toboldlygo
-
Posts
5,266 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Events
Exhibition Layout Details
Store
Blog Comments posted by toboldlygo
-
-
just needs some doped linen to finish it off - lovely kit
-
52 minutes ago, Methuselah said:
The RR engines have been mooted as a stand-in for a long time - and there is much merit in that option to at least see a Typhoon in the air. As for regenerating the Sabre - the prognosis isn't great. A vast effort to get - probably at most three Typhoons into the air..... The Sabre is a pretty fiendish engine. I knew mechanics who'd worked on them in the war - and they found them a nightmare. Still - if money is no object....
The question I have, is what engines those mechanics you knew had been working on previously to the Sabre?
-
1 hour ago, Methuselah said:
The Whirlwind is a strictly static build. The Tempest - being a Centaurus - is a bit more practical - but still a Herculean effort, and I very much look forwards to seeing it fly. The Typhoons.....well, it's fair to say that anything with a Sabre in it is in quite another league - rather an understatement..... I don't think ANY Sabre has even ground-run since the 1950's. There are few engines, very few spares - and nothing to compare with the infrastructure that sits behind, for example, the Merlin. No one alive was involved with the design, development or servicing of the Sabre. The Sabre was always a highly problematic engine, and the RAF got rid of them all as soon as the war ended - for exactly that reason. Napiers only half-decent engine was the Lion - and that took them decades to get right. We may well get to see a Sabre-engined Typhoon ground run, but the odds are stacked very heavily against it flying.
I suspect to get a Typhoon or Tempest V in the air - it may well be fitted with a Griffon or a Merlin (both of which will fit the air frames - I know Ian was mentioning that as an interim measure for his Typhoon). Though with modern design and engineering tweaks we might see a Sabre engined one fly.
-
14 minutes ago, Methuselah said:
Kermit Weeks has possibly got more Sabre engines than anyone else of the planet. His Tempests II & V are being restored to airworthy standards - but for static display. ( I think he possibly has eight Sabres.). Kermit has excellent resources and facilities - and is better positioned than probably anyone else to get a Sabre-engined Tempest into the air. One might argue that the FAA is perhaps a tad more adventurous than the UK's CAA. Even so - I wouldn't put money on his Tempest V flying.
Kermit has so many projects on the go, it's just crazy.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, MPR said:
Typhoon projects
Tempest (nearly there)
https://www.scramble.nl/military-news/tempest-roll-out
and of course
https://www.whirlwindfighterproject.co.uk/brochure/
I've had a number of conversations with Ian at Typhoon Legacy.
And there's a few other Tempest's on the go and I can remember seeing a pair of Tempest II's in the private hangar on the opposite side of Dunsfold Aerodrome that were recovered from Burma or India.
-
2
-
1
-
-
11 hours ago, Methuselah said:
The Sabre was problematic at any height, and in the early days, the Typhoon's airframe also gave many problems - all very stressful for the MAP at the time. The Whirlwind's airframe was built around the Peregrine, which was a much smaller engine than the Merlin - so the Merlin was never an option, they were simply to big and heavy. All the time and effort went into developing the Merlins, so the Peregrine and the Whirlwind both withered on the vine. The Typhoon never made the grade as a fighter, because, quite apart from the problems with the Sabre's reliability, the Typhoon's wing was very thick. Great for strength and housing cannons, but it had a very low Critical Mach Number - a problem many other types of that period suffered from, such as the P38. The similar-looking Tempest had an entirely new, and much thinner wing, and was a much better machine that used the Sabre and the Centaurus. The Tempest was developed into Centaurus-powered the Fury and Sea Fury, both excellent machines, though the Centaurus was also not without it's problems.
Then someone had the bright idea to take advantage of the Typhoon's fighter shortcomings and it become the superb ground attack aircraft we all know - so good they named the Eurofighter Typhoon (much to the annoyance of the Germans).
With the Tempest, a lot of people ask why the Tempest V - the Tempest was developed to take a multitude of engines, the fifth prototype and first flown was fitted with the Sabre II, which was readily available as production started. Then the II with the Centaurus - the others fell by the wayside.-
1
-
2
-
-
On 07/06/2021 at 07:58, Mikkel said:
Dammit, this stuff looks so tempting. TBG, I think you're employed by the model aircraft business to infiltrate the railway modelling hobby. I hope they're paying you well because it's almost working. If it had a copper-capped chimney my last defences would crumble.
I do have an aircraft model in production cue, that has actual copper machine guns..
-
4
-
-
46 minutes ago, KeithMacdonald said:
Very nicely done!
How did you do the weathering? Would like to know for a Mosquito.
I'm glad to see the Seafang is on the list of aircraft flown by the legendary Eric Winkle Brown.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_flown_by_Eric_"Winkle"_Brown#S
Mind you, it would be more remarkable if it wasn't!
Easy a semi matt clear coat to seal the decals, then a smothering of Flory Dark Dirt Wash, which was cleaned off once dried. The various stains were done with Tamiya Weathering Powders.
-
1
-
-
57 minutes ago, Legend said:
Must admit I have never heard of it . My Dad worked on Seafires and Fireflies when he did his National Service , fortunately after the war . Nice build though . Looks a bit like a Sea Fury . Did it evolve into that?
I worked on a Firefly & Sea Hawk and got to sit in a Sea Fury & Swordfishes - all the FAA Historic Flight.
-
2
-
-
I've weathered one of these for certain @gwrrob, it certainly didn't have the 3D printing pattern on the roof (that's what the lines are). I suspect the roof is the bare 3D Print.
-
1
-
-
Looking at the sun-light through the top seam of the boiler, it looks to me like the sides of the boiler have not been held/clamped together for long enough for the glue to set properly - once parts have been added, the seam's been pulled apart, rather than it being a lack of glue.
As to fixing it, the easy option would be to put some low tack masking tape on the outside of the seam and squeegee in some Perfect Plastic Putty tinted to Hornby's Green (use Vallejo Model Air 71.324 Dark Green) into the gaps and let it set.
The hard option requires clamping either side of the boiler (without damaging anything and applying some pressure). Then running some Tamiya Extra Thin (or equivalent hot glue) along the seam - just don't mask the outside. In theory the hot glue will soften the existing glue enough that pressure applied by the clamps will close the gap.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Siberian Snooper said:Do I take it that you have an oil fired loco (steam) on ANTB that I've not noticed before?
Erm @gwrrob had his one arrive from 'The Works' in May 2019...
-
2
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, ScRSG said:
Some photos of my attempts at improving Hornby green, the first picture shows Tamiya X-24 Clear Yellow airbrushed on to a spare A4 tender -
And the second picture shows the same paint brushed on -
The clear yellow was used as I felt the original green needed to be richer.
Both finishes seem to be acceptable.
Another experiment I have tried was using the Humbrol 1322 clear orange (yellow?) on a Hornby Duchess pictured below.
This has given a very good finish in my opinion BUT, and it is a big but --
The Humbrol finish has a glossier look then the Tamiya which some may prefer but both do seem to enhance the original green.
With Tamiya (Acrylic) clear coat, you can vary the finish depending on what you use to thin it for airbrushing.
-
1
-
-
15 minutes ago, 57xx said:
Also the pressure is reduced when cold. I would always place the can into a pan of boiled water to heat it up, it thinned the paint and got the pressure up to a suitable spraying level.
Boiled Water?
most Aerosols carry a warning not to expose to temperatures above 50 degree's C.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, The Fatadder said:
I have had issues with two items, both times spraying in colder conditions. The first on a RTR grange and the second on a tender which had been sprayed with Phoenix enamel.
I have feeling both were sprayed in the garden holding the work piece, and may well have been held too close or sprayed too thick. The king which did not have the issue (and a couple or other locos sprayed since) were done with a lighter coat in the spray booth
My advice for using aerosols in cold weather outside (or in a cold loft or outbuilding), make sure the aerosol is kept warm before and in between coats of paint - as if they are cold the paint can come out quite thick.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, The Fatadder said:
That explains what happened with my Grange..
Did you use either Phoenix or Railmatch enamel paint?
-
Okay, I've been using a lot of different types of paint since my last post and learnt a lot.
Crazy paving in paint - let each coat dry out fully, before applying the next, as this is the main cause of cracked or crazy paving after you apply a clear coat.
Vallejo Model Air - forget thinning it with their own thinners, use Vallejo's Airbrush cleaner instead. Not only does it act as a retarder, but self levels the paint (it dries slower) and your airbrush won't clog.
Lacquers - stink to high heaven (so mask up & use extraction), but will produce a fantastic finish. Light coats, lower pressure and close to the model. To far away you'll get a powdery/chalky finish, too heavy and you'll destroy the paint finish below (the affected paint will bubble up, like you've hit it with paint stripper).
-
1
-
-
On 02/11/2020 at 13:11, toboldlygo said:I've emailed a client of mine, who spent his youth going to Nine Elms and clambering all over Bulleid's at that particular time-frame (his father was an engineer at Nine Elms, before transferring to Derby). He might be able to shed some light on Winston Churchill's whereabouts. And yes I'm doing a load of Bulleids for him
So after consulting with my client, the only other time he saw Winston Churchill after withdrawal was in 1980.
-
2
-
-
15 hours ago, pH said:
It could have been seen somewhere else between when I saw it in Banbury shed on September 9 and when it was moved to Hellifield in November. However, I doubt if it could have been repaired after September9 (especially since we were told on that day that it was not going to be repaired), returned to the Southern Region, used on the S&D, then withdrawn on September 19.
I've emailed a client of mine, who spent his youth going to Nine Elms and clambering all over Bulleid's at that particular time-frame (his father was an engineer at Nine Elms, before transferring to Derby). He might be able to shed some light on Winston Churchill's whereabouts. And yes I'm doing a load of Bulleids for him
-
1
-
-
51 minutes ago, pH said:
I’d have to ask “How late in 1965 was ‘late’?”. I’ve seen a couple of withdrawal dates for 34051 - 1965/09/19 and 10/1965. I saw it dead in Banbury shed on 1965/09/09. It had failed there, and shed staff told us they didn’t think it was going to be repaired and returned to service. I would say it couldn’t have been on the S&D any later than the first week in September 1965.It was withdrawn on September 19th - however it could well of been seen after that as it was moved to Hellifield Shed in early November 1965.
-
1
-
-
On 30/10/2020 at 19:46, Barry Ten said:
Given that I want to rename/renumber one of my Blandford's, I'm zeroing in on 34102 Lapford or 34103 Calstock as likely candidates. If I've done my homework right, neither was rebuilt, both have 9 foot cabs and both can be run with the same cut-down tender that comes with 34107. 66 Squadron is also a possibility but it's the one BoB that didn't have the airfield badge.
If you were playing tender battleships, you would have taken a spectacular miss with 34103 Calstock.
34102 had the same tender from new - so you are okay there - however never carried a Crest.
34103 gained a 4,500gl Tender in October 58 and the tender was cutdown at the same time.
34110* gained a 4,500gl Tender in August 58 and again it was cutdown at the same time.
*The nameplates are in different places between the BofB & WC so are the holes in the Hornby Bodies.
-
1
-
-
16 minutes ago, Barry Ten said:
Yes, I had a suspicion it was going to turn into a minefield!
I've ordered a copy of The Power of the Bulleid Light Pacifics, which I hope will shed some more light on the matter.
It's a good starting point, but you'd be better off with Irwell's The Book of West Country & Battle of Britain Pacifics - far more detailed info.
Though over the years, I have come across a few oddities that haven't made it into books or records
-
1
-
-
Having modelled the entire class, you're about to enter the deadly Light Pacific Tender Trap..
Boscastle & Braunton both ran with 5,250gl tenders in modified (rebuilt) form.
The majority of the second series that stayed in their Original Air smoothed form had their 5,500gl tenders replaced with 4,500gl tenders when the class started being being modified.
-
1
-
-
11 hours ago, St Enodoc said:
Somewhere near the West Somerset Railway, perchance?
Possibly..
-
2
-
.thumb.jpg.60c53fcbcaa34017b05b8919d1a9e6d2.jpg)
most Aerosols carry a warning not to expose to temperatures above 50 degree's C. 
A Royal Build - Airfix 1/35th Scale Austin K2/Y Ambulance (in remembrance of the HM the Queen)
in TBG - Bulleid Nutters New Blog
A blog by toboldlygo in RMweb Blogs
Posted
In away yes, Airfix do the decals (not shown anywhere in the destructions - must be a licensing issue). though in truth 'Katy' the star of the film had a later (4x4) chassis in the film.