iggie's modelling table

[AndrewR]

Now that's a nice looking build

[PaulBradley]

Nice Spitfire, Jim! You can never have too many....

[Lone Modeller]

Good news about the mojo Jim. The Spitfire looks really good especially in those markings.

[ShaunW]

I've seen the Spit in the aviation section and it really turned out nicely, Jim. I like the late versions of the Spitfire although it could be argued that they lack some of the grace of the early marks. I built this kit on here a few years ago and the only issue I had was with the decals which did not adhere particularly well and I had to be very careful when airbrushing on the final clear coat to ensure that none of them were blown off!

[iggie]

Thanks all for the kind words about the Spitfire and mojo return
I decided to delay my Hercules build again, and this is currently occupying the bench...

[iggie]

And I'm calling the Phantom phinished
The eagle-eyed amongst you will notice the omission of approximately three million tiny stencils which were supplied with the kit, but I'm blowed if I'm spending any more time going cross-eyed trying to see the damn things, let alone get them in the right places...
Not a bad kit, some very tight tolerances in places but overall the fit was really good and there's plenty of detail throughout...

[B4en]

The eagle-eyed amongst you will notice the omission of approximately three million tiny stencils which were supplied with the kit, but I'm blowed if I'm spending any more time going cross-eyed trying to see the damn things, let alone get them in the right places...

Been there, done that. Life's too short!
Elegant Phantom anyway.

[TeeELL]

Nice work on the F4 Jim. I really, really, really must build one for my ‘Aircraft I flew’/‘Aircraft of 29(F) Sqn’ themes!
This doesn’t quite cut it:

[Ratch]

Nice Toom Jim

[ShaunW]

Indeed, your build of the new tool Phantom looks great, Jim. I would agree that one of the bugbears with building modern kits of jets is the myriad of stencils - in the old days supplied stencils tended to include ejection seat triangles, rescue markings, air intake warnings and not a lot else. More often than not I will manage to apply around half of the smallest stencils before starting to lose the will to live and the ones that get skimped are usually those on the undersides.

[Impisi]

Nice, very nice Phantom

[Lone Modeller]

I agree with the above re-stencils. Thank good ness most early types did not have them!

[iggie]

As far as stencils are concerned, my next build goes to the opposite extreme from the Phantom, in so much that it has none
In fact, it looked a bit blame after applying the 8 (yes, 8 ) insignia provided with the kit, so I borrowed some Soviet era stencils from the spares folder to add some visual interest.
The build itself was not too bad: a lot of butt joints and poor alignment, and not a lot of detail. However, for such an unusual subject, it's worth the effort and would scrub up better had I bothered to apply a little more effort

So, with no further ado, I present for your delectation, the Amodel Illushin Il-40 'Brawny'
Apparently, only 5 were built, the version below being the last; initially the intakes were in the more usual location either side of the cockpit and guns mounted either side of the nose. However, whenever the guns were fired the gasses swamped the engines, causing hiccups or worse still, flameouts! To correct this, the guns were moved below the nose, and the intakes extended to the very front of the aircraft

[Lone Modeller]

I do like odd looking aircraft even if they have a hole in the back, and this one is no exception. What a strange looking type - I almost feel as though I would like to build one, but it doesn't have any struts!

[B4en]

Blimey! Now I have seen it all. I wonder what comic books the designers were reading.

Amazing model. Looks great.