weathering
01-19-2011, 05:43 AM
#77
RE: weathering
ORIGINAL: J�R�
[img][/img]
Too bad all exhaust stains have been washed away, Cleaned for museum.
[img][/img]
Too bad all exhaust stains have been washed away, Cleaned for museum.
01-19-2011, 07:21 AM
#78
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Alexander City,
AL
Posts: 2,584
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: weathering
ORIGINAL: paladin
I’ve spent many years around c-130’s mh-60’s, f-16, A-10’s and a cast of many others installing new features. They were always clean, their ground crews were very proud of their charges. Being a modeler I ask them to show me typical wear points, they showed me cans of paint. Lettering was the most obvious place weathering hit on 30+ year old c-130 paint jobs.
You are trying to compare modern planes taken care of on a modern airbase to planes that were being patched together out in the field in the early 40's? I was in the navy myself and I can tell you from personal experience that the planes on the carrier weren't as crisp at the end of the Med. cruise as the were at the beginning. Really, the only part of the planes that stayed pristine were the windshields and canopies.
Well I figured you would pick the one pic that had a problem if you could find one, that why I did not spend a lot of time on it. I had hoped to have a substantive discussion on over weathering and what was the correct amount and color but that is not happening . So this will be the last time I take any time for this thread again so go have your last words.
It's not our fault you started a thread that didn't make sense to any level headed person that can read a book and see pictures. It's hard to have a "substantive" discussion with someone who is being so irrational about the obvious. Must have been a really slow day there.
Joe
I’ve spent many years around c-130’s mh-60’s, f-16, A-10’s and a cast of many others installing new features. They were always clean, their ground crews were very proud of their charges. Being a modeler I ask them to show me typical wear points, they showed me cans of paint. Lettering was the most obvious place weathering hit on 30+ year old c-130 paint jobs.
You are trying to compare modern planes taken care of on a modern airbase to planes that were being patched together out in the field in the early 40's? I was in the navy myself and I can tell you from personal experience that the planes on the carrier weren't as crisp at the end of the Med. cruise as the were at the beginning. Really, the only part of the planes that stayed pristine were the windshields and canopies.
Well I figured you would pick the one pic that had a problem if you could find one, that why I did not spend a lot of time on it. I had hoped to have a substantive discussion on over weathering and what was the correct amount and color but that is not happening . So this will be the last time I take any time for this thread again so go have your last words.
It's not our fault you started a thread that didn't make sense to any level headed person that can read a book and see pictures. It's hard to have a "substantive" discussion with someone who is being so irrational about the obvious. Must have been a really slow day there.
Joe
01-22-2011, 12:23 PM
#80
My Feedback: (34)
RE: weathering
Sorry to not get back to you all. Work and kids schedules make the week go by too fast.
As to my Post #20 with the 3 corsair pics.
Paladin, correct on Ira Kepfords weathering around wing inlets.
also the main fuel tank cap and smaller acces panels are on the top of the fuse so ground crew constatntly walking on wing roots.
As to my question on port stab on #8. The corsair flew of the crushed coral airstrips in the pacific would get weathered very quickly. the coral pieces were like sand blasting and the bottom side of the wings, lowered flaps and especially the stab leading edges would get hit the most.
Of note is that the corsair had identical stabs. Chance-Vought designed it so it could be used on either side if one got damged. Thus #8 has so much wear on the top of the port stab, it was actually taken from another corsair's starboard side to make it flyable again. I can't rember exactly what book on the F4U I read it in, but it definately stayed with me. and every picture tells a story!
I found from another RCU thread about 3 years ago, that Tulip brand "metallics" silver best replicates this. It is really shiny in the sunlight and looks better than just silver or aluminum paint IMHO. Tulip decorating craft paint is actually used to decorate t-shirts and is like elmers glue in a tube. It is found at craft stores like Michaels. After final painting, I sand through with 600 wet sandpaper until the primer shows. then I go back and with a small paint brush, brush over those spots with the Tulip silver. It is very thick so be light.
As to scale judging (generally speaking) It depends on the documentation presented.
If the contestant presents photo documentation it takes priority over any ink drawings or artist renderings. If the contestant has a restored aircraft in perfect and sometimes too glossy finish, he is scored against that documentation. So both aircraft, weathered or new/restored, can actually be "correct" and both are welcome at contests.
However, that is not to say a judge may have a preconceived notion of what he likes best.
As for me, I no longer judge. But weathered is more realistic to me and moreover I enjoy trying to recreate that effect in my warbirds.
r,
Mike P.
As to my Post #20 with the 3 corsair pics.
Paladin, correct on Ira Kepfords weathering around wing inlets.
also the main fuel tank cap and smaller acces panels are on the top of the fuse so ground crew constatntly walking on wing roots.
As to my question on port stab on #8. The corsair flew of the crushed coral airstrips in the pacific would get weathered very quickly. the coral pieces were like sand blasting and the bottom side of the wings, lowered flaps and especially the stab leading edges would get hit the most.
Of note is that the corsair had identical stabs. Chance-Vought designed it so it could be used on either side if one got damged. Thus #8 has so much wear on the top of the port stab, it was actually taken from another corsair's starboard side to make it flyable again. I can't rember exactly what book on the F4U I read it in, but it definately stayed with me. and every picture tells a story!
I found from another RCU thread about 3 years ago, that Tulip brand "metallics" silver best replicates this. It is really shiny in the sunlight and looks better than just silver or aluminum paint IMHO. Tulip decorating craft paint is actually used to decorate t-shirts and is like elmers glue in a tube. It is found at craft stores like Michaels. After final painting, I sand through with 600 wet sandpaper until the primer shows. then I go back and with a small paint brush, brush over those spots with the Tulip silver. It is very thick so be light.
As to scale judging (generally speaking) It depends on the documentation presented.
If the contestant presents photo documentation it takes priority over any ink drawings or artist renderings. If the contestant has a restored aircraft in perfect and sometimes too glossy finish, he is scored against that documentation. So both aircraft, weathered or new/restored, can actually be "correct" and both are welcome at contests.
However, that is not to say a judge may have a preconceived notion of what he likes best.
As for me, I no longer judge. But weathered is more realistic to me and moreover I enjoy trying to recreate that effect in my warbirds.
r,
Mike P.
