Jump to content

Yellow training bands on Hunters


Duncan B

Recommended Posts

For some reason I have it in my head that the underwing yellow training bands on Hunter T7s (wearing HSS) didn't extend over the flaps. Now that I'm at that point, ready to paint, I can't find any references to confirm this nor remember why I have this in mind. Can anyone point me in the right direction please?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For some reason I have it in my head that the underwing yellow training bands on Hunter T7s (wearing HSS) didn't extend over the flaps. Now that I'm at that point, ready to paint, I can't find any references to confirm this nor remember why I have this in mind. Can anyone point me in the right direction please?

They did, I'll see if I can find a pic or two - what are you painting Duncan? You may actually be thinking of Lightning T-birds which didn't.

EDIT: I know its in the museum...and the serials are the wrong font (why would they do that?) but this may help

1236993M.jpg

From Air Britains site

Edited by Bill Clark
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They did, I'll see if I can find a pic or two - what are you painting Duncan? You may actually be thinking of Lightning T-birds which didn't.

You've hit the nail on the head Bill! I've got a Lightning T bird in build too and had seen photos showing the lack of training bands on the flaps of them. I had that lurking in my memory which was where the confusion has come from.

Thanks for that.

They did, I'll see if I can find a pic or two - what are you painting Duncan? You may actually be thinking of Lightning T-birds which didn't.

EDIT: I know its in the museum...and the serials are the wrong font (why would they do that?) but this may help

1236993M.jpg

From Air Britains site

That is a big bedroom ceiling! Nice photo too. Next question is how wide are the yellow bands? I do have the information somewhere though.

Edited by Duncan B
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You've hit the nail on the head Bill! I've got a Lightning T bird in build too and had seen photos showing the lack of training bands on the flaps of them. I had that lurking in my memory which was where the confusion has come from.

Thanks for that.

That is a big bedroom ceiling! Nice photo too. Next question is how wide are the yellow bands? I do have the information somewhere though.

Duncan they were 24"

Here's another great shot

1290780M.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Duncan they were 24"

Here's another great shot

1290780M.jpg

Nice shot Bill, reinforces the discussion about the leading edge "dog-tooth" a -while back.

Just for reference Duncan et al, the reason the Lightning T-Birds did not have the yellow bands on the flaps is because they were always being changed and also fitted single seaters as well.

Officially they were known as "Flap-Tanks" and they leaked like sieves. I don't have my tech notes handy so I'll stand corrected but I believe that they only carried about 30 gallons, of which 20 was usable the other ten having left a trail on the taxi-way !, - just enough to get the "Frightening" to the end of the runway.

Dennis W Robinson

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just for reference Duncan et al, the reason the Lightning T-Birds did not have the yellow bands on the flaps is because they were always being changed and also fitted single seaters as well.

Officially they were known as "Flap-Tanks" and they leaked like sieves. I don't have my tech notes handy so I'll stand corrected but I believe that they only carried about 30 gallons, of which 20 was usable the other ten having left a trail on the taxi-way !, - just enough to get the "Frightening" to the end of the runway.

Dennis W Robinson

So I take it the top side of the Lightning flaps didn't have the yellow bands either?

That reminds me that towards the end of my apprenticeship my Flight was sent to Binbrook for experience of the real RAF after 3 years at Halton. I do remember being surprised to find out that the flaps held fuel, which to me seemed to be for the sole purpose of filling up the drip trays underneath and that we had to refuel the same aircraft twice before it even went anywhere.

Duncan they were 24"

Here's another great shot

1290780M.jpg

That is another very nice photo, could almost have been taken specifically for model makers. It's very clean so I'll not have to do much weathering or pre shading anyway.

Edited by Duncan B
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not related to the original question but I've always thought the High Speed Silver/Yellow training scheme looked fantastic. Not only on Hunters, which seems to suit it particularly well, but on just about all the aircraft it was ever applied to.

Mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is a great shot and it show's just how wrong Academy have the wing tip shape - and as Dennis says the dog-tooth too! I have another shot somewhere (that Dennis may have sent?) of a GA11 from above - which demonstates the wing plan precisely....

Hi Bill,

Somebody on another thread mentioned the dog-tooth to be on the correct place on the Academy (based on measurements of a real airframe), with the aileron being of the wrong dimension.... What are your thoughts on this?

Best regards,

Guillaume

PS: on my Academy Hunters, I moved the dogtooth down a couple of mm's.... Easy to do, and the model looks a lot more 'balanced' as a result

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Bill,

Somebody on another thread mentioned the dog-tooth to be on the correct place on the Academy (based on measurements of a real airframe), with the aileron being of the wrong dimension.... What are your thoughts on this?

Best regards,

Guillaume

PS: on my Academy Hunters, I moved the dogtooth down a couple of mm's.... Easy to do, and the model looks a lot more 'balanced' as a result

Its a while since I built one, but like you cutting back the dog-tooth improved it a lot. It is indeed all down to balance sometimes rather that strict accuracy. I'd suspect that if the dog-tooth is in the correct place then the aileron would need to be moved in board. They're separate parts so its possible to do this but then its going to interfere with the flaps below, which will need to be reduced. The whole wing suffers from varying degrees of sloppiness. The ERU's are in the wrong place - I don't think (? I may be wrong here - it has been a while!) they're directly above the outer pylons, and the wing tips are far too rounded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Bill,

Somebody on another thread mentioned the dog-tooth to be on the correct place on the Academy (based on measurements of a real airframe), with the aileron being of the wrong dimension.... What are your thoughts on this?

Best regards,

Guillaume

PS: on my Academy Hunters, I moved the dogtooth down a couple of mm's.... Easy to do, and the model looks a lot more 'balanced' as a result

The 'dog tooth' is in the wrong place (too far inboard) but not by as much as it first appears. The problem is that people compare it's location to the inboard edge of the aileron and it's the aileron that's the root of most of the problem, i.e. the dog tooth is only about 1mm too far in board, but the aileron is 2mm out making the whole thing look out of whack. As Bill says, the aileron is difficult to fix without mucking about with the flaps as well. The easiest way to make the whole wing look better is to tweak the dog-tooth a bit instead as you describe.

See my thread here for a full-on moan about the Academy/Italeri Hunter!

Mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Duncan, Bill and All,

Lightning T-Bird mainplane yellow bands

Correct Duncan. In service aircraft did not have the yellow bands on the upper surface of the flaps. The prototype and some early production aircraft may have done though. Trouble is, its a difficult area to get photos off.

Hunter kits and mainplane tips

1] With regards to Hunter kits, I will confess that I am unashamedly biased in this respect so if you wish to take the next bit with a pinch or two of salt then please do so.

Many moons ago when I was DCE with the Hawks in Saudi, I "obtained", on the basis that it's not what you know but who......., a set of Engineering drawings of the Hunter. The dimensioned ones I passed back to the UK and Dick Ward and on to Revel for the production of their 1/32nd kit. As far as I am concerned, and I have literally put a micrometer on it, this is the most accurately outlined kit of the Hunter yet produced. The kit was manufactured virtually as Hawkers designed it and as such, all other variants could have been produced just by the manufacture of a few extra sprues to go with the basic "core" of the kit. It is a great pity, in my mind, that Revel did not bite the bullet and go ahead. It is an even greater pity that they did not produce a 1/48th version from the same drawings as that would have knocked the socks of any opposition.

2] With regards to the wing tips:- !!

One of the problems I believe that modellers have with gauging the correct profile of the Hunter tip is in the tip itself. The wing is quite thick virtually all the way out to the tip an then the top and bottom surfaces curve quite sharply to the tip itself. Depending on the angle of view, the tip can either be quite "square" or "rounded". IMHO, this is in most cases, a simple optical illusion.

With the introduction of the extended leading edge, the outer wing tip panel was also changed in plan view in order that the "curve" should meet up with the leading edge of the extension. Now originally, the panel was modified by extending the leading edge of the panel thus continuing the classic tip curve of the aircraft. A few modified Mk.4's and some early T7's had this "forward" extension until it was changed fairly early on in the mod programme. The final outer wing tip panel was widened at its forward end and as this "widening" was inside of the tip curve, it did not result in an increase in span for the aircraft.

However, I do have verbatim evidence from former HS employees at Kingston, that the GA11's produced for the Navy had the original fwd extended wing tip fitted. Unfortunately I have no documentary evidence for that.

I am attaching two drawings from the engineering side of Hunter production to illustrate the tip profiles of a "straight" wing and one fitted with the extension. Also a photograph of a Hunter (F4?) under going the leading edge mod. The later "widened" tip is apparent and by "widened" I am talking only and inch or so. Compare it with the similar shot of the Hunter F6 prototype.

 

tEosd7z.jpg
 

Hunter F1 plan

 

 

KroJVDn.jpg

Hunter T7 plan

 

Acj8Jwa.jpg

Hunter F4 wing Mod
 

Compare with Hunter F6 prototype :-

Q2Avrvu.jpg

 

 

HTH

Dennis W Robinson

PS:- Please right click and save for reference

Edited by sloegin57
Re-installation of Photographs/Drawings
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You've hit the nail on the head Bill! I've got a Lightning T bird in build too and had seen photos showing the lack of training bands on the flaps of them. I had that lurking in my memory which was where the confusion has come from.

Thanks for that.

That is a big bedroom ceiling! Nice photo too. Next question is how wide are the yellow bands? I do have the information somewhere though.

Lightning flaps/trainer bands: They weren't supposed to paint fabric covered surfaces!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 6 years later...
On 1/25/2012 at 10:06 AM, sloegin57 said:

Hi Duncan, Bill and All,

Lightning T-Bird mainplane yellow bands

Correct Duncan. In service aircraft did not have the yellow bands on the upper surface of the flaps. The prototype and some early production aircraft may have done though. Trouble is, its a difficult area to get photos off.

Hunter kits and mainplane tips

1] With regards to Hunter kits, I will confess that I am unashamedly biased in this respect so if you wish to take the next bit with a pinch or two of salt then please do so.

Many moons ago when I was DCE with the Hawks in Saudi, I "obtained", on the basis that it's not what you know but who......., a set of Engineering drawings of the Hunter. The dimensioned ones I passed back to the UK and Dick Ward and on to Revel for the production of their 1/32nd kit. As far as I am concerned, and I have literally put a micrometer on it, this is the most accurately outlined kit of the Hunter yet produced. The kit was manufactured virtually as Hawkers designed it and as such, all other variants could have been produced just by the manufacture of a few extra sprues to go with the basic "core" of the kit. It is a great pity, in my mind, that Revel did not bite the bullet and go ahead. It is an even greater pity that they did not produce a 1/48th version from the same drawings as that would have knocked the socks of any opposition.

2] With regards to the wing tips:- !!

One of the problems I believe that modellers have with gauging the correct profile of the Hunter tip is in the tip itself. The wing is quite thick virtually all the way out to the tip an then the top and bottom surfaces curve quite sharply to the tip itself. Depending on the angle of view, the tip can either be quite "square" or "rounded". IMHO, this is in most cases, a simple optical illusion.

With the introduction of the extended leading edge, the outer wing tip panel was also changed in plan view in order that the "curve" should meet up with the leading edge of the extension. Now originally, the panel was modified by extending the leading edge of the panel thus continuing the classic tip curve of the aircraft. A few modified Mk.4's and some early T7's had this "forward" extension until it was changed fairly early on in the mod programme. The final outer wing tip panel was widened at its forward end and as this "widening" was inside of the tip curve, it did not result in an increase in span for the aircraft.

However, I do have verbatim evidence from former HS employees at Kingston, that the GA11's produced for the Navy had the original fwd extended wing tip fitted. Unfortunately I have no documentary evidence for that.

I am attaching two drawings from the engineering side of Hunter production to illustrate the tip profiles of a "straight" wing and one fitted with the extension. Also a photograph of a Hunter (F4?) under going the leading edge mod. The later "widened" tip is apparent and by "widened" I am talking only and inch or so. Compare it with the similar shot of the Hunter F6 prototype.

 

WEBHUNTERF1PLAN.jpg

 

 

 

Hunter F1 plan

 

 

 

WEB-HUNTERT7PLAN.jpg

 

 

 

Hunter T7 plan

 

 

 

WEB-HUNTERF4WINGEXTENSION.jpg

 

 

 

Hunter F4 wing Mod

 

 

 

Compare with Hunter F6 prototype :-

 

 

 

WEB-Hunter-Prototype.jpg

 

 

HTH

Dennis W Robinson

PS:- Please right click and save for reference

Dennis, is there any chance you could repost those drawings/pics, please?

 

David

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, sloegin57 said:

Of course I can - original images (I think - it was 5 years ago !) re-installed in post .

 

Dennis

Wonderful.  Thank you.

 

David

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Question on the Hunter dogtooth / leading edge extension:  is the leading edge extension parallel to the original leading edge, please?  It looks to me like it is but I'd like to be certain

 

David

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...