Well some good new over the weekend! On kind of a whim, I gave the decal surfaces another coat of gloss clear, this turned the tissue that kind of translucent that I see on a lot of model pictures, and the surface felt significantly smoother. And voilĂ , the decals stick wonderfully now using this method, no sagging damp tissue. I still used the decal set on a couple of the radical fuse curves, because the plain water wasn't clinging that great, and this too worked wonderfully. I'm rather pleased with the results. The bottom of the wing and one side of the fin have poor decals, but the rest look pretty decent. I managed to at least salvage the wrinkly ones with the micro scale products, so it's workable even if it looks a little sad. (I've got a few issues with the finish on the model, but that's chalked up to inexperience/poor planning on my part)
So this makes me wonder: as I said I used two coats of 50/50 Midwest aerogloss clear/thinner, followed by a spray gloss coat where the decals go. Now when I see pictures of models, the finish looks significantly different than my own (more glossy/translucent), and the claim on them is 50/50 dope/thinner. But I'm speculating maybe the aerogloss comes "ready to use"? It seems kind of thin compared to other dopes I've seen (pictures of...aerogloss is the only type available locally). And I'm thinking maybe I'm thinning it "too much" by mixing it 50/50 with thinner. I think I read somewhere on the interwebs that scigs uses aerogloss, if you are reading might you confirm/deny that? I will experiment with it at some point. I was thinking of trying out nitrate, or just switching to the krylon method.
I figured since the stuka doesn't have a reputation for flying anyhow I'll get my technique in practice with it, so hopefully the others will do alright. Almost done with the stuka, so completed pics will follow soon.( I know you are all waiting with bated breath
)
not your average nut.