Airfix 1:72 Gloster Gladiator
Discussion
Eric Mc said:
Which Defiant have you got? Don't say it's the Airfix one.
MPM / Special Hobby: I needed a replacement windscreen for the Curtiss Hawk, and they said I'd have to pay postage from Czech republic. However, if I ordered a kit, they'd drop a few screens in the box for me f.o.c.Despite the maths behind the offer making no real sense, I ordered a 1:72 Defiant from them and used the 'free' postage to justify a new kit my wife, who, on it's arrival, immediately saw the many flaws in the logic behind the deal.
And after all that...they sent the wrong winscreen.
Eric Mc said:
I have an MPM Defiant somewhere in "the stash" - and an Airfix one. I also have the Valiant resin nose replacement for the Airfix Defiant - so if I build a Defiant, it might well be the Airfix kit - heavilly modified.
I looked at the resin nose for the Airfix kit at the Cosford show, but decided that for £20, the MPM "High Tech" version was by far the better bet, since it contains a highly detailed resin cockpit (& other items), a vacform canopy and a photo etch fret, plus the engraved panel lines on the plastic are superb. The only potential issue is that the turret is a bit too tall, but I wouldn't have known unless I'd read about it.
I like it, but please don't take this as a criticism, to me it looks like most other very well done silver models. Tricky to explain what I mean, but it's something we've discussed before of modellers replicating other modellers work rather than the real thing and thus perpetuating a myth, if you like, of what is 'real' and what things 'should look like'. Almost a "Dave is a really good modeller and his models look like this, so mine need to look like this as well" type thing instead of "Dave is a really good modeller but has he looked at the prototype?". I see parallels in the model aircraft world with that and the model car world with a too glossy finish. Copying the copier.
It's a very harsh comment as I know how blooming hard silver is to get looking right, especially silver in that environment, so please don't think I'm being picky, it's still an absolutely cracking piece of work.
It's a very harsh comment as I know how blooming hard silver is to get looking right, especially silver in that environment, so please don't think I'm being picky, it's still an absolutely cracking piece of work.
Red Firecracker said:
I like it, but please don't take this as a criticism, to me it looks like most other very well done silver models. Tricky to explain what I mean, but it's something we've discussed before of modellers replicating other modellers work rather than the real thing and thus perpetuating a myth, if you like, of what is 'real' and what things 'should look like'. Almost a "Dave is a really good modeller and his models look like this, so mine need to look like this as well" type thing instead of "Dave is a really good modeller but has he looked at the prototype?". I see parallels in the model aircraft world with that and the model car world with a too glossy finish. Copying the copier.
It's a very harsh comment as I know how blooming hard silver is to get looking right, especially silver in that environment, so please don't think I'm being picky, it's still an absolutely cracking piece of work.
I understand what you mean, but preshading (realistic or not) is a technique I like and think is effective particularly on 'flat' schemes like this. The problem is I didn't overcoat enough to tone the preshading down quite enough. Had I donr this I'd be totally happy with it.It's a very harsh comment as I know how blooming hard silver is to get looking right, especially silver in that environment, so please don't think I'm being picky, it's still an absolutely cracking piece of work.
I've looked at the real thing, and my own photographs of the real thing, and it just looks consistent clean 'silver' which, on a small model looks IMO, worse than something that's slightly broken up.
Eric Mc said:
As I said earlier, "silver is a bugger" and trying to get a silver aircraft to look "real" is very hard.
It's a bit like modelling water in a film. It's very difficult to "scale down" how water looks in real life down to smaller scales.
I was very impressed by this chaps work the other day.It's a bit like modelling water in a film. It's very difficult to "scale down" how water looks in real life down to smaller scales.
Quite a bit bigger than the Gladiator though... and representative of actual metal of course rather than painted fabric.
dr_gn said:
I understand what you mean, but preshading (realistic or not) is a technique I like and think is effective particularly on 'flat' schemes like this. The problem is I didn't overcoat enough to tone the preshading down quite enough. Had I donr this I'd be totally happy with it.
I've looked at the real thing, and my own photographs of the real thing, and it just looks consistent clean 'silver' which, on a small model looks IMO, worse than something that's slightly broken up.
Not criticising the technique at all, it's a valid tool in the armoury. I just feel that sometimes (speaking generally, not aimed at this model specifically), that models are copies of models, not copies of the real thing. As you say, you're nearly always on a hiding to nothing with silver, but that is the whole point, to me, of expanding techniques and bettering ones work/output. The sense of achievement in getting it right makes the work required all worthwhile. To become the copied is possibly the ultimate goal!I've looked at the real thing, and my own photographs of the real thing, and it just looks consistent clean 'silver' which, on a small model looks IMO, worse than something that's slightly broken up.
The harshest critic is often oneself, sometimes unjustifiably so.
Edited by Red Firecracker on Thursday 22 August 11:38
Ironically, with paints like Alclad, getting a true natural metal finish is actually easier than getting a realistic PAINTED or doped aluminium or silver finish.
Having said that, I have yet to use Alclad properly on a true "metal" aeroplane. I've only used it in small areas. So far I've been impressed but will need to have a go at something like a 1950s USAF jet of some sort to see how it works out for me.
I don't think Alclad is the best choice for painted aluminium or silver finishes.
I have a tin of Xtracolor High Speed Silver awaiting use - hopefully soon - on something like an RAF Vampire or Meteor.
Having said that, I have yet to use Alclad properly on a true "metal" aeroplane. I've only used it in small areas. So far I've been impressed but will need to have a go at something like a 1950s USAF jet of some sort to see how it works out for me.
I don't think Alclad is the best choice for painted aluminium or silver finishes.
I have a tin of Xtracolor High Speed Silver awaiting use - hopefully soon - on something like an RAF Vampire or Meteor.
Eric Mc said:
Ironically, with paints like Alclad, getting a true natural metal finish is actually easier than getting a realistic PAINTED or doped aluminium or silver finish.
Having said that, I have yet to use Alclad properly on a true "metal" aeroplane. I've only used it in small areas. So far I've been impressed but will need to have a go at something like a 1950s USAF jet of some sort to see how it works out for me.
I don't think Alclad is the best choice for painted aluminium or silver finishes.
I have a tin of Xtracolor High Speed Silver awaiting use - hopefully soon - on something like an RAF Vampire or Meteor.
There are dozens of types of Alclad, in fact only a few represent polished metal, and even then it's the preparation of a perfectly smooth basecoat that give the metal effect.Having said that, I have yet to use Alclad properly on a true "metal" aeroplane. I've only used it in small areas. So far I've been impressed but will need to have a go at something like a 1950s USAF jet of some sort to see how it works out for me.
I don't think Alclad is the best choice for painted aluminium or silver finishes.
I have a tin of Xtracolor High Speed Silver awaiting use - hopefully soon - on something like an RAF Vampire or Meteor.
I used Alclad purely because of the inherently fine grain. Overcoating with matt, or satin varnish as I've used here does give IMO a very realistic representation of aluminium painted fabric, it's just the preshading that I'm not happy with.
I had some success with Alclad representing metal on the F-84, just by using a slightly different technique (patchwork of shades rather than overall colour):
Eric Mc said:
That's what it's best at - in my opinion. I have a Hobbyboss F-84 I might practice on.
Someone built an Airfix Vampire for Scale Aircraft Modelling a few months ago. They used Alclad and it looked awful - far too shiny.
Yeah, but as I said it depends on basecoat and varnish: This is the first attempt, it's still exactly the same Alclad ("Aluminium"), but with a matt overcoat:Someone built an Airfix Vampire for Scale Aircraft Modelling a few months ago. They used Alclad and it looked awful - far too shiny.
I thought it was too matt, so went with satin for the current version.
Yertis said:
I was very impressed by this chaps work the other day.
Quite a bit bigger than the Gladiator though... and representative of actual metal of course rather than painted fabric.
I built that Monogram B-29 when I was a kid - mine was painted with Holts rattle cans...Quite a bit bigger than the Gladiator though... and representative of actual metal of course rather than painted fabric.
Gassing Station | Scale Models | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff