Snake45

I've done .22 CB Long caps down there on occasion, but they're hard to find and expensive now. I do still have most of a box of them I save for very special use.

I took it as just a generic warning/friendly reminder all-around.

Yes, that's exactly what I'm going to have to do.

Didn't get it today, actually a couple weeks ago. Springfield Armory/Air Venturi M1A .22 air rifle. It's as heavy as the real thing and almost as much fun to shoot--I've been trying to get in a few shots every day in the basement. Here it is with my real Polytech (legal semi-auto) M14 and my old faithful Crosman/Mendoza .22 air rifle.

C-47, B-17, and B-25--very VERY cool! BTW, did you know it's possible to BACK a B-17 into a parking space? (And no, they don't have reversible props.)

Well, that might work, but you'd still be driving it with the wheel on your chest. Not very comfortable.

I've discovered it's pretty easy to send such people into a complete meltdown.

I'm with you guys. Doesn't have to necessarily be practical, but has to be possible. I can think of one kit in particular that, due to poor original engineering, can't be built into something that could be driven--not straight out of the box, anyway. The steering wheel sits about six (scale) inches away from the driver's seat back, and you can't get more than a couple more inches of clearance without completely redesigning the whole cockpit. Even if you were VERY thin, if you could get in the thing, you'd be driving with the steering wheel on your chest. But it gets worse. It's a doorless roadster, so there would be no way to enter the driver's seat from the driver's side of the car. You'd have to get into the passenger seat and try to slide over somehow. And if the optional up-top were installed, I don't think it would be possible to get into the car at all. I can't bring myself to build this kit until I can figger out how to fix this problem.

Great save, I can't tell which one was damaged and which one is new. I recently bought a Monogram metal-body kit and you're inspiring me to get to it. Well done and model on!

No, in fact I've never photographed that particular model. But I definitely plan to use the technique again if ever I feel the need.

Sounds like you'd be better off watching eBay for a reasonably priced restorable glue bomb.

If I were doing it, I'd put a tiny bit of light tan and light gray paint in some thinned Dullcoat (clear) and airbrush it on till I got the effect I wanted. I've actually done this on a chassis to portray daily driver wear and weathering, and thought it came out pretty well.

At one point, Dad was flying the airplane on the cover of the sales brochure. I still have it around here somewhere (and the Fokker F.28 brochure he got Elvis to autograph).

I've not only seen it, but done it. My Dad used to fly Pilatus Turbo-Porters.

You are of course correct. If you have enough "headwind," you can take an airplane off--or land it--with zero ground speed, or nearly so. This is why aircraft carriers always (if possible) steam into the wind for aircraft launch and recovery operations. Speed of the ship into the headwind adds just that much headwind vector, and lowers necessary airspeeds. I went on U2be and watched not just the discussion, but the actual test with the real airplane. Wind speed at time of test was zero (or so he said, and I'll so stipulate). In other words, the air speed is the same as the ground speed--zero--except for the propwash, and I doubt that little ultralight produced anywhere near the propwash necessary to produce enough airspeed over the wings for flight (there would of course be some right at the roots). They had orange traffic cones laid out on the stationary ground next to the "conveyor belt" (tarp being pulled backward by a truck). In at least two scenes you can clearly see the airplane moving forward relative to the cones, meaning it was moving forward faster than the tarp was moving backward--meaning it had net forward ground speed and thus net airflow over the wings. Clearly it developed enough forward speed to take off. In fact, it was a completely normal takeoff except the airplane wheels would have been turning twice as fast (roughly) as usual. Some of the commenters called this out. I don't believe Jamie proved what he thought he proved.

That didn't turn out too bad for all the trouble you had with it. Model on!

I did a rescue on a builtup of that '74 Charger a couple years ago. Not the best model I've ever seen but it didn't turn out too bad. Might be nice to have it back.

If you'd like to see some of these old-school Novas tearing up the strip again, Watch Street Outlaws America's List on Discovery Channel, Monday nights. They pitting 20 of America's fastest, baddest "street" cars against each other, heads-up, and there are two 1G Novas on the list--and two '66-'67s, too. Very most way extremely cool!

One need only turn on a TV, read a newspaper, or just watch people in everyday life to see just how far "average" has fallen.

That's hard to imagine. And if it's true, I'm already sorry for them.

IMC Beetle, started around 1969 or '70, finished in 2018 for the first BOYD build. AMT dune buggy, started around 1969, finished 2014.

Thanks Geno and Ewetwo! Much appreciated!

Thanks! It kinda grew on me too when I got used to it. Keep me in mind. The Snakepit tries to be a "no kill" shelter.

I've made stub axles out of aluminum and brass tubing, piano wire, Evergreen rod, wood dowels, toothpics, sprue, even a plastic Q-Tip shaft. Whatever works! Improvise! Adapt! Overcome! Model on!

"First World Problems."