Jump to content

wmcgill

Members
  • Posts

    102
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by wmcgill

  1. Theoretically yes. Just like you could theoretically stick a Lancaster Mk.I nose section on to Manchester rear end (and wings) and change it into a Manchester. But no one is seriously suggesting any Lancasters were converted to Manchesters.
  2. i) is entirely believable. ii) needs to be backed up by some documentary proof. Not just the fact that some batches of aircraft ordered as Mk.I (or Mk.III) were completed as the other type. iii) needs to be backed up by some documentary proof if available. But knowing how talented and adaptable mechanics can be it wouldn't surprise me. Even if the internal electrics were not modified to fully suit the new installation.
  3. Hopefully they might be able to provide some documented cases of Mk.Is being re-engined as Mk.IIIs or vice versa.
  4. No, Lancaster Merlin engines did not have Rolls-Royce logos on their rocker covers. Not on the UK made Merlin XX or on the US made Merlin 28 or on the subsequent variants that found their way into Lancasters during WWII. There is not a single WWII Lancaster photo that I am aware of that shows that logo on the engines. But there are numerous photos confirming that they were not there.This also is true for almost all Merlin Spitfire engines as well (except for the very earliest marks). The Rolls-Royce Merlin engine logos were restricted to very few marks (usually the very earliest) and restorations and modellers (and aftermarket manufacturers) imaginations. http://www.wingnutwings.com/ww/v98C7274C/www/products/model_kitsets/32043/colour_photos/AvRo Lancaster B.Mk.I~III engine details (IWM).jpg
  5. The famous Mk.I Lancaster R5868 PO-S was completely rebuilt in late 1944, retaining only her nose section, but remained a Mk.I. But none of that is simply replacing the engines to change an aircraft from a Mk.I to a Mk.III or vice versa. Are there any official records of this happening as often as modellers claim in conversations such as this one?
  6. I know this is often talked about but is there any concrete proof of Mk.Is being re-engined with Mk.III engines or vice versa in the records? I'm not suggesting it did not happen but there were some instrument panel, and therefore internal wiring, differences between a Mk.I and Mk.III as they left the factory so it was not necessarily as simple as replacing an engine, or four. Generally, units tended to be equipped with one or the other type and not normally both at the same time. Newer model engines were frequently installed but my understanding was that they still didn't cross-pollinate between UK & US engine types so retained their Mk.I or Mk.III identities.
  7. No external differences*. Internal differences are the slow running cut off switches on the instrument panel and the engine cylinder banks, generator and the carburetors/carburettors. Early & mid production Mk.I engine bearers and radiators appear to have been painted a quite dark grey-green while on the Mk.III they were a very pale blue-grey. Later on these appear to have been silver. http://www.wingnutwings.com/ww/v98C7274C/www/products/model_kitsets/32043/colour_photos/AvRo Lancaster B.Mk.I~III engine details (IWM).jpg *Except that some of the very earliest airframe details like the FN.64 lower turret had been deleted before the Mk.III entered production.
  8. White stencils would be on the factory applied black underside as seen on P9450 in April 1940. But the Tamiya X4561 option would have left the factory in September 1940 with sky undersides and black stencils. The stencils would have been overpainted when the black wing was applied from December 1940.
  9. Not your aeroplane or necessarily scheme, but this genuine color IWM photo (& B&W copy) does illustrate the factory default colors for the undercart. The same colour as the undersides. It also shows how difficult it can be to interpret colors from B&W photos, specially so when various areas are subjected to shade differently.
  10. Undercart struts, inner doors, wheel wells and wheels would have been painted the same colour as the wing underside was at the factory. Only the "interior wing" (where the struts nestled into) would be painted silver. These components would remain that colour unless they were were replaced at a later date with parts from a differently painted aeroplane.
  11. W3528 has the rare "triangle" version of the fishtail exhausts. I don't think anyone does these as aftermarket.
  12. The key to light/dark changes appears to be using one very shiny paint and one much less shiny paint. http://www.wingnutwings.com/ww/v98C7274C/www/hintsandtips/Jeannin Stahltaube cowling 'scales' hints & tips.jpg http://www.wingnutwings.com/ww/v98C7274C/www/hintsandtips/Fokker 'turned' cowl hints & tips.jpg
  13. The TVAL BE.2F doesn't have the gravity petrol tank under the top wing.
  14. Without the extra fuselage petrol tank in the coaming in front of the pilot's instrument board, isn't this only able to be built as a B.E.2F (converted B.E.2C)? Or is the extra B.E.2E and B.E.2G (converted B.E.2D) fuselage petrol tank an optional part? Or have I mixed up my designations?
  15. Don't forget it's only 28cm wide with the outer wings removed. http://www.wingnutwings.com/ww/product?productid=3193
  16. Uncommon tyre with tread seen on Mk.Vb BM520 from June 1942 in this IWM photo. Follow the link and zoom in to the highest resolution version to see the tread detail https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/205210198
  17. Nearly correct but quite misleading answer. The tapered aerial post was metal with a wood core.
  18. Maybe this will help you out, or maybe not, but this online instruction booklet for the Wingnuts kit looks like has some good info & photos http://www.wingnutwings.com/ww/productdetail?productid=3180&cat=4
  19. Here's another, clearer, copy of that photo of Mk.IIa P7895. P7895 was brand new in early Feb 1941 and this photo shows it as she was just 3 months later in April 1941. A time at which she wouldn't have been worked anywhere near as hard as airframes at the height of the Battle of Britain. Only you should decide how much weathering your model of N3173 with 10 months service in September 1940 should have.
  20. https://www.windsockdatafilespecials.co.uk/fokker-fidri-1441-p.asp This new Windsock Datafile Special book covers the building and painting of this new Meng kit.
  21. Clean build but unfortunately it looks like your radiator is upsidedown. And maybe (just maybe) the undercarriage struts are on back to front. Both probably fixable.
  22. Your statement about cut outs in the decals are total nonsense. On the top wing upper surface lozenge the cut outs are there for the painted metal brackets which are moulded on to the wing. On the underside of the top wing lozenge decals there are indeed no cut outs, and an overhang. The instructions actually tell you to TRIM TO FIT. This appears to be because the underside decals are also used on the top surface of the wings for very early production Halberstadt Cl.II. Not all decal solvents work with all decals so I can't comment on that problem you had (which I never evperienced). But it is quite obvious that whatever you used would appear to be the wrong one(s). By all means have a preference for spending extra noney on aftermarket products. But do it for the right reasons, not because of ignorant statements like this. It's a shame so many incorrect statements can be made in one post.
  23. Good luck but unfortunately the Krakow museum Halberstadt is not painted correctly. It's camouflage does not look like WW1 Halberstadt camouflage.
  24. Rubbish. The cut outs in that decal are to expose the painted metal brackets on top of the wing. You can see them in the nicely model built on the Wingnut Wings website. http://www.wingnutwings.com/ww/productdetail?productid=3195&cat=5
×
×
  • Create New...