Jump to content

Tailspin Turtle

Members
  • Posts

    993
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Tailspin Turtle

  1. Pitots are generally heated so they don’t ice up. They can get hot enough to burn the cover off if you neglect to remove it before flight, which is why the forward portion at least is unpainted...
  2. If you scroll down quite a ways, you’ll see how the Revell nose needs to be fixed and why: http://tailspintopics.blogspot.com/2009/10/grumman-f-111b.html
  3. One recent discovery while preparing a response to a question from Ed is that the fence on the aileron was deleted on production F3H-1Ns early on. Ed has included the fence on his model (see this post for the picture he’s using: http://tailhooktopics.blogspot.com/2014/06/converting-f3h-2-to-f3h-1n.html). His question was about surface details ahead of the aileron that I hadn’t paid any attention to before. I’ll try an post an update on that as well in the near future.
  4. Also: https://tailspintopics.blogspot.com/2012/07/douglas-low-drag-external-fuel-tanks.html
  5. A word about Execuform vacuum-formed “kits”. Building a presentable model from them involves an even higher degree of difficulty than the usual vacuum-formed kits because they are drape-molded rather than cavity molded. As a result, any of the molds “sharpness” and shape are on the inside of the parts rather than the exterior and the location of the split line of the halves of the fuselage and wings is best described as vague. Also, there are no detail parts like landing gear, propellers, cockpit stuff, etc. as well as no decals. The drawings in the kit are pretty good, though...
  6. Probably more than you wanted to know: https://tailhooktopics.blogspot.com/2019/09/grumman-f6f-hellcat-belly-tank.html
  7. The F3H-2 did have functional auxiliary air doors initially but they were permanently disabled early on. The J40 afterburner nozzle description can be found here: http://tailhooktopics.blogspot.com/2021/02/westinghouse-j40-afterburner-nozzle.html The F3H Demon variants are summarized here: https://tailspintopics.blogspot.com/2010/11/f3h-demon.html The differences between the -1N and the -2 are provided here: http://tailhooktopics.blogspot.com/2014/06/converting-f3h-2-to-f3h-1n.html
  8. This is consistent with the abundance of caution with which the Secret Service assures the safety of the President. The life-limited parts on the helicopters (white tops) he flies are removed at 50% of life and transferred to other units or installed on green tops to be flown to limit carrying staff and members of the media. In any event, his trips by helicopter are so short that the speed of the tilt rotor would not significantly reduce the overall travel time. At this point, the tilt rotor is no more unsafe than other aircraft, if it ever was. As far as I know, all the accidents were the result of pilot or maintenance error or involvement in high-risk operations.
  9. As it happens, I was looking at it the other way round in 1/72 once upon a time: https://tailspintopics.blogspot.com/2014/08/north-american-fj-3-redux.html
  10. I can understand why the F7U-3 has an undeserved reputation but not the F3H. It went out on carrier deployments from 1957 through early 1964, a little over seven years, 44 times in all, overlapping the F4H’s introduction by about two years. It deployed for a few more years and made a few more deployments than the F2H-3/4 Banshee that was the Navy’s first all-weather jet fighter to be deployed much (the F3D was relegated to shore-based Marine squadrons except for two or three deployments). The much heralded but ineffective F4D (not supersonic in level flight either, limited all-weather armament compared to the F3H armed with Sparrows, always carrying draggy drop tanks for barely adequate endurance, poor handling qualities on approach, etc.) was only deployed for a total of five years, 18 times, and replaced on carriers as the air group’s all-weather fighter as soon as the F4H was deployable. (At least one air group commander wanted to replace the squadron of F4Ds that had been assigned to him for an upcoming deployment with F2Hs.)
  11. They were coated with Corogard, which is an aluminized epoxy paint. Also see http://tailspintopics.blogspot.com/2012/01/corogard.html
  12. Thanks - it’s new to me as well, which is also saying something
  13. The only refinements that I would add to Mike’s process is to locate the pencil (I prefer something with triangular cross-section for more precision) under the fuselage at the point where the wheels touch the ground and support the aft end of the model at its nose up angle when at rest (if any) before adding the weight until it tips forward. The nose-up consideration is because the amount of weight added when the model is level might, if just enough to keep it from tipping back in that attitude, be aft of the wheel contact point when it is sitting nose up. The other consideration is concern about too much weight overstressing the nose landing gear. There will be very little load on it if a reasonable amount of weight is added - note that the model tips back because there is no load on it. An overload on the nose landing gear results from setting the model down so the nose wheel contacts the surface first, which is exacerbated if you add more weight to the model than necessary to keep it from being a tail sitter. Like the actual airplane, you should set the model down so the main landing gear touches first (when landing a real airplane: touching down nose landing gear first with too much of a sink rate will result either in a bounce because the rebound increases the angle of attack and therefore lift or the nose landing gear will fail because its strength is minimized to not much more than holding the nose up during taxi and while parked in order to minimize weight).
  14. The main reason for raising the hook after landing was so it didn’t catch on the next arresting cable as the airplane was taxied forward. I don’t know for sure whether it was raised and stowed by the two deckhands who rushed out as the airplane was coming to a stop or just raised it to a “stinger” position and it was then stowed after parking. More later...
  15. https://tailspintopics.blogspot.com/2017/04/the-last-propeller-pulled-corsairs-f4u.html
  16. That’s a possibility. Because it was a centrifugal flow engine, the air wasn’t rammed into the engine but basically sucked into it from behind the accessory package in what was essentially a plenum chamber. Google J33 images...
  17. I've not seen a set of Aviation News drawings for an airplane that I was familiar with that didn't have errors. In this case, at a glance, the artist got the location of the main landing gear correct but not the offset nose wheel well (see https://tailhooktopics.blogspot.com/2014/02/hasagawa-p2v-neptune-kit.html) so I would not take them as gospel.
  18. All I can say for sure is that the Avengers are TBM-3Rs (CODs) not -3Es, which makes it the Korean War era. There wouldn't have been an F4U in a transport (VR) squadron so RS is not the correct tailcode for the Corsair. Based on the position of the letter S on the rudder, my best guess is that the tailcode is WS, which would be VMF-323 on Badoeng Strait (CVE-116) in late 1950 or (more likely) Sicily (CVE-118) in 1951.
  19. Very nice build - the usual photo of the airplane is a little misleading with respect to rest of the load out. See https://tailspintopics.blogspot.com/2013/04/things-under-wings-va-25-1-skyraider.html
  20. Sorry - I couldn’t help myself when I saw your excellent comparison of the nose gear of the airplane and the model...
  21. In response to a suggestion that I provide links to the material I’ve posted on the F4H, here’s one of interest in this case: https://tailhooktopics.blogspot.com/2013/02/f4h-1-flush-canopy.html As for the rest, until I finally do this myself, I suggest that you go to each of my three blogs and type F4H (or similar search terms) in the search block located at the upper left of the blog: https://tailhooktopics.blogspot.com/ http://thanlont.blogspot.com http://tailspintopics.blogspot.com/ Note that the first and third links look identical at first glance, but they aren’t... As far as my monograph on the first 47 Phantom IIs is concerned, I’m pretty sure that you won’t be disappointed, either as a modeler, an F4H enthusiast, or simply someone with an interest in carrier-based naval aviation in the 1950s and 1960s. Still not convinced? Go to Amazon.com books, search for Birth of a Legend McDonnell F4H-1 Phantom II, and read the reviews. But I request that you buy one from Steve Ginter (see http://tommythomason.com/books/McDonnell F4H-1/) to increase his income (he has to sell books to Amazon at a ridiculously low wholesale price) and therefore have the wherewithal to publish my next and last monograph, which will be on the F7U-3 Cutlass.
  22. Also in comparing the two pictures, note that the forward facing nose gear door extends up into the nose wheel well when nose gear is extended because the door is rigidly attached to the upper section of the strut and the pivot point of the strut is aft of the door.
  23. Trivia with respect to the barrier pickup (strictly speaking, not a guard) on the belly: https://thanlont.blogspot.com/2009/09/when-rube-goldberg-isnt-enough.html The introduction of angle deck carriers, which no longer required barriers, resulted in its removal from FJ-3s (I don’t know about FJ-2s for sure but Sabrejet might). Although there were exceptions early on, the guard was removed on gray/white FJ-3s. Note that if the pickup was down, the tailhook would be down as well and the small “guard” (it really snagged the Davis barrier actuation strap in the event of a nose or complete landing gear collapse) in front of the windscreen was extended.
  24. Strictly speaking, those red and yellow “handles” on the sides of the ejection seat were there to keep the pilot’s legs from flailing when he came out of the cockpit into the free stream air. The pilot was supposed to put his feet into something like pans on the front edge of the bottom of the seat and pull those handles into a vertical position (the early seats required a separate action to arm the seat and accomplish some preliminary functions before the face curtain was pulled). The “handles” should therefore be angled forward out of the way of the side consoles normally. Also see https://images.app.goo.gl/haFZu7FhKGgn2JwJ8 Note that the illustration is misleading in that the seat would normally have a seat cushion/survival kit in the bucket and a back-pack parachute in it (these were standard GFE and often left out of the aircraft manufacturer’s illustrations).
×
×
  • Create New...