[1/32 Tamyia Corsair Birdcage]

Not sure of the logic of this..Tamiya is a Japanese company and I think first it (rightfully so) caters to the home market

So after first a Zero then Spitfire, then a Mustang what should them make? A german subject? another european subject?

I think a pacific theater subject/star has a lot more appeal to the Japanese market

[Help needed with Airfix P-40]

not wanting to be contrary, but rather than glass seams, i believe those to be metal rods which are part of the interior supports for the armored glass between the gunsight and the fixed windscreen/canopy. early spitfires likewise had a similar structure before the glass armor became an exterior part of the canopy retained by the actual framing.

That P36/ Early P40 wind screen is one piece of curved Plexiglas is a common misperception

The P36/H75 & Early P40/H81/Tomahawk has a wind screen made from three pieces of laminated "safety" glass like you have in your car windshield ..the three pieces have a frameless seam between then that is filled with cauk in a frameless "butt joint...there are medal rod behind the the glass to hold the top and bottom frame together and clamp the three glass pieces in place

I’ve confirmed this from various sources

First I wrote the USAF museum about their P36... they confirmed that wind screen as I describe above

Then there are the PILOT'S NOTES TOMAHAWK I that can be found at http://www.warbirdforum.com/manual.htm

"2. The cockpit is totally enclosed. The windscreen is in three sections of laminated glass and behind the windscreen there is a section of 1-1/2 inch glass for protection from gunfire. "

Finally if you go to YouTube you can see a film that show the P36 wind screen being built and get a quick shot that shows it is three pieces of glass

See "Curtiss-Wright Production Soldier building the P-36 Hawk"

Go to the 6:40 mark to 6:50 mark

[Help needed with Airfix P-40]

Cheers Roy thought that would be the case, another problem with the kit is that if your building an RAF version the canopy isnt correct it shouldnt have any frames on the front part of the canopy.

Regards Steve

There no diff in the canopy in the RAF Tomahawk, US P40B/C and AVG H81 other then the mirror and a sometime RAF field mod of flat armored glass replacing the center curved glass (the real windscreen is 3 peices in a framless "buttjoint" ..see photos)

Here is a quick list of fixes for the Airfix kit

=========================

Fuslage: There is a panal line missing on the left side just above the radio hatch (See right side that has correct) the radio hatch is wrong / too small, at the very least remover the little triangle clips at the bottom corners (it looks like the kit has a later P40 D-N hatch)

The kit rudder also needs minor correction in the right side service hatch needs to be moved (see photos) (again it lool like the kit has a later P40 D-N setup)

Wing: Top wing gun ammo doors need to be added and some extra panal lines removed...if doing a Tomahawk remove the inset trim tab on the left aileron and go to a fixed tab like the right aileron...Its fine for a P40B/C...

Also the wing tips needs to have the tip wash out added (just bent the tips up at the tip pannel line outboard of the ailerons so when viewed from the front the top of the tip seems level with the wing top and the bottoms seem to angle up to give the tip a "washout" look)

And the kit seat is fine for a P40B/C but if doing a Tomahawk or AVG H-81 you need the square back type seat

The nose gun look a little too close together..they should be a scale 18in apart from the center of the gun barrels

=====================

[Idle thought - Airfix P-40 in to P-36/Hawk 75?]

Hi...it is doable but a lot of work

The basic wing and fuslage is the same but the thing is there are a lot of scabed on faring that differ..(one of my gripes when I wrote that article back in 2006 was people taking one of the things Trumpeter's P40 had right, the belly faring, and "correcting it' to the wrong P36 type belly faring seen in the old Monogram 1/48 P40 B )

So

Fuslage: New nose to firewall...new wing root faring to firewall, minor mods to canopy and new rear windows, new horizontal stabilizers and elevators, new bulged tail wheel faring

Wing: All new belly faring, new landing gear, landing gear doors, smaller round wheelwells.. and changed panal lines in wheelwell area

Also remove the inset trim tab on the left aileron and go to a fixed tab like the right aileron.. and move fuslage hand hold back a bit (see photos)

This get you to a later 4 wing gun Hawk 75...If you want a P36 or early Hawk 75 the fuslage panal lines differ

FYI the 1/72 Airfix Tomahawk/P40 can also use some general fixes (they also apply to a Hawk 75/P36)

Fuslage: There is a panal line missing on the left side just above the radio hatch (See right side that has correct) the radio hatch is wrong / too small, at the very least remover the little triangle clips at the bottom corners (it looks like the kit has a later P40 D-N hatch)

The kit rudder also needs minor correction in the right side service hatch needs to be moved (see photos) (again it lool like the kit has a later P40 D-N setup)

Wing: Top wing gun ammo doors need to be added and some extra panal lines removed...if doing a Tomahawk remove the inset trim tab on the left aileron and go to a fixed tab like the right aileron...Its fine for a P40B/C...

Also the wing tips needs to have the tip wash out added (just bent the tips up at the tip pannel line outboard of the ailerons so when viewed from the front the top of the tip seems level with the wing top and the bottoms seem to angle up to give the tip a "washout" look)

And the kit seat is fine for a P40B/C but if doing a Tomahawk or AVG H-81 you need the square back type seat

The nose gun look a little too close together..they should be a scale 18in apart from the center of the gun barrels

There is a lot of other minor details you can added that you can see in my old article

=======================

Some old notes on H-75 P36 vs H-81 P40

==============================

Tomahawk /Export H-81 "AVG" seat (vs "round back" P40 seat in Airfix 1/72 kit)

Note Black leather parachute ripcord anti chafing padding and bump outs in seat bottom

This is an UK req, same padding and bump outs seen Spitfire and Hurricane seats in same time frame

Note the "squarback seat" is also seen in export Buffalo's and RAF Mustangs Mk1, UK Yale & French NA-64 and UK Harvard trainers

The "squarback seat" orgins seem to go back to a common UK / French req to US aircraft makers, the back of the squarback fits a French backpack parachute, the seat bottom fits a UK seatpack parachute...

The squarback seat itself seem to be just a mod of the common US "round back" fighter seat of the time ...

I belive but can not prove both seats "Roundback" and "Squareback" designs were done by same US company "American Seating" they a major prewar speciality seating designer / maker and US goverment contracter ..and still in business today. Later "American Seating" farmed these out to subcontract makes. One the subcontract may have Slick Johnson then a prewar furniture maker in the same area as "American Seating" ,Slick Johnson they later evolved this in to the Slick Johnson seat seen in the P51 but this is straying off into 'WAS" =Wild bottom Speculation, on my part:>

[RAF Kittyhawks North Africa 1942]

I've got this nagging doubt about the seats, the seat harnesses would have been changed for Sutton Harnesses, my doubt about the seat refers to rounded or square tops to the seat backs (e.g. the bit behind the shoulders), although this may only apply to Tomahawks not Kittyhawks. I'm away from my references right now and won't be able to check for a while but hopefully, this will prompt somebody else to come forward with the gen.

Radios would have been changed for British ones with a different control unit in the cockpit but you'll probably be able to get away with that.

Wez

The medal square top seat is only in the Tomahawks ...not Kittyhawks...on a Kittyhawk go with the roundtop

There is however some evidence in the Curtiss manual of a wooden square top similar to what was seen in Mustang, used in some later P40's

(Both drawings below came from a Curtiss P40 Parts manual)

[Polish roundels - why asymmetrical?]

I'm doing a small Polish collection (well lets face it, they didn't have a huge range of planes !) and am intrigued by the asymmetrical placement of the rondels (squaredels?) on the upper wings. Why? So you can tell which way the plane is going? Easy recognition?

Paul

I would guess same reason the US used just one star per wing...so there no center beween to equal spaced rondels to aim at

[British aircarft finish specifications]

It would be logical to paint the wheel hubs of P-40 with underside colour, as they were nothing else as underside surface in the end. American version of Sky in this case IIRC.

In fact from photos taken at the same time at the Curtiss factory, the wheel hubs of US Army P-40's were a green (looks to be a green cromate same as the wheel well) vs the H81 Tomahawks ...as that side of the hub was "UP" facing the well roof and not seen went the gear was retracted, the color would not be seen as part of the underside surface

[British aircarft finish specifications]

.... As an example, early Spitfires had silver specified for the general interior colour (apart from the cockpit, of course,) but some time later (date not yet known, but around 1945) this changed to green, hence a recently-seen 22 with green wheel wells.

Edgar

Edgar...in regardes to silver specified for the general interior colour, did this apply to all RAF fighter type in the 40-41 time frame?

Reason I ask, there has be an ongoing question over on Hyperscale in regards to what was the Tomahawk wheel wells color and in looking at some Curtis factory photos it would seem silver would fit

In the photo below...in the b/w photo below showing the gear door... while you can never be sure with a b/w photo...it does look a lot like silver paint

In the color photo the wheel hub is clearly silver

And finaly in the lowel color photo showing overspray on the wing around the wheel fairing...while I still think this is the gray underwing camo color ... it could again be silver

So if silver was the know RAF spec at the time for wheel wells it would seem to fit with what is seen in the photos

[Interesting Tomahawk photos]

Thanks to Mr Haselden, I had an explore round the IWM site for interesting pics. Found these Tomahawk photos.

One of interest is this shot of the Camera installation:

http://beta.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/205212751

Here in the Camera bay open photo on the right ...with a partial closeup photo on the left of the Camera bay door closed... it's a poor photo ...but you can get and idea of the door detail

[RAF P-40B Control Column]

Hi Edgar great find...thanks

In the iwmcollections Tomahawk photo you can ever see the Sutton harnesses so its a very safe bet

have you come across anything on cockpit colors?

An this point im very inclined to go with Nick Millman's Du-Pont 71-036 reinforced by the color Google life P40/Tomakawks photos

However these also seem to show the upper armor plate as "yellow ZC"... also from iwmcollections cockpit photo and the handbook photo you posted..the support bar below the panal and rudder pedal look to be the lighter "yellow ZC"

And from my post above the color photo of the seat (upper far right) that looks to be a darker green then Du-Pont 71-036 ..almost the same as the exterior camo "Dark Green" used on the Tomahawk...odd

So at this point my Tomahawk (and AVG "Flying Tigers") cockpit colors are

overall Du-Pont 71-036

upper armor plate, support bar below the front panal & rudder pedals "yellow ZC"

headrest Black

Seat exterior camo "Dark Green"

Yes I know it out side the conventional thinking and its all subject to change depending on new info

[RAF P-40B Control Column]

It was a stick ....in all Curtiss H81/P40/Tomahawk....but the Seat was diffrent in the P40 vs the Tomahawk ..the airfix kit has the US P40 type seat

http://www.freewebs.com/p40-tomahawk/

=========================

DESCRIPTION:

Tomahawk Mark IIB, AK184: cockpit interior, port side. Photograph taken at Air Service Training Ltd, Hamble Hampshire.

http://www.iwmcollections.org.uk/dbtw-wpd/...mp;FG=0&QS=

[American Volunteer Group P-40 Tomahawk colours?]

FYI if any one had see these AVG Tomahawk photos before

http://www.criticalpast.com/video/65675040...ian-city-harbor

[American Volunteer Group P-40 Tomahawk colours?]

Hume, have you noticed that a whiteish-grey (or perhaps aluminised) paint was applied on undercarriage components? The area around the fairing appears to be similar. The IWM colour photograph is interesting because the undercarriage leg and wheel hub are painted blue, but it is not the same blue as the Azure under surface - instead a slightly greenish or turquoise blue.

Regards

Nick

Hmmm that a thought If you look at the google life P40 /Tomahawk color photos sets you do see all the unpainted aircraft on the ramp look to have wheel hub covers in a silver paint...the US Army painted one all have green painted wheel hub covers....

[American Volunteer Group P-40 Tomahawk colours?]

Construction photos show that the undercarriage was assembled prior to major component painting so I suspect this area was finished in a protective coating rather than the external camo finish. I doubt that it was re-painted which would have been difficult with all the undercart gubbins in place.

Hi Nick

That what just keeps bugging me in the second photo, I would expect to see a protective coating (a cromate green/yellow of some kind) peeking out from around the gear faring on the wing but you don't, not a bit of cromate green/yellow (on the gear faring yes but not on the lower wing skin)

But there is clearly some color difference peeking out from around the gear faring (a gray looking color) that different than the majority of the medal on the unpainted wing and so that what I would expect to see on the wing skin inside the faring

Like you said "re-painted which would have been difficult with all the undercart gubbins in place" so do your final finish first of the wing skin where the faring and gear will go, then put the gear and faring in place after (and no worry about overspray outside the area the faring will go as it get painted over later)

The other idea that the "gray looking color" around the gear faring is just medal scrubed of it protective coating just around that area...why would you do that for that one area? that unpainted wing has protective coating and paint overspray from prefinish all over it, look around the gun covers in the front of the wing ..that looks be prefinish overspray of the camo green????

The second photo in my Post #27 remind me of a model in progress you also see prefinish overspray all over it till it done

[American Volunteer Group P-40 Tomahawk colours?]

Hi Nick

On a side note to my post above ...wheel well finish color

The P40 was some what diffrent in it landing gear set up in that you had a opening in the wing for only the wheel but the gear strut was on the outer wing skin then had a bolt on gear faring to cover it

In my post above, from what is seen in the photos, I speculate that:

US Army spec for the P40, the wheel well opening in the wing and area ON the outer wing skin in and under the bolt on landing gear faring is to be painted in a chromate

But

UK (or just Curtiss' own) spec for the Tomahawk, the wheel well opening in the wing is to be painted in a chromate but the the outer wing skin in and under the bolt on landing gear faring will be paint in underside camo color like the rest of the underside

Do you know of an doc to support that idea because as a modeler what area gets painted what (a chromate vs a camo color) is something to pin down

[British Camo Rubber masks]

Edgar...On your drawings for coverting formats ...have you downloaded gimp http://www.gimp.org/ ...its a great FREE/shareware photo/paint program

[American Volunteer Group P-40 Tomahawk colours?]

Question: Have you read Terrill Clements "American Volunteer Group Colours and markings. It was published by Osprey but was originally privately published research.

Yes, a few years back

[American Volunteer Group P-40 Tomahawk colours?]

Hello Kari your point about "All aluminum is not equal" is valid and I assume in regards to my second post above

However it begs the point ....

If you see in the first photo chromate green paint on the wing where the bolt on landing gear faring will go...

Why in the second photo do you see a "gray" on the wing around where the bolt on landing gear faring is? ....

That "gray" is either aluminum cleaned of all overspray paint and or coating

Or a "gray" paint sprayed on before the bolt on landing gear faring is put in place...

So for what logical reason would you bother to scrub that small one area around the landing gear faring of any paint/coating when it going to get painted over with the underside camo paint anyway like the rest of the wing you did not bother to scrub of paint and or coating?

I would say the more logically idea is it a simple overspray of "gray" paint for the under wing skin in and underwhere the landing gear faring will go

So occam's razor whats the more simple …over sprayed "gray" painted on , or paint/coating scrubbed off?

[American Volunteer Group P-40 Tomahawk colours?]

As for what color was the underside of the Tomahawk....Ive presented this before and I know many disagree but I just ask you take a second look

---First Photo

Above in the first photo you see a wing being built…note the chromate green already pre painted on the wing where the landing gearing faring will go (and sprayed past where the landing gear faring will go )…logical because this would be inside the landing gearing faring area so easier to paint now

---Second photo

Now look at this second photo… note the “gray” color around wing where the landing gearing faring is…

Now Dana Bell and others were of the opinion that gray is really natural medal scrubbed of it protective coating ….

But in the context on the first photo with the pre painted chromate green and overspray is that logical?…

I would expect to see the final inner landing gearing paint spray…

The last thing you would want under the edge of the landing gearing faring on the wing skin is raw unprotected medal

Why would you srub off the overspray on the wing in that one area that going to get painted over with the final under wing final color…

Yet leave yellow chromate on the landing gear faring itself and also the other overspray you see on the wing?

Ok so if that gray area is overspray paint not scrubbed natural medal why is it not chromate green like the first photo?

OK here is my theory /interpretation of these two photos…

The first wing with the chromate green already pre painted this is for a P40 and the US spec is this area on wing skin in and under the bolt on landing gear faring is to be painted chromate green like a wheel well

However the second photo is not a P40 but a Tomahawk…(note the black and yellow tip prop and earth spinner) so what the color around the landing gear faring?

My guess is the UK spec for the Tomahawk is this area on wing skin in and under the bolt on landing gear faring is ruled to be “"under wing"” not “"wheel well"”

So this area on wing skin in and under the bolt on landing gear faring is pre painted in the RAF undewing camo color and the overspray you seen the second photo is the famous sky/gray

Any way it just a theroy

[American Volunteer Group P-40 Tomahawk colours?]

... The fact that US production was about raising issues at the end as opposed to the British method of oversight of the product through production. .... Or the fact that there were not enough individuals for British style oversight.

Hi all one thing on this... seems to be SOME British oversight of the Tomahawk production at the Curtiss factory ...note the button this man has on ...so is this a British goverment offical at Curtiss or a Curtiss employee working the British contract?

[American Radials - R1820 and R2600]

I have drawings from the 1941 ACCA Aircraft Yearbook and the Double Row Cyclone 14 appears to have slightly shorter stroke cylinders. You'll have to scale these to the right dims.

John

Hello does the ACCA Aircraft Yearbook have any simlar drawing of the P&W R1830 and

Allison V1710 C model (the long nose case) and Allison V1710 F model (the short nose case)with major dimensions?

[Strange clear blister dome RAF Curtiss H81 Tomahawk ? any ideas]

Here's a photo showing the Spitfire ident light, on the spine to the rear of the aerial mast on these MkV's.

Funny I was aware of that light on the Spitfire spine but just assumed it was a running light but the size is larger then a normal running light....any info on how the ident light system worked? was it just a light or could you flash code?

[Strange clear blister dome RAF Curtiss H81 Tomahawk ? any ideas]

Looks like an identity light similar to those seen on the spitfire.

I thought the "clear blister" up on the spine might be some type of ID light but it is far bigger then a normal running light.... does any one have a photo of a Spitfire fitted with something similar in shape, size and postion?...

Im posting the best phot I have of this to give a better idea

[Strange clear blister dome RAF Curtiss H81 Tomahawk ? any ideas]

Strange clear blister dome RAF Curtiss H81 Tomahawk ? any ideas

I posted this on Hyperscale but wanted to post here because the strange "clear blister dome" Im seeing on some RAF Tomahawks...any ideas?.... Fyi I have come across some Curtiss bluprints for the H81 "Tomahawk" showing both the TR9R & TR1133A radio installs

"New"(?)Spine detail Curtiss H81 Tomahawk (RAF & AVG China) versions

Hello all I just want to share some RAF & AVG Tomahawk detail notes I've been working on

FYI, this is just a quick and dirty work in progress that may change as more detail come to light

Most of the AVG Flying Tiger photo from a relatively new photo archive...San Diego Air & Space Museum , AVG/China Collection on Flickr

http://www.flickr.com/photos/sdasmarchives...57624587561232/

Also does anyone known what the clear blister dome (if it is clear) on the RAF Tomahawks is for?

[what is the difference between P-40D and E ( Kittyhawk I & IA )]

I knew you'd arrive- great stuff, Hume! Is the shape of the ammo access door still rectangular? I hate to complain, but your view cuts it off, and the overlay seems to have some distortion, making it look like the aft edge tapers. I would think that the length (span) of the door might be different, too?

Another thing I've observed is that the Ds often (by evidence of photos) seem to have smooth leading edges. I'm thinking that this is because those photographed were stateside or used for training, and therefore unarmed. I wonder how the gun fairings were attached, and how easy they would be to remove/ install?

One more question, since you're here: Does that manual (or do you) have general dimensions of the wing, suitable for getting the basic outline established? The drawings I've seen so far are not high-res enough to read the numbers.

bob

p.s. The mysterious 20mm cannon still needs resolving, at least in my own mind!

Na all I have is the two pages from the manual, in pdf and there is a lot of distortion in them... so what you see is the best ive got

===========FYI all thanks for these manual should got to "smeagol_to_others" over on www.ww2aircraft.net=============

check out

http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/other-mec...ual-7478-2.html