Dave Fleming Posted January 4, 2017 Share Posted January 4, 2017 (edited) Having dug through the SIG photos, I eventually found a couple of pics that suggests the correct colour for the intake bell mouth is EDSG with white on the lower part back to the first panel line In retrospect, I think I knew this already ...... Edited January 4, 2017 by Dave Fleming 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Navy Bird Posted January 5, 2017 Author Share Posted January 5, 2017 1 hour ago, Dave Fleming said: Having dug through the SIG photos, I eventually found a couple of pics that suggests the correct colour for the intake bell mouth is EDSG with white on the lower part back to the first panel line In retrospect, I think I knew this already ...... Thanks for taking the time to look through those references. Part of the difficulty is that this area is almost always in a deep shadow in the photos, so it's hard to tell. That second photo you just posted answers my next question - how far back into the intake did the underside white extend on the fuselage side? It looks like a tad more than double the amount on the lower intake lip itself. Cheers, Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
junglierating Posted January 5, 2017 Share Posted January 5, 2017 Fair one on the Frankenstein a/c. Dave. Meanwhile as someone who spent a fair bit of time sat inside the intake poking about for pulled rivets and pushing aux intakes and boundary layer doors not tomention inspecting the Lp fan for damage etc etc.on the overall dark grey a/c I'm sure the outside colour extended say 6-10 inches then it was an off white/light grey colour but may off course be mistaked ..I will take a look in my photo album and see if I can find a useful picture from 1987-1989 when I could be bothered to take pictures of the mighty shar! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Navy Bird Posted January 5, 2017 Author Share Posted January 5, 2017 Let's get up to date on this mess...er, I mean my latest build: The 1:72 Fujimi Sea Harrier FRS.1 (with a little help from Hasegawa, Pavla, Master, Microscale & Eduard). Did I mention that some of the seams needed a little bit of filler? Holy cow, what a mess! Eh, what's a little filler between friends anyway? I mean, I wouldn't have bought the 1 kg tube of filler if I wasn't going to use it, right? I mentioned how nice the Aden pods from the Hasegawa kit are, and they are when compared to what Fujimi included. Here is a photo right after I drilled in the vent holes. The Fujimi pods didn't even have the ejector slot on the top (bottom) blister. The best part, though, was the fit to the fuselage, hardly any blending was required - just in a couple of places with some Mr. Surfacer. Once that was done, I cleaned everything up, repaired a couple of nicks in the exhaust nozzle fairings, and fixed the nose probe mount. Then I decided to paint the underside white first. Once this cures, I can mask off the demarcation line and spray the EDSG. So on went the white! I got a bit of overspray on the intakes that I just repainted EDSG, but that's OK. Once things are masked off I'll shoot some more of the World's Greatest Naval Aircraft Colour into the intakes again. I need to make sure the white is completely cured first though, so if it still smells like paint, I won't be masking anything. This could take 2-3 days. I left the wing pylons off because I have those big honking serial numbers to add to the bottom of the wings first. But there will be a lot of masking and detail painting before we get anywhere near the stickers. The wheel wells stay white, but I think the air brake well is Light Admiralty Grey. As far as those stickers go, I'm obviously going for an early FRS.1, and am leaning towards either XZ454 800 Squadron or XZ451 700 Squadron, both from 1979 or so. This means no Sidewinders I believe. Although I like the inflight refueling probe, I'm not sure when or how often they were carried. Cheers, Bill 16 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Procopius Posted January 5, 2017 Share Posted January 5, 2017 49 minutes ago, Navy Bird said: Did I mention that some of the seams needed a little bit of filler? Holy cow, what a mess! Jeepers. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Learstang Posted January 5, 2017 Share Posted January 5, 2017 (edited) To paraphrase what PC said regarding the filler, 'Yowza!'. It's almost a pity, Bill, to cover up all that lovely filler work with the paint. And here I was thinking I might need to pick up and build this kit. I think I'll do something a little easier like whittling a 1/24th scale B-36 out of a Douglas fir. Regards, Jason Edited January 5, 2017 by Learstang Corrected punctuation. I am a published author after all. Wow, I love stating that! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
giemme Posted January 5, 2017 Share Posted January 5, 2017 (edited) No doubt you had a lot of filling to do, but the white coat went on as smooth as ever Masking on a Harrier is quite a tricky job , looking forward to how you handle this Ciao Edited January 5, 2017 by giemme 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Fleming Posted January 5, 2017 Share Posted January 5, 2017 10 hours ago, junglierating said: Fair one on the Frankenstein a/c. Dave. Meanwhile as someone who spent a fair bit of time sat inside the intake poking about for pulled rivets and pushing aux intakes and boundary layer doors not tomention inspecting the Lp fan for damage etc etc.on the overall dark grey a/c I'm sure the outside colour extended say 6-10 inches then it was an off white/light grey colour but may off course be mistaked ..I will take a look in my photo album and see if I can find a useful picture from 1987-1989 when I could be bothered to take pictures of the mighty shar! On the later colour scheme (Dark Sea Grey overall) The intake was light grey. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
71chally Posted January 5, 2017 Share Posted January 5, 2017 (edited) It's definitely as Dave says, XZ493 front, and GR.3 XV760 rear. This was the only way of displaying an FRS.1, as they had either all been converted to FA.2s or lost, it was a great move by the Fleet Air Arm Museum. Interpretation of the intake colour is interesting, I took a whole load of shots in that area and came to the conclusion that it was a protected dull natural metal finish - sound familiar! BAe Sea Harrier FRS.1 XZ493 001-N 801 Sqn by James Thomas, on Flickr That shot also shows just how deep the intake section is behind the blow in doors, it looks like a wall but is smoothly transitions in to the intake area, Superb progress there Bill, looks really quite peachy! Edited January 5, 2017 by 71chally 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martian Posted January 5, 2017 Share Posted January 5, 2017 Now there is some paint going onto the model, it is beginning to show just what a great job you have made of grafting the parts from different kits together. Martian 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moaning dolphin Posted January 5, 2017 Share Posted January 5, 2017 Starting to look the bizz there Bill. I do like the 700 version as it has a bit more colour than the 800's. Nice work Bob 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Navy Bird Posted January 5, 2017 Author Share Posted January 5, 2017 Thanks, guys! Lovely shot of the FrankenFRS, James @71chally. I note that it is displayed with Sidewinders on the wing pylons. Which version of the 'winder would be correct for the 1979-80 period? The Fujimi kit has what looks like AIM-9J or P (with the cranked forward fins) and the Hasegawa kit has the AIM-9L (with the double delta forward fins). I don't want to make the mistake of putting the wrong missiles on it. Done that before! Perhaps some of the overall grey aircraft had white intakes? This from SAM: "These were resprayed during 809's work up at Yeovilton in the 'Medium Greys' scheme devised by Mr PJ Barley of the RAE Farnborough to match the requirements of the expected weather conditions and combat altitudes in the South Atlantic. In the event the pilots found that at low and mid-levels over land and sea, where many of the engagements took place, these aircraft were much more visible then their EDSG counterparts. Details of the Medium Sea Grey colours denote that on or around 21st and 22nd of April the whole fuselage, wings and tailplane upper surfaces were resprayed Satin Medium Sea Grey (MSG) (B5381C:637) with this colour overlapping the wing and tailplane leading edges by 4" at the wing roots, tapering to 2" at the wing tips and a constant 2" on the tailplane. The MSG also overlapped some 3" around the intake lips. The intake interiors were finished in Satin White, which soon discoloured." Interesting, but not really surprising, that the Medium Sea Grey planes were more visible than the EDSG planes. So did Barley Grey get its name from this PJ Barley bloke? Reading that quote from SAM brings up another question - can we verify that in the EDSG over white scheme, the EDSG overlapped the wing leading edges? I'm sure it did, as is shown in the Hasegawa painting instructions, but the Microscale sheet doesn't show it. Every other plane I've built with this scheme had the EDSG overlap, so I'd be surprised if it didn't. Microscale must be wrong - wouldn't that be unusual! The white paint still smells like paint this morning - maybe I'll put it in the toaster to help cure the paint. Cheers, Bill PS. What are the holes in the leading edge of the wing right at the root? There seems to be one on each side, with a red square (or diamond) around them. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selwyn Posted January 5, 2017 Share Posted January 5, 2017 47 minutes ago, Navy Bird said: Thanks, guys! Lovely shot of the FrankenFRS, James @71chally. I note that it is displayed with Sidewinders on the wing pylons. Which version of the 'winder would be correct for the 1979-80 period? The Fujimi kit has what looks like AIM-9J or P (with the cranked forward fins) and the Hasegawa kit has the AIM-9L (with the double delta forward fins). I don't want to make the mistake of putting the wrong missiles on it. Done that before! Perhaps some of the overall grey aircraft had white intakes? This from SAM: "These were resprayed during 809's work up at Yeovilton in the 'Medium Greys' scheme devised by Mr PJ Barley of the RAE Farnborough to match the requirements of the expected weather conditions and combat altitudes in the South Atlantic. In the event the pilots found that at low and mid-levels over land and sea, where many of the engagements took place, these aircraft were much more visible then their EDSG counterparts. Details of the Medium Sea Grey colours denote that on or around 21st and 22nd of April the whole fuselage, wings and tailplane upper surfaces were resprayed Satin Medium Sea Grey (MSG) (B5381C:637) with this colour overlapping the wing and tailplane leading edges by 4" at the wing roots, tapering to 2" at the wing tips and a constant 2" on the tailplane. The MSG also overlapped some 3" around the intake lips. The intake interiors were finished in Satin White, which soon discoloured." Interesting, but not really surprising, that the Medium Sea Grey planes were more visible than the EDSG planes. So did Barley Grey get its name from this PJ Barley bloke? Reading that quote from SAM brings up another question - can we verify that in the EDSG over white scheme, the EDSG overlapped the wing leading edges? I'm sure it did, as is shown in the Hasegawa painting instructions, but the Microscale sheet doesn't show it. Every other plane I've built with this scheme had the EDSG overlap, so I'd be surprised if it didn't. Microscale must be wrong - wouldn't that be unusual! The white paint still smells like paint this morning - maybe I'll put it in the toaster to help cure the paint. Cheers, Bill PS. What are the holes in the leading edge of the wing right at the root? There seems to be one on each side, with a red square (or diamond) around them. Red squares are fire access points for extinguishers. Selwyn 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
71chally Posted January 5, 2017 Share Posted January 5, 2017 1 hour ago, Navy Bird said: I note that it is displayed with Sidewinders on the wing pylons. Which version of the 'winder would be correct for the 1979-80 period? Interesting, but not really surprising, that the Medium Sea Grey planes were more visible than the EDSG planes. So did Barley Grey get its name from this PJ Barley bloke? Reading that quote from SAM brings up another question - can we verify that in the EDSG over white scheme, the EDSG overlapped the wing leading edges? PS. What are the holes in the leading edge of the wing right at the root? There seems to be one on each side, with a red square (or diamond) around them. I believe that Sea Harrier used AIM-9G up until just before the conflict, when the 9Ls were supplied. However, others will know better. Yes, it is him of Barley Grey fame, an RAE Scientific Officer. Yes, the EDSG did overlap the underside white. And, as Selwyn says, fire access points. These allow a ground fire lance to inject fire retardant into the engine bay, the red square NATO symbol denotes this. Oh, and don't put it in the toaster! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Evil Posted January 5, 2017 Share Posted January 5, 2017 (edited) As above, 9 Limas were supplied for the Falklands, Golf (or D?) airframes before that. Below shows XZ451 in that loadout in '81 although now with 899 rather than 800A, although I guess the paint over the 'A' markings was probably still wet... Chuffed you're going for EDSG over white, a stylish scheme indeed! Edited January 5, 2017 by Dr Evil 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Navy Bird Posted January 5, 2017 Author Share Posted January 5, 2017 On 1/5/2017 at 15:26, Dr Evil said: As above, 9 Limas were supplied for the Falklands, Golf (or D?) airframes before that. Below shows XZ451 in that loadout in '81 although now with 899 rather than 800A, although I guess the paint over the 'A' markings was probably still wet... Chuffed you're going for EDSG over white, a stylish scheme indeed! Sometimes you get lucky - I just looked in my stash, and I have the Hasegawa Aircraft Weapons Set III which consists of US air-to-air missiles, including AIM-9D Sidewinders.That seems to be the version mounted on the aircraft in the photo you posted. That's a good shot, as it shows the launch rail as well as the pylon. I think Fujimi might have a better representation of these components than Hasegawa do. Hasegawa moulded the mounting plate (the thing between the pylon and the launch rail) as if it were part of the pylon, and not a separate part. I'll look for a close-up picture. Yeah, I love the EDSG over white scheme. I am not a big fan of all-grey, or grey-grey schemes. I like a little colour. Unless I was actually flying one of these things and someone was shooting at me. Then I'd probably be a big fan of low-viz schemes! Cheers, Bill 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Fleming Posted January 5, 2017 Share Posted January 5, 2017 MSG FRS1s had white intake inners 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keefr22 Posted January 6, 2017 Share Posted January 6, 2017 Seeing as you started this thread in 2016 Bill, & I've only just found it, does that mean I'm a year late? That would be a record even for me! Anyway, cracking work as usual, I've somehow run out of 'likes', but suffice to say I like everything you've done to the thing thus far! And having seen it already has the undersurface white on, I'm glad I actually found the thread before you'd finished & it was in RFI..! ATB Keith 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Navy Bird Posted January 6, 2017 Author Share Posted January 6, 2017 On 1/5/2017 at 19:03, keefr22 said: Seeing as you started this thread in 2016 Bill, & I've only just found it, does that mean I'm a year late? That would be a record even for me! Anyway, cracking work as usual, I've somehow run out of 'likes', but suffice to say I like everything you've done to the thing thus far! And having seen it already has the undersurface white on, I'm glad I actually found the thread before you'd finished & it was in RFI..! Heck, you're not even a day late if you live on Venus. Welcome to what is rapidly turning into a kitbash between the Hasegawa and Fujimi kits, augmented by aftermarket accessories that were designed for neither. I'm only doing this to reduce my stash inventory! Well, that, and I need an FRS.1 in my FAA collection. What do you guys like for load-out? The Aden pods are a given, and I think the Sidewinders are, too. This leaves the center pylon and the two inboard wing pylons. I have a variety of iron bombs (not actually sure which ones they are), drop tanks, and rocket pods. It's beginning to sound like a broken record (skip for you younger kids, no, wait, you wouldn't know that either), but the parts are different between the two kits. Drop tanks are different length and shape (but not different enough to simply be 100 and 190 gallon tanks) and the bombs have different shapes. Even the bolt-on refueling arms are different (considerably different). Anyway, I think a bomb on the center pylon and rocket pods under the wings would look cool. Was that ever done in combination with the guns and missiles? I'll post some photos of these parts so we can collectively decide which ones to use. Cheers, Bill 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Navy Bird Posted January 6, 2017 Author Share Posted January 6, 2017 All right then, let's see what we're dealing with. First, some things that go boom: The Hasegawa bomb is on top, the two Fujimi choices below. Hasegawa label theirs "1,000 pound bomb" whilst Fujimi name the middle one "bomb" and the lower one "1,000 pound bomb." So, two very different looking 1,000 pounders! Since I am a complete neophyte when it comes to British ordnance, anyone want to take a guess at what we've got here? And more importantly, which ones look best for using with a Sea Harrier FRS.1. Next up, the tanks. As before Hasegawa on top: For what it's worth, the Hasegawa tank matches the one shown on the Russian drawing; Fujimi does not. In the event that I mount the tanks, I will most likely go with Hasegawa, unless someone can verify that Fujimi is actually better. Lastly, the refueling probe. First, a look at our two candidates, again Hasegawa is at the top. Different diameter to the arm, different configuration of the end, different shape to the vane at the bottom where it bolts to the intake, and a different slope to the arm. Easier to see if I put the Fujimi part directly on top of the Hasegawa part, aligning the surface that attaches to the intake. Comparing to photos, I think Fujimi has this right, especially with the way that the base "leans forward." Using the Hasegawa part would result in a probe that is too high above the fuselage. I think...I can't really compare these parts to the Russian drawings, as they show the IFR probe in perspective. Appreciate any comments you guys might have. Thanks! Cheers, Bill 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martian Posted January 6, 2017 Share Posted January 6, 2017 I would be inclined to go with both the Hasegawa tanks and bombs. Martian 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neil5208 Posted January 6, 2017 Share Posted January 6, 2017 The first bomb looks to be M117, the second has the right shape for UK bomb and the third looks to be a cluster bomb. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Evil Posted January 6, 2017 Share Posted January 6, 2017 I'd deffo go for the Hasegawa 1000lber, photie below, (although it has a retard tail rather than the squarer free fall fins on the bomb you have.) http://forum.keypublishing.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=112038&stc=1&d=1138823648 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
junglierating Posted January 6, 2017 Share Posted January 6, 2017 3 hours ago, Martian Hale said: I would be inclined to go with both the Hasegawa tanks and bombs. Martian I would concur the top 1000Iber looks right to me i guess it depend what tail it is supposed to represent...parachute or ballistic....bet selwyn knows.118 parachute? As for the drop tank 100 gall...hasegawa again. Looking good 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
71chally Posted January 6, 2017 Share Posted January 6, 2017 Just reading up on the missile thing, seems it was AIM-9G carried on early FRS.1, however to my eyes beyond a fatter seeker head I can't see a big visual difference to the D. Re the probes, the Fujimi one is far closer to the actual design. http://www.airliners.net/photo/UK-Navy/British-Aerospace-Sea-Harrier-FRS1/1059723 The EDSG/white SHars do look so much better than the latter schemes, especially with those nice white serials & codes and the bright sqn tail markings, particularly 700A for me! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now