! They would've gotten the pilot, only a couple of hours and miles later when he would've been alone, in the snow, exhausted... But the idea is great and full of drama. Wish I could make such a dio! Another such Super Diorama is from years back. Made by Marijn van Gils, really a Super-modeller and the best figure painter that I know of. The pictures don't do the diorama justice; all those exquisite details! But at the end, one only wonders how the glass-in-lead windows could have survived like they did while the whole church was reduced to rubble... Please don't heap photograpic evidence on me now..... Ah well, maybe sometimes artistic license makes the best dioramas! BTW; Marijn is a very nice guy, approachable, softspoken and modest. But I keep saying he's the best figure painter / sculptor I know. So this is a nice reason to insert some pics of his work.... Survival Of the Fittest (2006, 54mm / 1:32,) Photos from Modellversium.de A hurried descent (2006, 54mm / 1:32 scratch) Photos from Modellversium.de On the Watch-Out (2006, 54mm / 1:32, scratch) Photos from Modellversium.de One Way Ticket (2006, 54mm / 1:32, scratch) Photos from Modellversium.de

Looking good, Jeroen! But for XXXXXX's sake, cut those molten fenders off and replace them with suitably mangled PE ones! Oh and finish the beast, it's worth it!

Hi Rog, It's always difficult to see the finer details of a model/diorama off a picture on the internet. Huub looked at it in real life and spotted some things amongst which was an issue with the wing. "Measure twice, cut once" gone bad, apparently... He also said that the painting of the figure was very good; better than one sees often on aircraft dioramas. The diorama did get Silver on EuroMilitaire. To get such a medal on that show is quite a big deal, really. Finally, he loved the diorama too, otherwise he wouldn't have made a photo of it and wouldn't have posted it... How do I know? He showed me the pics from EuroMilitaire, we talked about it and I encouraged him to post the photos here. Cheers, Erik.

Ceeeeeeeeeeeees!!!! Wingcooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!! Where are you?????? Your soulmate is here!!!! Woooooohoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!

Great! It looks like it's going to be an epic journey! Can't wait to see your progress. A word of warning.... If you see a pool of saliva forming underneath your screen, you know that Cees -Wingco 57,our resident-large-scale-heavy-bomber-modeller- is wathing the topic! Cheers, Erik.

Jeff!!!!! My HERO!!!

AFV Review Build-Off is okay too, in my opinion. I just think (sorry if I'm wrong...) that there's more interest in aircraft than military vehicles on LSM?... Just regarding the number of posts in the Aircraft, AFV and GB sections...

On a related note: When replying in a thread I often get a reply-box (either the small type or the one after clicking "More Reply Options") where the toolbar is "misty". That means that I can't select a smiley or use the "insert image URL" options. I CAN however upload images from my HD... Anyone know how I can get the toolbar active?

...if needed... You're supposed to enjoy the hobby. Mustn't be a duty! I'd like to build an F-84G and an F-104G because my father flew those in the '50's and '60's.

Oh, and BTW, very nice weather- and warweary Shinden you brought with you!

Hoi Ulrich! Hartelijk welkom bij Large Scale Modeller! Leuk om hier nóg een Dutchie te zien! Translation: Hi Ulrich, Welcome at large Scale Modeller! Nice to see anóther Dutchie oveáh heáh! Cheers, Erik.

Ouch! Let's not start that one! From what I see around me there are the "engineer-modeller's" who like to fiddle with the kit, make many details themselves and often see painting as a necessary evil. On the other side you see the "artist-modeller's" who often see the assembly stage as something one must endure before the real fun -painting!- can begin. The most endangered species is the "universal modeller" who likes to shape a detailed scale model from a Mach-2 kit, and can paint it as a Rembrandt, not only because of his talents but also because he has learned weathering and detail painting methods because he is also interested in learning techniques from other "modelling bloodgroups" as armour, figures, railroad modelling, ship modelling, etc. Off the soapbox; Cees, you're doing a swell job, making that PCM Tempest to obey to your will!!! Carry on, lad!