Jump to content

Max89

Members
  • Posts

    53
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Max89

  1. Does anyone know if the boundary layer bleed "vents" on the Supermarine Scimitar (if that is the correct term) could be opened and closed from the cockpit? I have these circled in red in the diagram below. And a slightly more complicated question... what benefit do these provide? And why were they positioned above the engine intakes in this manner?
  2. I don't see anything in these pilots notes suggesting the presence of elevators, trim tabs, flaps or any other movable control surface on the tailplane. As 71chally says, it sounds like trimming was done by moving the entire tailplane slab and holding it in position.
  3. Off topic, but the amount of knowledge on this forum never ceases to astound me.
  4. Thank you for the information. I assume that rules out the presence of flaps on the Scimitar's tailplane as well (similiar to the Blackburn Buccaneer's tailplane flaps)?
  5. To add to my original post, I found a cutaway for the Scimitar, and I don't really see anything on this diagram that suggests the presence of elevators or flaps on the tailplane.
  6. It appears that the Supermarine Scimitar F.1 had an all moving tailplane, but I can also see lines on the tailplane surface suggesting the presence of elevators (highlighted in red below). Did the Scimitar actually have movable elevators, or am I just looking at panel lines? There's also a little snippet on Wikipedia that suggests the aircraft had elevators that worked in tandem with the moving tail, but I don't see any sources or mentions of that anywhere else.
  7. Interesting. Would XS590 have been a late production FAW.2? And would it have rolled off the production line with the updated canopy, hatch and extended booms already included?
  8. Does anyone know what these openings are (circled in red)? Were they actuated/movable or were they fixed?
  9. So the "wing modification programme" was just to repair the wings? I'm assuming the wing shape and appearance would have remained mostly the same then, Was anything else done for "mod 9" besides the wing reinforcement plates?
  10. I'm looking at the history for F.6 XS925, and I noticed that in Nov '84 the aircraft was sent to a "wing modification programme". A few months later in Feb '85 it was upgraded by British Aerospace to extend airframe flying hours by 400 hours. Does anyone know the details behind the wing modifications of Nov '84 and upgrades of Feb '85? What did they do? And were there any externally visible differences? The museum accession containing more information on this aircraft is right here: https://www.rafmuseum.org.uk/documents/collections/1990-0690-A-LIGHTNING-F.6-XS925.pdf
  11. It is indeed really odd that the EE Lightning had a fixed/immovable cone. I would've thought that this was a necessity for any aircraft that exceeded mach 1. Was this the case for all variants?
  12. I've come to learn that the inlet cone was actually movable on many cold war aircraft, and that it'd move forward or backward depending on the airspeed. Did any of the Lighting variants have a movable cone? Or was it fixed/immovable?
  13. Quite educational indeed! Okay, so just to make sure I'm on the same page... do I have this right?
  14. Thank you all for the information. I also just realized that I've been using incorrect terminology all along. I see that the part I was referring to is called the horizontal stabilizer, not the elevator. I understand now that "elevator" only refers to the movable control surface attached to the horizontal stabilizer.
  15. Ok, so now I know what it's called. Anyone have closeup pictures of where the tailplane attaches to the fuselage?' I'm trying to figure out how to model this correctly in 3D. Should I attach the fins to the tailplane at an angle? Or the tailplane to the fuselage at an angle? Was this adjustable on the real aircraft?
  16. I noticed that in many diagrams and pictures of the B-24, the rudders seem to be pointing upwards at a slight angle. I'm trying to figure out where this angle comes from. Are the rudders mounted to the elevator at an angle, or is it the elevator that's mounted to the fuselage at an angle? Or is it both? It's really difficult to tell by looking at the diagrams, and I don't have many useful pictures of the tail to go by, especially ones that show where the elevator and rudders attach. Take a look at the attached image. Any ideas?
  17. I know that only one prototype was completed because the manufacturer never got any orders for the 105, but does anyone know about the fate of that particular prototype? Also, was the GT7 105mm gun on the prototype actually functional? Details and photos here: http://www.military-today.com/artillery/rooikat_105.htm
  18. Some very good pictures there, thanks. So both lamps look like they were meant for ID only... which means they probably weren't retractable. I wonder why the drawing I referenced in my previous post labels that as a retractable landing lamp. Strange.
  19. Are you sure about this? I found a drawing of the FB.11 where the lamp under the right wing is labelled as a "retractable landing lamp". I couldn't find this drawing with a larger font so it is a little difficult to read, but I'm fairly certain that this is what it says. If it actually was retractable on either one or both wings, then I wonder if it would have dropped/retracted automatically with the landing gear, or whether it was controlled separately.
  20. I already ordered the 1/72 Trumpeter, so perhaps I'll try a 1/48 for a different aircraft next time. By the way, does anyone know if the landing lamps underneath the Sea Fury's wings (highlighted in green below) would automatically drop down when the landing gear was down? Or were the lamps controlled separately from the landing gear?
  21. Then Trumpeter 1/72 it is! I just ordered the kit today, so the next stop is my local hobby shop to pick up the rest of the materials. I suppose I'll start a WIP thread once I get the kit where I'll have the opportunity to ask more detailed questions regarding paints, materials, techniques, et cetera. As a side note, I did have one more question concerning "cooling flaps". Is the section just behind the engine (circled in green below) movable/actuated similar to some other piston engine aircraft?
  22. I'll be posting quite a lot in the WIP section as well! :) Also, the Trumpeter kit is 1:48 in scale, so that would make the actual model around 8.6 inches long when complete, is that correct?
  23. Yes, perhaps I will go with the 1/72.
  24. Is one kit recommended over the other for a beginner such as myself? I've been modelling aircraft in 3D for ages, but this is going to be my first time doing the real thing.
  25. Thank you for the information! Any recommendations on what kit I should go with if I want to model a Sea Fury FB 11?
×
×
  • Create New...