ajmm

Superb. One of the nicest completions of this kit I’ve seen. Really nicely done.

Very nice! I’ve been wondering about this kit and you’ve convinced me. That’s a lovely little model.

Sensible man. Mine keeps looking at me forlornly from the shelf of shame.

I haven’t had a crack at the victor yet but Mikromir kits are getting better the whole time. The Valiant (one of their first) is pretty difficult but the Hastings is a really beautifully engineered and well thought out kit. And thanks. We do have his log books. I’ll have a look for them (just moved house). He was CO 50 Squadron at Waddington from 63. 50 received 617’s cast off B1s when the latter upgraded to B2s I think I read.

Very nice! Thank you for the detail on how to convert a B2. Very impressive work - a super finish. I too share your frustration at the lack of B1 Vulcans, especially in 1:144 - my preferred scale. My grandfather flew B.1s.

Thank you all for the kind words! As always, they are greatly appreciated. Thanks Marcello! Take a look here - it's all 1:144 stuff, which as a scale is afflicted by a bad rash of 1970s-era Crown moulds, for which the more up-to-date offerings of a given type are usually short run Eastern European kits which have their own challenges and quirks. It's been good fun. http://www.kampfgruppe144.com/phpBB3/viewforum.php?f=73

Recently completed as part of a GB on another forum, but posting here as you don't see these finished all that often so thought it might interest some people. This is the US Coast Guard variant of the C-123 Provider. Quite a challenging kit (the GB this build was part of was entitled 'Nightmare Kits'!). This is the third Amodel C-123 I've built. I tried some new approaches this time that made the build significantly easier, but it's still a classic short run kit. Nothing some good old fashioned modelling skills cannot fix, but - at best - tedious at times. You can if you're interested read the build log here. I was intrigued by what the Coast Guard needed the C-123 for - the answer is quite fascinating (or I think so, anyway). The HC-123s were acquired in 1958 to help support the Loran-C network of navigation stations across the world. The USCG took over responsibility for maintaining this global network in 1958. I spent a bit of time trying to understand the Loran navigation system but to no avail. It's pretty complicated stuff. But basically it was a US-led development of the British GEE system used by RAF Bomber Command to navigate accurately deep into Germany. The system relied on ground stations that sent out a low-frequency radio pulse; a receiver on the aircraft (or ship) then measured the time difference between the pulses to get a fix. This GEE system was highly accurate - but only at shorter ranges. The more you 'stretched' the range by lowering the frequency, the greater the margin of inaccuracy (as it were). Successive Loran systems refined the accuracy of the fix obtainable at greater ranges through some Very Clever Engineering (that Angus won't pretend to understand). But there's a good explanation in this Coast Guard film if you want one - and can muscle your way past Siri's narration. The Coast Guard had become interested in the Loran system from 1942 (its dual utility for aerial and maritime navigation appealed) and were a major partner in its wartime development. Classic short newsreel feature on this here. The USAF and USN were actually fairly fickle in their interest post-war - flirting with their own alternative systems or (more complex) inertial navigation systems. With trials proving that Loran-C worked, the Coast Guard took on responsibility for the Loran-C chains from 1958 - it acquired its HC-123s to expand and maintain the Loran chains. Except for an enlarged radome to house the AN/APN-158 search radar, the HC-123B was a standard C-123B in all other respects. The first network of Loran stations was set up in the Mediterranean in 1959 (with stations in Italy, Greece, Turkey and Libya), the Norwegian Sea in 1960 and finally across the Pacific. Coast Guard Providers were scattered to Florida, Puerto Rico, Italy, Alaska, Guam and Hawaii in support of this until 1972. Loran was used extensively by both civil and military aircraft and ships during its lifespan, providing accurate navigation over 12 million square miles of planet earth. Less known, it was used extensively by the allied ballistic missile subs (hence all the repeater stations in the Norwegian sea) to synchronise or update the ship's inertial navigation system without trailing an antenna above the surface (Loran-C signals could be received over 60ft below the surface). With the coming of satellite-based navigation systems in the 1990s, Loran use dropped off (though widespread civilian uptake ensured it lived on longer than most other navigation systems). The Coast Guard ran and maintained the US Loran chain of around 31 stations for 52 years. It has now largely been shut down (the US decommissioned its Loran network in 2010). Anyway more pictures of the real thing... Nothing too difficult really. The undercarriage nosegear needed quite a bit of shortening to get the right sit. If I'm honest, I'm unhappy about the metallic panels in these photos - though the contrast is much subtler in real life lighting. But that one on the wing looks odd. Alas. Anyway... A surprisingly big old girl... And finally with her sister ship. There's a trio of ugly nose jobs the C-123 offered - I've done two of them! Thanks very much for looking! Angus

Beautiful - I’ve often thought about building a flock of Daks like this and you may just have provided the inspiration. It’s hard to find a livery the Dakota doesn’t look awesome in.

Nev - wow this is fantastic, I can’t thank you enough but - all the same - thank you so much for taking the time to reply and upload all this information. This looks like more than enough for my purposes. All sorted! This forum really is the internet at its best at times like this! Im so sorry for the delay replying - I only got a notification of your most recent post so I missed the first one entirely. I’ll work this place out eventually. Thanks again - I will post a photo on here of the Cat when she’s done!

Hi Nev Thanks so much for replying. I’m not much further actually, though I did find a couple of great photos of the 18ft version below which will be helpful. I would love to see any photos you have too if you’re happy to share them. Thanks again Angus

Just wonderful. I am in complete awe.

That’s an epic shot. You must be so pleased with this and how it’s turning out. I just think it’s hard to see how you can ever better this build. You’ve set your own bar fairly high now sir!

Love it!

Brilliant job. Dead impressive conversion. My father in law remembers seeing this one flying in and out of RAE Thurleigh / Bedford. You’ve done a very nice job on the engine too.

This looks interesting. I’ve often wondered about this kit. Will be following your progress.

Hello I wonder if anyone can point me in the direction of any plans for either of Higgins’ air-dropped A1 lifeboats? There was a 27ft version and an 18ft version. I want primarily to scratchbuild the latter to go under a PBY wing but also interested in any info on the 27 footer if anyone has it. Thanks very much.

That's lovely work.

I’ve seen one of these in real life and they are tiny enough at 1:1. Superb work with this. Truly impressive!

So do I. Very nicely done.

Very cool. Lovely scheme and beautiful finish. I should get some of those decals.

Very nice. I got about halfway through mine and then moved house. I really should pick it up again - I’d finally finished all the bubble filling etc you mentioned. I hope it turns out as well as yours - very inspiring, thank you.

Thanks so much for the kind comments guys - they are greatly appreciated.

Looking forward to this!

Thanks so much guys. I agree - from some angles it’s almost normal. But then you rotate it a bit and whoa! Thanks for the kind comments. @malpaso yes Great Lakes was resurrected in the 1960s wasn’t it? And I believe it still builds aircraft to the original 1930s design - but modernised. Firmly in the dream hangar!

The Great Lakes XSG-1 needs no introduction is about as obscure as you can get and exactly the sort of thing that fascinates me. A single prototype scout seaplane from the early-1930s (designed to spot the fall of shot for the big battleships and cruisers), it is surely one of the ugliest flying machines ever designed - and a total, dismal failure. Its history actually reads like an elaborate practical joke - or the long-lost plot to a Laurel and Hardy film. It is partly its looks - as if the designers tried really, really very hard indeed to think of all the possible ways to introduce drag on an airframe. To me it looks One measure Grumman Duck, One measure Republic Seabee, both shaken and stirred, then mangled a tad - and finally served tepid, with a fresh slice of Heath Robinson. But it's definitely one of those instances where you actually can judge a book by its cover - performance was feeble: it was underpowered, heavy on the controls, aerodynamically unstable and, to cap it all, slower than its contractual guaranteed speed. But spare a thought for the gunner too - if this had ever been attacked by an enemy fighter he would have had to reach outside the aircraft to lift the machine gun from its stowage point in order to fit it to the cumbersome rack mounting in his compartment. IF he managed all this without dropping the gun into the slipstream or being whipped overboard himself, he had virtually no field of fire so could do precious little to actually defend against the enemy! At least his bailout (by the looks of things he'd just have to let go and gravity would do the rest) was easier than the pilot, who would have had to negotiate a thicket of cabane struts before leaping into the slipstream while attempting to clear the colossal tailplane mitt bracing wires. Then there's its first water handling tests where, among other things, the spray was so appalling that it nearly blinded the pilot, the observer/gunner compartment started filling up with water and nearly drowned him (but with no intercom or link to the upper cockpit, the poor man couldn't alert the pilot to his plight - though I imagine he banged wanly on the cabin walls - he did survive) and finally the engine drowned. All in all, the whole testing experience seems to have been about as relaxing as trying to give a Bengal tiger a vasectomy with a pair of nail clippers. And all this from the company that produced just the year prior one of the prettiest and sweet-handling US biplanes ever designed (in my meagre opinion)... If the XSG-1 was a prank, it was a ruddy marvellous one if you ask me. Sadly, I can find no evidence that it was. The kit comes with the Anigrand Sikorsky XPBS-1 (which I finished last year). It's fantastic to have a kit of something as bizarre and unusual, especially in 1:144 - one of the many reasons I love this scale. The build itself provided no major challenges - there's a build thread here if you're interested. I replaced most of the kit struts with plasticard which had a better scale fitness (I also removed one of the inner struts which should not have been there and added a handful more that Anigrand omitted). I added some other bits like the .30 cal gun and thinned down a few other bits to give them a better scale look. Paints were Hataka. I replaced the insignia with some thinner ones from the spares box (the Anigrand ones are very thick). Rigging was with Uschi VanderRosten thread. There are definitely compromises in here in the name of structural integrity. Given infinite time and patience I would have replaced the W strut on the forward fuselage with something daintier - I feared doing so would jeopardise whatever it was that was holding the upper wing on. Same deal with the floats - the rear struts I left alone as they provided the strength, the forward struts are prettier stretched sprue but merely decorative. I would also have filled the exaggerated rib lines scored into the wings. Inevitably all these things are much more evident in photos than in the flesh. But anyway. I am basically really happy with this. Anigrand also do a 1:72 kit of this aircraft if you find yourself with a sudden passion to build one yourself. Not a great deal more to say. A fun build and a good challenge. And with a somewhat more successful water bird that first flew just a couple of years after this - incidentally the same year that Great Lakes Aircraft Company went bust. Thanks very much for looking. Angus