Missouri Armada P-51D Mustang: documents and partial scratch from the Tamiya 1/48 kit

[Totally Mad Olivier]

Even if Antonio pointed out rightly that this area will not be visible (I would rather say it will be just slightly visible), I have improved the hollowed chambers area, that is now much more in compliance with what the docs show... I am now gonna focus on other details of this right panel. More soon... 

 

[John Terrell]

With regard to the gun sight and control units, what you want to depict all depends on what evidence you can find in period photos, as it was far from perfectly standard. The photos that Laurent has presented are likely the best possible resource for this particular subject/field-modded 8th AF P-51D.

 

As Laurent's posts illustrate, the US Navy Mk.18/Mk.21/early K-14 gyro gunsights were used in field-modified Mustangs in late '44/early '45 (referred to as K-14's in both photos). The control unit seen in Laurent's posts are associated with both the Navy Mk.18 and Mk.21/early K-14 gunsights. The 357th FG, along with other 8th AF fighter groups, also performed a common modification where the stock gunsight bracket was removed and a cut-out was made into the instrument panel shroud (about 3-inches in, as I recall), and a special gunsight mounting apparatus was built to re-position the gyro gun sights farther forward, away from the pilot's face. That is also what you see illustrated in Laurent's photos. What is shown in Laurent's photos is probably the exact same as it was in "Missouri Armada", but finding any more documents to illustrate everything in detail for that setup is difficult. This photo shows the extent of the cutout: http://www.aircraft-gunsights.com/wp-content/gallery/k-14/K-14-Gunsight-8.JPG

Here's another (the famous publicity photo of Don Blakeslee), which again illustrates the same field-modification/added gyro gunsight, with the cutout in the instrument panel shroud as well, this time in the 4th Fighter Group (note how, like the other photo I also linked to, the rivets are all drilled out for the removal of the stock gun sight mount, and you can see the bolts sticking out for the added apparatus for mounting the gun sight): http://www.aircraft-gunsights.com/wp-content/gallery/k-14/K-14-Gunsight-13.JPG

 

There is an ex-78th FG P-51K preserved/displayed in the Netherlands, which although the gunsight and mounting apparatus are long gone, it still has the same cutout in the instrument panel shroud and gyro gunsight throttle from the field-modification (it is a P-51K-10-NT, which, like "Missouri Armada", originally came from the factory with an N-9 gun sight and had a gyro gunsight installed in the field): https://www.flickr.com/photos/34363610@N08/27407264088/in/dateposted-public/

 

The NAA engineering drawings show a special bracket/shelf for mounting the K-14A control box to, under the right-side of the instrument panel shroud, on potential early K-14A factory installations. This is what I depicted in some of my flight simulator recreations (images of my flight sim work have been posted throughout this thread), and it can be seen reproduced in a couple of restorations - "Upupa Epops" and "Feeble Eagle". However, I've never seen this bracket on any original Mustangs, and I don't think it was actually ever used (if I were able to go back in time and redo my work, I would have done some things like that differently). I think it was one of those concepts that never made it past the blueprints. Even on "Upupa Epops", prior to restoration, it had the K-14 control box mounted directly to the instrument panel shroud (right side), as it probably always did, ever since leaving the factory - it was only during the restoration that the restorers, only following the NAA drawings and not the evidence before them, made it otherwise/as the drawings showed it should be, rather than what it really was.

Edited April 7, 2018 by John Terrell

[Totally Mad Olivier]

First thank you very much for this documented reply and the links, John.

I apologize for both my ignorance on the matter and for my english not good enough to avoid me doubts on some sentences, but can you precise please:

- if I understand well, the pics Laurent showed with this round dimmer box does not correspond to the K14 gunsight but to another one, not mentioned up to now in the thread (I only knew up to now the N-9 one as the previous one on the P-51), that is the US Navy Mk.18. I am not sure I understood rightly, because Laurent mentioned above in his post#838 that the pic showed a K14 gunsight... So?

- this Mk.18 would have been set in the field on a P-51D-10-NA like the Missouri  more probably than the K14, that's right?

 

13 hours ago, John Terrell said:

in 1/48 scale, it probably woulb be rather hard to tell any of these apart

- I am not sure I understand well this sentence: does it mean that anyway, the K14 and the Mk.18 are quite similar, especially considering the scale (1/48)? the main difference between both would be precisely the control box, that's right?

 

 

Sorry for these questions, but I need things to be clear in my mind of non-expert...

 

 

[Totally Mad Olivier]

11 hours ago, John Terrell said:

The NAA engineering drawings show a special bracket/shelf for mounting the K-14 control box to, under the right-side of the instrument panel shroud, on early K-14 installations. This is what I depicted in some of my flight simulator recreations

In my previous post, I forgot a question: 

when you mention this special bracket/shelf, you mean the one below?

 

So this would not correspond to what we could find on P-51D equipped with the K14, the control box was in fact fixed inside the shroud, OK?

By the way, congratulations for the amazingly beautiful and realistic reproduction you made for simulators... I had not clearly understood these pics I often use were yours...

 

Olivier

[Totally Mad Olivier]

On 05/04/2018 at 21:40, antonio argudo said:

I really can't make a  statemt from a poor quality picture,  as the light reflects on the curve surface it can really trick the eyes, 

 

Here is an enlargement of a better quality version of the Butch Baby pic. Honestly, it is difficult for me to imagine that the retractable part of the flaps were RAF Dark Green painted on that aircraft. I know we may be abused by optical effects, but when I look at this photo, I still wonder if all 357th FG were painted in this area (thanks to Alexey and Antonio, we could see on several examples that it was definitely on most of the P-51 of this FG, while it wasn't on many of the camouflaged ones of other FG).

 

Why do I insist on this question?

For a simple aesthetical consideration. The Missouri top surface all painted Dark Green, without even D-Days stripes on wings to create a contrast, is quite dull imho, and an alu contrast there would break this dull surface.

If I was 100% sure the Missouri was, like the Passion Wagon and others P-51 of the 357th, with rf painted, I would choose, to respect historical truth and out of desperation, to paint this area RAF DG, but if there is a chance some could not be so, in the doubt, I would definitely choose the alu one.

Everyone interested in this debate (one more...) is invited to express his opinion... (I hope this thread is still of interest for some modelers, because it takes me a lot of time - this precious time - and energy to do photos, labels and comments)...

[John Terrell]

Olivier, I'm still learning too, especially with regard to the gunsights, but here are the main points:

 

- The early gyro gunsight installations (Navy Mk.18 and Navy Mk.21/K-14) had the same style of control unit/selector as seen in Laurent's photos, and would be correct to what "Missouri Armada" would have had given the time frame (late 1944/January 1945 at the latest). If I recall correctly, the the Navy Mk.21 (K-14) gunsight was actually never used by the Navy and were all directed to the 8th AF in England for incorporation on their fighters.

 

(I may be off the mark, but I believe the control box which I had been showing in later installations came about with the K-14A.)

 

- Yes, the bracket/shelf I refer to, as likely having never actually been used, is the setup in that screen capture seen in your post #854. It's in the NAA drawings, but I've never seen a photo of an original wartime or unrestored airframe with that configuration - only in a couple restorations. Again, that control box was introduced later/after the time frame of "Missouri Armada" (as I have now learned).

Speaking of the early K-14 gunsight control unit/selector, here is another photo showing a field-modded early P-51D of the 357th FG, with the same early Mk.21/K-14 gunsight field-installation, but the control unit/selector just happens to have been installed on the left side (and the cockpit light from the left side of the instrument panel has been re-positioned to below the gunsight bracket). This may have been a one-off, or there may have been more? http://www.aircraft-gunsights.com/wp-content/gallery/k-14/K-14-Gunsight-6.JPG

 

Note in the photo I linked to, there is a bracket installed containing four spare gunsight bulbs fitted to the right-side of the instrument panel shroud  - throughout both field-modded and factory installations, there would typically always be a bracket with spare gunsight bulbs installed on the opposite side of the instrument panel to the location of the gunsight control unit/selector. In both of the photos Laurent posted, since the control unit/selector is installed on the right side, the spare bulbs are located on the left side.

The gunsight in this first photo is a K-14, and the gunsight in the second photo is either a Navy Mk.18 or Mk.21 (not too familiar with those).

 

 

 

Edited April 7, 2018 by John Terrell

[Totally Mad Olivier]

Ok John, thank you again for these precisions, for your knowledge and for this great pic linked. We can see here how complex things are, with so many variations... I had not noticed the spare bulbs on the Laurent's pics, thank you to attract my attention on this detail.

Olivier

Talking about variations, I would be pleased to have your opinion about the question I raise in my previous post... Don't you think it is possible that some retractable flaps have been remained unpainted on some of the P-51 of the 357th, especially the Butch Baby, by looking at the pic above?

 

 

[elger]

1 hour ago, Olivier de St Raph said:

 (I hope this thread is still of interest for some modelers, because it takes me a lot of time - this precious time - and energy to do photos, labels and comments)...

This is a most enjoyable and inspirational build. Please keep it up

[Totally Mad Olivier]

Sorry for this little rant, but I am a human, I need encouragements, especially for such a challenge this build is. Antonio was up to now my best supporter on the thread, with always "likes" and kind comments. I know he is very busy these times, but I admit I miss his encouragements. Happily, I have personal exchanges with Juan, who was very present these last days, which were quite difficult for me, because of pain due to my renal intervention. But on the thread, I sometimes feel a bit alone, and I do wonder: do I post too many steps of my build? Is this thread too boring because of my quest for truth? (a problem we met in the first Fiat thread, the Gangshow).

So thank you elger for your kind comment, that is a useful (and even essential) fuel for me to go on...

 

 

[antonio argudo]

Hi Olivier,

more 357th with the complete green wing flap,also from screenshots from the video.

to me looks like p51 from the the 354th which were in Olive drab had  that part in bare alumnium but once they were repainted in England with RAF green that space was consequently green too, the evidence is quite strong

cheers

Edited April 7, 2018 by antonio argudo

[Totally Mad Olivier]

Thank you for these new pics, Antonio. I admit the evidence is quite strong indeed. Without questioning your point of view, supported by several docs, I would like to have some other experts - like John, fe - opinion on that matter and especially on the Butch Baby pic I posted above. One more time, the question for me is not:

- Had most of the 357th FG their rf painted? (this is definitely true)

but rather:

- could some of the P-51D of this FG have had their rf remained unpainted? (like the Butch Baby suggests imho)...

I deeply regret that the very nice and color photo of the Butch Baby we have in the Merle's book 2nd and 3rd cover page doesn't show this part...

[Garry c]

 

I agree with Elger, this is a very inspirational build. While following along I was inspired to start work on the 1/72 Airfix P51. Applying  what I learned here and motivated by the constant updates, I managed to finish the build. I have at least 8 unfinished models so finishing one is rare. I would like to thank you for your passion, your skill, and your persistence. If you are interested, my lesser quality effort is here ;

http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235036187-mustang-airfix-172-p51-d/

 

Garry c

[Totally Mad Olivier]

Thanks Garry, I had a look at your thread and to your nice build. If this thread has inspired you to finish your build, I am very glad.

[Totally Mad Olivier]

Tell me frankly if you think I show too many steps of my build, or if on the contrary, you appreciate seeing the slow progress...

The oxygen hose was made by rolling a 0,2 mm tin wire around a 0,5 mm one:

[Garry c]

 I like seeing all the steps and missteps, sometimes the mistakes and corrections are the most enlightening part.

 

  Garry c

[Totally Mad Olivier]

 

1 hour ago, Garry c said:

sometimes the mistakes and corrections are the most enlightening part.

 

You learn more from your errors than from your successes, we know that... 

I will add that I have never tried to hide my mistakes, I assume them totally, defending my right to make them! 

And only God knows how tricky is this build, unlike what I thought (in my ignorance, I thought everything had been said on the too famous Mustang, I was far from truth!!!)

[Biggles87]

Regarding the flaps Olivier, I think the answer is that some were painted and some where not. It could be as simple as wether they were up or down when the painting was done.

I also like to see all the different stages of the build.

 

cheers

 

John

[Totally Mad Olivier]

12 hours ago, Biggles87 said:

It could be as simple as wether they were up or down when the painting was done.

 ! I had not thought to that, John. If so, it however seems that most of them were down when the painting was done... But seriously, it is a very possible assumption, while the first priority of the 357th mechanists was probably not the question of painting or not the retractable flaps... 

 

12 hours ago, Biggles87 said:

I also like to see all the different stages of the build.

 

13 hours ago, Garry c said:

I like seeing all the steps and missteps

 

Ok, so, I will go on with the different stages (with often missteps...) as i did up to now...

[antonio argudo]

11 minutes ago, Biggles87 said:

I think the answer is that some were painted and some where not. It could be as simple as wether they were up or down when the painting was done

that could be John, but there is no one certain picture yet to prove that yet, the "Butch Baby" picture to me is not a defenetive one, if you pay attention all the wing edgge contour looks lighter due to light reflection and shine, all the rest available picture proves they were fully painted

cheers

Edited April 7, 2018 by antonio argudo

[Totally Mad Olivier]

2 minutes ago, antonio argudo said:

if you pay attention all the wing edgge looks lighter due to light reflection and shine

Yes, Antonio, I had noticed that too, but a wing edge on a worn aircraft may leave appear the metal. For a round surface like the retractable flaps, I am less convinced. But as I said above, I regret that we don't have any indisputable pic showing that detail on the Butch or another 357th P-51D... A bottle of Champagne to the one who finds such a pic!!  

[antonio argudo]

I mean the wing contour, also the alerons looks lighter, the curve  section of flaps will look lighter as a cylinder if your point of view is lower or from the ground and the light comes perpendicular from above like in "Butch Baby" picture

that picture with aluminum part I'm afraid will never come... muahaha

cheers

[antonio argudo]

this is not 357th FG but as the captation says the aircraft has been repainted and the flap edgge too, this is the plane  in which General  Eisenhower took a ride in the backseat

 

there is also a video of the moment about it

cheers

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Y_TBXRqdXk

 

[Bedders]

I check BM every day to see if there's anything new on this model. So please keep up the progress reports, and I'll comment when I have something useful to say (which I'm realising is not very often!).

 

Jusrin

[Totally Mad Olivier]

 

I have just a problem: I broke down of 0,2 mm tin wire. I have ordered some on ebay but I won't get it very soon. I am gonna try using the 0,2 mm copper wire I used above for the long wire running along the right panel (the red bright one on my post#864) 

I first burn it over a flame to get it softer. More soon...

 

P.S (1 hour after): pity, the 0,2 mm copper wire, even heated, is not at all soft enough to be an alternative to the tin one. I will have to wait until I get the ordered one. Meanwhile, I will go on with other aspects and details...

[Totally Mad Olivier]

Hi Antonio,

your pics, that I reproduce below, show this dull surface that I fear from an aesthetical point of view, and still, here there is the white strip breaking the full Dark Green paint... 

I am torn between historical considerations (with a small remaining doubt) and artistic choices.

By the way, I looked at the video on YouTube. Funny, that staging, with the assistant sat on the wing while the aircraft runs on the track, ready to release the pilot and the General Eisenhower...