Thank you.

The B-17 bomb bay is actually large enough to take an Upkeep on a retractable spin/launch frame except for one thing  - the central structural keel.
It would have to be got rid of completely and then the plane would probly fold  in the middle.
But only in real life.
In a movie filmed with models it would be possible.  As Gerry Anderson proved when he made his own Dam Busters movie - the Sci Fi/time travel/disaster movie Thunderbusters.

 

   for sure

Liking it a lot 

Quote from: zenrat on April 23, 2024, 05:24:39 AMSnip...  As Gerry Anderson proved when he made his own Dam Busters movie - the Sci Fi/time travel/disaster movie Thunderbusters...Snip

Is that the one where the Queen got blown out the airlock and Trott Scacy turned to his brother Trohn and said told he was only supposed to blow the bl***y hatch off? Classic.

I may have missed it, but where did the upkeep bomb come from? Looks to have very crisp detailing.

Quote from: Charlie_c67 on April 27, 2024, 01:25:47 PM

Quote from: zenrat on April 23, 2024, 05:24:39 AMSnip...  As Gerry Anderson proved when he made his own Dam Busters movie - the Sci Fi/time travel/disaster movie Thunderbusters...Snip

Is that the one where the Queen got blown out the airlock and Trott Scacy turned to his brother Trohn and said told he was only supposed to blow the bl***y hatch off? Classic.

  

Quote from: Charlie_c67 on April 27, 2024, 01:25:47 PMI may have missed it, but where did the upkeep bomb come from? Looks to have very crisp detailing.

Airfix.  From the current Op. Chastise Lanc kit.

Anyone thinking of building a 1/72 B-17 could do themselves a favour and avoid the Academy B-17E.  Priming it has revealed the true badness of fit.
Worst, and possibly hardest to fix is the tail.  The complete rear end of the fuselage is moulded in clear and is slightly smaller in diameter than the fuselage to which it attaches.  Sanding is going to be a lady dog due to the already masked tail gunners windows.
So as I said, avoid.  Unless its very cheap and you are seriously hacking it about.

It's the only option for a B-17E and all of the Academy big tail Model 299O (B-17E/F/G) kits have the same tail fit problem. Academy
opted to do a single mould for the fuselage to cover all of the 299O variations, with a very predictable result in terms of fit.

I've seen a couple of builds where the modeller glued the tail gun position parts to the fuselage halves, and dealt with the fit and fairing issues before joining the fuselage together.

A new 1/72nd second B-17E would be nice especially if it included the option to do a very early E with the Sperry remote control belly turret.

The clear part for the tip of the tail is a single hollow piece  - slide moulded I presume.
It couldn't be fitted to the separate fuselage halves unless it was cut in two longitunally.
Well OK, it could be fitted to one half but that wouldn't help the fit.

PSR continues.  It seems to be going smoothly (sic) apart for the predilection the play doh masking has for shrinking as it hardens resulting in it falling out of the turret holes.

Bugger Fred...oh well more PSR then..like we all done that before 

Quote from: jcf on April 28, 2024, 10:49:57 AMIt's the only option for a B-17E and all of the Academy big tail Model 299O (B-17E/F/G) kits have the same tail fit problem. Academy
opted to do a single mould for the fuselage to cover all of the 299O variations, with a very predictable result in terms of fit.

I've seen a couple of builds where the modeller glued the tail gun position parts to the fuselage halves, and dealt with the fit and fairing issues before joining the fuselage together.

A new 1/72nd second B-17E would be nice especially if it included the option to do a very early E with the Sperry remote control belly turret.

Am I on the wrong way  ?   But the old B17e kit from Revell is often to find here . I used two of them last winter , very cheap .

PSR continues.
Fit of the small fuselage windows is abysmal.  I glued them all in and masked them but may now punch them out after painting and use Krystal Klear instead.
I am really not liking this kit.  Lucky it was cheap.

Quote from: killnoizer on May 02, 2024, 03:03:21 PM

Quote from: jcf on April 28, 2024, 10:49:57 AMIt's the only option for a B-17E and all of the Academy big tail Model 299O (B-17E/F/G) kits have the same tail fit problem. Academy
opted to do a single mould for the fuselage to cover all of the 299O variations, with a very predictable result in terms of fit.

I've seen a couple of builds where the modeller glued the tail gun position parts to the fuselage halves, and dealt with the fit and fairing issues before joining the fuselage together.

A new 1/72nd second B-17E would be nice especially if it included the option to do a very early E with the Sperry remote control belly turret.

Am I on the wrong way  ?  But the old B17e kit from Revell is often to find here . I used two of them last winter , very cheap .

While boxed as a B-17E a couple of times, the kit is actually a B-17F.

I'd like to believe PSR is finished.  However as we all know a coat of colour and fresh eyes can expose what i've missed.

But, assuming all is OK, my thought turns to paint.

I'm liking something similar to this...



Olive Drab over USAF Light Grey with darker green blotches.  I wish I could remember which green I used for this as it is the one I want to use again.

DAP Tempest II - 14 by Fred Maillardet, on Flickr

<edit.  I think it's Gunship Green.  We shall see.>

Oh that Tempest looks good 👍 👀 😁
Yeah mate that would be great on the 17 ..hunt it down 😊