Jump to content

Flying boats and float planes GB chat


Recommended Posts

On 8/9/2017 at 10:31 PM, jrlx said:

 

Hi Alan,

 

Thanks for the link. I'm afraid PB is blocking all the images even when I click "view image". F5 didn't show the images either but I'm using Firefox and I'm not sure if you used that shortcut with this browser.

 

Regarding the Eduard sets, are they completely wrong? Is there a reference source which allows us to check what's wrong and what's right?

 

Thanks

 

Jaime

Hi Jaime

 

I'll have to go back and re-do the photos in my build........;)

 

As far as a "Resource" there is really no one place and even if you do have access, knowing what to look for and what's not right

is not always apparent.

I'm quite lucky in that I have manuals for the Mk I/II, Mk III,Mk V Sunderland's and many discussions with my father who maintained RNZAF Sunderland's on many

technical things on the Sunderland (like the twin 12 and 24 volt electrical systems)

 

The Port holes - the Eduard product does NOT exist on any real life Sunderland

Eduard Photo Link

Eduard Portholes

 

Real Sunderland Portholes - you can see there are NO rings around the non opening Portholes

ynMUPv

 

As in the link below, you can accomplish an easier solution by simply filling in the Non Opening ports, and leave the ones that do,

they should suit the scale effect

Italeri Sunderland portholes

 

If you need to know which open and which don't let me know

 

Inspection covers (lots of little dots) In Real life do not sit "Proud" of the Skin

Italeri Kit Photo link

Inspection covers

 

Real Sunderland Inspection hole covers - note how they are "Flush" with the skin

NL49YLb_MrLNUpcTnhmf6eJY6-HcrMgilo1NQKDk

 

This page from the Sunderland Mk III manual shows the inspection covers for the Wing, note there is in this illustration, NO cross bar

across the fuel tank covers

Sunderland Wing Inspection holes

 

Bomb Trolly tracks under the wings _ Italeri shows them to be open - fine if you wish to display trollies out under the wings

 

Eduard bomb tracks

Bomb Trolly tracks

 

Sunderland in real life - Note, when not in use metal strips cover the tracks - you can see them partially open in this photo

CIT4JunsKm5WIrEsEsuwds3a2iQCuIlF8oeya3mM

 

Fuel Tank covers - again in real life the covers as shown by this Eduard Link don't exist or sit "Proud" of the wing surface

 

Eduard Fuel tank covers

Eduard Fuel tank Covers

 

Photo of Fuel Tank covers on a Mk I Sunderland wing

Sunderland Wing tank covers

 

Unfortunately there are times where illustrations can mis-lead, but not necessarily show whats actual, as in this Wing tank illustration from

a Sunderland/ Sandringham manual

Sunderland Manual Wings

 

Hope that helps?

 

Regards

 

Alan

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, LDSModeller said:

Hi Jaime

 

I'll have to go back and re-do the photos in my build........;)

 

As far as a "Resource" there is really no one place and even if you do have access, knowing what to look for and what's not right

is not always apparent.

I'm quite lucky in that I have manuals for the Mk I/II, Mk III,Mk V Sunderland's and many discussions with my father who maintained RNZAF Sunderland's on many

technical things on the Sunderland (like the twin 12 and 24 volt electrical systems)

 

The Port holes - the Eduard product does NOT exist on any real life Sunderland

Eduard Photo Link

Eduard Portholes

 

Real Sunderland Portholes - you can see there are NO rings around the non opening Portholes

ynMUPv

 

As in the link below, you can accomplish an easier solution by simply filling in the Non Opening ports, and leave the ones that do,

they should suit the scale effect

Italeri Sunderland portholes

 

If you need to know which open and which don't let me know

 

Inspection covers (lots of little dots) In Real life do not sit "Proud" of the Skin

Italeri Kit Photo link

Inspection covers

 

Real Sunderland Inspection hole covers - note how they are "Flush" with the skin

NL49YLb_MrLNUpcTnhmf6eJY6-HcrMgilo1NQKDk

 

This page from the Sunderland Mk III manual shows the inspection covers for the Wing, note there is in this illustration, NO cross bar

across the fuel tank covers

Sunderland Wing Inspection holes

 

Bomb Trolly tracks under the wings _ Italeri shows them to be open - fine if you wish to display trollies out under the wings

 

Eduard bomb tracks

Bomb Trolly tracks

 

Sunderland in real life - Note, when not in use metal strips cover the tracks - you can see them partially open in this photo

CIT4JunsKm5WIrEsEsuwds3a2iQCuIlF8oeya3mM

 

Fuel Tank covers - again in real life the covers as shown by this Eduard Link don't exist or sit "Proud" of the wing surface

 

Eduard Fuel tank covers

Eduard Fuel tank Covers

 

Photo of Fuel Tank covers on a Mk I Sunderland wing

Sunderland Wing tank covers

 

Unfortunately there are times where illustrations can mis-lead, but not necessarily show whats actual, as in this Wing tank illustration from

a Sunderland/ Sandringham manual

Sunderland Manual Wings

 

Hope that helps?

 

Regards

 

Alan

Hi Alan,

 

Thank you very much for taking the time to collect all these pictures and links. Really very interesting and useful :worthy:

 

It seems all have to do a lot of research before committing to building the Sunderland. I wonder why Eduard got it wrong? Are there any significant differences between Sunderland Marks? The one I have is the Mark III

 

I got curious about your last link where the cross bars on the fuel access panels are clearly visible in the wing diagram but then are not visible in the pictures. Were the cross bars strengthening structural components internal to those panels?

 

Cheers

 

Jaime

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Late (again) in responding but manners dictate that  I add my appreciation for the work you've done on the banner Jaime.:thumbsup2:

 

I've finally settled on doing  the:143208-11185-23-720.jpgfor this. I might try adapting this from the kit G variant back to a D once I've had a chance to go through my references and see what would be required.

 

Tony

Addenda: having skimmed through the references last night there's far more available information on the 'G' interior, plus a 'D' would require remodelling the nose profile and woiuld I think take too much time out of the available GB period to get done right. G it is...

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/13/2017 at 19:41, TheBaron said:

Late (again) in responding but manners dictate that  I add my appreciation for the work you've done on the banner Jaime.:thumbsup2:

 

I've finally settled on doing  the:143208-11185-23-720.jpgfor this. I might try adapting this from the kit G variant back to a D once I've had a chance to go through my references and see what would be required.

 

Tony

Addenda: having skimmed through the references last night there's far more available information on the 'G' interior, plus a 'D' would require remodelling the nose profile and woiuld I think take too much time out of the available GB period to get done right. G it is...

Hi Tony,

 

Thanks very much for your appreciation! I must extend it to the modeller friends who provided the images: Pat (@JOCKNEY), Tony (@TonyTiger66) and Reggie (@The Cameraman) and all the others who provided comments and feedback on the various versions.

 

Your chosen entry look great! I've also settled for a Dornier flying boat: Italeri's Do 24T

140960-11185-27-pristine.jpg

 

I'll build it out of the box (it comes with a PE fret for the cockpit, so it's not a simple plastic build) and I'll do the German scheme with yellow wingtip undersides.

 

Cheers

 

Jaime

 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Spadgent said:

Hya @jrlx Jamie.

I have never been part of a group build before and this one looks like it might be fun.  Am I too late to become a member?

Either way, thanks in advance.

 

John.:waiting:

 

Hi John!

 

You're very welcome to join the GB! Anyone can join at any time during the time frame of the GB, there's no pre-registration required. Just read the first post to see what's allowed and what's not.

 

I look forward to see your build. Have you already chosen a kit? Please let us know :)

 

Cheers

 

Jaime

 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 14/08/2017 at 4:41 AM, TheBaron said:

Late (again) in responding but manners dictate that  I add my appreciation for the work you've done on the banner Jaime.:thumbsup2:

 

I've finally settled on doing  the:143208-11185-23-720.jpgfor this. I might try adapting this from the kit G variant back to a D once I've had a chance to go through my references and see what would be required.

 

Tony

Addenda: having skimmed through the references last night there's far more available information on the 'G' interior, plus a 'D' would require remodelling the nose profile and woiuld I think take too much time out of the available GB period to get done right. G it is...

 

Thats a lovely kit Tony, it has great potential and not that much needs correcting. The props need a tiny bit of fettling; especially the spinner on the rear one.

 

One thing I really like about the kit is the crew; they're really nicely moulded, very realistic. CedB would love them :D.

 

I think they're blue, the rest green. I have the kit barely surviving in a carrier bag. It's been like that for years :(.

 

I would very strongly recommend one of these:

 

http://www.jaysmodelkits.com/jaysmk/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=102_106_107&products_id=376

 

(prices here in NZ $; hannants and others sell them too).

 

The windows in the kit would make a nice pair of glasses for Colonel Blink.

 

IMG_1129.jpg

 

This is going to be a fun GB :D

TonyT

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, jrlx said:

Hi Tony,

 

Thanks very much for your appreciation! I must extend it to the modeller friends who provided the images: Pat (@JOCKNEY), Tony (@TonyTiger66) and Reggie (@The Cameraman) and all the others who provided comments and feedback on the various versions.

 

Your chosen entry look great! I've also settled for a Dornier flying boat: Italeri's Do 24T

140960-11185-27-pristine.jpg

 

I'll build it out of the box (it comes with a PE fret for the cockpit, so it's not a simple plastic build) and I'll do the German scheme with yellow wingtip undersides.

 

Cheers

 

Jaime

 

 

Thanks Jaime, that's very kind :)

 

I'm afraid that I'm also doing a Dornier :D:

 

IMG_1130.jpg

 

Is anyone doing a Do 26? It's been callled the most beautiful flying boat of all time.

 

I can see why:

 

IMG_1131.jpg

 

The Seeadler - Sea Eagle. 

Stunning.

 

Best regards

 

TonyT

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, TonyTiger66 said:

Thats a lovely kit Tony, it has great potential and not that much needs correcting. The props need a tiny bit of fettling; especially the spinner on the rear one.

I haven't taken a close look yet at those props yet TT but there's a ghastly sink mark on one - is that the issue?

 

It's a pity there aren't more aircraft in that Falcon set that I'd intend building in future...I love their stuff. May have to look at some vacforming....;)

 

Nice to see you Dorniering it too on this one. You can see why they referred to the Do18 as the 'whale's calf'! 

 

The kit itself looks fun but seems to be an odd mishmash of conflicting detail. Aside from nose issies, if I'm not mistaken Matchbox have made the fuselage too long for either a D or G variant - once past the midpoint it seems to stretch out backwards too far, meaning some 'interesting' decisions to make.

 

 @JWM had a lovely build of it on then forum here a while back.

 

You're right - that '26 looks like a child's dream of something that flies and floats:

bd26aa00790797719768c69e38753c14--sea-pl

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, jrlx said:

Hi Tony,

 

Thanks very much for your appreciation! I must extend it to the modeller friends who provided the images: Pat (@JOCKNEY), Tony (@TonyTiger66) and Reggie (@The Cameraman) and all the others who provided comments and feedback on the various versions.

 

Your chosen entry look great! I've also settled for a Dornier flying boat: Italeri's Do 24T

140960-11185-27-pristine.jpg

 

I'll build it out of the box (it comes with a PE fret for the cockpit, so it's not a simple plastic build) and I'll do the German scheme with yellow wingtip undersides.

 

Cheers

 

Jaime

 

There's going to be an interesting family tree of Dorniers in and amongst the other in this GB Jaime - nice one!

 

Dornier's RS III always struck me as a first attempt at getting all the bits in the right places for a seaplane:

dorn_rs-3.jpg

Now that would be a scratch build if I ever find myself with a spare couple of years....

Tony

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, TheBaron said:

The kit itself looks fun but seems to be an odd mishmash of conflicting detail. Aside from nose issies, if I'm not mistaken Matchbox have made the fuselage too long for either a D or G variant - once past the midpoint it seems to stretch out backwards too far, meaning some 'interesting' decisions to make.

 

You're right Tony, they did make a bit of a bobbins of it. If you would rather not reshape the nose, a bit of Dexter action at the rear should put things back in order. I think you'll be getting feelings of déjà-vu, perhaps Doom :o!!!

 

I did make this thing twice, once as a teenager, then when I should have been revising for final exams at university. That time I tried to sort it out. It's the same one that's in the carrier bag here, now. It has been since 1991 :(.

 

I did enjoy it. It just got lost in time, but I enjoyed the problem solving. It's a lot like a Frog kit; apart from the panel lines. You may wish to fill in some of them; it was a pretty smooth airframe.

 

The cockpit will benefit from a good pimping, in much the way any FROG or most Matchbox kits would.

 

A nice shot of the i/p here:

 

http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/LRG/do18.html

 

The only thing regarding a G is that I think they had bigger floats . You can get away with a D-3 with the least butchery afaik. That has the smaller floats. Just a little nose fettling would see it through.

 

I bet you're starting to thing that you're  going to have to take a saw to the nether regions of every kit you make from now on :frantic:!

 

Sink marks on the rear prop is a shame. The blades do need work. Wrong shape, but there's more. Too wide. I think maybe too short too. The spinner on the rear prop should have a very tapered, pointed profile compared to the spinner on the front. It's very elegant in real life. The pitch on the rear prop is the wrong way around; they would fight each other.

 

If you would like some more Dexter action; there's opportunity for a little more sawing (intakes) and detailing on the nacelles.

 

I'm starting to make it sound like a nightmare now but there's also a step 'as is' when the wings are mated up to the nacelle. Milliput will be your friend. 

 

I can save a lot of time here. I've been looking for something for you. It helped me. More or less a 'how to do it'.

 

Thank heavens it hasn't been destroyed by Photomuppet.

 

Behold most of the answer; and enjoy:

 

http://www.bare-metal.com/Matchbox-Dornier-Do-18D-2G-1.html

 

Best regards

Antoine de la baleine 🐳 

 

PS: The instructions for mine are in Chinese. Only Chinese. If yours is the same, a university friend (Chinese) annotated my instructions; colours etc, I'll send you a scan.

 

Antoine de la baleine Chinoise 🐳 🇨🇳

(je pense que vous êtes comme Antoine du chien de la mer 🌊 🐶 Do G :winkgrin:).

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, TheBaron said:

 

 @JWM had a lovely build of it on then forum here a while back.

Thank you! And thank you also for recalling me that i am "in" this GB. I am not decided yet - most likely I will do Savoia SM 55 (Delta) from SCW. If not the second on the list in Norwegian Hover MF 11 (Broplan) third is Blackburn Ripon (Broplan) - in Finish colours.  Those are hydroplanes on the top of my stash currently...How much time do we have for this?

Of Dorniers I have still to do Do 24 (I want to convert her to Netherland one, but it is not very obvious task  since this model was blamed for some flaws) and another Wal (from SCW, nationalists). The another Wal (RYAF) as well as  Do 22 (RYAF), Do 18 (Luftwaffe) and Do 26 (Luftwaffe) are already on shelves and were  RFI (now converted to Flicr, so available again already...

 

I think with Do -18 there is much more work to do then only change nose (the kit nose is in between early D (D-1,D-2 and late variants) and enlarge floats in G variant. If you want to be realistic the props are completly wrong, you can think also on some surface detailing: ribs visible on fin, "deck" along the fuselage top as well as inlets to the engines which change a lot between variants so study of photos is neccessary.

Regards

J-W

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 15/08/2017 at 8:57 AM, TonyTiger66 said:

I enjoyed the problem solving.

I understand this instinct completely TT.:nodding:

 

I'm less bothered by the kit's inaccuracies than by the quality of what I can do to set things right - as far as is humanly possible - within the time available for the GB. It will inevitably mean compromises...

 

You're dead right about the quality of the moulding on the pilots. Thanks for the instructions offer but I managed to blag an English set off of Scalemates...having only belatedly realized that such a facility existed.:banghead:

 

Thanks for the further information btw. :thumbsup2: It is much appreciated. Rather bafflingly for the G variant, the kit only provides MG15s from the preceding D (I'v settled on doing a 'D' btw so ignore my earlier comments - I just don't like that turret sticking up like a boil on the airframe at the back) rather than the MG131 and 151 combination it should have. The kit parts for the weapons are 'Mother Tussauds after a fire' soft in detail so I'm off to get outfitted at the CMK shop.

 

On 15/08/2017 at 9:08 AM, JWM said:

Thank you! And thank you also for recalling me that i am "in" this GB. I am not decided yet - most likely I will do Savoia SM 55 (Delta) from SCW. If not the second on the list in Norwegian Hover MF 11 (Broplan) third is Blackburn Ripon (Broplan) - in Finish colours.  Those are hydroplanes on the top of my stash currently...How much time do we have for this?

Glad to have prompted you Jerzy!:lol: That SM55 would be a fantastic (in the true sense of the word) aircraft to see. I think that there's slightly under 4 months' time available to complete things for this GB.

 

I've been doing some overlays in Photoshop using those drawings of the D018 you sent me a few months back in order to work out an idea of the actual shape of the fuselage. I have to say that in both 'D' and 'G' ladenplans, the rear section of the kit deviates from them in angle and length by almost identical amounts* - the kit being far longer and stretched almost like the tail of a dogfish. I'll post these graphics up when the build actually starts.


Nose and props - as both yourself and TonyTiger note - also require some attention to overall shape. More on such matters when we actually get cracking.:thumbsup2:

 

*Addenda 17/08/2017. I was not satisfied with this conclusion as I felt sure that this matter would have received attention previously from wiser heads. Indeed so. I downloaded the same drawings but from an alternative source (they appear to be official ladenplans, contemporary with the aircraft)and it transpires that after comparing these, (plus with some profiled from an Air International article for the sake of caution) that somebody had scrambled the aspect ratio of the drawings I had based my original observations upon (either inadvertently stretching it on the horizontal axis or squeezing it on the vertical - easily done if the aspect ratio isn't locked in the likes of Photoshop) likely during scaling it for a webpage.

 

So kudos to Matchbox, some amendments to shape in some parts as already mentioned but in terms of length they are exactly spot on.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, TheBaron said:

Nose and props - as both yourself and TonyTiger note - also require some attention to overall shape. More on such matters when we actually get cracking.:thumbsup2:

After all this time I re-read the build I sent the link for. I take back my 90% assessment of it covering what needs to be done :(.

it's a start and addresses some issues.

 

I now realise that mine has been in a carrier bag for 26 years, because it was waiting for a 'Baronial Build'. It knew that after such a thing, it was guaranteed a real chance of being a model that could hold up its reshaped nose in the display cabinet :).

 

I'm looking forward to 'The Baron's Carvery'. Just make sure not to run out of stuffing balls and Cranberry Sauce :thumbsup2: 

 

How did I know your instructions were Chinese.....wierd.

 

Best regards

Antoine de la baleine psychique Chinoise 🐳 🇨🇳 :christmas:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, jrlx said:

Hi John!

 

You're very welcome to join the GB! Anyone can join at any time during the time frame of the GB, there's no pre-registration required. Just read the first post to see what's allowed and what's not.

 

I look forward to see your build. Have you already chosen a kit? Please let us know :)

 

Cheers

 

Jaime

 

 

Yay! Thanks. I saw that Tony was halting his box of joy to join in on this build and there seemed to be a few friendly faces so I thought it sounded like a lot of fun.

I bought this while consuming wine in a field in England.

36192601970_c3848272cb_b.jpg

it might be a tad ambitious however.:huh: but it looks like a good kit and I'll do it OOB.

Count me in if that's ok. I just have the HP O/400 to finish. Hmmm 3 weeks you say. :bounce:

 

thanks again for for letting me in.

 

johnny boy.

 

oh gawd, just noticed that this has rigging too.:christmas::blink:

Edited by The Spadgent
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

TheBaron has suggested that the Dornier Rs III would be a good project for this GB and that it was the first attempt by Claude Dornier and his team to get all the bits and pieces in the right places for the later flying boats which are going feature here from September. Well I do not wish to cause dissent but I think that if you look at this phooto of the Rs II (late) you will see that the bits and pieces are almost in place here:

 

35760631734_549dda6097_c.jpg

The above photo shows the mid version of the Rs II with engines mounted above the hull but uncowled, and the original tail structure. The shed in the background is at Seemoos, Friederichshafen, Lake Constance where these early flying boats were built.

 

36427376162_f0f1b26b47_c.jpg

 

This photo shows the Rs II on the turntable at Seemoos in July 1917 after the engines had been cowled and the tail unit had been simplified. I had been thinking of scratch building either a Hansa-Brandenburg W 13 or a Hansa-Brandenburg W 20 flying boat, but both a smaller than the Dornier and I want to try something a little more challenging. So to complete the family of Dorniers, but not to go to the very first, (which was a biplane with a 43.5m upper wing - just too big for me even in 1/72 scale!), I will pitch in with the Rs II (late). The early Rs II had three engines which were in the hull and drove the propellors via drive shafts as per the Siemens Schuckert Werke Rs I which I scratch built earlier this year. I will use a little modeller's license in that I will present the original more complex tail but have the 4 engines cowled because I simply do not have the photographic evidence or drawings to represent them uncowled. There is the additional minor problem of the time needed to build them!

 

Incidentally the Rs III has been modelled in 1/72 scale by Dave Hooper on ww1 aircraft models.org: it is worth having a look at a first class model.

 

P

Edited by pheonix
spelling error
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, pheonix said:

I will pitch in with the Rs II (late).

Greatly look forward to seeing this choice come together Mr. Phoenix! :thumbsup2:

Quite a Dornier dynasty forming up here now. 

Tony

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Blooming Nora Pheonix, if there was a medal for modelling bravery I would pin it on your chest, good luck mate.

 

I really hope you can do it in the time, of the GB.

 

As I have a few of the Joystick Vacform WW1 kits I hope you don't mind if I follow your build for any tips, so much to learn, so little time !

 

cheers Pat

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, JOCKNEY said:

I really hope you can do it in the time, of the GB.

 

As I have a few of the Joystick Vacform WW1 kits I hope you don't mind if I follow your build for any tips, so much to learn, so little time !

 

cheers Pat

Thanks for the kind remarks Pat. By all means look in to see if you can learn any tricks which would help you with your vacforms. I have other scratch builds on ww1aircraftmodels.com (where I blog as Lone Modeller), I am honoured that others find my builds so useful.

 

With reference to the time I am not sure, so I am starting to make some parts before the official start but rest assured what I do will be nowhere near 20% of the build. I will post everything of course, but I am still trying to finish the Breuget, so not a great deal will get done on the Dornier before the official start date.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/13/2017 at 0:22 AM, jrlx said:

Hi Alan,

 

Thank you very much for taking the time to collect all these pictures and links. Really very interesting and useful :worthy:

 

It seems all have to do a lot of research before committing to building the Sunderland. I wonder why Eduard got it wrong? Are there any significant differences between Sunderland Marks? The one I have is the Mark III

 

I got curious about your last link where the cross bars on the fuel access panels are clearly visible in the wing diagram but then are not visible in the pictures. Were the cross bars strengthening structural components internal to those panels?

 

Cheers

 

Jaime

 

Hi Jaime,

 

Apologies for getting back to you later than I would have liked.

 

Differences in the Sunderland marks (Bare Basics here:D)

 

As a constant, the bow section, lower deck -Toilet (strbdside)/Cloak room (portside), Wardroom/Galley/Bomb bay/Rear ward room remained much the

same during all Marks (slight differences in equipment). Flight deck - 1st Pilots (Port) 2nd Pilot (Strbd)/ Radio operators station/Navigators station/Flight Engineers

Station stayed in the same positions during all marks. Addition of ASV Stations all marks, Drogue stations same

All had 10 Portholes Starboard side lower section, 9 Portholes Port side lower section (forward of bomb bay)

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3Yff6LKWML1MW9ZTFowZlJhdjQ/view?usp=sharing

 

For the Italeri Sunderland's you will have add an extra porthole (1 in above diagram) Starboard side

 

All Marks had 12Foot, 9 Inch Props

 

Mk I and early Production Mk II - fuselage at base was slightly wider than Mk III/V. Unfaired step, 3 portholes aft of wing trailing edge

VGO MG - front turret/Upper Beam stations, 4 MG turret at rear

Inner Port Engine had exhaust passing through leading edge (went through boiler) and exited aft of leading edge

Flight Deck Pilots seats were parachute seat type, Behind Radio Operators position was a Hot/Cold air mixer

 

Mk II - Late production addition of Upper turret and mezzanine floor (roof over rear ward room), deletion of upper beam gun stations.

newer 4 gun FN Turret at rear, deletion of exhaust through leading edge

Both Mk I/II had flare dispensers located in rear ward room/camera for filming attacks

 

Mk III - Bristol Pegasus Mk XVIII engines, fared step, addition of extra 2 fuel tanks aft of main wing spar, deletion of 1 porthole aft of trailing edge,

and upper flight deck, Seat cushions for pilots, Change in Inst panel, addition of  Glycol tank aft of flight engineers station, retention of mezzanine floor/upper turret.

Change in Navigators station equipment/Radio Operators equipment/addition of electrical equipment across from Flight Engineer

Deletion of Flight Engineers astrodome access ladder/additional equipment on flight deck, deletion of flare/ camera station in rear ward room, and

addition of flare chute aft of rear hatch/door Starboard side

Circa 1944 addition of fixed forward guns (UK based Sunderland's only). Also about this time deletion of Upper turret and replaced with hatch

 

Mk IIIa - Addition of FN5B Mk2 turret in bow, and four gun FN4B Mk2 turret rear.  Retention/deletion of upper turret, Bomb bay doors 2 or three

portholes, addition of Mk VI ASV radar and domes under wings.

 

Mk V early - Much the same as Mk III a, except with 2 porthole bomb bay doors retention/deletion of upper turret/ Sonobouy station, and

addition of GPI (Ground Position Indicator) station directly behind 1st pilot

 

Mk V/MR5 - Much the same as Mk V, except Upper turret deleted and hatch in place, addition of beam gun positions aft of training edge and

hatchs/ports for guns - change in rear decking with addition of Beam positions

 

Please note the above is each mark in a nutshell and not comprehensive

 

To answer you query on the cross bar, I hunted through the Mk I/II and Mk III manuals I have, and as you can see in the attached diagram form Mk III

M&E manual, no mention of removal of cross bar

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3Yff6LKWML1UVNtRTVsZE0zeXc/view?usp=sharing

 

As far as  Eduard goes, I think bad research, misinformation on the net (Just read Wiki on the Sunderland;)), Erroneous Modelling articles, I can think of one in particular, and the list goes on..........

 

Regards

 

Alan

Edited by LDSModeller
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Permission to come aboard? But I will lower the tone. The prospect of being in a GB with the legendary spadgent, earnest discussions about Sunderlands and lovely Dorniers is already sharing me. I will end up with a Cessna floatplane

plan A is a conversion on this

https://www.scalemates.com/kits/192337-monogram-6825-cessna-180 

been in my stash for 15 years but is a lot older and, allegedly, in that much loved scale of 1:41. Though I've never measured it out

 

plan B is a conversion on this

https://www.scalemates.com/kits/239238-eidai-005-100-cessna-172-skyhawk 

and isn't far out in scale

 

plan c, which it'll probably come to is a frantic tinternet search probably ending up with

https://www.scalemates.com/kits/239238-eidai-005-100-cessna-172-skyhawk

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
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...