Ex-FAAWAFU

Just to show that I am still working on this model as well as pontificating (and building Seafires), my Dad now has a seat and some straps to hold him and his mates in: Getting pretty close to finishing inside now - the main thing left to do, apart from a little work with the trusty Prismacolor silver pencil, is the two Observer's windows; the frames (PE) are built, but I have still to glaze them and (obviously) fit them in position. None the less, this is what the internals look like as we close in on putting much of this away from view for ever! Note also that Airfix's spares department came up trumps, and I have a replacement nose. More soon Crisp

Brilliant! That makes perfect sense now, and explains why the other end of the drogue was permanently rigged to the fuselage; the TAG simply chucks it out of the back and lets wind and current do the rest. The Sea King sea anchor is very much the same idea, and also permanently rigged. As a matter of interest, where are you getting these gems of info from?

If you wonder why the Navy gets a bit anal about flash points and the like with aviation fuel (and, indeed, why they were so desperate to move to turbine engines in the first place), then look up the HMS Dasher disaster from 1943. She exploded in the Clyde approaches, killing 379 of her ship's company.

D12 vs D19 - I am not sure what the difference was; photos suggest that (just as with the exhaust, as we have seen) individual airframes varied. To be honest, I went for D12 because Airfix suggested it for the FAA scheme, and I am building a FAA machine; I THINK that my only photo of AA5R (see below) suggests D12, but it's not 100% conclusive. My photos from Yeovilton suggest that there could be other designs, neither of which is provided by Airfix; to be honest I don't think it really matters. The Walrus was a workhorse, and the more I study photos the more I appreciate how widely they varied in details between individual airframes. D26 is the folded back headrest of the (folded) co-pilot's seat; when the seat was rigged the headrest folded downwards. You can see part of it in this photo (mine, from Yeovilton last week - incidentically, as discussed elsewhere, the light in there is very low and I am deeply suspicious of the lurid green colour that this photo seems to show). D27 good question - my guess is compressed air, but…? Clear pictures of the inside of a Walrus are as rare as rocking horse poo - particularly of an original, non-restored one. D42 is the folded co-pilot's seat; look at the Eduard PE set (even if you don't buy it, you can see the instructions online, which make this much clearer). D24 & 23 are, as you suggest, cable reels; again, reference shots are your friend here - most Walruses seem to have flown rigged with a line running from each of these drums, through a slot in the rear gunner cockpit ring, to a small connector low on the fuselage a couple of feet behind the forward catapult spool (at the step in the boat hull) - the connector is visible on the right here (again, my photo from VL): ...and the line can be seen in this evocative shot of a Shagbat on a cruiser catapult: I am not 100% certain what it was for. For a while I thought maybe steadying lines for hoisting the aircraft out of the water (see the video posted earlier in this thread), but I have photos of a Walrus being hoisted back on board a cruiser where those lines are rigged but not in use (i.e. they are using steadying lines, but not using the ones we're talking about for that purpose). Since the aircraft was designed as an out-and-out amphibian, they might have been designed as lines to secure the aircraft to something when afloat? (After all, she carried an anchor!). Once you know this information, you can work out what that curly thing is that Airfix have moulded on the back of parts D23 & D24 - it's meant to represent a coil of rope wound round a cleat ...but you only tell that when you already know what it is, which rather defeats the point in my opinion. D43, yes, I think dinghy (but again I am not 100% certain) D07 no idea, though oil cooler seems plausible - but trust me, you cannot see it when the nacelle and engine are built, so I wouldn't worry about it. Landing light or not - some aircraft had it, some didn't. I know this is frustrating, but it's reality; the FAA Museum aircraft doesn't have one, the RAAF Museum yellow one does - and I have seen at least one reference photo that appears to show a double lamp in the port wing. K8341 above doesn't have it (though it does look as though someone dinked the lower port wingtip recently, and the upper port wingtip seems to be missing altogether...!), but this (colourised?) one below does: If it helps you to decide, the only photo I have found of AA5R is this one, and that seems to show a landing lamp (as well as the line discussed above). Only the RAF used the Walrus as a dedicated ASR aircraft (though later in the war - notably in the Pacific Fleet - the FAA had a Walrus embarked in each carrier for that rôle - the equivalent of the 50s-70s plane guard helicopter). RN Walruses were multipurpose - originally designed to spot fall of shot for battleship guns (and actually used as such at least once; hence the "Spotter of Spartivento" scheme offered by Airfix), but also used in anti-submarine, communications, squadron hack and pretty much anything you an think of. AA5R, however, was definitely NOT an ASR aircraft; 751 NAS was one of the Observer training squadrons. The above photo shows light series bomb carriers (I think - they are partially hidden by the port float), but not bomb racks. My Dad's log book has sorties in different Walruses that involved dropping smoke floats, practice bombs and depth charges (not all in the same trip!), which is why I intend to fit LSBCs at least - I might yet leave off the bomb racks. Again, that photo clearly shows that AA5R had a tail wheel rather than the rudder fairing. I very strongly suspect that the Xtradecal designers used this very picture as their source; I certainly haven't managed to find any other shots of this particular airframe. I assume that the engineers removed the (water) rudder fairing from aircraft that didn't plan to land on the water; 751's Arbroath cabs only operated from runways, so it would be one less thing to keep well-maintained. Incidentally, Airfix provide a part for the tailwheel without water rudder fairing, but there is no reference to it in the instructions. Hope that helps! Crisp [Edit: one thing seen on many Walruses but not included in this splendid Airfix offering is a baffle forward of the Observer's windows (which opened by hingeing at the top) - presumably this was to lessen the gale blowing into the Looker's face, chucking his charts around etc. Looking again at this picture of AA5R, I think she has the baffles fitted - there is a distinct shadow ahead of the Observer's window in exactly the right place, and I think AA4T probably has it, too. I have the Special Hobby kit in my stash, and I seem to recall that they did include this thing as a piece of resin. I shall dig it out forthwith - I can either nick it or (more likely) use it as a pattern from which to scratch build one.]

Do you keep that near the Sporran of Satisfaction and the Quaich of Over-Sized Rivets? [Massimo, if you’re reading this, as an Englishman I apologise on behalf of my Scottish cousins: a Sgian-dubh is a kind of dagger you keep in your socks, a Sporran is a Jock handbag inexplicably worn in front of one’s private parts, and a Quaich is a flat vessel designed for drinking whisky. And Gallic is a wonderful language, but it ain’t half got weird spelling!]

There you go, Bill; those jars of what looks like brown & grey snot in the foreground are for painting the panel lines. All this talk of hormones; let’s face it, guys, at our age we’re far more likely to need a new Hip.

Aires stuff is beautifully done, but it is notorious for needing a lot of work to get it to fit - especially thinning down the original kit parts. But in my experience it’s definitely worth it; you certainly shouldn’t worry. No RFI yet - waiting to get my proper camera back in commission to take some decent pictures of it. The aircraft is currently carefully stowed inside a rigid box, sourrounded with bubble wrap.

Holy thread-resurrection, Batman! If you go back a couple of pages in this build, you will see a stray 1/48 Griffon. It was not fitted to the FR46 (nor was it ever intended to be) - but it's time I came clean. I so enjoyed building the Airfix Seafire 46 that I promptly went out and bought another one, this time to be built as a Mk 47, complete with folded wings. And this time I have decided to detail it a tad; there are various after-market goodies available. I have decided NOT to add resin gunbays, but I AM building in an Aires cockpit (probably an act of lunacy, since I know how little of the cockpit is actually visible once done), and a beautiful Aires Griffon - which was the one sneak previewed a few weeks ago. While my Walrus is taking a couple of days off (the only down side of using oils in weathering is that it is sensible to wait at least 48 hours for it all to dry before you start handling things again), I have gone back to Seafires - specifically to this: The underside panel (with the distinctive Seafire 47 chin intake) is not glued in place, but everything else you see is glued. Today I have been adding the pipes on this side of the engine: the Z-shaped one that runs from the coolant header tank overflow / pressure relief valve (guess who has been poring over drawings in Morgan & Shacklady!), ducks underneath the engine bearer and ends in a drain (i.e. a hole); and the big fat one that runs from the underside of the coolant header tank join (not visible in this shot), along the bottom of the engine bearer, ducks inside and ends up at bottom left heading through the firewall in the direction of the starboard radiator - it has a mirror image on the port side of the engine. Aires provide some 0.9mm copper wire for these pipes, but I soon discarded that on the grounds that it is impossible to bend with any degree of accuracy / control - and these boys need some serious bending. Instead I am using 0.9mm lead wire (what would we do without Plus Model, eh?). The thinner pipe (Z-shaped one) is made of 0.4mm Albion Alloys nickel tube, which is stuff I use a lot. You can also see 0.2mm nickel tube involved in ignition wires - but that was put in a few weeks ago. In this second shot without the underside panel, you can see the join with the coolant tank (bottom right) and get a better idea of the fat pipe run (there is a resin connector joining two sections of pipe, fitted immediately beneath where the main engine bearer beam joins its smaller, thinner support cousin). Anyone who has ever worked with Aires will not be surprised to learn that - though the detail is beautifully cast - the tolerances are minuscule; you have to sand things within an inch of their life. I will show you what I've had to do to the fuselage in later posts, but here you can see how much of the engine and panel had to be sanded off to make it fit - and how the fat coolant pipe actually breaks at the front end of the engine. Trust me; you won't be able to tell once it is finished. Anyway. The Walrus is my main priority; this build will only advance slowly, during periods when the Walrus needs to dry etc. But the FR46 will eventually have an FR47 stablemate (markings yet to be decided, but high EDSG/Sky demarkation line, wings folded, not Korea stripes (they were only worn for a couple of weeks, yet almost every Mk47 you see modelled has them). More in due course. Crisp P.S. Added photo of the fuselage and wing cutting & sanding that has to be done to get this to fit - with countless dry fitting to check, check & check again. Note how thin you have to make the fuselage wall by the little stub of wing root that remains (otherwise the engine bearers foul it), and note the big thick groove you have to file inside for the firewall to fit. You can't see how thin the fuselage walls are in the cockpit area here, but trust me they are - the whole fuselage is quite fragile at present, and will be until everything is glued together. However, though it is a lot of work, it DOES fit if you keep at it - and I think it is going to look pretty decent. It also gives me a better idea of how tightly everything was crammed in there; I tend to think of the engine finishing somewhere around the leading edge of the wing, but in fact the rear edge of the hole cut in the wing coincides with the firewall - i.e. the engine goes almost as far back as the landing gear.

I’d somehow missed this, @Ridibunda - superb work!

All excellent, with (to my eyes) Stan Orr’s Fulmar & Dickie Cork’s Sea Hurricane particularly outstanding. BZ

You might want to revisit your “1/7s” title: I logged on half-expecting to find a colossal beast 3 times the size of a 1/24...

We prefer to think of ourselves as an aesthetic elite, free from the un-necessary strait jacket of the conventional preference for sleek plank-wing dullness... Or a bit weird. But the first version is better. [I only said it was attractive in comparison with a Hormone... but it does have a chunky Soviet charm all of its own]

That Ukrainian paint job would be a challenge

If I were more confident with those prop blur things (not sure about how good they look), the optimum solution would be a taxying Gannet caught in mid-fold; illustrates the true bonker-dom of Fairey’s design, yet still shows off the aircraft.

I think one would have to be a serious connoisseur of burnt fuel to be able to tell the difference between AVCAT & AVTUR by smell alone. Mind you, with the breadth of talent available on Britmodeller I wouldn’t necessarily rule it out!

My twin has a far more patrician pointy nose. Lovely Gannetry, Bill. Notes duly being made for a 1/48 (AS4) future build of mine. With folded wings. Oh yes.

Better than interior, surely? Love the Catalan Independence torpedo!

I didn’t even notice that; I was on a mission for Bill, so acting with laser-like focus, obviously. Or I’m an un-observant sod. Take your pick!

Wow! Great job; I’d forgotten all about this build

Those are fantastic photos. Some of it looks very familiar (albeit with that unmistakeable Russian turquoise green everywhere), and some is most odd. What are the huge rack of large electronic boxes in that rack in the back? Sonobuoy receivers? And I assume the body under the tail must be a towable MAD bird. The rotor head, however, is positively restrained, logical and simple in comparison with a Sea King! Still, with references like that I’m expecting a fully-plumbed-in 1/48 dipping sonar installation... No pressure.

Something similar happened to a mate of mine - alas, no longer with us - in a Sea Harrier. He reckoned that split second after the canopy departed but before he worked out what was going on was the most scary time of his life.

Not impossible... though there’s no visible means of getting said heat down into the cabin. And of course the fuselage had two large hatches “venting to atmosphere” (as engineers seem to like to describe an open hole). Put me down as sceptical! (Mind you, if this was the real reason, perhaps this example of fine British engineering was what inspired the heater in the early Land Rover; driver remains freezing while passenger in danger of 1st Degree burns to the shin). Both Sea King and Lynx had cabin “heating” which drew from the engines. Believe me, you had to be very, very, very cold to subject yourself to a face full of not-very-diluted exhaust gas; I don’t think I ever used it - I’d rather be cold than feeling sick (I‘m picky like that). I am one of those weirdos who actually likes the smell of burned AVCAT (much to my wife’s incredulous horror) but preferably not directly into my face, and definitely in low doses.

You have really beaten the Schwein into submission. I particularly like your replacement of the kit’s bottle opener with a footstep, though quite how the pilot is going to open his beer now is less clear. @Corsairfoxfouruncle Is right about yoyr wee drilled tube thingy; venturi to drive instruments (more reliable than a vacuum pump)

Since the Kamov-27 first flew in 1973, I think it can probably just about class itself as Cold War too... The Hormone is just TOO 60s for me; too redolent of Moskva & Leningrad, Mod Kashins and all that grainy intelligence photo stuff. Whereas I came up against a number of Helixes on trips to the North over the years, and grew rather fond of them. Still, everyone is entitled to their favourites. But I completely agree that a good quality model of the Hormone would be good. See also Wasp, Whirlwind...

Ooh! Nice! I always thought the Helix was a good-looking machine (especially by Soviet helicopter standards - cf its ugly older brother the Hormone). I’m told it’s a good aircraft to fly, too, though I can’t say I’ve had the pleasure myself