- Thread starter
- #61
P51-D "Snifter"
- Thread starter Greedy
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Airframes
Benevolens Magister
Eh!? How come you got a first when it's not finished? Having said that, it's a LONG time since I bothered with IPMS, so no doubt the rules and set-up have changed a lot. Last time I attended a meeting, many things weren't allowed - only a minimum of white metal, and resin and PE were only just being talked about! As it was the 'I PLASTIC MS', models had to be something like 95% plastic! There were exceptions, such as balsa fuselage plugs, but very few. My, how things have changed! Mostly for the better, I must add.
- Thread starter
- #63
Lol i should of made myself clear i was half asleep when i posted last night.
Out of all the builds that are in progress mine is in first place so far it has gotten best build in progress. As far as IPMS goes it has changed alot we have diecast modelers and 3d paper builders too now
and there are alot of different types of builds. The two most commen builds are.
* From the box (Nothing added but whats in the box)
* Out of the box (The box kit plus photo etched and res parts)
Alot of the tank armours built has more then 65% metal (Brass).
As for the p51-d i found out last night that this is the new version of the dragon kit where the problems of the last kit should of been fixed by dragon. So i asked the dragon rep why the problems are still their.
His answer " They used new tooling for the moulds and the rivert lines and other areas of the kit have been improved. But saying that dragon uses other companys moulds they subcontract these companys to build the parts needed. ".
So i find out the kit has parts of other kits like Airfix and Tamiya. I was also told it had something to do with copyright another campony copyrighted that part so it was easier just to use their moulds.
Out of all the builds that are in progress mine is in first place so far it has gotten best build in progress. As far as IPMS goes it has changed alot we have diecast modelers and 3d paper builders too now
and there are alot of different types of builds. The two most commen builds are. * From the box (Nothing added but whats in the box)
* Out of the box (The box kit plus photo etched and res parts)
Alot of the tank armours built has more then 65% metal (Brass).
As for the p51-d i found out last night that this is the new version of the dragon kit where the problems of the last kit should of been fixed by dragon. So i asked the dragon rep why the problems are still their.
His answer " They used new tooling for the moulds and the rivert lines and other areas of the kit have been improved. But saying that dragon uses other companys moulds they subcontract these companys to build the parts needed. ".
So i find out the kit has parts of other kits like Airfix and Tamiya. I was also told it had something to do with copyright another campony copyrighted that part so it was easier just to use their moulds.
Pieces of garbage, I tell you man. Any customer support these days are horrible, most of the operators dont even speak understandable english [In the US]. Example: IBM has terrible customer support and most of their customer service answer from India or the Phillipines.. But you worked past the kink and the kit is going suave smooth! 
Airframes
Benevolens Magister
I agree with all that Maglar says, especially about your good work on the kit. But the bit from the rep about the 'improvements' from Dragon is fantasy, and smacks of cover-up excuses.
First, neither Airfix or Tamiya produce a 1/32nd scale Mustang, or even any parts common, and second, months before this kit was even released, Dragon announced that it was being produced with their own 'slide-mould technology', and that it was 'all new'. Don't know where the rep got his info, but the same faults are obviously present, and some of them are blatantly obvious in the pics!
Personally, I think that perhaps some of the tooling might have been contracted-out from the start; the pre-production test shots, possibly from a (short run) master-pattern for the moulds, would have produced parts that fitted well, as seen in the original, unpainted advertising model. But, when the production tools were used, probably at different locations, and the parts all came together, those from (for example) 'Tool A' didn't meet-up with the ones from 'Tool B' that they were supposed to match. This is more likely in line with what you were told by the rep, who probably quite innocently thought that it was an error due to the diverse manufacture, import of parts etc. The bottom line is, the kit is flawed, and it doesn't appear to have been corrected, which is not all that surprising, considering the huge cost of producing moulding tools. Shame really, as the kit does eventually turn out looking OK. But, just think what it would have been like if it was right in the first place!
One thing I've noticed that might support my theory - the latest variants of the kit, under the guise of a recce version, and, I think, a Korean War period version, are quite a bit cheaper than the original P51D you and I bought.
But, back to your build, and thanks for the explanation about the latest IPMS set-up. Looking forward to more progress shots mate.
Terry.
First, neither Airfix or Tamiya produce a 1/32nd scale Mustang, or even any parts common, and second, months before this kit was even released, Dragon announced that it was being produced with their own 'slide-mould technology', and that it was 'all new'. Don't know where the rep got his info, but the same faults are obviously present, and some of them are blatantly obvious in the pics!
Personally, I think that perhaps some of the tooling might have been contracted-out from the start; the pre-production test shots, possibly from a (short run) master-pattern for the moulds, would have produced parts that fitted well, as seen in the original, unpainted advertising model. But, when the production tools were used, probably at different locations, and the parts all came together, those from (for example) 'Tool A' didn't meet-up with the ones from 'Tool B' that they were supposed to match. This is more likely in line with what you were told by the rep, who probably quite innocently thought that it was an error due to the diverse manufacture, import of parts etc. The bottom line is, the kit is flawed, and it doesn't appear to have been corrected, which is not all that surprising, considering the huge cost of producing moulding tools. Shame really, as the kit does eventually turn out looking OK. But, just think what it would have been like if it was right in the first place!
One thing I've noticed that might support my theory - the latest variants of the kit, under the guise of a recce version, and, I think, a Korean War period version, are quite a bit cheaper than the original P51D you and I bought.
But, back to your build, and thanks for the explanation about the latest IPMS set-up. Looking forward to more progress shots mate.
Terry.
- Thread starter
- #66
I do agree with both of yous. You would think that they would of fixed the faults with the first one. Either way its a big let down. Im going to copy these posts and pass them on to him. Dont get me wrong but i thought dragon was japenness! So why would airfix have something to do with them? But again im sure their will be a hundered cases for why this model is the way it is. And its not as if dragon dosent have the money to fix the faults so why dont they!!!.
Back to IPMS dont know why they call it international plastic model blar blar. The amount of people in it from other nationalitys should be named International peoples modeling society. lol
Now for the p51-d more pics!!!
Back to IPMS dont know why they call it international plastic model blar blar. The amount of people in it from other nationalitys should be named International peoples modeling society. lol
Now for the p51-d more pics!!!
Attachments
109ROAMING
2nd Lieutenant
Looking Good!
Keep it coming mate!
Airframes
Benevolens Magister
Comimg on very nicely mate.
I think that Revell is slightly incorrect to suggest the yellow colour.The most correct name of the paint should be Yellow Zinc Chromate.It was a primer and preservative. If you want , you can mix yellow paint with a couple of drops of silver.The much silver the much greenish the mixture becomes.Why silver and yellow, because the mentioned above paint was of yellowish tonality but applied on sliver ( aluminium) plate got the green tonality.
But remember that a yellow colour applied on bare plastic is yellow not greenish.So if you want to imitate the Yellow Zinc Chromate paint you have to or mix these two mentioned above paints or use a metalizer or silver paint as primer.Or use the paint of the name which is offered in hobby shops of course.But I'm sure you know about it.
Tony Hill
Tech Sergeant
Looking good mate, I'd love to come over east some time and see the real girl.
Oh, and BTW, I'd stay away from the REAL Yellow Zinc Chromate paint. You would never need a "night light" again. I've worked with it and it is a high cancer risk.
.
Oh, and BTW, I'd stay away from the REAL Yellow Zinc Chromate paint. You would never need a "night light" again. I've worked with it and it is a high cancer risk.
.
- Thread starter
- #77
Airframes
Benevolens Magister
The cockpit and the area up to the rear bulkhead, behind the radios and fuel tank, should be Interior Green. The firewall in the engine bay, and the engine bearers were also interior green. The other fittings in the engine bay, such as the oil tank and the insides of the cowlings, the front of the main spar in the wheel bay and the interior of the rear fuselage were yellow zinc chromate. The wheel bays themselves were laquered aluminium. The pilots seat would be either Medium Green or Olive Drab 41. The insides of the gun bays were zinc chromate, depending on production run/factory, either yellow or green, and the ammunition trays were Interior Green. These were the coatings applied at both the Inglewood and Dallas factories. Australian, CAC built aircraft used a different shade of green, and those Mustangs preserved in flying condition today, will often show some different colours; for example, wheel bays might be yellow or green zinc chromate, to protect them, and cockpits might be painted grey.
Airframes
Benevolens Magister
Mostly memory, from past research, and working with real aircraft over the years. Bear in mind though, I've been at it for over 46 years! Heck, I'm getting old!!!
