Jump to content

As a result of the close-down of the UK by the British Government last night, we have made all the Buy/Sell areas read-only until we open back up again, so please have a look at the announcement linked here.

This site uses cookies! Learn More

This site uses cookies!

You can find a list of those cookies here: mysite.com/cookies

By continuing to use this site, you agree to allow us to store cookies on your computer. :)

HBBates

Members
  • Content Count

    177
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by HBBates

  1. While not directly antenna related I did do some details notes about spine detail http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd135/humebates/SpinedetailCurtissH81TomahawkRAFAVGChinaversions.jpg
  2. If doing a P40cu from a P40B/C the main problem is the rear left glass doed not have the two round opening for gas and oil fill that the P40B/C has.....you can't fill you have to create a new glass piece .. you then have to scribe the new fuel, oil and hydraulic fill doors on the fuselage Notes the on P36vs P40cu vs P40B/C If kit makers would just do the rear glass with the frame then the could do glass inserts for the P40cu and P40B/C.. and then have the P40cu fuselage fuel door as a"fill" in if doing a P40B/C.. could get whole other version out of it
  3. The wing root fairing was replaceable so. doesn't necessarily correspond as a given that an early product aircraft would have it entire life The early product aircraft that may of left the factory with the smaller original root fairing could (and would) have the later larger fairing fitted... The larger fairing was a needed aerodynamic fix If you at photod of early cu you will see some retrofitted with the larger one than you can see it by the mismatch panels Dana Bell saw the smaller fairing in photos of the early cu and then did the research to find the documentation. .. If I recall it was a fix for a stall issue So the serial number is not a predictor of seeing the smaller versus larger fairing...it's the time of the photo.
  4. Hello all A few years back I got know one of the major P40 /Tomahawks rebuilder and got to go through his recovered parts pile.(Two cargo containers worth of recovered parts and skins. Photos above are some of the parts that we pulled out into the sunlight so I could photograph) So I did get to see in person the skins of one of the Tomahawks, recovered from Russia some years back. It was in the Curtiss applied "RAF paint". I also got small samples of the skins in the Dark Earth, Dark Green and, Sky ... Bottom line.. in person ...to me.. the underside color on a large surface clearly looks like the du pont sky color with the green tinge to it ( That's allowing for the sky color was quite oxidize so much so that it was rubbing off on my jeans and I came home with du pont sky all over my pants...so from first hand knowledge including trying to wash that paint out of my pants ...it not straight gray it does have a green to it
  5. To my knowledge the early Tomahawks I did not use the roundback seat..its possable but i would have to see a photo The point of the "square back seat" seem was to be genric seat that would accommodate Brit seatpack parachute and French backpack parachutes..(the flat square seatback fits a backpack parachute better then a round curved seat back..that the point of a flat square seatback...also note that the squareback seat ..seatpan is also unique with and indentation in the bottom and bump out on the left with leather lining to meet British requirements for their seat pack parachutes...) You see the square back seat used on Tomahawk, Mustang, Buffalo, Harvard and Yale ..its actually a very common seat..they are still around on today on warbirds today (Harvard and Yale trainers, the EAA XP51 Mustang ) Now before the square back seat... on Hawk 75's sold to France you do see the US type round back seats... modify a bit for the French..so I would not be really surprised to see it in early Tomahawks from the French order..but I can not recall seeing one I've always suspected the square back seat originated with the Anglo-French Purchasing Board Set up in North America in 39 for the British and French to coordinate common buying of war material in north america .. Hence a common aircraft seat that fit both British and French requirements
  6. I'll on the subject of the Aleutian P40 I came across a photograph sometime back that showed at least one with a real strange anomaly that have never been able to figure out, which is the circular hatch in the rear right glass ..
  7. Here is a photo of Humbrol paint tins next to Tomahawk skin samples I had Note the "sky" skin (it was from the stabilizer) that we cut the sample from, when seen in person, did have a slight green tint to the gray ..the photo of the sample did not catch this These samples came from a Tomahawk recovered in deep in Russian and had be exposed to the weather for many years
  8. You want the squareback for a Tomahawk H-81 https://www.ultracast.ca/product-p/ult48257.htm
  9. Color photo of a Tomahawk under construction see the dark green seat on the left wing..the squareback seats in the Tomahawk are the same seats used in export Harvard's and Yales..(also the same seat in early Raf Mustangs and Buffaloes but thoses seem to be silver) .if look over on warbird exchange you can see modern color pictures of these same seats from Harvards and Yales in this same kind of dark green The squarebackseat seemed to be a generic design for US export aircraft that was developed to fit both British seat pack parachutes and French backpack parachutes systems note the seat does not match the cockpit color which was a dupont variation of RAF cockpit green ( ive seen recovered Tomahawks cockpit parts so I know what color it was and its not the same as US P40..)
  10. If you can get a scan of that manual that would be outstanding!... thank you Hume
  11. If you can in any way find out about possibility of geting a digital scan copy I've been really grateful and pay you for it. When I contact them some years back they said they couldn't do that.
  12. Curtiss on the P40 just like North American on the P51 uses different seat makers... Now the point of the square or flat back seat was to allow for the use of a backpack type or seatpack type parachute vs the roundback seat that was really for seatpack type parachute only Also note there are different squareback seats used The squareback seats used in RAF "longnose" Tomahawks and Mustang mk1 are not the same as use in RAF "shortnose" Kittyhawks/P40 and Mustang mkIII/ Merlin P-51 Below are samples of "shortnose" P-40 seats direct from Curtiss maintenance manuals ... Note the middle P40 squarback seat is near same as wood seat seen in the P51B/C (see Ultracast Mid Production Plywood P-51B/C seat photo and P51B seat photo at bottom) Many of these seats were made (or designed and farmed out for production during the war) by American Seating.. a company still around http://www.americanseating.com/ ---------- "Shortnose" P40/Kittyhawk seats ============================= P51 Seats
  13. Wel im looking at doing a US P40cu,with original tail wheel doors , a B with doors removed and a C with extended doors then an RAF Tomahawk I and RAF Tomahawk II, and 2 AVG Tomahawk.. early and the later when absorbed into the USAF.with the dark neutral Grey belly repaint and of course a couple different Russia Tomahawks Then do some P 36, hawk 75 conversion R1830 and R 1820....and the fixed gear China demonstrated
  14. Question Are any of the UK members anywhere near the Imperial War Museum... they do have in the collection an original Curtiss H81a2 Tomahawk service manual ..its quite detailed with photos and blueprint drawings...I only have a scan of a few pages.. that gunsight sightline drawing is one
  15. Thanks I was looking for that gunsight drawing that comes straight from the H81 Tomahawk manual
  16. Ok...i see that now.. i did see that in a few earlier photos but I thought it was just maybe it was a molding flaw They did seem to somtimes confuse rivet lines and panal lines on the blueprints.. at least we know they we're looking at the blueprints ..
  17. Some other quick notes... lower cowl seam (so same as kit lower cowl seam) ...and ...Piano hinge line on the wing gun hatches (needs to added on kit I think) Also the under left wing air temp probe (on US P-40's only) Also on the Tomahawk the is a round hatch on the right side of the engine cowl.. it sometime left off in the field Round hatch left off ( just above wing root fillet ) Round hatch just aft of "smile lines" ( again just above wing root fillet ) (Note again Lower cowl single center line seam ) Round hatch (again just above wing root fillet) (note on bottom photo.. disregard lower cowl "cheek seam".. this incorrect on the restoration copying later short nose P-40 cowls.. long nose cowl should only have single centerline seam as shown above) Final Note .. the "kink" in the Gun cowl to Engine cowl
  18. Sorry not having better info right now.. I do no have my files right now .. just gabbing thing I had in my photobucket For the Tomahawk I I think the main thing you need to look to at this scale is the antenna mast Below are some notes an spine detail .. for the RAF Tomahawk .. note the little blister light.. the same opening is patched over on the AVG Tomahawks
  19. RAF gunsite Im doing this blind because I do not have the kit... but in looking at the instruction I do not see an RAF gun site included Here are some incomplete notes By the way.. note the grab bar on top of windscreen And note armor glass is it mounted straight on RAF AVG Tomahawks But armor glass is at an angle to right on US P-40 due to gun-sight reflector mounted on windscreen glass (see below) US P-40 floor mounted gun site..(reflector is on the windscreen glass) US P-40 gun-sight reflector mounted on windscreen glass Armor glass (center photo) is mounted at angle to right due to gun-sight reflector
  20. Tbolt what are you looking for? this seam between the upper and lower fuselage its common to H75,81 &87 (P36 & early late P40)?
  21. Really people are upset because the aileron are not separate??!! That's almost like a man dying of thirst bitching cuz he didn't get ice in his drink... hey I wanted it too but hardly a deal-breaker it a 5 minute job to seperate.. in fact its separate from the top wings so it's only the bottom The Hasegawa P-40 does not separate ailerons either and it got rib detail error in it ailerons to boot... hell most the modern Japanese kits still don't have all separate controls Trumpeters separate surface is because it scaled down from their 1/32 kit I'll take a correct wing shape over separate control surfaces any day Trumpeters wing and aileron shape is a mess along with the all the other control services elevators, stabilizers, and rudder being a shape mess
  22. I definitely wanted the aileron's to be separate ...but it not that hard to remove..I just do scribe and break The P40 aileron's are slotted and have a quite distinctive gap on the underside you can see through Fyi on the kit left aileron there's an inset trim tab and right and external ground set tab That mostly applies just to US P40bc. RAF Tomahawk did not have..then had external ground set tabs on both aileron's.... AVG Tomahawks seem to be a mix of some with two external tab and some with the right external ground set and right inset
  23. Yep.. the top on the rudder on the right side should not have that hinge but that's no big deal it can be removed... and the right is correct in that access hatch for the trim tab linkage access...
  24. Crap I just noticed in your photo of a rudder it looks like the trim tab is not scribe there.. FYI can you show the other(right) side of the rudder I want to see if they got the details correct the early P40 different on that side of the rudder vs the the later P40
×
×
  • Create New...