With respect to weathering, gloss surfaces are actually great, with one exception being filters. But when it comes to dry brushing and pin washes, gloss surfaces make it much more easy to get colors to where you need them and nowhere else, and that's because of the inferior wetting angles of fresh color on a glossy surfaces. The color does not run but stays where you applied it.
Filters are different, because here you want a good wetting on the surface, you want the thinned color to spread by itself.
So I usually start with a semi gloss finish, apply filters, then I apply a glossy clear coat, then pin washes and dry brushing, and finally a satin or matt finish.
today's work
Collapse
X
-
I use 2K Acrylic Urethane auto paint -- most of those colors are gloss. After the colors go on I scratch the surface with #2400 grit sandpaper used wet. And proceed from there.Well that’s new to me. Why do you use gloss at the beginning? I always found gloss to be a pain in the butt to sand. Also, if it’s still sticky after 48 hours, it becomes contaminated, and has to be removed. When I used to paint model cars, I found that putting it in a room with good air conditioning and low humidity did the trick. But fisheyes always showed up.
Leave a comment:
-
Well that’s new to me. Why do you use gloss at the beginning? I always found gloss to be a pain in the butt to sand. Also, if it’s still sticky after 48 hours, it becomes contaminated, and has to be removed. When I used to paint model cars, I found that putting it in a room with good air conditioning and low humidity did the trick. But fisheyes always showed up.Leave a comment:
-
-
I don’t think I’ve ever seen you use a gloss color. Also, that particular shade is a new one on me. Excellent build.Leave a comment:
-
Leave a comment:
-
What kind of model are you performing repairs on in the last pictures? Victor III/Akula semiscale?Leave a comment:
-
-
-
It's not the destination so much as it's all about the getting there.I’ve never seen anyone perfect parts of the boat that will never be seen by anyone as you do. For some reason I’m the same way. I take pride in my limber holes being correct and square. It’s kind of weird, isn’t it? I would even say anal. I’m the same way with ham radio equipment. If I see a used piece of gear, and it’s got one smudge on it, I won’t buy it.Leave a comment:
-
I’ve never seen anyone perfect parts of the boat that will never be seen by anyone as you do. For some reason I’m the same way. I take pride in my limber holes being correct and square. It’s kind of weird, isn’t it? I would even say anal. I’m the same way with ham radio equipment. If I see a used piece of gear, and it’s got one smudge on it, I won’t buy it.Leave a comment:
-
[QUOTE=TAGood827;n188961]I've assembled four of these wonderful Mobius kits, but only one was outfitted with practical 'bow planes'. The other three -- assemble and profiting from lessons learned on the first, bow plane equipped unit --only required practical INDEPENDANT (and that is an important distinction) stern planes and fairwater planes. The practical bow planes turned out to be an ugly and redundant means of controlling the submarines pitch angle. Let let the following illustrations make my argument:
So after watching the videos you posted, I have my first questions.
During the video of the 1/128 Moebius kit in the big pool, I believe you said you thought you should add some bow planes to the front of the Seaview as she tends to dive with that big wing in the front.
Did you do that? If so, was it a cut of the wing and how wide did you go?
That's something I will have to plan for in modifying my Ken Lane files.
Also, I think it might be best if I create a new topic based solely on the Ken Lane Seaview so as not to disrupt this forum.
Tim
That first SEAVIEW was totally uncontrollable in pitch once achieved submerged trim; any advance of the throttle and the shovel-bow pushed the nose down and control could not be regained without going all-back-MF'r. I retrofitted the bow planes, and only with that rather ugly arrangement (see below picture) could I control the boats pitch angle. The stern planes and bow planes were mechanically linked together and worked in unison to rotate the boat about the pitch axis
Ellie and I produced an entire range of fittings kits for this subject. Here you see the bow planes, control horns and a portion of the stern plane-bow plane push rods.
Though the retro-fit bow planes continued the compound curved lives at the tips of the 'manta fins', once they assumed any angle the entire aesthetics of the submarine were ruined!
And here is the linkage that ran from the bow planes to the stern planes. As to the dimensions of the bow planes -- those were driven by the engraved outline represented on the kit parts by deeply engraved lines. Just follow the lines and you have the shape of the bow planes.
The stern portion of the bow-stern plane linkage.
Through extensive testing, evaluation, and experiment I came up with the fix: pre-setting the stern planes at a slight 'rise' angle and incorporation of a fixed stator van in the bottom of the nozzle to also produce a pitch-up moment whenever the pump-jets were pushing water. These two steps eliminated the need for the bow planes.
I have no problem sharing my thread -- the objective is to interact with you guy's, not to spout off without challenge from on high.
David
The Horrible
👍 1Leave a comment:























































Leave a comment: