*Finished* RAN UH-1B Iroquois

[abat]

Hi Everyone, I'm ready to go with a Royal Australian Navy UH-1B Iroquois. I started the kit a few years back but didn't get very far as the photos below show. Now is a good time to pick up where I left off and learn a lot about Hueys in this group build. I'll be modelling N9-882 (857) which served with 723 Squadron from 1964 to 1989. This airframe is now in the Fleet Air Arm Museum, Nowra.

Components are the Italeri 1/72 UH-1B, Eduard UH-1B etch and Hawkeye's RAN-03 decal set.The Italeri rotors are said to be under-sized and will need lengthening to 48'. I'll also need to scratch-build a winch and may try scratch-building the distinctive additional fuel tanks. Should be fun!

Andrew

[abat]

I measured the current rotor diameter at 169 mm. That scales to 40'. So I need to add 8' or 34 scale mm (17 each side). That seems quite a lot.

The 48' I quoted comes from the RAN's own UH-1B website however various Google results bring up a 44' rotor diameter for the UH-1B. Perhaps the Navy's site got muddled up with the UH-1H diameter which does appear to be 48' - or perhaps Navy mounted large blades on their UH-1B's. Anyone out there able to confirm which is correct?

[milktrip]

Hello Andrew,

Glad to see you here. Really looking forward to seeing you take on a Huey.

I have an AB204 build on the bench (currently stalled as I require some specific decals). Anyway, if you look at the WIP you'll find I had some questions about civvie Hueys and differences with Agusta built ones and tail boom & rotor blade length. I can say for certain that Hueys are confusing!!!

I'm very far from being an expert and I hope someone can confirm for you. I'll try my best though; do you know if it's a 'B' or a 'C'? I have read that the 'C' had a longer tail boom but I'm not sure if that length is the same as the 204B tail boom. If you can find out for certain the tail boom length and then, if possible, find a profile shot you may be able to work out the blade length when comparing it to the tail boom (if that makes sense?). Also, searching the airframe number can sometimes help (which it did in my case).

Hope you find what you need. I'll have a search myself.

Cheers and good luck with the build

Aaron

[milktrip]

Sorry, I see that it's a UH-1B.

You may have seen this photo already but image 4 of 9 is a good profile shot to gauge what size rotor blades you need.

http://www.adf-gallery.com.au/gallery/Iroquois-N9-882/SP_N9_882

Although just a brief look, N9-882 appears to be '897' rather than '857'? Image 6 is interesting as one door is marked '898' as the door was borrowed from another aircraft which would be interesting to model if you could find the decals.

HTH

Cheers

Aaron

[S5 modeller]

Welcome aboard Andrew.

Another interesting conversion being attempted in the group build.

Maybe a good starting point would be some 1/48 scale missiles, or fuel tanks?

Might help you get the basic shape, then a bit of finnagling to sort out the end profiles?

Keen to see how you get on.

Have fun.

Matt

[abat]

Sorry, I see that it's a UH-1B.

You may have seen this photo already but image 4 of 9 is a good profile shot to gauge what size rotor blades you need.http://www.adf-gallery.com.au/gallery/Iroquois-N9-882/SP_N9_882

Although just a brief look, N9-882 appears to be '897' rather than '857'? Image 6 is interesting as one door is marked '898' as the door was borrowed from another aircraft which would be interesting to model if you could find the decals.

HTH

Cheers

Aaron

Aaron, thanks for picking up the marking differences in the decal sheet. The adfserials site notes that N9-882 flew under both 857 and 897 so their sheet doesn't match the configuration in the museum. The Hawkeye decals carries both N9-882 (as 857) and N9-3103 (895) so I could cobble together 897 from that, or go with 857 or 895. Another Britmodeller (John Ellis), who has worked on RAN Iroquois, commented in an older thread of mine that no two airframes were configured quite the same so I need to decide before I get too far.

On the rotor diameter, I measured the photo you referenced at 45.35' (possibly 44' allowing for measurement error or 48' if the rotor isn't parallel to the airframe?) Another shot of a parked N9-3103 measured around the same so I'm leaning to 44'. Interestingly though, I measured a photo of N9-3102 (mounted on a pole for display) at 48'. It could be a frankenhuey but the rotor is definitely longer and looks like it would contact the tail rotor if it was ever started in that configuration.

Cheers.

[Rob G]

According to the data in Stewart Wilson's 'Vampire, Macchi and Iroquois in Australian Service', the export version of the UH-1B (Model 204B in Bell's catalogue) had a main rotor diameter of 48', with blade chord of 21". Looking at photos of them parked and tied down, it would appear that the rotor tips are directly above the tail fin/boom angle, give or take a couple of inches.

I'm out for the rest of the day, but if I can help with further details, I'll be happy to.

Edit to clarify - the RAN's Huey's were export models, so technically 204Bs, thus the 48'/21" blades. If things look odd, it's possibly because the tail boom is the wrong length.

[TonyTiger66]

I hope it's ok to take a seat and watch this one? As I'm in the antipodes it seems only right to do so and its a lovely paint scheme

Best regards

Tony

[abat]

I hope it's ok to take a seat and watch this one? As I'm in the antipodes it seems only right to do so and its a lovely paint scheme

Best regards

Tony

Tony, your most welcome to pull up a seat and see how this goes. Warning though - I build SLOW so you'll need to pack a picnic lunch or two.

[abat]

According to the data in Stewart Wilson's 'Vampire, Macchi and Iroquois in Australian Service', the export version of the UH-1B (Model 204B in Bell's catalogue) had a main rotor diameter of 48', with blade chord of 21". Looking at photos of them parked and tied down, it would appear that the rotor tips are directly above the tail fin/boom angle, give or take a couple of inches.

I'm out for the rest of the day, but if I can help with further details, I'll be happy to.

Edit to clarify - the RAN's Huey's were export models, so technically 204Bs, thus the 48'/21" blades. If things look odd, it's possibly because the tail boom is the wrong length.

Thanks Rob, I'll rustle up some more photos and take some more accurate measurements. I don't have Stewart's book but I do have some other material handy. I can also hop in the car and drive to Nowra with my tape measure if necessary. Plenty to learn and I appreciate your help.

[abat]

I re-did my photo measurements on the best profile photos I could find on adfserials and still came up with 45' on 897 / 893 and 46' on 894. Then I checked the photos I took of 897 in the RAN Museum and found this plaque which specifies a 44' wingspan - rotor diameter. So I'm happy to call this solved. Now where did I put my razor saw, sheet styrene, glue and sandpaper?

BTW, Here's a link to the full gallery of my 897 photos from the Nowra museum for those thinking of modelling this airframe or type.

[pacificmustang]

To further complicate things Andrew, a couple of the RANs B's were fitted with C tailbooms. I'll see if I can dig up the numbers for you. Possibly not noticeable in 72 scale though

Bruce

[abat]

To further complicate things Andrew, a couple of the RANs B's were fitted with C tailbooms. I'll see if I can dig up the numbers for you. Possibly not noticeable in 72 scale though

Bruce

Thanks Bruce, I'd appreciate that. Andrew

[abat]

So I've found some very useful information on RAN UH-1B/C on the fine scale modeller forum from 2007.

http://cs.finescale.com/fsm/modeling_subjects/f/16/t/85741.aspx?page=1

It's a detailed account of the differences between B and C models and reveals that RAN C models had some but not all C features. N9-882 appears to be all UH-1B. Essential reading for RAN modellers.

[Nigel Heath]

Watching this one with interest of course. I'm going to check my rotor diameter now.

[abat]

Watching this one with interest of course. I'm going to check my rotor diameter now.

Report back on how it goes. I'm thinking about where best to cut and extend mine.

[Nigel Heath]

According to my calculations 44ft scales out as 186mm, my rotor measures out at 170mm therefore 8mm should be added to each side of the rotor. I think the best place to add a new section would be between the two raised lines in the centre of each blade. I need to get further on in my build to see how this stacks up with the tail. It might be more sensible to leave it as it is.

[S5 modeller]

Hmmm, it seems the huey is a veritable minefield of variations. Careful research seems to be the key, a right mish mash of parts.

Almost like "what spares we got in the back? That'll do".

Good luck with this build, although I don't think you'll need it.

Matt

[philp]

Rotor info from Wiki so take it for what it is worth.

"The 205 was initially equipped with a 44-foot (13.4 m) main rotor and a Lycoming T53-L-9 engine with 1,100 shp (820 kW). The rotor was lengthened to 48 feet (14.6 m) with a chord of 21 in (53 cm). The tailboom was also lengthened, in order to accommodate the longer rotor blades."

Cobra Company does a rotor replacement for C models and Cobras which should be the 44' version. I haven't picked up one yet but have other stuff from them which has been well done.

http://www.cobracompany.com/72014.htm

[max39]

Very interesting build.Watching with interest.

Richard

[abat]

I've now made some progress on the cockpit area with some etch. I've said it before and I'll say it again that etch and I don't get on very well at all. I just find getting the stuff to stick to anything except my fingers to be near impossible. And even when it does stick, it's liable to pop off if touched or prodded in any way. But progress none-the-less.

I gave up on the etch on the cockpit sides and fitted some lovely plastic which sticks to plastic very well.

And then to the seats ... The kit jobs are armoured and I'd tried trimming off the armour and fitting the supplied etch frame. You can see these at the top of the thread. Problem is, they now look nothing like the real thing seen below.

So I got out my trusty evergreen sheet and had a go at fashioning something a little more representative. I'll now cobble together some framework add some belts from spare etch or Tamiya tape and reach for that lovely red paint pot.

That's all for the moment.

[milktrip]

Hi Andrew,

Sorry the etch is not playing ball I understand your frustration! If it helps at all I use different viscosities of superglue, thick, medium & thin. All have their uses and also some activator to get things going when the glue decides it doesn't what to set!

your scratch seats are looking brilliant already! I remember you scratch built the framing on your Seaking seats, so we are in for a treat.

[pacificmustang]

Great progress Abat

Thought these might help you too

DSC_0097 by Bruce Anders, on Flickr

File1029 copy by Bruce Anders,

File1028 copy by Bruce Anders,

DSC_0099 by Bruce Anders, on Flickr

DSC_0101 by Bruce Anders,

File1024 by Bruce Anders,

File1030 copy ,

[Nigel Heath]

Looking good. I fully sympathise with the sentiments on the PE, I have had to stick some bits of mine back three or four times.

[abat]

Hi Andrew,

Sorry the etch is not playing ball I understand your frustration! If it helps at all I use different viscosities of superglue, thick, medium & thin. All have their uses and also some activator to get things going when the glue decides it doesn't what to set!

your scratch seats are looking brilliant already! I remember you scratch built the framing on your Seaking seats, so we are in for a treat.

Thanks Aaron,

I'll persevere - certainly a learning experience.

Great progress Abat

Thought these might help you too

Thanks heaps, just the ticket.

Looking good. I fully sympathise with the sentiments on the PE, I have had to stick some bits of mine back three or four times.

So it's not just me then.