Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
My Stash Just Grew Again / Re: My stash just grew again 2021
« Last post by The Wooksta! on Today at 08:32:37 am »
Ebay says I've won that Superscale sheet I was bidding on for RAF Aces.  There's a Mosquito on it and I know I haven't got that sheet.  Sadly, I think the distructions for the colour scheme are way off and the colours on the markings themselves are quite simply wrong. We shall see.
Aircraft / Re: PolyKarpov I-1616 Dvoynoy Ishak
« Last post by Tophe on Today at 08:06:36 am »
The first sanding was done then... the butcher came, next step will be putty again: <_<

= link

I've been out of here for a little time...

Back today...

With some of my models (scracthbuilt) used in a professional (french) sci fi mini serie...


first episode available here :

And more to come !

Hope you enjoy ! ;D
Armour / Re: LVT(A)-1A "Crocodile"
« Last post by Old Wombat on Today at 07:05:12 am »
Phase Four - Turret Completed & in Primer:

Oops, shot that one a tad low! :-[

A bit wonky on that one but I like the "eyes"! ;)

As mentioned elsewhere the .30cal M1919s (co-axial & commander's) are NOT .30cal M1919s but, rather, 7.62mm Mk.21 Mod.0's as per the USN's modification process.

Quote from: wikipedia
Mk 21 Mod 0

The increasing American involvement in Vietnam created a demand for small arms, especially the new M60 machine gun. The Navy had surplus machine guns left over from World War 2 and Korea, but they were chambered for the earlier .30-06 Springfield cartridge rather than the new standard 7.62mm NATO cartridge. The Mk 21 Mod 0 was a US Navy conversion of the .30 M1919A4 to fire the 7.62mm NATO cartridge. This was accomplished by replacing the barrel, bolt, and feed cover and adding a chamber bushing, a link-stripper, and a second belt-holding pawl to allow it to feed and fire the new cartridge. Spacer blocks were added to the front and back of the feedway to guide the shorter round and block the use of the longer .30-06 Springfield ammunition. A six-inch flash hider was also added to the barrel to reduce the muzzle flash.

The conversions were performed from 1966 through 1967 at Naval Ordnance Station Louisville.[25] Modified M1919A4s had the designation "Machine Gun, 7.62mm / Mk 21 Mod 0" stamped on the receiver sideplate in 1/4-inch lettering. The replacement barrels had "7.62mm NATO-G" stamped on them in 1/8-inch letters to differentiate them from M1919A4 or M60 barrels; the letter G indicated it used a grooved barrel bushing.

It used the standard 7.62mm NATO M13 link "strip-out" disintegrating link,[26] in which the bolt pushes the round out of the bottom of the two-part link and then forwards into the breech. The old M1 link "pull-out" disintegrating links, which are pulled backwards out of the one-piece link by the extractor towards the bolt and then forwards into the breech, would not feed through the new mechanism. The M1 links, which were designed for the longer and thinner .30-06 Springfield, would also be too narrow to fit the shorter and thicker 7.62mm NATO round. The US Navy, because of their narrower inventory of 7.62mm NATO ammunition, used linked belts of either 7.62mm M80 Ball or a 4:1 ratio mix of 7.62mm M80 Ball and 7.62mm M62 Tracer.

The refurbished feed mechanism was left-hand feed only. It was different from the one in the M60 GPMG in that the open end of the belt had to be on top so it could be stripped out. To prepare the ammo, gunners had to take out both of the 100-round belts from an M19A1 ammo can, had to link them both together, and then loaded the resultant 200-round belt back into the M19A1 can upside-down so it would feed correctly.

Mk 21 in Vietnam being fed by an upside-down M-13 link belt (the links are not visible)
Aircraft, Armor, Weapons and Ships by Topic / Re: F-16 Dérivatives
« Last post by Tophe on Today at 06:59:58 am »
And from a Ching Kuo eggplane model kit, inspiring: <_<
As well with a classical F-15 eggplane from Hasegawa, towards a different F-16 egg (not Hasegawa's F-16 eggplane): <_<

= link
Aircraft, Armor, Weapons and Ships by Topic / Re: F-16 Dérivatives
« Last post by Tophe on Today at 06:19:09 am »
An Airacuda-like F-16??!! Are you kidding? This would be crazy! Worse: this would be "what-if"!: <_<

= link
Recce & Surveillance GB / Re: Grumman NRA-6A Trespasser
« Last post by NARSES2 on Today at 05:53:25 am »
Current favourite is a belly mounted pod (possibly using magnets so I can remove it).

Good idea  :thumbsup:

Those wings will certainly make it look different.
Recce & Surveillance GB / Re: The Ardennes 1945
« Last post by NARSES2 on Today at 05:50:28 am »
They are a mixture of the pads Lee describes and larger sanding blocks, so with four "working" sizes and some two. Varying grades of grit. Outstanding value IMHO

Here's a shot of some of the types included, note some of the thinner pads are single sided, some double. Hope it helps Kit

It's almost certainly a case of Lucky Dip as to what you actually get Kit.

Model Kit News / Re: KP/Kopro
« Last post by NARSES2 on Today at 05:33:51 am »
Got it today, see the My Stash etc thread, and it is very nice. I got the RNZAF boxing.

Will definitely be getting a couple of Mk II's once released and depending how this one goes a Mk VI as well. The boxing caters both for series I and II airframes with the different cannon barrels etc.
Meanwhile on the modelling front I needed a break from the Moonbat and bits of the Beaufort were drying/setting so I picked up the KP Seafire. So far excellent detail and fit. Shame there's no open canopy option so you can see the cockpit detail more clearly as I doubt most of it will be seen through a closed one. One of those kits you can't put down once started.

Only thing I would say is that the plastic is rather soft and a glue like De Luxe Materials Plastic Magic is probably to strong for it, especially the smaller detail parts of which there are a few. I'll leave you to guess how I know that.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10