AAARRRRRGGGH, Heller's raised panel lines!
Ragnar Eckhoff
>Hi everyone,
>
[snip]
>Why do they make them with raised instead of recessed panel lines? Is this
>so beginners can practice their dry-brushing techniques?
[snip]
>Is this with all Heller/Airfix aircraft models? If so, please let me know so
>I won't buy them again in the future (and I thought Revell was bad).
>
>Greetz,
>
>Jodil Willems
>Maastricht, The Netherlands, Europe.
>@-mail: Jodil....@FYS.RuLimburg.NL
They make raised lines simply because it's easier/less expensive to make
moulds with raised lines. A couple of decades ago, nearly all kits had
raised panel lines, and no one was complaining... It's only quite recently
that engraved lines have become the norm. Heller's Connie is quite old AFAIK,
and when it first came out most kits had raised lines.
Most European manufacturers, like Airfix, Heller and Revell, have mainly old
kits in their sortiment, which means raised lines, but some of their latest
kits feature engraved lines. Note that even Hasegawa and Tamiya are still
manufacturing kits with raised lines, so you never know!
Ragnar E.
Ragnar Eckhoff
## Jodil ##
I recently have bought a Lockheed L-749 Constellation 1:72 (Heller, it was
the only box of the Connie) and guess what: raised panel lines! And even
worse, it has very big raised lines in the vincinity of the front edge of
the wings.
Why do they make them with raised instead of recessed panel lines? Is this
so beginners can practice their dry-brushing techniques?
BTW, I cut them off and sanded it smooth but it is still a mess, because it
is almost impossible (too much work and I lack the accuracy of the precise
position of them) to replace all raised panel lines with a scribing tool. I
don't trust the positions of the lines on my model.
Andrew Abshier
>
>Is this with all Heller/Airfix aircraft models? If so, please let me know so
>I won't buy them again in the future (and I thought Revell was bad).
>
>Greetz,
>
>Jodil Willems
>Maastricht, The Netherlands, Europe.
>@-mail: Jodil....@FYS.RuLimburg.NL
No. The later kits by both manufacturers do have recessed panel
lines. The Connie's raised lines are overdone, but the DC-6 does
have engraved detail. Best advice is to ask on this board, if
you are interested in buying a particular Airfix or Heller model,
to get more information before spending your money.
Andy
Ragnar Eckhoff
[snip]
>Why do they make them with raised instead of recessed panel lines? Is this
>so beginners can practice their dry-brushing techniques?
[snip]
>Is this with all Heller/Airfix aircraft models? If so, please let me know so
>I won't buy them again in the future (and I thought Revell was bad).
>
>Greetz,
>
>Jodil Willems
>Maastricht, The Netherlands, Europe.
>@-mail: Jodil....@FYS.RuLimburg.NL
They make raised lines simply because it's easier/less expensive to make
Ragnar Eckhoff
Peter Habala
> They make raised lines simply because it's easier/less expensive to make
> moulds with raised lines.
Oh! I finally got it. It's cheaper.
:-)))).
Colin K. Work
>Why do they make them with raised instead of recessed panel lines? Is this
>so beginners can practice their dry-brushing techniques?
>
Its to do with molding process - its comparatively easy to etch panel
lines in the master (=raised lines in the model). You will probably
have noticed a relationship between raised/recessed lines and cost
(though unfortunatly this is not a reliable guide!)
>Is this with all Heller/Airfix aircraft models? If so, please let me know so
>I won't buy them again in the future (and I thought Revell was bad).
This is certainly the case with any Heller and Airfix I have bought,
though I find genuine Heller kits (beware re-boxings!) usually are more
subtle than Airfix. Conversly, I find the Heller plastic somehow
"soapier" and prone to flaking, which makes re-scribing more difficult.
But the whole panel line thing is a bit iffy anyway - go and look at a
well maintained aircraft. Now scale the panel joint down to 1/72nd - in
many cases you wouldn't be able to see it. In most cases 1/72nd model
panel lines are overscale - raised or recessed - so the best you can
hope for is to create the correct illusion. I find that this is not
always via recessed lines. Amongst my WWII aircraft collection, I have
a mixture - recessed lines for the frontline fighters, jets and other
high performance aircraft, but some of the biplanes, trainers and other
utility aircraft don't look bad with raised (though admittedly sanded
down somewhat) panel lines.
Having said all that, if you can look at some classic/vintage aircraft
(e.g. DC-3) you will notice that some joints are not correctly
represented by EITHER raised or recessed lines since one panel actually
overlaps another - i.e. one panel is higher than the other, with a small
step effect.
Regards,
Colin
SC Lexicat
<c...@mail.soton.ac.uk> writes:
>But the whole panel line thing is a bit iffy anyway - go and look at a
>well maintained aircraft. Now scale the panel joint down to 1/72nd - in
>many cases you wouldn't be able to see it. In most cases 1/72nd model
>panel lines are overscale - raised or recessed - so the best you can
>hope for is to create the correct illusion. I find that this is not
>always via recessed lines.
Colin, you're a man after my own heart. Couldn't agree more.
Simon Craven
Lexicat Ltd.
England (also at scraven @ delphi.com)
Magnus Fridsell
Jodil....@FYS.rulimburg.nl writes:
>BTW, I cut them off and sanded it smooth but it is still a mess, because
it
>is almost impossible (too much work and I lack the accuracy of the
precise
>position of them) to replace all raised panel lines with a scribing
tool. I
>don't trust the positions of the lines on my model.
Your'e trying to do things in the wrong order Jodil! Start with
rescribing the lines, using the raised ones as guides, then all that is
needed is some gentle sanding to reveal a surface that, depending on
operators skill, is somewhere between Matchbox and Hasegawa in quality!
Apart from that, if the lines are in the wrong position it wouldn't
matter if they were raised or not, they would be in their wrong positions
anyway. Apart from that, it is easier to sand away than to fill in!
Also, when commenting on the accuracy of Heller: I love their little
charming models of unusual subjects and often they are spot on accurate.
My Tempest suffered from a slightly small canopy but otherwise it was
very good and with rescribed panels using the method above it is a real
beauty!
Good luck with your Connie
Magnus
=================================================================
Magnus Fridsell
Skyttevagen 9, 1tr.
S-191 51 SOLLENTUNA
SWEDEN
Phone: +46 8 96 66 06
e-mail: x...@ilk.kth.se
All mammals have hair.
Shave the whales!
Dogbert
Jens Håkon Brandal
>the only box of the Connie) and guess what: raised panel lines! And even
>worse, it has very big raised lines in the vincinity of the front edge of
>the wings.
>
>so beginners can practice their dry-brushing techniques?
>
>is almost impossible (too much work and I lack the accuracy of the precise
>position of them) to replace all raised panel lines with a scribing tool. I
>don't trust the positions of the lines on my model.
>
>I won't buy them again in the future (and I thought Revell was bad).
>
Jodil,
If your idea of a great kit is anything with engraved panel lines, I beg to differ. Some ten,
fifteeen years ago they were the rule, rather than the exception as they are easier and
cheaper to produce. With the latest molding techniques (and customers' demand), they
have become much more common.
As an example, let's compare two kits; Fujimi's MiG-29 in 1:72nd and Monogram's F-106
Delta Dart in 1:48. Even if they are not to the same scale, that is not relevant.
The MiG-29 kit has engraved panel lines, so that must make a good model, eh? Well, the
kit was issued before the West could have a really good look at the MiG, so there probably
are some dimensional errors, but by far the worst criticism is the totally inaccurate canopy
and cockpit area that look "squashed" - all you need is to take one look at a real MiG-29 to
see that this area spoils the entire model (IMHO).
Now, look at the Dart: It has raised panel lines - so by your standards it is a lousy model, right?
It features beautiful detailing in the cockpit, wheel wells engine...you name it. It even gives
you the option to display the fully detailed weapons bay! True, it doesn't fit perfectly - I had
to use a bit of filler on mine, but it really captures the sleek look of the aircraft. Now, which
is the better representation of the subject in model form? I have a soft spot for the 'Six, so
I'm probably biased... :)
What I am getting at is that there are far more serious things to worry about than raised panel
lines (IMHO) - the most important to me is whether the model captures the character and
appearance of the subject. As long the shapes are OK and that all the parts are symmetrical
(e.g. fuselages are equally wide, wings have the same aerofoil section), I can live with less
detail, raised panel lines and using a bit of filler. These things are fairly easy to fix - if you want
to. This is not intended as a flame (a gentle roasting perhaps:), but I think it would be a pity to
discard a kit just because it has raised panel lines. Airfix and Heller have a few interesting
subjects in their ranges - and some are even unique. I spoke to a representative for Airfix at the
UK IPMS Nationals a few years ago, and they said that they were going back to having raised
panel lines as they were much cheaper to make. They have done some new subjects with
engraved panel lines though, and I got the impression the new Spitfire 22/24 and Seafire 46/47
would have engraved ones as the tooling will be made in Korea. Airfix' and Heller's Su-27 Flankers
have really nice engraved panel lines, as have the 1:48th Mirage 2000s. On the contrary, the
Jaguars in 1:48 have poorly executed engraved panel lines that are probably close to the real
thing in size! So, the answer to your question is; not all Heller/Airfix kits have raised panel lines.
Now, I might not have convinced you, so what do you do about the panel lines other than a total
rescribe?
The simplest solution is to just sand them off as you have done and leave them llike that. The
lack of panel lines is not the first thing you'll notice on a well finished model (i.e. no glue smears,
seams showing, running paint) with moderate weathering or a smooth, well maintained subject.
Another option is to use a pencil to draw the panel lines on the model. This might not work as
well on an all black model, but for most subjects it will look as realistic as washed panel lines.
Rusty White had an article in FineScale Modeler some time ago about this very effective technique
(sorry, don't remember the issue and I'm still at work). It could also be used to enhance engraved
surface detail - as a substitute/supplement to "washing". What you need is a thin technical pencil,
an eraser in a pen fitting, masking tape and some drafting templates to create circles and ellipses.
One drawback with this technique is that the lead adheres best to matte surfaces, and that you have
to be careful so that you won't smudge the model in lead. On the other hand, correcting mistakes
is easier than filling a panel line you engraved in the wrong place...
Third option is to rescribe only a few panel lines - the ones that are most obvious. If you look at phots,
you rarely see *all* the panel lines.
Fourth option: Paint the panels in slightly varying tones of colour to give an impression of individual
panels. I suppose this could be difficult to do well - especially on a multi-colour camouflage pattern,
and certainly involves a fair amount of work. Personally, I wouldn't have the patience to do it!
Fifth option - and the most labour intensive is to cover the airframe in individual panels. I've seen
some very impressive models by Alan Clark who uses this method in combination with polished/bare
metal finishes- awsome isn't even the word for it!
Right, I'll step down from my soap box. Sorry for this long winded reply, but panel lines and representing
surface detail happens to be one of my pet subjects in modelling... I wish you happy modelling in the
future - raised panel lined or not:)
Best wishes,
Jens
Abe Lynn
> >But the whole panel line thing is a bit iffy anyway - go and look at a
> >well maintained aircraft. Now scale the panel joint down to 1/72nd - in
> >many cases you wouldn't be able to see it. In most cases 1/72nd model
> >panel lines are overscale - raised or recessed - so the best you can
> >hope for is to create the correct illusion. I find that this is not
> >always via recessed lines.
> Colin, you're a man after my own heart. Couldn't agree more.
Just to present the other side. Photographs of poorly maintained
planes or aircraft during wartime (ie. the Vietnam war), seem to
indicate that at least the major panel lines are clearly visible from
fairly large distances (ie. 50 to 100 feet from the aircraft). Soviet
aircraft from the' 50s through '70s seem to always have plainly
visible panel lines, sometimes looking like they are just oozing
hydraulic fluid and collecting exhaust stains on every panel line
available.
Visibility of panel lines seems to depend on a lot of different
factors, ranging from how well-maintained the aircraft is, what
environment it's running under, how dark the camouflage/paint job is,
what scale your model is, etc.
The bottom line, and I *do* agree with Colin on this, is that look at
photographs (preferably ones that approximate the same scale distance
that you may look at your model, ie. maybe arms length), and then find
the best way to "create the correct illusion" that best approximates
what you see.
Abe Lynn
S.M. Head
>
>I recently have bought a Lockheed L-749 Constellation 1:72 (Heller... and guess >what: raised panel lines! And even worse, it has v=
ery big raised lines in the >vincinity of the front edge of....
>Why do they make them with raised instead of recessed panel lines? Is this
>so beginners can practice their dry-brushing techniques?
>
>Is this with all Heller/Airfix aircraft models? If so, please let me know so
>I won't buy them again in the future (and I thought Revell was bad).
>
>Greetz,
>
>Jodil Willems
>Maastricht, The Netherlands, Europe.
>@-mail: Jodil....@FYS.RuLimburg.NL
>
Jodil,
Besides what Jens replied, some aircraft had welded or overlapped panels, like the DC-3/C-47. Recessed lines correctly represent, al=
beit not true to scale, butted panel joints, but if your aircraft had welds or overlapped panels then raised panel lines would be mo=
re accurate than recessed. I'd check references on that Connie! Im building mine with raised lines, and sanding off the heavy ones y=
ou mentioned. Those are the deicer boots, and they should appear flush to the wing's surface. They are actually rubber, and in this =
scale would be closely replicated by a flat black tinted with about 10% white for scale effect.
I actually like the Heller Connie series, I'm building the EC 121 variant now and despite a few minor fit problems I am enjoying thi=
s as much as any Tamiya or Hasegawa kit. Happy Modeling!
Scott Head
IPMS 32841
Steve Reid
> In article <4d5mt6$g...@hickory.soton.ac.uk>, "Colin K. Work"
>
> >But the whole panel line thing is a bit iffy anyway - go and look at a
> >well maintained aircraft. Now scale the panel joint down to 1/72nd - in
> >many cases you wouldn't be able to see it. In most cases 1/72nd model
> >panel lines are overscale - raised or recessed - so the best you can
> >hope for is to create the correct illusion. I find that this is not
> >always via recessed lines.
>
> Colin, you're a man after my own heart. Couldn't agree more.
>
And I'll third that. I was about to suggest that the panel-linephobes
go out to the nearest airport & see how many panel lines they can find
@ 1/1 scale.
-Steve
Damien Burke
|> In article m...@newsbf02.news.aol.com, scle...@aol.com (SC Lexicat) writes:
|> > In article <4d5mt6$g...@hickory.soton.ac.uk>, "Colin K. Work"
|> > <c...@mail.soton.ac.uk> writes:
|> >
|> > >But the whole panel line thing is a bit iffy anyway - go and look at a
|> > >well maintained aircraft. Now scale the panel joint down to 1/72nd - in
|> > >many cases you wouldn't be able to see it. In most cases 1/72nd model
|> > >panel lines are overscale - raised or recessed - so the best you can
|> > >hope for is to create the correct illusion. I find that this is not
|> > >always via recessed lines.
|> >
|> > Colin, you're a man after my own heart. Couldn't agree more.
|> >
|> go out to the nearest airport & see how many panel lines they can find
|> @ 1/1 scale.
Depends what country you're in. Ever seen a MiG up close? ;-)
--
[ Damien Burke | Software Engineering | Email: D.M.Burk...@cs.bham.ac.uk ]
[ My world wide web home: | http://www.cs.bham.ac.uk/~dmb ]
[ Sinclair Spectrum page: | http://www.cs.bham.ac.uk/~dmb/speccy ]
[ European military aircraft page: | http://www.cs.bham.ac.uk/~dmb/hangar ]
SGordon12
seeing the "crack" but the area. IOWs, the area around a panel line holds
dirt and grime, since it is the site of activity. Also, some "panel
lines" are really access doors and the like. which means that there are
grubby mechanics opening the doors causing dirt and chipped paint etc.
Stewart
SGordon12
the entire model with a light gray, for darker schemes reverse it for
lighter schemes. Then paint the model with the top coat. After
weathering, very lightly wet sand the raised panel lines with a sanding
FILM. The panel lines will pop out very realistically. IMHO if you do
this right it looks better than most of the gaping engraved lines on
models. And this is Soooooo simple and quick, I did my 'six in about ten
minutes.
Stewart
Andrew Madison
: Another effective technique I use, (even did it on MY 'Six) is to paint
: the entire model with a light gray, for darker schemes reverse it for
: lighter schemes. Then paint the model with the top coat. After
: FILM. The panel lines will pop out very realistically. IMHO if you do
: this right it looks better than most of the gaping engraved lines on
: models. And this is Soooooo simple and quick, I did my 'six in about ten
: minutes.
(For those wondering) the recommended grit for this technique is
approximately 1800. Plus or minus a couple of hundred grit is okay,
from my experience with these ultra fine abrasives. I personally haven't
tried this technique, so your mileage may vary.
--
A.J. Madison mad...@nexen.com
Ascom Nexion
289 Great Road phone: (508) 266-2332
Acton, MA 01720-4739 FAX: (508) 266-2300
Luigi Cemulini
: Hi everyone,
: Why do they make them with raised instead of recessed panel lines? Is this
: so beginners can practice their dry-brushing techniques?
Because that was the way models where made 20 years ago .
: Is this with all Heller/Airfix aircraft models? If so, please let me know so
: I won't buy them again in the future (and I thought Revell was bad).
Since their output in the last decade was nill , I'm afraid that the
answer is yes ( even if some of them are good )
Hope this helps
Luigi Cemulini
l37...@alfa.ist.utl
Andrew Madison
And I wouldn't mind so much, but I bought this Hasegawa 1/72 B-47 for
mega-bucks and opened it to find raised panel lines. Okay, sure the molds
are older, but I think the pricing should reflect that status. I think
Hasegawa pricing indicates that since there's twice or three times as much
plastic in the box as a P-51 kit, then the price should be double or
triple the P-51, even though the model is from a completely different
era of quality.
Ed Baroth
those who've said it's not a matter of accuracy. To me, it's in the repair
that recessed has the advantage over raised. If you remove a raised panel
line while sanding, it's simply much harder to recreate than if you fill
in a recessed panel line.
By the way (just in case you ask), I've found that to recreate a raised
panel line, simply place tape (I use drafting but masking would work,
transparent tape may be too thin, cut to give a sharp edge) on the old
line and carefully spray (use primer - it's thicker) into the edge.I know
they always tell you NOT do do this, and this is why - you leave a line.
I've found it works very well. I've used it to make straight and curved
'raised' panel lines.
To recreate recessed panel lines, simply scribe them (but you knew that).
--
The best mind altering drug is truth - Lily Tomlin
Ed Baroth
eba...@eggcream.jpl.nasa.gov
Dave Rogers
>
>Another effective technique I use, (even did it on MY 'Six) is to paint
>the entire model with a light gray, for darker schemes reverse it for
>lighter schemes. Then paint the model with the top coat. After
>weathering, very lightly wet sand the raised panel lines with a sanding
>FILM. The panel lines will pop out very realistically.
Is this advisable with raised detail on instrument panels as well? I've
just started work on the Hasegawa 1/72 Nakajima B5N "Kate" torpedo bomber,
and it's got the best cockpit interior I've ever seen in 1/72, so I'd like
to do it justice. Recessed panel lines too. Shame about the flash.
--
dave....@bt-sys.bt.co.uk | Opinions expressed here
rational romantic mystic cynical idealist | are official statements
| on behalf of the Chrome
Pentium designers support the 48.999973524'ers | Moon Faction, *not* BT.
Brian MacNamara
Ed Baroth <eba...@eggcream.jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:
>Here's another thought re: raised vs. recessed panel lines. I agree with
>those who've said it's not a matter of accuracy. To me, it's in the repair
I agree completely. As far as accuracy goes, in scale you really can't tell
a difference between proper raised and recessed lines, however the repair
factor has always been a pain. All I can say is THANKS, Ed! Your idea is
simple, probably (should be) obvious, and just make my life a whole lot
happier!
>By the way (just in case you ask), I've found that to recreate a raised
...snip...
>line and carefully spray (use primer - it's thicker) into the edge.I know
...snip...
>'raised' panel lines.
Another wonderful example of "why didn't I think of that." Thanks again!
/Brian (who's off to fix his panel lines)
--
My opinions belong to me and my company can't have them!
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|@@@@@@@@@@ @@@| Brian MacNamara | Email: macn...@pci.on.ca |
|@@@@@@ *** @| Sr. Tech. Manager | Tel: (905) 764-0614 |
|@@@ ******* @| | Fax: (905) 764-9604 |
|@@ ********* @@| PCI Inc. | PCI WWW Url: |
|@ ******* @@@| 50 West Wilmot St. | http://www.pci.on.ca/ |
|@ *** @@@@@@| Richmond Hill, Ont. | Personal WWW Url: |
|@@@ @@@@@@@@@@| Canada L4B 1M5 | http://www.pci.on.ca/~macnamar |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
SC Lexicat
I know times have been lean, but at least there's some sign of
improvement.
Simon Craven
Simon Craven
Lexicat Ltd
England (also at scr...@delphi.com)
SGordon12
(Andrew Madison) writes:
>SGordon12 (sgor...@aol.com) wrote:
>: Another effective technique I use, (even did it on MY 'Six) is to paint
>: the entire model with a light gray, for darker schemes reverse it for
>: lighter schemes. Then paint the model with the top coat. After
>: weathering, very lightly wet sand the raised panel lines with a sanding
>: FILM. The panel lines will pop out very realistically. IMHO if you do
>: this right it looks better than most of the gaping engraved lines on
>: models. And this is Soooooo simple and quick, I did my 'six in about
ten
>: minutes.
>
>
>(For those wondering) the recommended grit for this technique is
>approximately 1800. Plus or minus a couple of hundred grit is okay,
>from my experience with these ultra fine abrasives. I personally haven't
>tried this technique, so your mileage may vary.
>
>
Another bonus to this technique is that you will need less gloss coat
since you are reducing the "tooth" of the paint by sanding it. Just watch
the edges of the paint as you will remove all the paint and need to
touch-up the paint.
Stewart
Mike Schatz
many of you have little or no concept of the mold making process.
To create the recessed panel lines you're talking about is to build a mold
that requires a very fine (and I mean VERY fine) ridge of material protruding
from the base of the mold. This file detail is exceptionally fragile and
subject damage very easily. Sure, the mold maker can build the tool, but
can you imagine the cost of having to have the tool repaired every time the
seam line was damaged? Guess who'd have to pay for that! You and me, that's
who.
So, as a compromise, the panel lines in the mold are basically scribed lines
which are far less likely to be damaged in the molding process.
I know, I know. This doesn't make you any happier or make your task any
easier. But then again, where's the satisfaction in doing an 'easy' task?
My 2 cents worth...maybe not worth that much.
--
______________________________________________________________________________
Mike Schatz.........................................................Boise, ID
Take your choice: Mmsc...@aol.com msc...@msn.com msc...@boi.hp.com
Disclaimer: All opinions expressed here are mine, AND YOU CAN'T HAVE THEM.
Colin Work
>
> Is this advisable with raised detail on instrument panels as well? I've
> just started work on the Hasegawa 1/72 Nakajima B5N "Kate" torpedo bomber,
> and it's got the best cockpit interior I've ever seen in 1/72, so I'd like
> to do it justice. Recessed panel lines too. Shame about the flash.
Yes it is nice, but a shame about the transparencies - I've been waiting
for a nice vacform set (preferably without having to pay for a whole
Falcon collection) before making it - does anyone know of anything
available?
Also, I'm wondering about the colour scheme which looks real nice - green
and brown (hard edged or soft edged?) splotches on a natural metal?
silver? IJN Grey? base colour - this base colour is my main problem -
which is it? Hasegawa are unreliable on such matters, I can't find an
example of the exact scheme and my other sources indicate that all 3 of
my suggested base colours are possible.
Any ideas?
Thanks, Colin
>
> --
> dave....@bt-sys.bt.co.uk | Opinions expressed here
> rational romantic mystic cynical idealist | are official statements
> | on behalf of the Chrome
> Pentium designers support the 48.999973524'ers | Moon Faction, *not* BT.
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Colin K. Work
University of Southampton Computing Services
C.K....@soton.ac.uk
(01703) 593090
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
SGordon12
dave....@bt-sys.bt.co.uk (Dave Rogers) writes:
>nique I use, (even did it on MY 'Six) is to paint
>>the entire model with a light gray, for darker schemes reverse it for
>>lighter schemes. Then paint the model with the top coat. After
>>weathering, very lightly wet sand the raised panel lines with a sanding
>>FILM. The panel lines will pop out very realistically.
>
>Is this advisable with raised detail on instrument panels as well? I've
>just started work on the Hasegawa 1/72 Nakajima B5N "Kate" torpedo
bomber,
>and it's got the best cockpit interior I've ever seen in 1/72, so I'd
like
>to do it justice. Recessed panel lines too. Shame about the flash.
>
>
Dave,
Yes, you can do this, but it is easier to just dry brush it with light
gray. If you want to increase the visibility of the highlights you might
try this. Take a toothpick and "paint" it with silver. I like to use a
TESTORS paint marker since the silver is the best I have seen. After the
toothpick is coated, but not dripping, rub it along the area that you want
highlighted. The toothpick transfers the paint in a very controlled way.
This is much better than a brush. If you want to bring that Kate alive
first paint the entire model silver as a base coat. Then paint it the
final color. To weather it, simulate rivets with a compass point. The
"rivets" will show the silver underneath just like the "real" aircraft
would. Drag an Exacto blade along the leading edge of the wing, allowing
it to "bounce" and you have chipped paint. The same for panel lines,
scrape (LIGHTLY) along the panel line and the silver will be exposed.
Areas around the cockpit were notorious for this kind of weathering. The
best thing about this is the chipped paint "really" is chipped paint so
they have depth. Oh well, quite a long answer for such a simple question!
Sorry about that!
Stewart
Wayne C. Morris
>>Hi everyone,
>>
>>I recently have bought a Lockheed L-749 Constellation 1:72 (Heller, it was
>>the only box of the Connie) and guess what: raised panel lines! And even
>>worse, it has very big raised lines in the vincinity of the front edge of
>>the wings.
>>
>>Why do they make them with raised instead of recessed panel lines? Is this
>>so beginners can practice their dry-brushing techniques?
Count your blessings. Raised panel lines are infinitely better than the
canyon-like recessed panel lines on several of AMT/ERTL's Star Trek kits
(especially the Enterprise-A and the Runabout). These exagerated grooves
have to be puttied and then sanded, which is at least twice as much work as
removing raised panel lines and has much greater potential for destroying
adjacent details.
Wayne C. Morris
"Colin K. Work" <c...@mail.soton.ac.uk> wrote:
>>Why do they make them with raised instead of recessed panel lines? Is this
>>so beginners can practice their dry-brushing techniques?
>>
>
>Its to do with molding process - its comparatively easy to etch panel
>lines in the master (=raised lines in the model). You will probably
>have noticed a relationship between raised/recessed lines and cost
>(though unfortunatly this is not a reliable guide!)
Minor correction -- You mean the molds, not the master.
Doug Chaltry
>Yes it is nice, but a shame about the transparencies - I've been
waiting
>for a nice vacform set (preferably without having to pay for a whole
>Falcon collection) before making it - does anyone know of anything
>available?
>
>Also, I'm wondering about the colour scheme which looks real nice -
green
>and brown (hard edged or soft edged?) splotches on a natural metal?
>silver? IJN Grey? base colour - this base colour is my main problem -
>which is it? Hasegawa are unreliable on such matters, I can't find an
>example of the exact scheme and my other sources indicate that all 3
of
>my suggested base colours are possible.
>
>Any ideas?
>
>Thanks, Colin
Squadron makes a vacuform canopy for the Kate. It comes with only one
per pack for a couple of bucks. The Falcon naval set does not include a
Kate.
As for the color, all of my sources indicate that camoflaged Kates had
the greens and browns painted over the IJN gray base, not bare metal.
Very few carrier fighters were left bare metal because they needed the
paint for resistance to corrosion. Land-based naval planes may be a
different story, though. As to the hard or soft edges to the colors, I
would guess that they would be hard. If the camoflage was applied in
the field, I don't think that the Japanese used many spray guns, rather
the greens and browns were brushed on. Factory applied paint was likely
sprayed, though.
Doug