Spots on the Internet 2019.

[Guest]

That’ll be interesting: an M4 with working torsion bars. I suppose that must be the one on the commander’s hatch, as I can’t think of where else there might be any (I also feel the need to be a purist and say that this is not an M4A3E8 but an M4A3 with HVSS. Only the prototypes were E8s.)

[Dave Ward]

On the IBG Facebook page - another 'coming soon' 1/700 destroyer

Dave

[Dave Ward]

On the Zvezda Facebook page, a variant of their UAZ van, a fire truck, in 1/43

Dave

[AlanG]

The new 1/32 Revell Me262 A-1/A-2. This looks very nice indeed!

[Dave Ward]

On the AFV Club Facebook page - not really clear on when, but looks rather good

Dave

[JR]

Don't think Dave has posted this, available in June.

BOX ART

Photos of the completed model






From Modelling News.

Looks strange to see such a gap on those front track guards, must be a good reason for it.

[Dave Ward]

John,
I don't post from Modelling News, I prefer to try and look at the makers Facebook pages, or websites - although the effort some put into these is laughable!!!!
re the ARL 44 - all the photos I've seen show the track guards in that configuration - maybe they ran out of sheet steel, or the designer had a sickie............
Dave

[JR]

From ARK models web page

AK48047 I-16 type10/17

[IMG align="left"]http://ark-models.org/pictures/news/nps_143.jpg[/IMG] We present to your attention a new product. Model fighter I-16. It's not just a repeat of the old 48003 set. This is a fundamentally new set. Completely different resin parts. Engine, missiles, detailed interior of the cabin, chassis, simulation of sagging elements of the tail group and on the wings. The kit contains details for prototype variants: type 10 and type 17

Not for me but might be of interest to wingys.

[Guest]

[ATTACH]340775[/ATTACH]

Bronco will release a Ram cruiser tank in 1/35 later this year. No idea yet if it will include an interior, but if so, a Ram Kangaroo should be an easy conversion.

[Dave Ward]

From a late emailshot by MiniArt..............................

That is certainly different!
Dave

[rtfoe]

How did they counter rotate the fuselage with the roto wings? Also landing must have been not easy. This must have still been on paper.

Cheers,
Richard

[Tim Marlow]

Hi Richard
This only ever got to wind tunnel test stage. No prototype was ever built. There is no torque issue though, the rotating wing is on a free bearing and is powered by the ram jets on the wingtips. It was supposed to be a tail lander, the wing operates a bit like an Osprey, copter blade when the aircraft is vertical, and prop when it’s horizontal. Another example of the WW2 German solution looking for a problem really.....

[Dave Ward]

The Lockheed Salmon & Convair Pogo were from the same defective premise, although the US realised that contra rotating props were more realistic than a frictionless ramjet powered thingy!
The Germans realised that normal runways were prime targets ( most Me262s were destroyed, landing, or taking off ). So, no runways at all, hence the Bachem Natter - and this bizarre contraption.
Dave

[Guest]

Another example of the WW2 German solution looking for a problem really.....

Not quite. The Germans late in the war had the definite problem that their airfields were being bombed and otherwise harassed by Allied aircraft, leading to a lot of losses when taking off and landing. They had several designs intended to allow aircraft to operate from almost anywhere for this reason.

[Dave Ward]

On the AFV Club Facebook page....................
Another 251 variant
Dave