WWI Digest 4441 Topics covered in this issue include: 1) Re: Some Future was questions by "Jamie Gagnon" 2) Re: Some Future was questions by "Jamie Gagnon" 3) !Re: Re: slumping badly by "Matt Bittner" 4) Future wax and decal by "Jamie Gagnon" 5) Re: Some Future was questions by Larry Marshall 6) Non Lozenge finishes for Fokker D-VIIs by "Bill & Kaja Michaels" 7) Re: Some Future wax questions by "Mark C" 8) RE: Some Future was questions by "Laskodi" 9) Correction to previous post re Future by "Mark C" 10) Re: Just currious how big is your stash by "Mark C" 11) Re: Future wax and decal by Steven Perry 12) Re: Some Future wax questions by "Laskodi" 13) My stash by "Marcio Antonio Campos" 14) Magnificent Web!!!!!! by =?iso-8859-1?Q?Martin_H=E9ctor_AFFLITTO_ECHAG=FCE?= 15) RE: Magnificent Web!!!!!! by "Daniel Munoz" 16) Re: slumping badly by "NEIL EDDY" 17) Re: Just currious how big is your stash by "Robert Baumgartner" 18) Re: Just currious how big is your stash by Todd Hayes 19) RE: Varnishes and future by "NEIL EDDY" 20) Vale Jack Lockett by Shane Weier 21) Re: Just currious how big is your stash by xtv16@dial.pipex.com 22) Re: Some Future wax questions by Nigel Cheffers-Heard 23) Re: Some Future wax questions by Al Superczynski 24) Re: Some Future was questions by Jan Vihonen 25) Re: slumping badly by Jan Vihonen 26) RE: My prop won't spin! by James Fahey ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 19:52:47 -0400 From: "Jamie Gagnon" To: Subject: Re: Some Future was questions Message-ID: <005c01c205d9$9aa2d540$9b127018@ktchnr.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> Hi Larry; I think you misunderstood most of what I was asking. Mark seems to have decrypted it more in the way I intended. Oh well .... ;-) > Don't ask so many questions in one msg, Jamie. Allen's new short msg > restriction makes answering all of them in one response impossible. Not quite sure why umpteen small messages is superior to one big one, but I will comply. > It may be just semantics but Future Floor Finish is not a wax. But you knew what I meant so why the lecture on what I really meant? ;-) > > 2. Can the wax be used in place of a product like MicroScale decal film to > > coat over thin decals? > > I'm not sure what product you're talking about here but my suspicion is that > you're talking about MicroScale's decal setting solution. If so, the answer > is that Future does not replace this. As a protection of decals, it works > fine but that's not what decal setting solutions are all about. Nope, Micro Scale Liquid Decal Film is not a setting solution but rather something you can spread over the decal while still on the sheet to give the decal more strength; if you use it on super thin decals like some Eduard you can avoid having the decal fall apart. > You haven't bought any yet, eh? You don't need to dilute it; it's like water. Bought it many moons ago; for my floors. I had tried a few applications recently on models; particularly on my Blue Max Halberstadt and the DML Fokker D.VII. I was leary of applying it as is through the airbrush. Jamie ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 20:03:09 -0400 From: "Jamie Gagnon" To: Subject: Re: Some Future was questions Message-ID: <006801c205db$0d438260$9b127018@ktchnr.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> Hi Larry; > I suppose but why? When you read about people spraying with Future prior to > applying decals, it's because decals require a smooth surface and typical > military paints aren't glossy enough to provide that. I'm not sure I've ever > applied a decal to raw plastic but those surfaces are pretty darn smooth, > although I suppose some of the older models do have a "fabric" surface that > could cause problems. Decals will not adhere directly to plastic. The reason I asked about it was precisely as stated; the colour of the Se5a was just the right shade of brownish-green or greenish-brown. There were no marks to speak of and the fuselage went together with so little sanding of the top seam needed as to be almost invisible. I was sorely tempted at the time to try it, but the decals I had only included one set of roundels; too risky to experiment. So I dutifully painted with a colour that dried far less satisfactorally than the plastic colour. > Most airplanes of the era were brushpainted. But they weren't painted with > brushes that had 2' wide brush heads either :-) But airbrushes do a poor job of duplicating the way areas of colour meet when the original was done by brush. I am not attempting to build WWI planes by the original method just trying to find a reasonable excuse not to use a tool I hate... ;-) Most > streaked (hand) paint schemes, for instance, are done by the masters with > things like toothbrushes. They're trying to mimick the look, not the > methodology. Likewise, most lozenge is done with decals. Not what I was asking; I have no intention of trying to get a factory to create a printed fabric. I just find that airbrushes give the wrong look to surfaces that were hand painted, especially where colours meet or one colour is over another (as with the Fokker finish); winter camouflage being classic. I have seen some fantastic paint jobs done by airbrushing white over a scheme; but it just does not look like the original which was generally applied with mops. > > Where you'll spray paint bare aluminum, right (grin)? Actually the Humbrol metallic aluminums do a very nice job brushed on. ;-) Jamie ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 19:00:51 -0500 From: "Matt Bittner" To: "wwi@wwi-models.org" Subject: !Re: Re: slumping badly Message-ID: On Mon, 27 May 2002 14:09:50 -0400 (EDT), Diego Fernetti wrote: > I'm sure you have improved your skills since 6 years ago, so the > scratchbuilt parts you'll do "in the future" will be much much better to be > cast than the actual parts you have in the work bench. Go finish the > Nieuport 16 since you already know what's needed to make it accurate and how > to make replacements! Understood, but why make new parts when I know (hope?) replacements will be coming. > Mmm, the wood painting can be fun after all, but the struts! brrrrr..... I > need a drink! Neither are fun for me. Why do you think I don't do a lot of wood finishes? Scares me to death! > Folded? PE from a Toko kit? Or is it the PART set? Anyway, that's austrian, > nothing too cool looking after all. No, p/e from Part. > For the Cook-Up? Bwahaha! Yup. ;-) > Such as? cockpits? Correct, some of the cockpit. > I'll do this first to warm up the modelling juices. Well, if I didn't have to do the Strutter, and IM is waiting on the SPAD (and a whole boat load of others, including the Dr.I) then it's actually fourth on the list. > Way to early on the build stage. Leave it for a cloudy day. I agree, although originally I wanted to do four Fokker Triplanes for an IM issue... > Interesting! But maybe too exigent for the slow times. You risk a complete > stop of modelling while facing these subtleties Agreed. > Are you going to reach the deadline? Better hurry up! Since the absolute deadline is in Sept, I sure hope so! ;-) Or is it July... > Hmmmmm double interesting! I agree. ;-) Matt Bittner ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 20:14:24 -0400 From: "Jamie Gagnon" To: Subject: Future wax and decal Message-ID: <007401c205dc$9f9e7060$9b127018@ktchnr.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> Hi folks; Well, I tried it. The problem was with some rib tape decals on my Blue Max Halberstadt. The very ends of the decals, for some reason simply would not stick down on the trailing edge of several ribs. I had sprayed a coat of artist's acrylic gloss (Krylon) over the Lozenge before applying the rib tapes (with decal setting solution) which stuck everywhere except the last 1/32 of an inch on a half dozen ribs. I used the Future as a sealer over the rib tapes, but actually brushed a bit up under those ratty little ends. So far it looks as though they have adhered properly. I will let you know tomorrow. Jamie ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 20:26:22 -0400 From: Larry Marshall To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Re: Some Future was questions Message-ID: <200205272026.22477.larrym@sympatico.ca> > Not quite sure why umpteen small messages is superior to one big one, but I > will comply. I tend to agree. > you knew what I meant so why the lecture on what I really meant? ;-) It'll never happen again. My motivation was only to clarify. Have a good day. Cheers --- Larry ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 20:39:34 -0400 From: "Bill & Kaja Michaels" To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Non Lozenge finishes for Fokker D-VIIs Message-ID: <3CF29986.8128.17AFC0@localhost> Folks, The FFcookup group has just selected "Any FOkker D7 kit or plans" for it's next build. Already some discussion has started about color schemes that don't require lozenge fabric. By the way, the FF means free flight. The group is building stick and tissue models, most will probably fall in the 16 to 28 inch span. I don't have a lot in my reference library on D-7s. I'm hoping folks here can either send me scans or point me to some references. I'll then pass it on the to the FF cookup guys. One last question: Did Goring's D-7 have lozenge on the undersides of the wing? Thanks, -Bill Thanx!Check out my US Coast Guard subjects model list at: http://www.tiac.net/users/billkaja/kitlist.htm ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 21:33:01 -0400 From: "Mark C" To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Re: Some Future wax questions Message-ID: >From: "Jamie Gagnon" >Reply-To: wwi@wwi-models.org >To: Multiple recipients of list >Subject: [WWI] Re: Some Future wax questions >Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 19:22:20 -0400 (EDT) > >Thanks Mark; > >I think you understood what I was asking better than Larry. I need to be a >bit more precise with my wording I guess. > > > >4. When diluting the wax, what is the best 'solvent'; distilled water? > > >Isopropyl alcohol? Beer? some other substance? > > > > NONE. Future needs NO thinning, not even to spray. To remove it, use > > ammonia, either dilute, or use a product that contains ammonia. > >Ah, that is what I was wondering; it seems a bit viscous to go through the >airbrush well. > >Thanks, > >Jamie Jamie, Trust me - it will go through, no problems whatsoever. The one thing you must do is flush out the A/b thoroughly. I use household ammonia and water in equal parts. Don't wait very long, either - once it sets it can be a cow to remove, because it comes off a bit sticky. > _________________________________________________________________ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 18:35:22 -0700 From: "Laskodi" To: "WWI List Post" Subject: RE: Some Future was questions Message-ID: <000b01c205e7$efa2bfc0$3b3819d0@f4hn201> <<>> Tamiya Flat Base is not a paint. You cannot "paint" it on, it is an agent that mixes with paint to produce a flat sheen. It is basically talcum powder suspended in a carrier and it does mix quite well with Future. Tamiya paints on the other hand are latex based acrylics that do not mix well with Future. By varying the ratios of flat base to Future you can get every sheen from high gloss to dead flat (and everything between!). For dead flat I use between 25-30% flat base, for semi-gloss between 5-10% flat base. I never exceed 30% flat base (some people use up to 50%) because the finish tends to "speck up" (little specks in the finish) up on me. YMMV -----Bob ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 21:38:38 -0400 From: "Mark C" To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Correction to previous post re Future Message-ID: Sorry all, I misspoke. First, you want the Tamiya Flat to be about 35% of the combined Future + Tamiya Flat mixture. A back of the envelope calculation tells me that they should then be mixed about 1:1. Second, now that I think about it, I don't know if Future is a good decal coat after all. I misunderstood the question and thought it referred to using it as a sort of setting solution, for which it is actually very good. However, whether it has the elasticity to work as decal film is an open question, at least to me. _________________________________________________________________ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 21:40:08 -0400 From: "Mark C" To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Re: Just currious how big is your stash Message-ID: >From: Todd Hayes >Reply-To: wwi@wwi-models.org >To: Multiple recipients of list >Subject: [WWI] Re: Just currious how big is your stash >Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 19:03:53 -0400 (EDT) > >Hi Tom, > >My stash is about 220 kits. All 1/48 OT aircraft >except for two 1/144 Sram kits. Others are around 60 >ot kits in both 1/48 and that other scale. > >Todd You *must* have multiples of the same kit, right? I didn't think that 220 different OT planes had ever been kitted in 1/48. _________________________________________________________________ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 21:42:53 -0400 From: Steven Perry To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Re: Future wax and decal Message-ID: <3CF2E09D.7020206@tampabay.rr.com> > > I used the Future as a sealer over the rib tapes, but actually brushed a bit > up under those ratty little ends. So far it looks as though they have > adhered properly. I will let you know tomorrow. Thats been my experience in the same situation. Future will stick it down pretty well. Overnight it will really sucker down. I use decal solvent solution on larger areas and Future on strips, tails and corners that need a little encouragement to do right. BTW, do not use any decal setting solution with Future if it smells like acetic acid, (vinegar, stop bath). Wet or dry future will cloud and form white goo. Generally speaking the stronger stuff sold as sol or solvent works ok with Future, but not the setting solutions that smell like vinegar. If you prefer to brush paint, then consider artists acrylics blended with Future. Future has almost magical leveling properties which it imparts to acrylic mixes. Really reduces brush marks. hth sp ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 18:46:04 -0700 From: "Laskodi" To: "WWI List Post" Subject: Re: Some Future wax questions Message-ID: <001301c205e9$6df3ac80$3b3819d0@f4hn201> << ammonia, either dilute, or use a product that contains ammonia.>>> I always thin my Future before airbrushing, 50:50 with Polly Scale Acrylic Airbrush Thinner. I find that this gives you a much smoother finish. Straight up through my airbrush, Future tends to "pebble" on me. Future can use a wide range of thinners from most acrylic thinners, rubbing alcohol to water. However, avoid any thinner that contains ammonia like the plague (i.e., windshield washing fluid). Future does not like ammonia! YMMV ------Bob ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 23:15:56 -0300 From: "Marcio Antonio Campos" To: Subject: My stash Message-ID: <003601c205ed$9b9f6da0$f09be2c8@computador> Folks, Considering I completed 1 year of modeling in March... 1/72 OT kits, 41 (11 of them Revell D.VIIs) 1/72 ot kits, 15 1/144 ot kits, 12 Coming by mail: 5 more 1/144 ot kits, 2 1/72 ot kits and a package with some OT kits, but nothing certain yet. All the best from Brazil Marcio Campos from home ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 00:19:23 -0300 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Martin_H=E9ctor_AFFLITTO_ECHAG=FCE?= To: "WWI Lista" Subject: Magnificent Web!!!!!! Message-ID: <006b01c205f6$771a4820$9114e818@fibertel.com.ar> To you all Guys I've found a magnificent web,it is in Rusia,I don't know any Rusian,but you can obtain information about WW1 aeroplanes,all the books of Verlinder,monogram,squadron,etc.. I want to say sth. I don't know how legal this can be,I navigated in good faith,but it seems strange to me???????? http://www.aviacherteg.narod.ru/ But if sbdy.understands Rusian,and explains it to me Martin ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 23:27:25 -0400 From: "Daniel Munoz" To: Subject: RE: Magnificent Web!!!!!! Message-ID: <001701c205f7$965d19a0$0a00a8c0@bigbazar> I don't speak Russian at all, but I know an online translator capable of doing Russian/English translation (among many others combinations). Could help... http://www.translate.ru/eng/srvurl.asp Daniel > -----Original Message----- > From: wwi@wwi-models.org [mailto:wwi@wwi-models.org] On > Behalf Of Martin Héctor AFFLITTO ECHAGüE > Sent: May 27, 2002 11:22 PM > To: Multiple recipients of list > Subject: [WWI] Magnificent Web!!!!!! > > > > > To you all Guys > > I've found a magnificent web,it is in Rusia,I don't know any > Rusian,but you can obtain information about WW1 > aeroplanes,all the books of Verlinder,monogram,squadron,etc.. > I want to say sth. I don't know how legal this can be,I > navigated in good faith,but it seems strange to me???????? > http://www.aviacherteg.narod.ru/ But if sbdy.understands Rusian,and explains it to me Martin ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 15:50:41 +1000 From: "NEIL EDDY" To: Subject: Re: slumping badly Message-ID: <002601c2060b$9a696300$217232d2@default> Matt; My humble suggestion.....Build something "Brown" - its very therapeutic! All the Best Neil E ----- Original Message ----- From: "Matt Bittner" > All you French skeptics - notice how many in the list above are > non-French. > > Matt Bittner > > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 13:50:14 +1000 From: "Robert Baumgartner" To: Subject: Re: Just currious how big is your stash Message-ID: <005201c205fb$4b68e150$7300080a@rbaum> Sadly I worked this out last year........... if I build one kit every two months, I have enough kits for the next 33 years. Mixture of mainly 1/48 OT, 1/48 ot and 1/35 armour. Rob B The large print giveth, the fine print taketh away. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Todd Hayes" To: "Multiple recipients of list" Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 9:04 AM Subject: [WWI] Re: Just currious how big is your stash > Hi Tom, > > My stash is about 220 kits. All 1/48 OT aircraft > except for two 1/144 Sram kits. Others are around 60 > ot kits in both 1/48 and that other scale. > > Todd > > ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 22:53:55 -0700 (PDT) From: Todd Hayes To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Re: Just currious how big is your stash Message-ID: <20020528055355.23878.qmail@web11105.mail.yahoo.com> Hi Mark, Yes, I have multiple copies of some kits, but there are actually quite a few kits available and OOP. Of mine, there are around 150 separate kits with enough multiples of some to make up the balance. Todd --- Mark C wrote: > > > > >From: Todd Hayes > >Reply-To: wwi@wwi-models.org > >To: Multiple recipients of list > > >Subject: [WWI] Re: Just currious how big is your > stash > >Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 19:03:53 -0400 (EDT) > > > >Hi Tom, > > > >My stash is about 220 kits. All 1/48 OT aircraft > >except for two 1/144 Sram kits. Others are around > 60 > >ot kits in both 1/48 and that other scale. > > > >Todd > > You *must* have multiples of the same kit, right? I > didn't think that 220 > different OT planes had ever been kitted in 1/48. > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: > http://mobile.msn.com > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 16:14:46 +1000 From: "NEIL EDDY" To: Subject: RE: Varnishes and future Message-ID: <006e01c2060e$f7eb58a0$217232d2@default> Hi Nigel; I have used a number of different spray cans (the Albatros debacle was only the last straw), and of those Humbrol was the best performing. Some pooling but that was due to my judgement of the quantities. I did like their Satin finish though its a bit hard to get here in quantities. The varnish that ate my paint scheme was a Model Master Gloss can. Avoid it at all costs. Also avoid Gunze spray finishes as these tend react badly with enamels also. I have a H-B W-29 where the wooden walkways on the wings, painted in Humbrol Wood, crazed within 24 hours of spraying it with a Gunze matt spray. I had left the paint for a week to dry before spraying. I tested some Gunze sprays with different enamels on some scrap afterwards and it did it to all of them except the Extracolour (tough stuff Extracolour! - it alone survived the Model Master disaster). Tamiya sprays are okay though they will crack and craze if applied too thickly. So in my experience I would rate them in the following way: 1 - Humbrol 2 - Tamiya 3 - Gunze (but not with enamels) 4 - Model Master - use with extreme caution. Your idea of using Future as a sealer is a good one and may circumvent the problems I described. (I might test the MM spray with it and see what happens. I doubt whether atmospherics have much to do with these phenomena as the weather was mild and cool at the times of use. You are right though YMMV All the Best Neil E ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 16:55:45 +1000 From: Shane Weier To: "'wwim'" Subject: Vale Jack Lockett Message-ID: <7186131CB805D411A60E0090272F7C7102BCDF42@mimhexch1.mim.com.au> Neil said, >On a further sad note, Jack Lockett of Ballarat (Vic) passed away yesterday >aged 109. Jack was one of the few Western Front survivors left in Australia >(if not the last). Jack fought through most of the major battles involving >Australians on the Western Front. FWIW Jack Locket was 111 at death, he was 109 when he carried the Olympic torch in the relay in 2000 ! He was a veteran of Passchendale "that place on earth most soaked with Australian blood" and was nowhere near the last Australian WW1 veteran, there now being around 15 left (two in Brisbane that I know of for example). Nevertheless, as Australias oldest man (and by some accounts the second oldest in the world) and a veteran of the most ferocious battles Australians ever fought his passing is worthy of our notice. Shane ********************************************************************** The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and is intended only for the use of the addressee(s). If you receive this e-mail in error, any use, distribution or copying of this e-mail is not permitted. You are requested to forward unwanted e-mail and address any problems to the MIM Holdings Limited Support Centre. For general enquires: ++61 7 3833 8000 Support Centre e-mail: supportcentre@mim.com.au Support Centre phone: Australia 1800500646 International ++61 7 38338042 ********************************************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 07:59:03 +0100 From: xtv16@dial.pipex.com To: Subject: Re: Just currious how big is your stash Message-ID: <1022569143.3cf32ab78b301@netmail.pipex.net> I refuse to count for two reasons (i) I'll frighten myself how amny I have, and how much value is in it (ii) SWMBO will find out above ! Last count (7 years ago) gave over 600, it's not got smaller !! Dave Fleming ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 09:14:18 +0100 From: Nigel Cheffers-Heard To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Re: Some Future wax questions Message-ID: Being a bit of a pedant (and they can't touch you for it!) I tried to make an absolute reference for this. I got an A4 smooth flat surface, and painted it with three vertical bands of Humbrol Gloss, Humbrol Matt, and Tamiya Matt greys. This last because I wasn't sure about the difference in the matt finishes. I then masked it off and painted it with HORIZONTAL bands of neat Future; Future/Flat Base 90:10; Future/Flat Base 80:20; Future/Flat Base 70:30; Future/Flat Base 60:40, at which it is about as matt as you are likely to get. I now have a reference which shows me how my Future/flat coats are LIKELY to finish, although there is naturally some variation in practice, I can get very close to the sheen I want. If you have model block this weekend, try making one of these. N >3. What approximate percentage of Future wax to Tamiya Flat Base will >produce a flat finish? -- Nigel Cheffers-Heard photography + design tel: +44 (0)1392 87 58 57 fax: +44 (0)1392 87 74 97 mobile: 0771 261 4514 nigelch@cheffers.co.uk www.cheffers.co.uk Laburnums, Bridge Hill Topsham, Exeter EX3 0QQ, UK ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 03:48:01 -0500 From: Al Superczynski To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Re: Some Future wax questions Message-ID: <1pg6fuo9qfnehcddpa09qdmqt7ctv3uvi5@4ax.com> On Mon, 27 May 2002 16:22:33 -0400 (EDT), Jamie wrote: >Can the wax be brushpainted over with oils or oilbased enamels? Humbrol >will most likely be the paint of the day. Dry-brushed? Washes with >thinner/paint mixes? Washes are safe over thoroughly cured Future as long as you don't use any alcohol or ammonia in the mix. Dry brushing over Future should be fine but why would you want to wait until that stage? >Can the wax be used in place of a product like MicroScale decal film to >coat over thin decals? Sure - plain water doesn't react with cured Future. HTH, Al ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 12:31:27 +0300 From: Jan Vihonen To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Re: Some Future was questions Message-ID: <3CF34E6F.1BCDCF94@helsinki.fi> Hi Jamie, > > > 2. Can the wax be used in place of a product like MicroScale decal film > to > > > coat over thin decals? > > > > I'm not sure what product you're talking about here but my suspicion is > that > > you're talking about MicroScale's decal setting solution. If so, the > answer > > is that Future does not replace this. As a protection of decals, it works > > fine but that's not what decal setting solutions are all about. > > Nope, Micro Scale Liquid Decal Film is not a setting solution but rather > something you can spread over the decal while still on the sheet to give the > decal more strength; if you use it on super thin decals like some Eduard you > can avoid having the decal fall apart. > I once tried Future for this before I got LDF. Wasn't too happy with results. LDF is an excellent product and specifically formulated for it's intended use. Future, being floor polish is elastic to some extent but still too hard to allow the decal to nicely conform to panel lines and other such. I had to use scalpel. Now, as for protecting a decal when it's already in place on a kit or even as a setting media... Jan ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 12:55:12 +0300 From: Jan Vihonen To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: Re: slumping badly Message-ID: <3CF35400.F61E636E@helsinki.fi> Tom S. wrote: > And I though memorizing the Finland song was bad. What on earth is this? You've been punished by having to memorize "the Finland song"? This is not the Monty Python Finland song, is it? Jan (from Finland) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 21:48:23 +1200 From: James Fahey To: wwi@wwi-models.org Subject: RE: My prop won't spin! Message-ID: <004f01c2062c$cfaacc40$5191a7cb@computer> Thank you Diego, Steve and Neil for your suggestions and commiserations. Sorry for my slow response I am in Digest mode. It is quite difficult now to measure thrust lines prop, diameter and boom angles because the DH2 is built and has wires all over the place (photos to come soon). I have started to suspect the undercarriage may be slightly out - I corrected the axle length (which was too short) by spreading the legs more and putting a longer bit in the middle (so to speak) and this may have reduced the distance between the wheels and nacelle. The tail booms were very difficult to assemble and being out a few mm would also make all the difference. I don't remember trimming the DH4 prop, but I am sure I checked it against the plan. Has anyone else built the 1/72 Pegasus DH2 and would like to comment? The Revell DH2 doesn't have any prop problems because it was fitted with a clear perspex disk for an engine, suitable streaked while spinning on a drill, and the prop is invisible. The whole episode has caused me to ponder on the value of major revisions to a kit to achieve greater accuracy when all takes is some stupid mistake to compromise the whole ideal. I mean there is a certain irony in spending time correcting the shape of the ammunition bins, tailplane, fuel tank etc when at the end the prop grounds out. My wife says I am being silly and she thinks it looks great and that is the main thing. I guess the best thing is to move on and do better next time. I need something simpler to get a quick win, something accurate out of the box to get some instant gratification, maybe an Eduard Dr1 . . . One more question - the Humbrol clear satin coat stuff in the square bottles - does it ever dry? Mine is still slightly tacky after a couple of months. I just brushed it straight on, and yes I did wash the surface first. What would folk recommend as an alternative for someone who hand paints, which won't yellow with age? What about Xtracolour? Cheers James ------------------------------ End of WWI Digest 4441 **********************