canberra kid

I may have something along those lines Tony 🤔😎 John

Hi Steve, Sorry about the links, photo bucket did the dirty on me by starting to charge for hosting images and my web site went a similar way! If there is anything specific you would like to see let me know and I'll repost them. John

That's good to hear, Vol.2 goes into the in's and out's of the airframe. John

If you need to brush up on your Canberra's there is always the two volume work that me and Ken Delve have just published, also I'm in the early stages of a book for modelers on the B.2 T.4. John

Very good they are too! Just what you need if you are building an early B.2, T.4.

A B.57 Canberra tailplain is a good replacement. It's one of the few parts that Martin didn't mess with too much, apart from adding some aerodynamic 'improvements' but that's a diferant story. John

They are too long in span, correcting them shouldn't be too difficult, though I must confess I've never done it on the ones I've built. John

This is the T,5 if it helps? John

This may help? John

Thanks for the link @Giorgio N some interesting info there. John

John

Italeri must have a problem converting imperial to metric system as they also screwed up the B.57 Canberra. John

As far as I know no Stairmaster had sidewinders. John

If you need any detailed info or drawings/photos let me know. John

Is it the 1/48 kit? The Mechanics Inc. seat ( the one with the arms rest) then they aren't too bad out of the box, the ESCAPAC seat is not so good, Aroclub did a very good replacement, but I suspect that is long gone now, so a resin seat for an A.4 or A.7 would do at a pinch, it would be far better than the kit one. Which Canberra are you planning on building? John

It depends how deep you want to go into fixing whats wrong with the Airfix Martin Canberra B.57. much of the kit is wrong in some way or another! John

I'd say so, 60 years old and still doing work for the government and military John

General Dynamics WB.57F

Looks good to me. Well done. John

The dimensions were the same though, as they were converted tip tanks. I was going to suggest the chaff podsbut didn't want to coud te issue. John

Steve, you're right there is a flat bit just outboard of the nacelle on the trailing edge which shouldn't be there, but the wing chord at that point is correct at 19' it is also correct at the theoretical tip at 6'6". The CA wing is only 18'6" in chord, but correct at the theoretical tip. The CA wing has a better shape for the wing tip though. I too await the arrival of the next generation of accurate state of the art Canberra! John

Does this help? John

True Dennis, but as a percentage of time flown it wasn't very often, even more so towards the twilight years. John

The Airfix tanks are OK, just lacking in detail, you need to add the filler cap external cables for the nav light on the tip. The PR.9 didn't used tanks very often so you could use the ones in that kit for your T.17. As they come in the PR.9 kit they are not quite right for a PR.9 anyway, as the should have an adaptor plate that accommodates the diferant wing contour on the 9 where the tank sit. If you do need or want another set for your 9 let me know I have a few! John

I've been working on my PR.9 today too, well part of it 😎 John