Video

Hiya David - I'm a microbiologist but I've been in the clinical diagnostic device development space for 25 years. But I do have an artsy side as well and I look at this hobby as an artform. How about you, what racket are you in? Cheers

@@johnalecsscalemodeling John Alec’s Scale Modeling David R Lentz, Columbus, Ohio, USA (Friday, 26 July, 2024) John, microbiologist sounds interesting, and in today’s setting, potentially deeply so; great volumes of research is in progress throughout the sciences, and I enjoy reading generally upon them (I lack the depth of reading to grasp the overwhelmingly complex details! You enhance the intrigue of this several orders of magnitude with “clinical diagnostic device development”. This is a peripheral interest of mine-well outside my intellectual capacity or training to create, yet immensely fascinating nevertheless: I have health issues intermittently requiring medical intervention that in themselves exacerbate my chronic pain with the more severe physical agony in certain “medical procedures” I suspect derive from the Marquis de Sade. Indeed, in just the past few days, two phlebotomists on different days had endeavoured to take a blood draw for clinical examination; they could not locate a vein (at times, my blood pressure can be low, and I am terribly thin), and I shortly found their repeated re-insertions of the needle screamingly painful such that I had to insist they stop. The second visitor proposed to me that I would be a candidate for a PICC (peripheral intravenous cardiac catheter) line (I am testing my capacity for recall here!). As a Star Trek (TOS) fan, I recall Dr. McCoy’s (DeForest Kelley) hypospray. Though I intellectually understand (at least in general) that such fictional constructs simply may not translate to the nonfictional world, I nevertheless wonder (at times quite irascibly!) why the medical community has yet to devise some contemporary analogue thereof. (For that matter, I also want a Transporter; a phaser set for stun; a food replicator; a portable shield generator; a portable computer station, its data storage encompassing all the scientific, technological, and medical knowledge of the time; a universal translator, etc. Relax, I am just having a bit of fun with my nerdness!) John, my situation is a long story. I come to CZcams to watch modellers build the kits I wish I could. This is my way to have fun, despite grim circumstances and austere resources. I then write (I am an aspiring novelist, and an occasional, if reluctant, sociopolitical essayist) 1) comments on what I have seen-many are truly remarkable; some seem to me to be quite overdone in the wear and the weathering; I greatly prefer a rather more restrained approach, wanting the reproduction itself to draw attention; still, I can see the value in some cases of wordlessly marking the ravages of arduous travail in an especially grueling combat setting, or just showing the passage of the decades-and 2) outlines of the modelling projects I would like to implement. For example, to present a row of aircraft replicas on the same theme, e.g., all of Tamiya’s 1:32nd-scale kits of the Chance Vought F4U Corsair USN/USMC Fighter series; this might include a Goodyear FG-1D, and the Corsair II and IV in service with the Royal Navy’s Fleet Air Arm; also with Australia’s and New Zealand’s respective service branches. Maybe even Trumpeter’s 1:32nd-scale F4U-4 Corsair late-war USN carrier-based Fighter kit). John, this is rather elaborate, so I will segment my reply into thirds (roughly). Just read as much as you wish. This is how I do my modelling-a mental exercise in my imagination-and is an outgrowth of my expository writing. (As I noted, my situation is a long story, your videos and posts part of the fun here.) I would like to combine models of the same æroplane, all assembled in-flight, each one’s 1) propeller spinning (this may require a metal replacement; I understand that the torque in time may warp or deform the polystyrene); 2) the undercarriage retracted, the landing gear doors closed over their respective wheel wells; 3) the cowl flaps closed; 4) separable flight control surfaces (ailerons, horizontal and vertical stabilisers, etc.) one can set in various ways that correspond to airborne manœuvres (sharp banks and tight turns, deep dives and soaring climbs, even combat engagement, etc.); 5) a good-quality figurine in polystyrene, resin, or similar material, kit-manufacturer, aftermarket, or 3D made, of a pilot/aviator that I would set upon the seat (molded with positionable limbs and head to fit properly, so that our doughty flyboy looks like he actually belongs there, actively flying his airplane!).

@@johnalecsscalemodeling John Alec’s Scale Modeling David R Lentz, Columbus, Ohio, USA (Friday, 26 July, 2024) Part 2 In the case of a much larger warbird, of course, 5a) the likenesses of a full complement of crewmen, each shaped and configured to man the duty stations (for the modeller’s flexibility), dramatising them engaged in aerial combat high over Nazi Germany’s industrial base; 6) cockpit fixtures (knobs, levers, switches, dials, and other controls on the instrument panel and consoles; lights-tiny LEDs (round 0.3-0.5 mm) in various hues would serve; a larger one collectively to illuminate the indicator dials-etc.) one can modify appropriately to indicate flight performance. In most cases, I would place these finished models in ascending scales (thus of diminishing sizes in relation to its immediate processor), to create of several closely similar models a forced a perspective ærial diorama (FPÆD) of combat aircraft in various military movements at altitude (the Immelmann turn, the barrel roll, the cobra manœuvre, etc.). Alternately, some together might show to be in steady flight, e.g., a handful of fighters in echelon, at altitude on patrol against intruders; or a squadron of two dozen bombers in close formation high over an urban manufacturing complex. In such a manner of display, I have some ideas for physically supporting the reproductions in a way that ultimately obviates any so-called “display stand”-to my mind, the undignified intrusion of the world’s tallest telegraph pole thrust up into its navel from miles below! In lieu of this stand, to provide a necessary support mechanism, I would design and pattern (well, I am no engineer by any stretch of the imagination! I speak here expressly in terms of theory and concept, as far as I grasp even that much!) a device after what motion picture production calls the Chapman Crane, a robust, articulated steel arm with an amply counterbalanced gimbals apparatus. This supports well above the ground a high-resolution digital video or film camera, the camera operator, the director, etc., in a manner that enables them from an elevated vantage to approach the subject of the shot, to progress through the air in slow, graceful turns, or in more dramatic soaring and swooping, and similar dynamic action to achieve the action of the scene. One also can use it to suspend a performer in the air in an arrangement wherein the viewers cannot see the actor(s), or similarly, a constructed object of some kind. An excellent example of this is the mechanism that the special effects crew of Superman: The Movie (1978, Warner Bros.-Columbia, Richard Donner, John Williams) technicians had fashioned to hold pose the title character (Christopher Reeve) as though in flight, where 1) the actor lay prone upon a padded cradle they constructed and formed to fit closely his physical form, and attached to the end of another sturdy boom counterbalanced with a gimbals (I call this the “Chapman cradle”); 2) the wardrobe staff (so I infer) then covered in the costume this combination of actor and padded rack; 3) they next positioned all these mechanical components behind the performer (and anything else belonging in the shot), thus placing them out of view of the camera. Upon filming, they saw on the monitor the actor in character in mid-air. My hope is to adapt that to models and dioramas. For my adaptation under discussion for my innovative models display here, the supporting apparatus (the entire Chapman cradle arrangement) would be much smaller, needing only 1) to hold forth a mass of round a half-dozen kilogrammes (though to allow for any possible kinetic force during movement of any cause, one out of caution might think to exceed that by double or greater), 2) whilst remaining completely out of sight of the viewer. To simplify the display’s function and operation, the mechanism also serves as an insulated physical conduit for electrical wiring providing current to the motor(s), lighting (instrument panels, navigation lights on the aircraft’s exterior, duty stations, the control surfaces, and other purposes. For the necessity to keep to a reasonable size the opening at the pass-through point, I recommend a solitary line of ample amperage to meet the overall requirements, which would lead from a junction box or control board, the conduit passing along the support arm to a location inside the model, where an electrical fixture would distribute the current along finer wiring passing throughout the model.

@@johnalecsscalemodeling John Alec’s Scale Modeling David R Lentz, Columbus, Ohio, USA (Friday, 26 July, 2024) Part 3 The next essential element of this entire arrangement would be 3) the background, which would have two purposes: a) borrowing from the backdrop of the stage play and the motion picture film set, it would be a means generally to represent the sky at a fairly high altitude, for the simplicity of a clear azure vista free of extraneous elements; huge cumulus clouds (some perhaps roiling in the wind), terrain features, towering structures, etc., all passing to the right or the left. all would add complexity that might undermine the effect, or at the least could distract the viewers. Otherwise, one carefully must plan and co-ordinate every detail of the background, synchronising any movement therein with what the æroplane(s) at that moment would be doing. Even just a change in the lighting’s brightness and its colours could show on the models. This adaptation of the stage and movie backdrop also b) would serve well as a partition to obscure view of the support apparatus, the lighting, the electrical equipment, etc. All these together would present to the viewer a remarkably innovative “ærial diorama”, though it cleverly simulates a rather conventional imagery: aircraft in flight. Perhaps the centrepiece in my FPÆD idea would centre upon models in different scales of the Boeing B-17E Flying Fortress USAAF Heavy Bomber; as I noted earlier, these might be in the Pacific Theater of Operations (PTO), early in the campaign. Additionally would be similar displays of B-17Fs, the largest of them as a replica of the “Memphis Belle” round the middle of the flight crew’s service (which I would build as it actually was round 1943), the others holding close formation with the doughty bomber as members in the same squadron (that will require in-depth research to sort all these details, thus to assign specific markings to individual models). Next might be several early B-17Gs, some showing significant battle-damage and obvious war-weariness; and the late-war B-17Gs, all in natural metal. For these, I am thinking of quite a different tableau: a roll-out at a Boeing plant of several shiny, brand new airplanes glittering in the bright sunshine of morning (would one need to apply to the panel lines a pin wash?), in the foreground a sizeable gathering of WASPs: women pilots who ferried combat aircraft to their destinations (under the ægis of the Women’s Army Service Pilots, headquartered at New Castle Army Air Base, under the Air Transport Auxiliary). Then, of course, would be a series of Consolidated B-24 Liberator USAAF Heavy Bomber kits, again in various descending scales. These B-24D replicas I would present in the desert camouflage of the Mediterranean Theater of Operations (MTO), just 250 feet above the deck as they storm over the refineries and oilfields of Ploiești (Romanian orthography, formerly misspelt as “Ploești”), Romania. Well, John, what do you think of 1) my FPÆD idea, 2) borrowing from the Chapman Crane, and 3) my adaptation of the stage and movie backdrop to create a partition that obscures view of the equipment? Would anything along these lines serve to facilitate your aspirations in modelling, perhaps in offering you a better way to display in-flight your plane models, the propeller(s) spinning, all the positions filled, the undercarriage retracted, the landing gear bay doors and the cowl flaps closed, etc.? An even more exciting turn for me is that a number of 1:24th-scale aircraft kits of at least reasonable quality (well, as far as I can evaluate here on CZcams) have come forth. All so far come from Airfix (Trumpeter’s from reports I have read have fallen short, though over the next several years can we anticipate improvement), which is both quite a surprise and a true delight. One would be the Grumman F6F-5 Hellcat U.S. Navy Carrier-Based Fighter. This one for all its intricate interior detailing nonetheless looks immensely appealing to me. I similarly wish the kit-makers would produce a new mold of the North American Aviation P-51D/H/K Mustang USAAF air superiority fighter; as well as those of the Lockheed P-38F/G/H/J/L Lighting USAAF Interceptor (Lockheed expressly presented it so to work round War Department strictures on aircraft design parameters), and the Chance Vought F4U series Corsair USN/USMC fighter.

@@johnalecsscalemodeling John Alec’s Scale Modeling David R Lentz, Columbus, Ohio, USA (Friday, 26 July, 2024) Part 4 To build something intriguing and exciting, I would place a well-tended 1942 Ford sedan recently re-painted in fresh olive drab, beside an early Hellcat fighter, in the Navy’s Pacific Theatre of Operations (PTO) tri-colour camouflage scheme of gloss dark sea blue on the dorsal wing surface, flat dark sea blue on the upper fuselage, intermediate blue on the vertical surfaces, and gloss white on the ventral surfaces a bit worn and dusty. A stocky, grey-haired admiral passes to the aviator a hefty, thick, worn, leather case bound in bright, stainless steel chains, with orders promptly to return to USS Enterprise (CV(N)-6) USN Yorktown-class aircraft carrier-patrolling just offshore but a quarter-nautical mile away, its freshly painted Measure 33/4Ab Dazzle camouflage striking under the bright, tropical summer sun of mid-morning-to present to Captain Cato Glover the package for Admiral Halsey when the latter returns . . . . The best of what I have been able to infer as good or better are 1) the de Havilland DH-98 Mosquito RAF Fighter-Bomber kit. I must note that I have a keen personal interest in the RAF Light Bomber replica; as a boy, I had built a much smaller Airfix model of it, which for the swift grace of the actual æroplane for all these decades had remained with me! 2) Of course, of all the British combat aircraft of World War Two, Airfix’s new Supermarine Spitfire RAF Mark IX Fighter kit in this astounding scale essentially ties with its bigger younger brother. I also would like to find a number of fairly commonplace aircraft-civilian, commercial, and military-to juxtapose alongside private automobiles, municipal vehicles, workplace trucks (lorries), tractor-trailer rigs (articulateds), etc. For example, a Cessna 172/180 private airplane, a Bell JetRanger helicopter, a Lear private passenger jet, and others that would be reasonably similar. In comparison, a Boeing 747-8 commercial freight airliner’s wingspan is 68.45 metres [224’ 7”], its length is 76.25 metres [250’ 2”]; in the scale under discussion, the model’s wingspan is 9’ 4.29”, its length 10’5”! My living quarters lack the room for one, though. For that matter, I rather doubt that I would have the physical strength to build it! I also would like tableaux in plastic of different vehicles in the same scale: a good-quality, gloss-black four-door passenger automobile; perhaps a late 1930s Rolls Royce sedan (I know of no such kit, though) set alongside an Airfix (new mold) 1:24th-scale kit of an earlier Supermarine Spitfire RAF fighter (I think the company made a new-mold replica of a Mk.I and a Mk.Vc; we know they have a Mk.IX). I would like to create a 1:25th-scale streetscape diorama of the Roaring ’20s, a midwestern or mid-Atlantic USA small town setting, with Ford Model T automobiles-a sedan, a coupe, pickup trucks, one reworked into a tow-truck, a depot hack, etc.-as well as some vehicles of other car manufacturers; R. E. Olds, Dodge Brothers, Plymouth, Pontiac, Chevrolet, etc. (I have a hunch that these would be appreciably more difficult to find-or to afford!). On a pasture at the edge of town, an Airco DH-4 biplane bomber from round 1918, which after the Great War of 1914-1918 the U.S. federal government had acquired from the military several dozen surplus, numerous of which (along with the Boeing Model 40) the U.S. Postal Service had put into service as mail planes (in this scale, the model would be just 21 inches in wingspan!). I would like to include a couple of them, each aeroplane bound for a different town a few hours distant, in a morning rendezvous with a quartet of Ford Model T trucks. I wonder if any of my more ambitious projects might be something you would contemplate. You surely have the modelling skills to well exceed me! I also anticipate that your clinical diagnostic device development work would afford you the technical capacity to implement my FPÆD idea borrowing from the Chapman Crane. On a lighter note, I certainly wish a big city publisher would buy my novels. LOL I would order a good PC to dictate my novels and essays whilst my hands and eyes built my model kits. I then would hire a team of engineers, technicians, etc., all who build the better-quality, more sophisticated model kits, to implement FPÆD . . . . Thank you, John! :D

Thanks so much David - yeah Nige is a great guy I respect him a lot. He build his just before me and didn't watch the other series. His approach is more flexible for sure. Those belts are so thick! Cheers

Hiya David - thanks so much for your kind comments and into. I lived in Indy for 4 years but have been around the Columbus beltway many times. Cheers!

John thank you so much, I really appreciate that. It's still a hobby to me and this makes it fun and enjoyable. Thanks for watching take care my friend.

Thank you very much Nugget! I appreciate that, yeah it's still just a hobby to me and I am so glad there are folks like you I can share it with. Appreciate you watching and saying high, buddy - cheers!

Thank you Zin - cheers

Thank you so much James

Glad you enjoyed it David, thank you so much.

Thank you Darren i appreciate you.

Cheers Bob, thanks for watching. Have a great day.

Thanks so much Craig. Appreciate you watching, take care.

Thank you Dave, yeah all good!

Awesome Dan. It builds up really nice. Only had one fit issue the side 'skirts' on the turret but the rest was excellent. Cheers

Thank you Les! You're probably right there. I'll be glad when it is done! Cheers

Thank you so much David. It's a hobby as long as you're pleased and enjoying it that's all that matters. Thanks for watching - cheers.

Thank you Paul, cheers buddy.

The juggler, lol. It's very difficult for me to just start and finish one build at a time, I get too distracted. Thanks for watching.

Thank you Steve, appreciate you checking it out.

Thank you Bill. Yeah that Ducati is excellent. I just realized I started that a year ago, and probably forgot what paints I used! Cheers

Thanks for checking them out Jeff, appreciated. You too!

Thank you Colin! Cheers

Thanks for taking a look Craig! Cheers

Yes a little, it does. That may be a factor of getting the aftermarket stuff, which does make the kit better. Thanks for watching - cheers

Thank you buddy! It's been a good build I recommend it. I have to warn you tho there are these control link rods that you attach to the chassis, all but 1 broke. They are so fine and brittle. Just laid down all the 2k today on the panels. You can skip adding engine until all the chassis is done. Cheers

Thanks Sully!

Thanks James!

Thanks Alex!

Thanks Julian!

Sharp eyes Samuel - I just added some Mr Hobby Thinner (blue label) immediately brings it into better solution. If you have any lacquer type thinner it should work. Cheers

Thank you MGP!

Thanks you so much Les - cheers!

Thank you buddy, appreciated.

Thank you buddy! I actually 2k'd the gloss black part today. I was varnishing something else and thought why not. Cheers

Thank you Bob!

Thank you buddy!

Thank you David!

Thank you Scott! Should have the paints by Friday. Cheers

Thank you Steve!

Thank you David yeah looking forward to more painting.

Thank you Jeff - appreciated buddy

Thanks for looking David - appreciated buddy.

Thank you Alex! I've no got the body color parts, seat surfaces, and fender parts primed.

Thank you Ken I do appreciate that.

Thank you Marcus! Cheers!

Thank you Neil. I am going with Gloss black fenders, Stone Brown main coat, Stone grey cover, and Tacoma cream wheels.

@@johnalecsscalemodeling sounds good John Alec - still fancy doing a copy of either Father in Laws or Brother In Laws - but have been told to reduce stash first😂