GB Chat thread - Hawker Tempest

[dr_gn]

Red Firecracker said:

if you think it looks right, you may have gone too far.

Subtlety is the key and don't be afraid to do something that you think is right rather than what is deemed correct.

Preshading is tricky. I first tried it on the Globemaster a couple of years ago, and have used it on my three subsequent aircraft models. Out of those four, only one - possibly two - turned out the way I wanted them to. The problem is, if you overspray the preshade too much, you can't see it at all, and if you overspray too little it looks rubbish. I usually overspray too much, and all the work gets lost. I've never tried it on a small 1:72 model, so I'm expecting it to be much more difficult. It is something you can get rid of quite easily if it is obviously not turning out the way you want during spraying.

[dr_gn]

Anyone who's bought the Resin Art interior kit might want to read this:

http://inscale.org/pub/index.php?topic=601.0

Then again they might not want to read it...

[perdu]

I have to say (maybe I should have before) it always looked like far more stuff than the fuselage should take

Most of that stuff, if you really need to, can be scribed and appliqué'd in place rather than bulky extra parts added inside

Nice to have all the extra control units though... Maybe removing lots of thickness on the fuselage frame sections would fit it easier



Blimey it is a nice piece of moulding though. Imagine some of that detail showing on an in-hangar battle damage re-skinning diorama with lumps of duralloy missing

Now that's a thought...

[dr_gn]

perdu said:

I have to say (maybe I should have before) it always looked like far more stuff than the fuselage should take

Most of that stuff, if you really need to, can be scribed and appliqué'd in place rather than bulky extra parts added inside

Nice to have all the extra control units though... Maybe removing lots of thickness on the fuselage frame sections would fit it easier



Blimey it is a nice piece of moulding though. Imagine some of that detail showing on an in-hangar battle damage re-skinning diorama with lumps of duralloy missing

Now that's a thought...

Don't forget there's the cockpit sidewalls, then the spaceframe that fits inside. I had a quick look at mine, and I'm pretty sure it *does* all fit in the fuselage - just. Having looked at the pictures in the article again, he's assembled the spaceframe incorrectly, and obviously didn't do much checking before final assembly.

[Eric Mc]

Has anyone come across any detailed photos of the sidewalls of a rewal Tempest V? I discovered I had an Airwaves etched brass cockpit interior set but am not convinced that the sidewall details are correct. The instrument panel and seat is nice though.

[Yertis]

I admire you guys doing the interiors so diligently. I'm keeping my canopy firmly shut.

[dr_gn]

Eric Mc said:

Has anyone come across any detailed photos of the sidewalls of a rewal Tempest V? I discovered I had an Airwaves etched brass cockpit interior set but am not convinced that the sidewall details are correct. The instrument panel and seat is nice though.

http://www.hawkertempest.se/album/nv778/index_12.html

ETA I could scan the diagrams in the Tempest V Pilot's Notes book if anyone's interested. B&W pictures only though.

[IroningMan]

dr_gn said:

Anyone who's bought the Resin Art interior kit might want to read this:

http://inscale.org/pub/index.php?topic=601.0

Then again they might not want to read it...

I've only got the exterior kit, but appear to have already achieved a fail with the tailwheel box. Oh well. It's filler time.

[Eric Mc]

dr_gn said:

http://www.hawkertempest.se/album/nv778/index_12.h...

ETA I could scan the diagrams in the Tempest V Pilot's Notes book if anyone's interested. B&W pictures only though.

Thanks for the limnk although I have to say that the pictures are so close up it's hard to see the context of each shot. What do those Tempest manual pictures look like?

Is the tubular structure less pronounced in the Tempest compared to the Typhoon?

[dr_gn]

Eric Mc said:

Thanks for the limnk although I have to say that the pictures are so close up it's hard to see the context of each shot. What do those Tempest manual pictures look like?

Is the tubular structure less pronounced in the Tempest compared to the Typhoon?

I think the spaceframe is mostly below the level of the emergency door edge (more or less elbow height when sitting in the pilots seat I'd imagine.

[Eric Mc]

Thanks very much. Those pictures are clearer.

I think I'll stick with the Airwaves set as it is. Higher up the sidewalls there appear to be square shaped frames which are depicted in the set and they can just be seen in those pictures too. British cockpits of that era were amazingly messy affairs.

[dr_gn]

Eric Mc said:

Thanks very much. Those pictures are clearer.

I think I'll stick with the Airwaves set as it is. Higher up the sidewalls there appear to be square shaped frames which are depicted in the set and they can just be seen in those pictures too. British cockpits of that era were amazingly messy affairs.

I think the square sections you can see are fuselage skin stiffeners (present on the Resin Art cockpit sidewall pieces if you look the pics), rather than an integral part of the spaceframe. Whatever, the round tubular spaceframe itself appears to be almost invisible for all practical purposes.

[Eric Mc]

That's the conclusion I've come to as well. I was chuffed that I found the Airwaves set - I'd forgotten I'd bought it. I've obviously far too much modelling "stuff" hidden away.
I've not done too much metal bending on models before so this is a bit of handy practice for future projects.

[dr_gn]

RE. the topic of old vs. new paints; had a rummage in the loft earlier and found these:



I'm sure the old folk will appreciate it! The price on the (unopened) Airfix bottles is 9d . Pretty sure I've got a much smaller glass Airfix bottle as well, but I can't find it.

[Yertis]

dr_gn said:

Splendid...

[Eric Mc]

That definitely takes me back. I've a couple of the old Airfix and Humbrol tins but none of the bottles.

[pacman1]

Eric Mc said:

That definitely takes me back. I've a couple of the old Airfix and Humbrol tins but none of the bottles.

Must be a little older than us!

[Eric Mc]

I definitely used the bottled Airfix paints. They only switched to tins about 1972/73. I was already a modelling veteran by then.

[Yertis]

Eric Mc said:

I definitely used the bottled Airfix paints. They only switched to tins about 1972/73. I was already a modelling veteran by then.

I only started properly in '73. Spitfire IX and Me 110 Dogfight Double. Then a Frog Kittyhawk, then the Lancaster, then they all just merge, but hundreds probably. I had a few bottles though, that I'd been given with a Tyrannosaurus Rex.

[Eric Mc]

My first model was the Airfix Northrop F-5A in 1966.