Selwyn
-
Posts
3,934 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Events
Profiles
Forums
Media Demo
Posts posted by Selwyn
-
-
6 hours ago, TeeELL said:
Hi Selwyn,
standby!
OK. The jet-pipe end of the nozzle exits from the aperture in the airframe of 880mm (see details in Admiral Puffs thread page 2, ‘the plastic surgeon’s’ entry). So my jet pipes and nozzles are 12mm diameter. The ‘ring’ is 12.2mm. Length from the side where the ring touches the rear fuselage to end 8mm, the nozzles point inwards at 3deg and downwards 3deg, there are 27 ‘holes’ around the circumference with the bottom hole being on the centre-line. I will endeavour to visit the Air Museum at Gloucester to absolutely verify the re-heat nozzle diameters although ‘theplasticsurgeon’, I believe, might be a volunteer there and be able to do some more detailed measuring as they do have a jet-pipe/re-heat nozzle.
Hope this helps?
Interesting! the nozzles on my frog kit measure out at 12.5mm diameter and the length from the airframe is 8.5mm. so pretty close!
Unfortunately the nozzles on my kit will have to be remade as they are oval, (11.6.x12.5mm!) which probably accounts for the stray 0.5mm in the dimensions, but not a problem there, however there is no toe in or down apparent.
Thanks for your time and effort on this.
Selwyn
-
11 minutes ago, TeeELL said:
Returning to the replacement rear fuselage. The High Planes replacement is OK but their re-heat nozzles are way too large.
in this photo the High Planes part is top left. My earlier iteration based on the Warplanes drawings is below it. On the right hand side are 2 of my corrected prints that hold the jet-pipes/nozzles at the correct angle inwards.
I have placed one of my redesigned jet pipes/nozzles next to the High Planes version. Note that ‘my’ printed parts are lacking details that, having noticed my error, have now been added.
I guess I could/should create re-heat nozzles that sit at the correct angle and ‘fit’ the High Planes conversion??
Can you tell me what is the diameter/length of the re heat nozzles, I am at the moment converting the Frog offfering to a FAW 8 with a nose conversion I have, but I am not sure about the nozzles on this kit . It would be interesting to get an idea if they are too large or small.
Selwyn
-
Best I start suing all the decal manuafacturers I use as just a quick check in my stash, shows a variation in size. Also you may notice that kit supplied sheets don't usually have the decal sizes marked on them anyway!
Selwyn
-
1 hour ago, Bedders said:
Must say that on the photos they look the same size as the roundel. When I did my Fujimi/Italeri F4 with Modeldecals I followed the Modeldecal advice on 16" serials and looking at them now, they seem a tad small.
Incidentally the top photo above is handy in showing the position of the drop tank pylon and swing brace locating point. A number of kits have this wrong.
Justin
In real life decerning a 2"diffference (thats 50.8mm) from a photo woud be nigh impossible. By the way that translates to the roundels being 0.705mm larger in 1/72 or 1.05mm in 1/48 which to me on a model would be within the printing tolerance of a decal anyway.
Selwyn
-
1
-
-
8 hours ago, AdrianMF said:
Thanks for the info Selwyn. I have a plan to do it for the August Blitzbuild, if I can resist sticking any more parts together (only five so far…). I’ve found the Matador great fun to assemble and the Bedford looks good enough for my purposes.
I will have to re-enter the snake pit of confusion that is WWII support vehicle camo to work out when the Bedford was introduced and which camo schemes it’s eligible for…
Just finished the glazing on this one, the lazy way by doing it all on the inside. It’s funny how the measure of successful glazing seems to be not being able to see it at this scale!
QL production started in March 1941 so the refuller would be sometime after that.
Se;lwyn
-
1
-
1
-
-
Are you doing the Bedford as well?
If you are, remember the wartime Bedford would be in the same colour scheme as the AEC and don't fit the refuelling booms as this was a postwar addition. The kit Bedford colour scheme is a postwar scheme. I used the chassis and cab out of the airfix Bedford QLD / QLT kit as I thought it looked a lot better.
Selwyn
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Shaun said:
Does anyone have info on how the Bucanneer carried the WE177. What was more common the long or short versions.
Were the aircraft parked with the bomb bay open when sitting QRA in Germany..
Cheers
Shaun.
Up to two bombs in the internal bomb bay, the WE177A small bomb was primarily a naval weapon. so unlikely to be seen on Germany. The bomb bays would be open in the HAS as the aircrew had to inspect and arm the bombs before flight.
Selwyn
-
37 minutes ago, Des said:
Good memories to have brought back.
Modeldecal No.2 was the first aftermarket decal sheet I ever bought when they started back in the late 1960s although I used the Robin Olds F-4C option first then the VFMA-531 F-4B both from the original Airfix USN F-4B kit release and using Humbrol 'Authentics' paints (B/C differences did not mean much to me back then) 767 NAS example was from the rather dodgy Revell kit although at that time the newly released Humbrol EDSG was actually closer to a shade of green and never really looked right.
I read on the sheet notes 2 that the recommended kit for the sheet schemes was the airfix kit.
Selwyn
-
Just a couple of quick nitpicks;
The Matra rocket launchers in the kit are not Matra rocket launchers! They are No 7 2" rocket launchers which were not made by Matra.
Don't use the yellow ring decal markings on the bombs for these colour schemes, They depict UK 1000lb bombs from 1980 onwards, before this the yellow markings were painted just behind the nose plug. They were repainted further back when paveway II bombs came into UK use as the bomb nose fairings covered the yellow hazard band,
Selwyn
-
2
-
2
-
-
On 8/5/2022 at 12:56 PM, Lord Riot said:
This may be a very long shot, but any Harrier experts out there know whether XV778 ever served with No. 3 Sqn, specifically with light grey undersides and pointed nose (early GR.3)?
I’m thinking of changing mine to 3 Sqn but I’d prefer not having to change the serial if possible.
Nobody in their right mind would want to paint this aircraft in spawn of the devil 3 Sqn markings, Do it in proper 4 sqn markings!
Selwyn
EX 4 Sqn Harrier groundcrew at RAF Gutersloh , so not biased in any way of course!
-
4
-
4
-
-
On 8/4/2022 at 7:34 PM, Steve147 said:
If anyone has built the above kit and still has the instructions, can they please explain how you fit 3 fuselage halves together.
The kit sprues have 4 fuselage halves, numbered 6, 7, 8, & 9.
Section 4 of the instructions, shows what parts glue in fuselage half #8; section 5, parts to be glued in fuselage half #7; and section 6, parts to be glued in fuselage part #6. Section 7 shows construction of the main wings and then section 8 shows the fuselage glued together and the positioning of the rear wings. All of the aircraft I have built previously, show how the two fuselage halves glue together. Also, despite being shown in the instructions, there is no guide on the fuselage part, to where exactly the instrument panel fits in the fuselage as well.
I have looked at the instructions on Scalemates and although it is not the exact same model, the instructions are the same, and hopefully does show what I'm trying to explain:
https://www.scalemates.com/products/img/6/1/9/371619-27-instructions.pdf
I can only assume that it's a misprint and that you have the choice between parts 6 & 7, or 8 & 9.
Thanks in advance.
The kit sprues are generic and come with two fuselages ,one for the standard bomber wellesley parts (6/7), and one for the Long Range Development Unit (LRDU) wellesley parts (8/9), which had a different engine installation with a streamline cowling. (compare the engine cowling to the boxtop picture to your kit box, I think the streamline cowling are parts 12 and 13). The kit you linked to is the bomber version so you have to use the appropriate fuselage /engine combination which I think is 6/7 and cowling 14/15.
The kit instructions you linked to have no decal scheme for the LRDU option, other boxings (see my link above) do. I must admit the instruction sheet for this kit is a bit of a dogs dinner!
Selwyn
"Should have bought the matchbox Wellesley!"
-
10 minutes ago, Markh-75 said:
Excellent! I rather like the ol' F4's, more so the ones that the RAF used and fitted the Spey engines into! Always loved the ROAR when they took off!
I am clearing my shelf of doom at the moment, on it is a unfinished matchbox phantom being completed soon an FGR 2 if it comes out well i shall post it for your pleasure!
Selwyn
-
1
-
1
-
-
15 minutes ago, Ad-4N said:
Great job on an oldie. I had the F-4E version in '73 or so from Airfix but I couldn't bring myself to build it since they inexplicably failed to mold the window between the front and rear cockpits and my 16 year old self couldn't figure out a way to make a window there. I can spot a sixties Airfix Phantom from 348 miles away because of that missing window.
Aren't Modeldecals great?
I love Modeldecal schemes, i have a lot of their sheets, if i see one I buy it just in case,"don't you know. " Check out my A7 in the matchbox group build for another great modeldecal scheme!
Selwyn
-
1
-
-
20 minutes ago, Markh-75 said:
Very nice job too! I always remember this kit with the two tailplane parts having those little cams on so that the tail could tilt up and down! Ahh, Memories
And it works on this kit build!
Selwyn
-
1
-
-
11 hours ago, salomon said:
I plan to edit the J-20 and I look for the photos in the pilot's seat and I have a feeling that it looks very close to the US Marin Becker. Also no many reference on the backside of the seat, any help? thank you.
Sorry, Do you mean the UK Martin Baker Seat? Have a look at the Martin Baker Mk 16 it may be what you are looking for?
Selwyn
-
53 minutes ago, Phone Phixer said:
The Paveway II system did not have an active laser seeker sensor. It was purely passive, it required dropping into the reflected laser energy to then guide, not seek it out itself.
The laser from the designator equipment, either ground mounted or from a Pavespike pod, would be reflected out in a cone shape. The LGB needed to be dropped into the cone, either from altitude or tossed into it. Once located, the guidance unit would correct the bombs flight when it reached the extremities of the cone. These changes obviously got more frequent as the LGB got closer to the target and the cone got narrower.
Back in the 80's there was a cracking video on 237 (Bucc) OCU of a Paveway II LGB in flight, one of the nav's filmed through a Pavespike pod. 20 Sqn Tornado's had come to Lossie on detachment to drop LGB's on Garvie island. Several live Paveway II's were dropped, designated from the Buccaneers. Then they dropped some HES PW II's, designated by SBS in dingies. HES was a safety consideration due to the proximity of the SBS bobbing about in the sea. One of the OCU's Buccs flew along with one of these drops and the nav zoomed right on to the bomb and filmed it. Don't think the bombs flight is a smooth arc, it was zig zagging all the way down the cone. The control fins were constantly moving.
Rob.
Paveway II canard fins work on the "bang bang" principle. when required the fins do not slightly adjust proportionately to steer the bomb, every control input causes the fins to go from zero to full up or down as required deflection and then back to zero, basically "banging "against the stops, hence the zig zag flightpath.
Selwyn
-
1
-
-
On 7/31/2022 at 6:06 PM, goon said:
Hi Selwyn,
Thanks for the confirmation of the fins popping put on release.
I'm a little confused that you say all LGB drops were unguided, as Squires is quoted in Air War South Atlantic describing his attack, and I have found this article that says that four drops were made with laser designation.
Cheers,
Gareth
first i have heard of this, if so it must of happened at the very end of hostilities.
Selwyn
-
1 minute ago, BIG X said:
Lovely story Selwyn & a lovely build too.
I lost my mum in April & it has hit me harder than I ever would of imagined.
God bless the mums - Steve
Yes, you kind of think mums are immortal, lts a shock when they leave. 2020 was a terrible time for our family. My mums elder sister died of COVID on a Sunday, mum died of the big C just 48 hours later. still not totally over it, my heart goes out to you and your loss.
Selwyn
-
4
-
-
9 minutes ago, Autle said:
Really good backstory and modelling Selwyn, isn't it amazing how our parents shape our lives in one way or another. As it happens my dad build this for me when I was about 4 or 5, can you imagine how happy I was to work on these fantastic looking aircraft in the RAF during their last few years. Money just can't buy memories like that. Thanks for the post, do you have the original box art.
well I have the original box if that is what you mean?
Selwyn
-
8 minutes ago, exdraken said:
I have heard before that the laser guidance was tired but did not work. But wouldn't what you describe be a waste of LGB parts?
As I read it, GP bombs would have lead to the same...? No?
This was a new weapon at the time, The bomb guidance's were actually air dropped to the task force IIRC. they didn't know a lot about how they worked, so in the absence of the proper designators They tried using LTM the troops had to see if it could be used to guide the bomb. They found out it couldn't, as Paveway uses a pulse laser system. So the bombs were dropped as free fall weapons as described.
I think to correct designators arrived the day of the surrender.
Selwyn
-
2
-
-
13 hours ago, bootneck said:
I've just remembered where we were, having looked at a map. Our Commando unit was on Mt Challenger, preparing to move out to attack Mt Harriet. I also realise that the 7 deg arc must have been the search range of the LGB, as the LTM was a pinpoint laser light.
HTH,
Mike
The LGB used in the Falklands did not use the bomb guidance system, they were dropped as dumb free fall bombs as they did not have the correct pulsed target designators with troops on the ground. What they were using as you describe was the laser target marker (LTM) which indicated the target position to the aircraft marked target seeker (located in the dolphin nose of the GR3 harrier). This marked the target you designated on the aircraft HUD and the pilot attacked this point. using the loft manoever as you saw. The bomb did not "guide" it was aimed using the aircraft weapon system. To answer another question in the thread The LGB fins are always activated and deploy on release from the aircraft.
Selwyn
-
2
-
2
-
-
- Popular Post
Back in the mists of time (1979 in fact) at the age of 17 ½ I left the family home and Joined the RAF. My bedroom was the small room our three bed semi, which my mum rapidly tuned into her sewing room (she was a seamstress by trade). When I visited on weekends/leave I graduated to the second bedroom so that wasn’t a problem anyway. Fast forward forty years to 2020, after a long illness mum died leaving me the family home (Dad had died in 2005), and I moved in that year. Since then I have been progressively clearing the house and recently hit the biggie, clearing out the loft! To my great surprise I found a box full of my stuff that Mum had packed up when she converted the bedroom, and in the box I found a small stash of kits that I had long forgot I had.
One of the kits was the very very old Airfix Phantom. Scalemates tells me its the 1963 mould, and the boxing is from 1973, and according to the box top I had purchased it from Woolworths for the astronomical sum of 55P! Revelling in nostalgia I decided that I just had to build it! Now I do remember building this kit as a schoolboy, as the Israeli F4E version, So this time it had to be the US F4B. Assessing the kit, it was all there, flash free, decals were another thing, being incredibly yellowed and curly, and well past their sell by date, So it was a deep breath and a deep dive into the decal stash for a suitable replacement, which was found on an old Modeldecal sheet 2, A US Marines F4B of VFMA-531 base at MCAS El Toro California in 1968. Very fitting, a 1960’s kit with a 1960’s scheme. Below is the result.
I went with the kit supplied all AIM7E weapons load, don’t know if it was a correct config for this aircraft but hey ho.
Is it my best build? Hell No! Is it an accurate F4B? Hell no! Was it a filler monster? surprisingly not! Did I have a lot of fun building it? Hell yes! Many thanks to my wonderful mum for packing it away so carefully back in 79.
Selwyn
-
83
-
2 hours ago, Lord Riot said:
True, though I don’t think the last few batches ever flew as FAW7s, being converted in the factory to 9s before issue to the RAF.42 FAW 7 entered service and these aircraft were fitted to carry missiles - the remaining 80 FAW.7s were delivered to the RAF but went straight into storage at RAF Kemble, and were subsequently converted to FAW 9 before seeing Squadron service. the in service FAW 7's were converted as well, so some serials flew on squadrons as FAW 7 & 9.
Selwyn
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, Lord Riot said:
Very interesting. I wondered whether it was worth getting the Mistercraft kit. Do the kit parts actually make an FAW.7, or is it a 9 like the Airfix and Frog ones?
XH893 was definitely an FAW.9
XH858 was never actually issued, it was excluded in a ‘blackout block’ between Javelin serials.
XH754 was an FAW.7
I don't think that there were any new build Javelin FAW9. They were all converted from FAW 7 airframes so the aircraft serials would be correct for both FAW 7 and FAW 9 depending if they are pre and post modification. There were 118 FAW 7 converted to FAW 9.
Selwyn
-
3
-
1
-
Calling All Beaufort Experts
in Aircraft WWII
Posted
By the way its a side mounted Vickers K gun not a Lewis! Interestingly its also fitted with a vane sight.
Selwyn