Calling all model kit fans - she's finally done

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

classic33

Leg End Member
Probably worth about 50p then lol
Still worth more than what you paid for it. Re-released a few years ago, increasing the value of the first release.
 

Cycleops

Legendary Member
Location
Accra, Ghana
That's a total masterclass. I work with consultant surgeons every day and I haven't seen any of them as patient or as accurate as this guy!
My parents always thought I'd become a surgeon as I was always doing Airfix kits and loved detail intricate work but it never happened.
 
It is no where near finished but chatting about the Sherman Firefly v Cromwell reminded me of my attempt to make a model of a Comet tank out of plastic card. I used a 1/76 scale Matchbox model as reference and doubled up the measurements so it's approximately 1/38 scale.
The gun barrel is made from brass tubing and I was intending to detail the interior of the driver and gunner's position. The tracks were made of card but would look better if I could source some rubber tracks.
I found the Comet tank at Bovington useful for reference.
 

Attachments

  • IMGP5132 (2).JPG
    IMGP5132 (2).JPG
    178.7 KB · Views: 47
  • IMGP5133 (2).JPG
    IMGP5133 (2).JPG
    170.1 KB · Views: 44

classic33

Leg End Member
It is no where near finished but chatting about the Sherman Firefly v Cromwell reminded me of my attempt to make a model of a Comet tank out of plastic card. I used a 1/76 scale Matchbox model as reference and doubled up the measurements so it's approximately 1/38 scale.
The gun barrel is made from brass tubing and I was intending to detail the interior of the driver and gunner's position. The tracks were made of card but would look better if I could source some rubber tracks.
I found the Comet tank at Bovington useful for reference.
How far out would 1/35th tracks be?
http://www.hobbylinc.com/fruilmodel...links-plastic-model-tank-tracks-1:35-scale-13
 
I don't think they would be too far out and that is what I thought of using. I could do a quick check with a couple of other kits that I haven't built yet to see how they compare.
 

Joey Shabadoo

My pronouns are "He", "Him" and "buggerlugs"
The Swordfish also did dive bombing, believe it or not.

Naval fighters tended to be big and robust to cope with carrier landings and carry plenty of fuel. Naval thinking was they would be used against reconnaissance and bombers, not state of the art fighters. The Japanese Zero was a wake up call to that thinking.

Ironically the RN ended up with arguably the finest piston engined fighter - the Sea Fury.
 

Yellow Fang

Legendary Member
Location
Reading
The Swordfish also did dive bombing, believe it or not.

Naval fighters tended to be big and robust to cope with carrier landings and carry plenty of fuel. Naval thinking was they would be used against reconnaissance and bombers, not state of the art fighters. The Japanese Zero was a wake up call to that thinking.

Ironically the RN ended up with arguably the finest piston engined fighter - the Sea Fury.

The Sea Fury was good, but did not arrive until after the war and after the jet age had started.

Regarding the Swordfish, I watched Sink the Bismark recently. One of the crew members mounted a machine gun on the back. What was the point of that? If there were any fighters in the area then they're dead.

Surprisingly the Fulmars pilots did quite well, considering their planes were so slow. The RN replaced the Fulmars with Fairey Fireflies, and they only did 320mph despite their Griffon engines. Even if the RN did want a navigator or observer, did those planes have to be so big and heavy?

The RN used converted Hurricane and Spitfire versions. I would not have thought the Seafire was ideal. It had a narrow undercarriage and quite a short range (at least the Spitfire did).
 
Top Bottom