Navy-ating Bucc's fizz - On the deck at last

[keefr22]

9 hours ago, perdu said:

Pretty sure I read it in there too, I do miss "I learned about flying from..."

 

Yep, I always enjoyed those articles too.

 

Was thinking about the 'way to hold your helmet' (good job Ced's given up with the fnaars!) question again, & reckon the pic of the guys with the S1 was likely more than10 years before I started my brief 'flying career' so the problem might not have been known of by then.

 

Keith

[Ex-FAAWAFU]

I think your 1/72 version is probably worse in its sticky-outed-ness than my 1/48?    To be honest, given the notorious fit issues with the Airfix Buccaneer, this looks not too bad - nothing holding it in place for this photo other than the grip of the original Airfix plastic.  I have an S2/S2C/S2D/SMk50 boxing of the kit, which will be built as an RN cab - probably 809, since the transfers are easier to get.  The S1 (Anti-Flash White natch) will be built from the S2B kit, which has RAF-specific features - notably the bulged bomb bay with the tank.  The recce pod is how I plan to address that problem, plus I have the intakes - the rest will require some of that there modelling.

 

The photo on the cover is an RAF S2 (note that Fox emblem rather than the FLY NAVY of Bill's similar shot above), but other than that I'm not sure there's any visible difference?

 

 

A tiny thread drift, if I may - on the old "I saw this and thought of you" principle:

A RR Gnome fitted to a TR3 chassis (I think - TR something, anyway) by a friend in the ?80s.  @hendie, get back to your Wessex!

Edited March 6, 2018 by Ex-FAAWAFU

[huvut76g7gbbui7]

Is that a copy of the one I sent you Bill?

I can't remember it hanging so far below and like that it is certainly wrong.

Can't offer you a fix..I don't have the pack   (not a hint..I'm rebuilding the broken 809 one as an S50 first)

 

[Ex-FAAWAFU]

A bit more on the recce fit - I knew I had this somewhere, but it took me a while to find it.  Warplane No.8 by Nico Braas, on the Bucc.

 

This photo suggests that the 1/48 resin is not bad, but the 1/72 is as we initially thought - it sticks out quite a lot at the rear, but not at the front (and it's an S1, too!)

 

If it helps, the facing page has quite a lot about the layout of the recce pack and various options.  No mention of more than one version of the whole thing - just the options for camera fit.

Edited March 6, 2018 by Ex-FAAWAFU

[huvut76g7gbbui7]

Bill's secret project?

http://www.steelnavy.net/MTMBlackburnBucaneer.html

[huvut76g7gbbui7]

1 hour ago, Ex-FAAWAFU said:

(and it's an S1, too!)

Sorry..it's not!

That's XN978,the 4th production S2 with 700B Flt at HMS Fulmar.

1 hour ago, Ex-FAAWAFU said:

Warplane No.8 by Nico Braas,

Could I trouble you for the ISBN number for this please ?

It's one I don't have so will order at local book shop

[huvut76g7gbbui7]

16 hours ago, perdu said:

I assume this is the pack divorced (or separated) from the airframe

Forgot about this bit..excuse tardiness!

That's the main part of the pack without the fore and aft parts.

[perdu]

2 hours ago, Scimitar said:

Is that a copy of the one I sent you Bill?

I can't remember it hanging so far below and like that it is certainly wrong.

Can't offer you a fix..I don't have the pack   (not a hint..I'm rebuilding the broken 809 one as an S50 first)

 

Yes it is a copy Richard, I will get it back asap

It does hang awfy low so I intend rebuilding the base whilst keeping the lowest face as is.

 

With the help we're getting here it should be a reasonably easy job to build the new base up

 

[huvut76g7gbbui7]

As I said..no rush.

I decided to rebuild the broken 809 one as an S50..may do an RIP for that.

Found these when I was trawling instead of building.

The angle it was taken at makes it look as if the back end was flush but as @Ex-FAAWAFU's phot shows it isn't.

[Ex-FAAWAFU]

ISBN 978-90-8616-168-3

 

I was sure it was an S1 from the shape of the intakes, but not 100% sure!  Might have guessed I'd be wrong.

[huvut76g7gbbui7]

21 minutes ago, Ex-FAAWAFU said:

Might have guessed I'd be wrong.

You now join a cast of thousands ..now I'd have slagged you if it had been a Sea King or a Lynx.

Thanks for that ISBN.

Richard 

[keefr22]

3 hours ago, Scimitar said:

may do an RIP for that.

 

Oh dear is it that unwell....

 

4 hours ago, Scimitar said:

Bill's secret project?

http://www.steelnavy.net/MTMBlackburnBucaneer.html

 

And an even bigger OH DEAR for that....!! 

 

Keith

[71chally]

That 1:72 recce pack looks dreadfully too deep, nothing that you can't correct though Bill!

The 1:48 looks like it could use some work as well!

 

Note in the S.1 landing picture that the photo flashes have been released from the crate.

[hairystick]

It looks like the crate sits almost flush with the bottom of the fuselage and that 1/72nd resin version has been resident in a local pie shop...

 

On 3/6/2018 at 4:24 AM, Ex-FAAWAFU said:

I have an S2/S2C/S2D/SMk50 boxing of the kit, which will be built as an RN cab - probably 809, since the transfers are easier to get.

Do yourself a favour and get some aftermarket decals for that kit. The airfix supplied decals are nicely out of register and also appear to have been "slimed" by a randy jellyfish.

 

Don't ask me how I know...

 

 

[Massimo]

Very interesting page,full of useful info about the recce pod!

The resin one in 1/48 seems more accurate , compared to the 1/72 on, but I think by positioning it a little deeper in the fuselage, filling the gapsand  smoothering thejunction between the two shapes,  it 'll  be good. 

Leave it with Bill!

[Ex-FAAWAFU]

38 minutes ago, hairystick said:

Do yourself a favour and get some aftermarket decals for that kit. The airfix supplied decals are nicely out of register and also appear to have been "slimed" by a randy jellyfish.

 

Don't ask me how I know...

Thanks for the tip!  Any recommendations for RN 1/48 after-market decals?  Any (Naval) squadron will do!

[Massimo]

11 minutes ago, Ex-FAAWAFU said:

Thanks for the tip!  Any recommendations for RN 1/48 after-market decals?  Any (Naval) squadron will do!

In Model Alliance sheet there are several aircraft.

[keefr22]

Two other MA sheets with Bricks on Crisp -

 

S1 on this;

 

https://www.hannants.co.uk/product/ML48121

 

S2 on this;

 

https://www.hannants.co.uk/product/ML48196

 

Appears Big H no longer have stock of the sheet Massimo shows above.

 

Keith

[huvut76g7gbbui7]

9 hours ago, Ex-FAAWAFU said:

probably 809, since the transfers are easier to get.

I can send you  XV346/656LM of 736. Eagle and Lightning bolt on fin or XV358/107E of 800. White 'E' on red chevron on fin.

Chose one and Massimo can have the other 

[71chally]

1 hour ago, massimo said:

The resin one in 1/48 seems more accurate...

Once you change the shape of the forward facing camera bulge, it will be getting there!

 

The shape of the crate is what seems to confuse things a bit. In side elevation it is almost flush to the underside of the aircraft, but because it is squarish shaped is section, in many photographs (espacially if an angles side on view) it appears to 'stick out' more.

Edited March 6, 2018 by 71chally

[perdu]

4 minutes ago, 71chally said:

Once you change the shape of the forward facing camera bulge, it will be getting there!

Reducing that to a proper tear drop shape as we sits contemplating it

 

Looks to me as if the camera pod is a little far back under there too, I never was good at sums (numerophobioc to the Nth degree sadly, always been blind to the  beauty of numbers ) but I am trying to calculate how far forward the pod bit should be on the whole pod just now

 

Working out roughly, percentages

[71chally]

This might help, it's a direct scan.

Buccaneer reece pack by James Thomas, on Flickr

 

These images of XX889 at Brunty are useful as well,

https://c4.staticflickr.com/8/7739/17937699450_79da1a117e_c.jpg

https://c4.staticflickr.com/8/7725/17504857263_07140b54fe_c.jpg

[perdu]

OK thanks James, I think I can call the planning stage to a halt and  get building

I have a couple of the original shapes that I will try to adapt first-off but the pair of crates might just be better fully scratch built

The domed pod section in mine are very poor replicas, whilst it may be true that no onlookers will have a clue how it ought to look, we will!

I am hoping to get into the garage tomorrow to splash paint all over the Gannet and Spitfire, with luck I may get the belly pack under way too

I might even get to cast a couple of the new shape packs, we will see

 

Nice to have some Brunty input too Matt thanks for your aid here

[Terry1954]

There is a link here Bill that might help (sorry if someone already posted). https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/flyingstations/buccaneer-photo-reconnaissance-pack-t273-s10.html

 

There are a few more helpful pics there and I must say looking at all this to my untrained eye, the horizontal flat of the pod (front to back) looks almost level with the aircraft underbelly. I think the fact that the flat part extends out either side, creates all kinds of optical trickery to the eye. The fourth picture down in that link shows that well I think. There are some other reasonable shots too.

 

Opinions?

 

Cheers

 

Terry

[Terry1954]

BTW my comment also applies to the two Brunty links posted above also. When you think about it there is plenty of room above in the bay for the internals of the pack, so no real need to protrude much if any below the dead centre lower fuselage line. Not sure how long the lenses are but they cant be that long? Just a thought.