Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
Other / Re: Can you help me to identify these figures?
« Last post by Buzzbomb on Today at 04:10:01 PM »
Reasonably sure it is the Dragon Soviet Spetznaz set



I have a set and it was the boots that triggered the ID
2
Other / Can you help me to identify these figures?
« Last post by ysi_maniac on Today at 10:26:29 AM »






Digging in my "strategic material" boxes I found these figures. I only have the bodies, no weaps, no helmet or any other complement.

I think they are Dragon kit. Vietnam era or posterior.

I will appreciate any help. Thank you.
3
Land / Re: Automobiles in general
« Last post by apophenia on Today at 09:20:22 AM »
Battle Lada w/ 73mm SPG-9

Oh, I feel a 'Battle Lada' in digital camouflage coming on  >:D
4
Aero-space / Re: Supermarine Spitfire Family
« Last post by apophenia on Today at 09:16:55 AM »
On that Allison Spit.  There seems to be some sort of grill or air duct on top of the cowl even with the wing leading edge.  Is this the carburetor intake?  It's in about the correct location.

The 'Memory Sieve' has retained zero details on that turbo Spit  :P

Although I do vaguely remember pillaging P-38s and B-17s for bits and bobs ...
5
Profiles and Pixels / Re: Apophenia's Offerings
« Last post by apophenia on Today at 09:13:39 AM »
A Fury monoplane derivative is a notion that I keep returning to. This time, it will be more backstory drive ...

Sidney Camm and the Hawker 'High Speed Fury Monoplane'

In August 1933, Hawker Chief Designer Sidney Camm submitted his 'High Speed Fury Monoplane' concept to the Air Ministry for consideration. Officialdom was (unofficially) interested but there was no AM Specification for such an aircraft and, therefore, no funds allocated for such a project. As an experimental aircraft, the Air Ministry had already funded the Supermarine Type 224 monoplane fighter. But RJ Mitchell's Type 224 had displayed a disappointing maximum speed of only 228 mph.

As submitted, the 'High Speed Fury Monoplane' was powered by the same engine - an evaporatively-cooled, 600 hp Rolls-Royce Goshawk V-12. [1] Of less advanced construction than the Supermarine Type 224, the Camm design would also result in a lighter, more nimble fighter. Instead of a cranked wing with heavily-trousered landing gear, the 'High Speed Fury Monoplane' featured a simple, tapered planform and dainty, cantilevered main undercarriage legs with Dowty internally-sprung wheels. Camm was convinced that his team had designed the superior fighter. But neither the Air Ministry nor the RAF was yet convinced that this 'High Speed Fury Monoplane' represented a sufficient advance to warrant development.

In mid-October 1933, Sidney Camm presented his 'High Speed Fury Monoplane' concept to the Hawker Board of Directors. With the active support of TO Sopwith, the Board approved funding for a private venture prototype. But there were stipulations. Little of the production Fury remained in Camm's 'High Speed Fury Monoplane'. To limit development costs, the Board insisted that the actual Fury fuselage be retained. It was also suggested that the Air Ministry's preferred experimental steam-cooled Goshawk be temporarily abandoned in favour of the conventionally-cooled 640 hp Rolls Royce Kestrel VI V-12. The two engines were similarly sized but, the Board felt, the Kestrel would be more acceptable to the lucrative export market.

Faster Fury - Refining the 'High Speed Monoplane'

At its best, the troublesome Supermarine Type 224 had proven to be only 5 mph faster than the pending Fury II biplane. [2] Clearly, the Supermarine Type 224 was no yardstick. Rather, the goal must be for Hawkers to produce another world-beater. To Camm, that meant a further redesign. He would need a budget sufficient to cover a fully-retractable main undercarriage and an entirely new empennage - the objective for the latter being the elimination of all struts, bracing-wires, gaps, and other drag-inducing excrescences. The Board agree to this plan. The new Hawker 'High Speed Monoplane' would combine the basic fuselage structure and engine of the Fury II biplane with new wings and tailplane.

The refined 'High Speed Monoplane' retained the basic wing design of the August 1933 concept. The planform had more sweep on its leading edge, less on the trailing edge. However, the basic structural approach and total wing area (200 sq ft) remained unchanged. A key difference, of course, was the incorporation of bays for the new retractable Dowty undercarriage main legs. Those undercarriage legs attached to new centre-section 'stub' - as did the outer wings wing panels. The empennage was entirely new, as was a retractable tailwheel.

Those centre-section 'stubs' were also designed to allow future additions to fixed armament. An immediate armaments change was in adopting the fuselage-side armament position from the August 1934 concept. This revised gun position was designed to accommodate .303-inch machine guns - either Vickers Mk.IV or Browning - or the larger .5-inch Vickers gun. Wing hard points were to be included - outboard of the retracted main wheels - for Small Bomb Carriers or racks.

The cockpit position was as it had been for the biplane Fury. The enclosed cockpit from the August 1933 design was adopted. That sliding Perspex canopy was moved aft to match the original Fury cockpit location. Plans included the use of a reflector gun sight (although the RAF had yet to make a selection of its preferred type). New to the cockpit was a hand lever which which the pilot would manually charge the undercarriage retraction system ... although it was still to be decided whether that system would be pneumatically- or hydraulically-operated.

(To be continued ...)

_____________________________________

[1] The 9-cylinder Bristol Mercury radial was offered as an alternative engine.

[2] The Type 224 and Fury biplanes also had roughly the same wing area - 295 and 252 sq ft respectively. However, the Fury II was over 1,100 lbs lighter than the Supermarine monoplane.
6
Land / Re: 1/12 Ford GT40 (remodelled)
« Last post by apophenia on Today at 09:11:08 AM »
Pink is for Cadillacs. ;)

Black is the traditional Ford colour ("Any customer can have a car painted any color that he wants so long as it is black." Henry Ford, 1863-1947), or blue. 8)


 ........  or beige. :o

Or the '64 Mustang's iconic Rangoon Red?
7
Land / Re: 1/12 Ford GT40 (remodelled)
« Last post by Old Wombat on Today at 08:48:23 AM »
Pink is for Cadillacs. ;)

Black is the traditional Ford colour ("Any customer can have a car painted any color that he wants so long as it is black." Henry Ford, 1863-1947), or blue. 8)


 ........  or beige. :o
8
Land / Re: Tamiya 1/12 F1 Lotus JPS Mk 3
« Last post by Old Wombat on Today at 08:31:24 AM »
 :smiley:
9
Scifi and Fantasy / Re: Bandai 1/48 Snowspeeder
« Last post by kpnuts on Today at 02:17:09 AM »
Hi all here is the next installment.





10
Land / Re: 1/12 Ford GT40 (remodelled)
« Last post by kpnuts on Today at 01:58:46 AM »
Here's a quick mock up ( I'm thinking of using some led's and have it hovering)








Can't decide on colour gold, blue or pink.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10