HubertB

Looks good to me: we have the sand, and we have a « subject » Hubert

Maybe too late for the offer, thanks to the jet lag, but you can have my Sparrows, which look good with no warped fins. Just PM me your address and they are yours. Hubert

I still have to find a better alternative to Micro Foil Adhesive, but have not so far. One important thing : Micro Foil adhesive can be thinned (a lot) with alcohol. I then brushed it on the part to be foiled rather than the foil. But, yes, the thicker the foil, the better, when you want to burnish it on compound curves. Hubert

Mine will be sans missiles …but with the pylons. Btw, Fisher has done an excellent work on the Sparrows Mk1, but they had a pointy, straight cone nose. Fisher’s Sparrows have a too rounded nose, if you want to be accurate. Hubert

Need to go back to my references, but, from the dates the Thunderbirds flew them, and the pics I remember, I’d say they were NMF, not silver-painted … Hubert

What I know is the F-105 started with a real NMF, then, as a corrosion guard were painted silver. I do not know for the F-100, or F-86, but would assume it is a likely possibility .. Hubert

Well, as the dice seem cast, and to broaden the spectrum from the expected « Afrika Korps / MTO » subjects, I found this interesting site, with hundreds of pictures from 1919 to the 70s, where sand is really a big component … https://aviation-algerie.com/aviation-algerie/ Just scroll down the list of topics (titled in French). There are literally hundreds of them, each with about 40 pics. And, yes, you can even model a Bréguet 961 « Deux-Ponts » in 1/32 (or 1/48 ), courtesy of « One Man Model » in Japan (although his eBay store does not seem active nowadays) .. HTH to bring some additional inspiration, and, to add ideas, thanks to Mark31, « May the Force be with you » ! Hubert

Isn’t « Sandbox » the right theme then ? Hubert

So Martin, Have you made the choice (although the poll is quite clear ) ? My only remark is about the deadline. 4 months is short, for most of us - and even more for me with a lead time that counts in years rather than months 🤣) Hubert

C’mon, Peter, we know you are an outstanding modeller. No need to post pics of the real A/C landing gear bays and pretend it’s your work . Show us your real work, we’ll be kind to you. I promise … Hubert

Hello and I don’t think you will get the same result using brass strips and flattened tubes, as Rob suggested, especially in terms of rigidity. Flattening a tube is easy, by holding it in a vise, and slowly closing the jaws of the vise. Albion Alloys used to have a special jig for that, but it’s now in Unobtainium Land … To control the thickness of the flattened tube, you can insert a much smaller diameter brass rod in the tube, and make it slightly longer than the tube. This way you will obtain constant thickness struts, and with positioning pins on top of it. To obtain for example a 3 x 1 mm strut, you should be OK starting with a 2.5 / 2.6 dia tube. HTH Hubert PS: make sure the jaws of your vise are smooth, not striated. That was the interest of the AA device …

Well, thanks for the tip, Chris. I am usually wary of drawings, as they can sometimes induce some mistakes, and most of these are no exception. But it yielded some pics of the plane I intend to model, which I had not found hitherto, and will prove invaluable 👍 ! Hubert

I just love the Lukgraph kits. High quality, and on top of it, my kind of subjects. As usual, I’ll be taking a seat o watch the Master at work Hubert

There are seven surviving airframes, most of which have been used as gate-keepers and have rotten consequently. The pics I posted are from a F7U-3 displayed at the NASM in Pensacola, and features many bogus features and / or missing components. It’s (wrongly) tagged as a F7U-3 M. I have used other pics for some detailing, like the landing gear bay, of BuAer 129554 (a F7u-3), which was supposed to be restored to flight condition. It has changed hands many times, and is now in Phoenix, AZ. I don’t know if it will ever be finished to flightworthy condition, bur whereas the hydraulic system could be updated to modern standards, and thus alleviate one of the main issues that plagued the Cutlass, the question of the engines would remain, and of the fragile front landing gear strut … It’s still the most reliable source for detailing the kit Hubert

Wow ! Stop teasing and tempting us, Rob Hubert

Not a lot of apparent progress to report, but some I feel pretty smug about... A bit of background. Fisher seem to have completely forgotten one aspect of the Cutlass, that is the device that holds the arrestor hook in place (or if it was included, it is not in the parts I have, nor apparently in the instrcutions, but then some small details have been overlooked in the said instructions). This is what it looks like IRL. The photos are lifted from an IPMS NL walkaround, but beware that the F7U-3M displayed seems to have been cannibalised, or vandalised, over the years, and not every component is still present on this airframe. And this is my rendition of it, adding a few pieces that seem to make some mechanical sense, but are apparently not on the walkaround pics. The whole is less than 1 cm long, if you wonder ... I quite like my springs, made from 0.2 mm tungsten wire coiled around a 0.5 mm brass rod A few hours' work, not perfect, especially the alignment which is slightly off, but "good enough for govenment work" as the saying goes. In the meantime, I have started repairing the rear of one wing tip, which has been damaged in all the handling the Cutlass has endured so far. And the fins are now glued in place. Next should be mating the front and rear of the bird. TTFN Hubert.

Yes, the B-68 had underwing positions, and they were for « special weapons », which are represented by Monogram / Revell. You apparently created for yourself a set of problems by going for an in-flight display … but I am sure you will prevail in the end. For me, the B-58 looked like it was doing Mach-2 even on the ground on its spindly landing gear, so I always loved its highly complex landing gear. As for the scheme, it was never meant to drop anything else than « special weapons », so a SEA scheme seems incongruous. But then, it’s your build and you can do as you want. I have taken a seat to watch your progress Hubert

Absolutely gorgeous, Kris ! Hubert

I read your report, Officer, and against all my hopes, I realised this was a deliberate act of sabotage ! And against a war asset of His Majesty ?? !!!! You know what the outcome to this is, don’t you ? Hubert

Very well done, Peter 👍 ! But ... YOU LEFT THE FLAPS DOWN ??!!!! God help you, poor soul ... Hubert

Thank you guys. There is more, which I forgot. I have prepped all the antennas, pitot boom and fuel dumps to ensure they will hold by more than just a butt joint. So I drilled a 0.6 mm hole in each, to insert a steel pin. Just need to drill the same hole on the fuselage, and I will have stronger joints. Of course, the pins will be shortened before gluing, as for one fuel dump where it is already done. 😉 Hubert

I continue to work on the small improvements required, before ttrying to make both ends meet. When this mating is done, some of the work will be just clumsier because of the bulk of the new ensemble. So : 1) The fins are in the process of being improved, on two accounts. Firts the back of the fin at the base of the rudder was a bit short, probably as a result of mold wear. I cut off a small piece of resin, and glued some plastic to recreate the right profile, with the result below : There is still some tweaking to do on one of the fins, but the issue is now cleared. You can also see the second improvement I had to do. If you have followed Scott's own build, you will have seen that there is a significant mismatch between the end of the MLG bay and the fin that abutts to it, of about 1.7 mm - the fin being too skinny to match the profile of the end of the MLG bay. The extra thickness was built up with plastic card, then putty. I will do a primary smoothing with the fins still independant, before fine-tuning the fit after gluing them in place. 2) I mentioned earlier that I did not like the gluing area between the front fuselage and the main one, at the bottom of the front fuselage. The gluing zone is very small, and matching the frony end rear ends will require some pressure that will add more tension on the gluing area. So I decided to add a heavy duty "keel" a) to help the matching of the two halves, b) to increase the gluing area, and finally c) to have a way fo transferring the torsional load that will apply to the bottom gluing area when the Cutlass is on its legs, to the top fuselage. It will also make sure the rear end of the front landing gear bay stays put without any temptation to lift upwards. It's not pretty, but it should work as planned 3) The prominent exhausts on the top fuselage have a good, but not great, molded representation of the vanes. I decided to remove the molded vanes, and add new ones from thin plastic card. Fortunately, Fisher's resin is easy to work with, especially with a well-honed chisel. This is how it looks now. 4) Finally, I have masked and painted matt black both the inside and outside of the canopy components. Please note how Fisher has done his usually good homework by molding accurately the armoured windscreen, thicker than the sides 👍. It took me the masking job to notice it. And, btw, I ground off the front of the interior of the windscreen, as it was creating fit issues by conflicting with the IP coaming. That's all for now, folks. More when there is more Hubert

4 only, not 5 … FDM is Ok for large pieces, and allows to use filaments like HIPS (polystyrene). But the filaments’ layers are visible, so forget about fine resolution details. SLA allows much finer resolution and is what you need for detail work. And with 8K, and now 12 K, the size difference of parts with FDM is getting less and less relevant. Yes, you need to wash the parts, but that is what a wash and cure station is for. And some resins are now water-washable, which is a plus, but you need to verify the resolution obtained. Hubert Edit PS : You may think that I am a compulsive collector of technological gear. The truth is that I have kept the older machines when I upgraded to newer, more capable, ones, whether it is the SLA machine from 4K to 8 K, or the FDM machine from Felix to Prusa. And I have a professional interest in this technology with my company. As the technology evolves fast, there is a very small second-hand market for the "obsolete", or rather "superseded" machines, so trying to sell them is a low-success endeavour. I gave away in the Christmas raffle 2 years ago my first Anycubic SLA machine. It ended in the hands of Carl, after a stop in Calgary .

two Elegoo printers, a 4K one (Mars ?) and added recently an 8K one (Saturn ?), and two FDM printers, a Felix and a Prusa (for wgich I still have to set up the multi-filaments device . I also bought one year ago a powerful gaming PC (with the relevant grapic card to go woith it) to run the 3D-design software, Atom 3D, which has the outlook and features of Solidworks, but not the same licence cost. Hubert

I do not know Ixo. As for Pocher, they can be built - with a lot of TLC , and even more investment in AM, which is a bit steep, considering the initial cash outlay - into spectacular replicas, but they are very often … is « approximative » the most apt word ? Hubert