Jump to content

Airfix Tiger Moth


Denford

Recommended Posts

The prewar ones were called Woods frames consisting of acetate/celuloid rings and. fabric patches. The celuloid ring provided a non tear surround and the fabric within the ring was cut out and then repatched The modern type of inspection cover is slightly domed and I believe have a fastener in the centre so there is no doping involved.

I used Photobucket Pro to post my photos.

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was at the Royal Newcastle Aero Club yesterday and took some detail pics of the club's Tiger Moth. In regards to the gap betweeen the upper engine cowling and the upper forward decking forward of the windscreen on this particular Tiger there is a slight gap visible, maybe half a finger's width deep. With regards to the inspection patches, these are circular fabric patches doped over circular metal rings. This Tiger also has the tread tubes on top of the upper cowling to spread the force when there is a person standing there refuelling the aircraft. One of the inspection patches on the rear fuselage is at the moment removed (the one under the left hand tailplane). I'm returning to the Club today so I'll take some more pics including one of the fuselage interior inside the removed inspection patch.

RHB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello John Aero,

There are both types of inspection patch on this particular Tiger. What I have interpreted as metal rings may well be celluloid. I'll have a closer look at theopen hatch today today.

RHB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There may well have been other versions. The reason the original type were celluloid is that they will bond with ordinary dope to the doped fabric. The fabric is cut out of the centre of the frame which leaves a stiff edge to the fabric. After the inspection a fabric patch larger than the frame and with frayed edges is doped over the frame and for subsequent inspections this patch can be ripped off and again replaced. The Woods frame also indicates exactly where the inspection point is for future use.

John

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 6 years later...

There are three props provided in the Airfix 1/48 kit, with curved diagonal tips (B3), one rounded tip and one squared off tip (B4) and streamlined tips (C10).  Can anyone explain the differences?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't seen the kit yet, but the rounded tip type might be the early type of prop. Most wartime Tigers had the diagonal tips with wider chord blades. Many modern and restored examples have symetrical props with rounded tips or a square tipped Black variety by such as Hoffman.  Thje Menasco props on some Canadian variants rotate the oppoosite way to Gipsy types.

 

John

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is an old post from 2014 relating to the new tool 1/72 kit. Might be best to find the 1/48 kits thread and repost this same question on that. 
Cheers.. Dave 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 years later...
On 2/10/2014 at 12:43 PM, John Aero said:

I have just about every Tiger plan, and I have a drawing completely covered in measurements taken off the real things. I hope to have one soon to look at for the Canadian Tiger conversion. For information: the engine thrust line is 2.1/2" above the fuselage datum which is on the top longeron. Measurements taken as parallel with the main spar the top wing overall length (one panel) is 13'.10 1/2" and the lower wing panel is 13'.10 3/8" The centre section is 24" wide. In front view the span is 29' 4" with no overlap.

The Tiger Moth geometry is a nightmare and it's design inception, chaos! But I love 'em. I can't remember now, but I think I made three issues of the Tiger in 1/72 scale and two in 1/48, all different.

John

G-AOFOTollerton_zpsf96c7573.jpg

John, greetings, hope you well. I've bought the Airfix 1/72 & 1/48 Tiggies for a bit of retirement time filling - and also have the Warpaint 101 - but on checking the 1/48 plans within that publication the Airfix 1/48 appears a tad on the small side, both on fuselage length and wingspans. As I think I read somewhere you were involved with Airfix on this one, and you mention your own plans, thoughts? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Solar Panel Phil said:

but on checking the 1/48 plans within that publication the Airfix 1/48 appears a tad on the small side,

 

34 minutes ago, Solar Panel Phil said:

Measurements taken as parallel with the main spar the top wing overall length (one panel) is 13'.10 1/2" and the lower wing panel is 13'.10 3/8" The centre section is 24" wide. In front view the span is 29' 4" with no overlap.

@John Aero   has not been on here since Nov 2020.

Plans need to be treated with caution, and can easily be distorted or resized when printed.   I suggest getting a ruler out and checking against the actual dimensions given on the plans and the kit.

I've not seen any wailing or gnashing of teeth over the Airfix Tiger Moth on here as well.

HTH

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Solar Panel Phil said:

John, greetings, hope you well. I've bought the Airfix 1/72 & 1/48 Tiggies for a bit of retirement time filling - and also have the Warpaint 101 - but on checking the 1/48 plans within that publication the Airfix 1/48 appears a tad on the small side, both on fuselage length and wingspans. As I think I read somewhere you were involved with Airfix on this one, and you mention your own plans, thoughts? 

As Troy said above, it's best not to put total faith into published plans as the printing process introduces variance into the output that can skew the results. Looking at various official 1930s/1940s Tiger Moth publications from the RAF, RAAF and RCAF, the wingspan of the aircraft is consistently listed as 29 feet, four inches. Reducing that to 1/48 scale gives us a scale dimension of 7.33 inches or approximately 7 and 11/32 inches. Pulling an Airfix kit out of my cupboard and measuring the wingspan of both wings yields an actual measurement of about 7 and 9/32.

 

Curious about why that difference might be I looked through some of the Tiger Moth documentation I've collected and found in the Manual of Instructions for Operation, Maintenance and Rigging issued by de Havilland Aircraft Ltd. Australia a factory drawing which illustrates lubrication points. If you compare the shape of the wingtip in the drawing with that of the kit, it appears to me that Airfix made the tip too squarish where the drawing shows an egg-shaped curve widening out considerably at the aileron hinge point. I think that difference accounts for 1/32 of difference on each side which could make up the missing span width. It may well be that Airfix based their kit on restored/preserved examples that had been modified over the years for whatever reason with slightly different shaped wingtips.

 

I in no way claim to be an expert on the Tiger Moth, I just have made a habit for 20 years or so of collecting useful bits and documents as I come across them.

 

spacer.png

 

spacer.png

Edited by bjohns5
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many years ago an engineer mate warned me about relying on incidental detail in any drawing prepared for a particular purpose - he said that most of it was simply to show the position of the subject matter in relation to the rest of the structure. On that basis I'd be reluctant to regard the drawn shape of a wingtip in an oiling diagram as gospel - rather, it simply gives an idea of where the oiling points lie in relation to the wingtip. The Airfix wingtips look much more like the wingtips on the examples of the real thing that I've been up close and personal with than does the wingtip shown in the oiling diagram.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/12/2024 at 8:12 PM, bjohns5 said:

If you compare the shape of the wingtip in the drawing with that of the kit, it appears to me that Airfix made the tip too squarish where the drawing shows an egg-shaped curve widening out considerably at the aileron hinge point.

I agree with Admiral Puff: comparing the wingtips shapes of the kit with that drawing is not likely to lead to happiness. Comparing the kit to actual Tiger Moths makes a lot more sense. The full size aircraft wingtip bows were not made with reference to that drawing, it's just an approximation and all you can rely on it for is the information it actually set out to convey

Edited by Work In Progress
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...