Page 8 of 15 FirstFirst ... 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 142

Thread: BIG JUGGS!!!

  1. #71
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    between tedium and apathy, with an occasional sidetrip to monotony
    Posts
    1,120
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Re: BIG JUGGS!!!

    Chaps...

    I'm beginning to doubt that I'll ever be done with this (or any other) profile, but I submit the latest iteration for your fresh eyed appraisal.
    Attached Images Attached Images  
  2. #72
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    France
    Posts
    2,343
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Re: BIG JUGGS!!!

    I like it very much. Your NMF is great as always.

    Only corrections needed, as far as I can see:

    * the shadow cast by the wing on the bomb pylon and the same shadow on the bomb itself are not coherent. You need to move the bomb's shadow rearwards. I don't know if you see what I mean?

    *Nice touch on the star & bar perspective, but it's a tiny bit too flattened near the top IMHO.
  3. #73
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Detroit, MI, USA
    Posts
    120
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Re: BIG JUGGS!!!

    To build on gamary's corrections: the black underwing D-day stripes are far too thick in relation to the white ones. On the very forward edge of the cowling, you might want to check and make sure that it was filled in black on the foreward side of the foremost row of diamonds. The diamond pattern of the 353rd Fighter Group's P-47s had many variations, and weren't always consistent even within the same squadrons. Sometimes an additional set of diamonds were painted around the underside of the cowling around where the cowl flaps would have been had they gone 'round the bottom of the fuselage.
  4. #74
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    between tedium and apathy, with an occasional sidetrip to monotony
    Posts
    1,120
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Re: BIG JUGGS!!!

    Thanks for the feedback, you guys nailed all of the things that bothered me (esp the wing invasion stripes, the bomb shadow I missed completely) about this profile, but was to lazy to fix until now.

    As for the Diamonds, I'm not entirely sure what you mean re "very forward edge of the cowling" I suspect that you are referring to the way the forward diamonds wrap around the cowl? I did work from a reasonably clear image and as far as I can tell I got pretty close. And no 5th row either, looking at the scale that they are on the image below I doubt they would have fit anyway.

    Like I said fresh eyes.
    Attached Images Attached Images  
  5. #75
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Detroit, MI, USA
    Posts
    120
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Re: BIG JUGGS!!!

    Yeah, I can see from that photo that you've got it very close on, though the diamonds themselves might be a hair too large on your profile. Note that at the very back edge of the cowling, before the flaps, the very tips of another row of diamonds can just be made out.

    What I meant was more a cautionary about other 353rd FG Jugs. For instance, look at the most forward row of diamonds, that wrap around the lip of the cowling; on some planes the yellow background was filled in with black (Lt. Monroe Q. Williams' Jug was one). Other non-photographic sources seem to think that the diamond patterns for other planes are yellow painted on black. I know that still other aircraft would have had the yellow halted at the cowl flaps all the way around, with no "extension". Glenn E. Duncan's razorbacks were painted with a straight checkerboard pattern.

    One other thing I'm curious about: are you sure that Ernestyne had a black anti-glare panel? It's difficult (for me at least) to tell if it's black or OD Green; in the photo, it does look slightly lighter in shade.
    Last edited by Goodwood; 15th April 2010 at 19:10.
  6. #76
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Chattanooga, TN
    Posts
    165
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Re: BIG JUGGS!!!

    The anitglare panel looks the same shade as the black checks to me.
  7. #77
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    between tedium and apathy, with an occasional sidetrip to monotony
    Posts
    1,120
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Re: BIG JUGGS!!!

    Excellent point re the 5th row of diamonds, I honestly didn't notice them, even after staring at them for a considerable amount of time.

    As for the anti-glare panel running along the length of the fuse, I have no idea whether it was black or o/d so(having seen it represented elsewhere both ways) I illustrated both, but chose to display the black version here, simply because I thought that it looked a little better on the screen. Its no biggy to change either way, if I can get definitive proof.

    I appreciate the time you have taken to set me straight.
  8. #78

    Re: BIG JUGGS!!!

    HOLLYCRAP GIANT! I thought it was as good as it gets already but that blows me away!
    My Zero's seem remedial in comparison!
    Superlative work, we'll all need to try harder to keep up!

    FAST AND BULBOUS!
  9. #79
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Ellistown UK
    Posts
    2,089
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Re: BIG JUGGS!!!

    hi GFR,

    just the one little fault, anti glare on P47's was always OD, i have never found any reference to it being black, sometimes when they polished them!!!!!!! the colour went darker now who in there right mind would polish an anti glare panel. hahahahahahhahahahahahahaha
    JMSmith (back by popular demand)
  10. #80
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    France
    Posts
    2,343
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Re: BIG JUGGS!!!

    I wouldn't bet my life on it either, but my impression is that the antiglare panels were generally OD, applied directly at the factory.

    I wouldn't exclude the possibility that some P-47s had them repainted in black or another colour, but it does seem more probable it would be OD.

    BTW, a little extra nit-picking: the rear-view mirror's foot should be a bit taller IMHO.

    Guess nobody is going to give you any slack on this one!
    Last edited by gamary; 17th April 2010 at 12:52. Reason: John's fault, as usual!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •