Wez
-
Posts
8,931 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Events
Profiles
Forums
Media Demo
Posts posted by Wez
-
-
The interesting thing is the Revell release of the MH-47E has the correct profile blades.
I haven't seen these but as I said, the Italeri ones are correct in profile for a composite blade (applicable to a MH47E), but are incorrect in chord - too narrow - for a composite blade. They may well have revised the blades for the MH47E release but I doubt it
Wez
-
The comment on returning fire sounds definitive.
Memory suggests that turreted Defiants had the HF radio aerials on the underside of the fuselage, and so would need to retract (or at least fold) for landing. This would not be needed without the turret, and the VHF radio did not need the wires, so later Defiants could have other arrangements. Presumably the masts were used for Mandrel as well as HF (or VHF)radio, or did the 515 Sq aircraft have a different VHF installation?
My comments on the size of the jamming equipment was clearly excessively influenced by the size of Jostle. My apologies.
I'd concur with your comments Graham, also, the Defiant fit would only be limited to a certain frequency band within the spectrum whereas the 100 Group heavies (not forgetting the USAAF Lib's either), had multiple Mandrel fits to cover a wider frequency range within the spectrum and would therefore require multiple TR's.
Jostle WAS huge and by all accounts filled the bomb bay of the B17's - I should think it would dwarf a Defiant!
Regards
Wez
-
The issue with the blades is that they have the correct profile for composite blades but the chord of metal blade (six inches narrower) so the blade is neither fish nor fowl
, and I'd say it's pretty much impossible to correct it either way (it just gets too messy)!Your easiest option is to use the blades from the Matchbox kit if you can find it - these are correct in chord and profile for a composite bladed aircraft (of which BN was one of).
Dunno about the recent Trumpy CH47D - that may have the correct blades but then you'll need to do other stuff to make it look like an HC.1 - which BN was at the time of the conflict.
HTH
Wez
-
All in 1/72nd scale 'a'cos my eyesight is still good
Wokka HC1/2 conversion - composite blades, IR Jammer pods, EAPS units.
Pits/canopy actuators for Esci/Italeri/Revell F5A/B
Italeri/Revell Wessex pit/cabin.
Wez
-
That's all when and good but it is the Fleet Air Arm 100 years anniversary next year but I doubt if IPMS would do anything. Still, we in the FAA tend not to shout too loudly, we don't need to tell everyone we think we are the best, we know we're the best and just go about our business with quiet professionalism.
Haggis,
You are so quiet, humble and unassuming! You need to shout from the highest rooftops that your heavy-lift capability is provided courtesy of the RAF (the mighty Wokka) and that the really serious attack capbility is provided by the Army (Apache) from your grey funnel line cruise ships
Seriously though, the FAA desreves to be celbrated just as much as the RAF - hopefully it'll happen.
Best Regards
Wez (ex Junior Service and extremely proud of it!)
-
Surely not the Rose twin-fifty but the late-war FN one? Which with guns removed would be difficult to distinguish from the 4-gun FN, except in a close view.
That'll be why I couldn't tell the difference then!
The only pictures I've seen of an MR Lanc with .50 cal's were French MR7's and even then I wasn't sure
Regards
Wez
-
I told Neil when he was doing his Tamiya Mossie stuff to do those NF36 exhausts!!!....but he choose not to do them,maybe if you all PM him and ask nicely..
Good idea... ...wonder if he's lurking
Wez
-
Maybe a bit OT, but to me, for what I know, there seems to be may similarities between the TSR.2 "issue" in the UK and the CF-105 "issue" roughly at the same time in Canada. I might just have opened another can of worms...
Sten!
Didn't your Mum tell you that cans marked "Worms" don't have resealable lids!
I think you're right though...
Wez
-
I'm looking to copy Brett Green and fashion a MR.3 Lancaster out of the Revell boxing.
Is there anything I should look to change apart from the Upper Turret and guns
Looked at doing this myself, there seems to be a school of thought that says they all had the 2x .50 cal gun Rose-Rice rear turret fitted but most of the photo's I've seen show them with the 4x .303 rear turret fitted - without guns (FN turret - not sure of the exact type). Most had a fairing immediately beneath the rear turret which was I beleive for a rear facing camera fit (others may know more). I've not seen a picture of an MR.3 with an upper turret.
Many MR.3's were fitted with Lincoln wheels and rudders. The Lincoln's rudder featured a deeper trim tab and lower rudder, if you look at the Lanc's rudder the bottom of it curves up and the trim-tab sticks out of the back - a Lincoln's rudder doesn't curve up, the line of rudder bottom meets the trim tab in a straight-ish line - this may not make sense until you look at some pictures you'll see what I mean (incidentally the BBMF Lanc has Lincoln rudders). All MR.3's had additional observation windows in the rear fuselage, the starboard one in the rear crew-entry door and a pair of square windows in a similar position on the port side.
The Modeller's Datafile is a useful reference.
HTH
Regards
Wez
-
As regards the technical difficulties, once again I point anyone to the copious reading (I don't mean the political spin or the counter spin of those involved) on the mater it was clearly years away from operational service - the most optimistic being 1970/1.
Marty...
Regardless of which persuasion of governement that cancelled it (if you read the history of the times we as a nation were living on extended credit and were looking both east and west to extend those lines of credit even further to avoid the devaluation of the pound which finally came in the early 1970's so we would have had to appease either the Americans or Russians or both to get that credit), the fact remains, it was a travesty.
1970/71 is still 15 years ahead of any aircraft with similar capability merely in terms of capability (e.g. Tonka GR.1A's with the linescan capability). In the meantime the analogue, mini-valve technology within the TSR.2 would have been upgraded with modern digital systems that would have taken up less space and provided greater capability that would have kept the aircraft in the fore-front twenty years later.
It's a shame we never got to find out and I think that's why it's still held with great affection and esteem.
Regards
Wez
-
Thanks all for your replies - it looks as though I shall have to whittle some exhaust shrouds out of purest plastic
But then again, maybe an enterprising white metal or resin manufacturer may take pity upon us
Here's hoping!
Wez
-
As the others have said, this nose is in the Tamiya kit and the Airfix NF30 kit. THe airfix kit contains the correct 2 stage merlins and also all the various exhaust configurations.
My personal preference is for the Airfix kit, it may be old but it is dimensionally more accurate, however, the nose is a bit of a pain to fit and the 2 stage merlin nacelles need some work to improve the shape a litte and sharpen up some detail.
You do get everything in one box, which is always useful.
Bob,
Is this the 1/72nd or 1/48th Mossie? I'm looking at 1/72nd.
Wez
-
I think you're referring to the semi-louvred exhaust shroud, there is a good photo on page 14 of the 'In Action' book, another not quite so good photo on page 16 and the drawing on page 15 that unfortunately would've been better at a larger scale.
peebeep
Yup, that's the babies (just looked at the In Action book), the pictures give me a vague idea - I'd prefer a drawing (engineering first, scale second).
Quite taken by the grey over black scheme of the 199 Sqn NF36 in the colour section of the In Action book.
Regards
Wez
-
Wez, I stand to be corrected, but I think the Bull nose was universal and at least one of my references states this. The images I have seen of the Tam XIII suggest that it comes with the Bull nose rather than Thimble nose. The various incarnations of the Airfix Mosquito in 1/48 and 1/72 come with the Bull nose as does the 1/72 Matchbox kit.
With regards to engines, the two stage Merlin can be found in 1/48 with Airfix kits or the old Matchbox kit in 1/72, although the latter doesn't have the shrouds you refer to. Not sure about the Airfix. Other than that you will need to look for resin replacements - come in Neil 'Mr Paragon'!
If you can find a copy then Mosquito in Action Part 2 has good drawings, sketches and photos. I would think the Modellers Datafile has good info but this is as rare as rocking horse poo.
peebeep
Thanks, I think you're right in terns of shape, the Bullnose was universal however, I've seen pictures of post-war Mossies with a clear radome that you can see the scanner through rather than a painted one - it was a clear one I thought I might need although I'm ready to be corrected!
I should have said that I'm looking at 1/72nd scale here, I have the Paragon two-stage Mossie donk's but I can't find any decent info on the 'zorst shrouds, when I looked at this before I think I found both references you quoted shall we say, suitably vague in this respect.
Thanks for the info.
Wez
-
The forthcoming sheet from Freightdog features an NF.36 - now I have the Tamiya NF.XIII(?), but, is that nose the same as the post-war radar nose or are they different? I had it in my head the nose on the later marks was more bulbous than the mid-war night fighters and a lot of them were in clear perspex too!
Can anyone verify this? If so, who makes a later NF nose (right now I'm guessing Aeroclub)? Also, does anybody make the exhaust shrouds applicable to these later Mossies or can point me in the direction of a decent set of plans and photgraphs so I can whittle my own?
TIA
Regards
Wez
-
Oh Bugger!
Firstly let me fifth or sixth what Bex said.
Secondly, I'm gonna have start saving for another 12 1/72nd scale Lightnings on top of the 70 I currently need to match the real life colour schemes - gonna hve to find a bigger house! Better not tell my wife why we need to move - she's a finance manager in real life as well as at home, she'll veto it! Bugger, bugger, bugg...
Wez
-
I'll have stick to some of the new 1/72nd Lightning kits. All these 1/32nd kits are simply too big to put anywhwere once they're built.
Paul Harrison
So will I but I've calculated I'll need at least 70 kits to cover all the marking options I currently have - that includes T-Bird conversions and export models!
Somehow I think 70 1/72nd scale kits would take up a bit more room thean the half a dozen or so 1/32nd scale kits I'd like!
Regards
Wez
-
Unfortunately, the RAF roundels in mine are off centre!
Looks like I'll be building the Singaporean jet too!
Unless those lovely folk at Model Alliance or Xtradecal would like to come to our aid with a JP/Strikemaster sheet???
Cheers,
Rob M.
I've got one from when it was first released - the roundels were off centre then too!
Definitely like the look of the Singapore jet though!
Regards
Wez
-
My first thought was Meteor TT.8 conversion (and was beaten to the drop by a cackin' interweb connection).
My later thoughts are the same, why interfere with the ventral tank drop mechanism?
Still think it's a Meteor TT addition regardless of the 2 Sqn photy (they'd still need to practice AA gunnery regardless)
Regards
Wez
-
This just keeps getting better and better!
Brilliant profiles Richard, interesting to see another variation on the theme.
Glad the information on the Wokkas was useful.
Looking forwards to the next instalment.
Keep up the good work!
Wez
-
There's a picture - only one, on Cybermodeller, it looks silver paint to me.
Follow the link to the F5A/B page, there's another link to the picture of the Phillipines jet...
Cybermodeller Freedom Fighter link
HTH
Wez
-
With the forthcoming bevy of Lightnings being issued - I got me a thinking about a representative line-up of all marks with a full range of squadron markings - and here's what I came up with initially......
F1 - 74 Sqn, F1a - 56 Sqn, F2 - 19 Sqn, F2a - 92 Sqn, F3 - 29 Sqn, F3a - 5 Sqn, F6 - 11 Sqn; Hopefully someone will bring out some T-bird conversions so we can have a T4 of 111 Sqn and a T5 of 23 Sqn.......
Then that leaves the second line units.....!!!
Bill,
I'd go for 92 as the F2 - the arrowhead marking they used in that scheme was far more attractive than the chequerboard they used later and 23 for the F3a (white fin)! As for the F3 surely 111Sqn (close call between that and 56). So many choices!
Regards
Wez
-
Absolutely!! I have all of my Modeldecal sets ready for action - and am eagerly awaiting MPM's F3 (I shall be converting a few of those back into F1/F1a/F2 guise!!) - I wonder if Aeroclub will re-issue their T4/5 conversion set??????
Aren't Trumpy doing some early mark Lighnings too - Hannants are certainly showing them as future releases.
Regards
Wez
-
See my post above Wez.......
Thanks Bill for the extra detail, I had to go and rummage in the cellar for the gen - didn't think of using the interweb!
Personally, I think all of the aircraft painted up for the anniversary make interesting and valid schemes.
Bring on the 72nd scale kits - that's what I say!
Regards
Wez
, and I'd say it's pretty much impossible to correct it either way (it just gets too messy)!
I might just have opened another can of worms...
515 Squadron Moonshine Defiants
in Aircraft WWII
Posted
At a guess I'd say it folded flush either controlled by a lever and lock or Bowden cable and latch, the aerial cable would probably have been kept taught by a spring tensioning mechanism - wouldn't want it flappin' about now would you?
Wez