Jump to content

Troy Smith

Gold Member
  • Posts

    10,379
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Troy Smith

  1. This is an interesting article https://www.autoweek.com/car-life/classic-cars/a30763715/rolls-royce-vs-packard-who-built-a-better-merlin/ and this mentions some of it plus more https://www.key.aero/forum/historic-aviation/35732-packard-vs-rolls-royce Seems I was wrong in my statement about US bolt sizes though. One point, while it was possible to fit a Lanc with both RR% and Packard Merlins, I don't know if there was a policy of mixing Bi and B.III on a squadron, just for the practicalities of parts supply, which was the point of having B.I and B.III marks, in the same way a Spitfire IX and XVI are 'the same' apart from the engine fitted. Hopefully someone will have time to trawl through the Lancaster at War books, as I'm sure there are a few more snippets in there.
  2. AFAIK, RR and Packard Merlin's were not compatible, The Packard built ones use US Imperial decimal size bolts, which also meant the Packard tool kits were only of use with their engines. IIRC SOMEWHERE in one of the Lancaster at War books their is something about engine interchange ability, but I'm not about to try to find that right now....
  3. I think they are kinda of dark grey stick on strip with some kind of grit, basically like some very rough wet and dry paper, the Hurricane in Finland, basically untouched since 1943, may have some paint overspray, but note the matt finish and texture from here, which I didn't know had been posted and are a stunning series of images.. The plane is the photos went into storage in 1943, and internally is as was built. It's a 2nd Hawker batch Hurricane. , wi
  4. Again, best guess territory. note this yes, Gloster did, and later in the Battle, they didn't get repainted. But earlier, I think they did get repainted, and I think LK-A did.... why.... because of this note the wing in the foreground, with the badly flaking roundel, which is considerably lighter tone than LK-A in the background. Note the barely visible difference with the new fin flash. As the pre war colours are briight, I can see that if there was time a repaint would be done, The 87 sq photos were all taken by 'Watty' Watson, who was a keel photographer, the whose plane was LK-G, Some of this first Gloster batch were noted for also having paint that flaked off.... like LK-G, another couple more tatty Gloster paint flakers VY-H of 85 Sq July 1940 85 Squadron 58 by Сергей Кривицкий, on Flickr note the fresh paint chip on this, and the armourers are wearing gym shoes 85 Squadron 59 by Сергей Кривицкий, on Flickr This one though is Hawker if it's the same VY-K, P3408 IIRC 85 Squadron 68 by Сергей Кривицкий, on Flickr
  5. it is usually quoted as being A = even, B=odd, (or the otehr way round) ...which is fine and dandy until you start to get black out blocks in the serials.. this should explain Block 1/G, First Gloster Produced Block Serial Range P2535 - P2584 (50), P2614 - P2653 (40), P2672 - P2701 (30), P2713 - P2732 (20), P2751 - P2770 (20), P2792 - P2836 (45), P2854 - P2888 (35), P2900 - P2924 (25), P2946 - P2995 (50), P3020 - P3069 (50), P3080 - P3124 (45), P3140 - P3179 (40), P3200 - P3234 (35), P3250 - P3264 (15) - Total 500 You get the idea, the sequence in place goes even-even or odd-odd... I have been meaning to make a survey of P**** serials and note down if they just kept alternating on the production line or.... I did do this for a Spitfire project, you need to find a similar serial Hurricanes and see what happens.. this may help... D/P2569 , J/P2575 and X/P2647 seen better here all show A pattern. P2617 'as is' now shows the A pattern. this image https://www.airhistory.net/photo/8777/P2617 of P2617 in Training Command colours, so scheme when earmarked for preservation and put into storage, shows A. I'd suggest looking at the usual photo places and see what matches up, (i'm not about to go down that time worm hole myself right now) bear in mind AFAIK there are no photo of P2617 in the war, so you are already making a 'best guess' as to appearance. HTH
  6. For a Spitfire XII, yes, But for a Seafire XV/XVII, they are not bad, these are the Seafire XVII/17 at Yeovilton. And OP was asking about doing the Mk.XII warbird, using Searfire XV blades... Handy as this has made me aware of the different blades types.... Some useful image here of the Seafire XVII, which has a single stage Griffon as the Spitfire XII, useful for nose contours
  7. Look great Colin, surprised Ultracast never did one. One little detail, that scoop is on the wing fillet, not the cowl panel. There is also a hole in the centre of the lower cowl, and one otehr detail i forgot, none of the 1/48th kits get the air intake right, it has a fairing at the rear, very hard to see in wartime images unfortunately fantastic image here Hurri BBMF underside crop by losethekibble, on Flickr this is the Mk.IV in Birmingham, which has the fairing missing, Hawker Hurricane - P3395 Think Tank 052 by touluru, on Flickr Hawker Hurricane - P3395 Think Tank 093 by touluru, on Flickr the strips on the side of the radiator are wood, and were for the armour plate tub. It's a shame that this Mk.IV, which served with several squadrons is done out in faux BoB markings.... Hope of interest.
  8. some Italeri kits did, by accident, I have two of the Italeri boxing, one did, (as in both noses) the other didn't. I assume as they just bought in bagged kits from Academy. AFAIK, the Academy kits are what they say they are on the box. You now know what too look for. The prop detail is from memory. Your photos do show a more straight sided paddle blade prop.
  9. erm, a TBM-3 kit? The Academy kits are reboxes of the Accurate Minatures kits, who did a TBF/TBM-1 kit, and a TBM-3 kit Italeri also reboxed these. The TBM-3 has new nose parts as the cowling is different. it has an intake on the upper and lower lip, and different cowl flaps this for comparison is the TBF-1 kit IIRC they do not have the right prop, just reusing the TBF-1, the TBM had wider blades. I think same as later F4U-1 Corsair and F6F-5 Hellcats Apart from the cowl parts, and some alternate weapons sprues, the kits are the same. HTH
  10. I doubt it. It's a rebox of the SH Seafire XV kit. the blades look the same as the SH XII I as talking about the SH blades maybe needing reshaping for a Spitfire Mk.XII, not for a warbird using Seafire XV blades.....
  11. If small airframe details bother you, the Arma kit may need some tweaks to do this. (it build a P**** through W**** series Mk.I ) I don't recall seeing images of L2099. It's late, so I'm not about to go digging, but this may need and early curved lower edge windscreen, 5 spoke wheel and pole aerial, and late L**** series Hurricanes mix up metal and fabric wings.... Neat work on the Mustang too. cheers T
  12. LF363 and PZ865 did, the Canadian G-AWLW had standard exhausts The letters were tape, to allow easy changes.
  13. straight even gaps are easier to fill with plastic sheet, find right width, add to gap, and when glue set, trim with a sharp blade. Done carefully should need no sanding, Done with superglue you can do the job in minutes. if you don't have any plastic sheet, look at food packaging, as long as it will glue, it will work. I'll have to catch up with the thread fully later.
  14. Hmm. I take these are a water based acrylic? I know Vallejo are fragile, though I think get harder when fully 'cured' Do you use a primer? You can often find decent acrylic auto primers in a rattle can, in the UK I have used Halfords, not sure what you have in Canada, but it's a possible cheap way to get a tough primer which more fragile paint will stick to better, which is usually the problem. Standard Tamiya acrylic has a bit more 'bite' on plastic as well, so a thin coat of that can help. You might want to experiment by mixing in some of your Pledge clear coat, as if they are compatible, that may toughen it, may make it glossy but not quite a covering though, but since you gloss coat it anyway this may end up the same amount of coats. Hope some of these may help. cheers T
  15. fascinating.... I don't know I've seen a Sanger (ex Contrail?) Halifax finished. One point, your photos are very small, a good width here is about 1024, yours are saying width 285. There are options about what size in your photo host. cheers T
  16. I wasn't impressed by them. I've seen worse "matches" but these are not great compared to the RAF museum chips. That MMP Dark Earth look good in the pic in the last post though.
  17. Just for you Edward..... Not very typical of their sound... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_World_War_(band) you'll find their 2 Lp's online easily enough.. they might amuse, as they really were an oddity from the era...
  18. see http://www.daveswarbirds.com/bob/hurricane.htm Hurricane XII G-AWLW, brought in from Canada, on finals for Duxford. (photo by Tony Clarke via Aircraft Magazine) note that "F/H3422" is likely to be LF363 Hawker Hurricane IIc LF363 banks away from the camera. (This is the same aircraft as in the photo above this one.) Despite wearing full squadron codes and Polish insignia, the fighter is still adorned with Battle of France black and white undersides. Surely a slip up on behalf of the film's continuity department? (Photo from Peter Sargent, text from Robert J. Rudhall's "Battle of Britain Film - The Photo Album") I don't think that is a "Hurricane bullet spinner" of any kind, it's too big at the base, what it does resemble is this which is just a guess, but a type used in Canada, and or maybe a Spitfire unit Anyway, look forward to seeing this one progress Colin, and hope the ramblings have been of some interest or use. cheers T
  19. you can see the camo pattern just in front of the N ] which bloook to slope back, so B which matches this though logicallly the new nose would be fresher, and maybe not as standard. You probably have found this, but if not and for anyone else HTH
  20. That's either LF363, or PZ865, the Canadian Hurricane, had the unique Canadian spinner and Hamilton standard prop note also the blanking plate on cowling, another Canadian feature along with the radiator shape, which the Hobbycraft kit has. see https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235104429-canadian-hurricane-mkxii-some-detail-observations-and-questions/ neat project!
  21. Seems the prop is from a Seafire XV see https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235047794-spitfire-mk-xii/page/6/#elControls_3226995_menu "I started to collect a Mk XII kit together some years back. Starting with a dedicated Mk XII firewall frame five with data plate, auxiliary gearbox pick up points and short Griffon engine mount lugs I grafted on a A-A Mk V/IX fuselage kit. The lower carry through spars are Mk V with the four equal diameter bolts. Mk VIII wings will not fit due to the increased width of the spar booms and the increased diameter of the two inner bolts on the lower spar and boom. I selected a pair of Mk IX wings although Mk V would have serviced the requirement. For these wings I gathered a Mk Vc Trop radiator set. The Trop main radiator is correct and one inch deeper than the temperate Mk V. Oleos are from Mk V or early Mk IX…the spline type. Wheels & Brakes are late Mk V four spoke. Beggars cannot be choosers and a Mk IX tail unit is fitted although strictly speaking it should not have the extended horn on the elevator. Rudder is pointed Mk VIII/IX/XVI type and is correct. Engine and bearer assembly are from a Seafire XVII and the four blade propeller from a Seafire XV…a perfect fit. Top cowling will be a cut down Mk XIV item with a dummy bulge between the cam cover profiles to simulate the clearance on the early magneto. Fuel and oil tanks will be Seafire XVII which is a bit of a compromise. All cockpit furniture, front windscreen and canopy are late Mk V/IX. A bit of fun, scale 1:1, Serial number EN224, Code EB-L, Registration G-FXII. Could be flying by next year with a following wind." No, sorry, I can't. @gingerbob maybe able too, I suspect the answer to this would require some digging at Hendon museum library. It's the sort of detail the late Edgar Brooks may have had some information on. cheers T
  22. One point, having been thinking about prop blades, in reply to @Antti_K I think SH use the Seafire XV blades, and the Spitfire XII blades are not as wide at the base.. maybe the Airfix blades are not as bad as i thought, though, IIRC, they did then use them in their Seafire XVII kitA quick reveals them to be still too slim and the wrong shape. I used the blades in the Aeroclub XII conversion as guide when I tried to reshape them, it a lot easier removing some excess than it is to build up a too slim blade.... You can see the lean to port from the reduced gear leg pressure as well Both from here that has a load of Mk.XII photos https://www.destinationsjourney.com/historical-military-photographs/supermarine-spitfire-mk-xii/ HTH
  23. yes. The colour of the disc indicates what the blade is made of and covered with. https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/234918219-propeller-markings-on-spitfires-and-seafires/ "Regarding the markings within the coloured disc I can add that the Horden-Richmond Aircraft one shown in my first response above with the green disc and HRA text was made of Hydulignum with a Rotoloid covering and Armoured Sheath as identified by the disc and letters HRA. Jablo Propellors Ltd blades had pink discs while Horden-Richmond Aircraft Ltd blades had green ones, Rotol Airscrew Ltd blades had white while Yellow ones were seen on The Airscrew Company Ltd blades. The lettering within the disc would vary which would indicate the Material , Covering and Sheath of the blade so marked." the linked Key forum thread is broken, but I know I had posted the images here on occasion. OK, found it https://www.key.aero/forum/historic-aviation/103145-propeller-markings and https://www.key.aero/forum/historic-aviation/79363-questions-on-spitfire-propellers-merged Ah, OK. Now... believe it or not I'm not that interested in Spitfires, but you end up absorbing info on here by osmosis.... But, there are different spinner makers, and they used different locking systems. a Key type with one slot, and one with usually two screw between each blade. The only ones I have made a bit of a study are Hurricane spinners, https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235078582-hurricane-rotol-spinners-the-cm1-vs-es9-quest/ there did not seem to be any logic to what was fitted, except one type was used initially, and the other became more common. I'm not about to go on an image hunt, but I suspect you may find the same applies to Spitfires, this goes for blade types as well. It does on Hurricanes. I honestly don't know. I suspect neither do Airfix, and some of these are just 'generic' items, or appropriate to maybe the XIV of "XVIII" kit... Airfix - research. I raise you the wing stripes I mention above. The 2nd part may reveal some of these, especially regarding the two Mk.XII batches, EN*** and MB*** IIRC. Some of it maybe just that in reality it didn't matter particularly, say the type of blade or spinner used, and it was what was available. It's late, and I really don't want to go down the rabbit warren of image hunting and detail checking, say the above points, but the above may give you a few pointers as to how far you want test your sanity, I mean research facilities and abilities.... pidä hauskaa! (I honestly hope auto translate is working) T
  24. this sprue tree has been added. Good question. I think this has been discussed before, @gingerbob maybe able to help. ah, https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/234923992-spitfire-xviii-camera-configuration/ depends in an F.XVIII or an FR.XVIII "It was 200 FR and 100 F for the XVIII." Note, as predicted, Airfix have just added a weapons sprue. What they have not done is changed the wing. The XVIII had a stronger spar (not visible) but also finally eliminated the redundant outer gun bays, and made space for survival equipment in a new upper wing panel, which previously had been the lower wing as ammo box access. see here https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235014550-spitfire-mkxviii-mk18-photos-of-wing-panelling-differences-confirmed/ Not really difficult to fill in the gun doors and rescribe one rectangular panel, and I can't see Airfix/Hornby spring for an entire new wing sprue for a few panel lines when they won't do a new sprue with a highback fuselage and associated parts. Maybe a little trickier for the under fuselage cameras in the FR.XVIII. HTH
×
×
  • Create New...