Jump to content

1:72 Merlin engined Halifax corrections


FZ6

Recommended Posts

And so it goes on and on!!

Oh you really are fed up aren`t you, are you on suicide watch? Pity you are quitting plastic modelling as you have made some excellent stuff and that Valiant was fab!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be fair, much of the above is in the instructions (or lack of same) rather than the kit itself, with many of the optional extras useful for other variants than those supplied on the transfer sheet. Apart from my comments on the engine cowlings and ailerons, which are expansions on what has been said before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be fair, much of the above is in the instructions (or lack of same) rather than the kit itself, with many of the optional extras useful for other variants than those supplied on the transfer sheet. Apart from my comments on the engine cowlings and ailerons, which are expansions on what has been said before.

And let's not forget half the "fun" is the research to find out what components should be used where and when and for what specific variant we're building. Having said that the vast majority of kit purchasers don't do the research and therefore adequate instructions of what bits are required for which variant should be supplied.

Cheers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the case of the Halifax I'm going to build my Revell Halifax OOB as the only people who will see it will be family and friends who will see what is hopefully a decent finish. In this case I'm not bothered about all the necessary corrections (apart from the props which will be easy to do). I've looked forward to this model being released and am going to enjoy it once I get back to Blighty. If it turns out alright I will put pics on the site now that my photo kit is better now. So if anybody wants to critise then fine. There I've said it.

Nobody should - your model, build it how you want. The value I see in this type of thread is that those who want to correct faults can do so, and to the degree that satisfies them.

Each to their own!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh you really are fed up aren`t you, are you on suicide watch? Pity you are quitting plastic modelling as you have made some excellent stuff and that Valiant was fab!

I suppose you could put it that way - but not "fed up" because of or indeed with the Halifax. My observation was simply saying the "errors" seem endless? My feelings about the Halifax are intense disappointment. I need a lot of convincing that they could not have done a better job!

But thank you for your kind words on the Valiant. A very nice kit - but I could not "enjoy" it nevertheless; and so if that is the case is it not time to admit "defeat"? My failing - not the Valiant kit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Graham that is an impressive list and I'll get it added to the first post in the thread so all the info is in one place. There are a few things I didn't notice such as the Retractable tail wheel only applying to the Hercules engined Halifaxes as well as the prototype. One of the most confusing things about this kit is the instructions and while I don't think the inclusion of all the extra parts is a bad thing as it boosts the spares box Revell don't make it clear which parts apply to which versions. Two useful parts Revell have not included in the box are the Z nose and the windows for the beam gunners. These parts are marked not for use in the instructions but not included in the kit and the Z nose is missing completely despite being seen on test shots.

Here's a bit more work in Progress. Sadly updates will slow down this week as I'm now back at work but i'll do my best to keep you updated with my progress.

The Revell Halifax progress was slow over the weekend as I did a bit of work to this 1:48 bad boy while I am all fired up and Halifax inspired. I think the work required to get a decent model from this kit makes the Revell one look like childs play.

48737515508_a64f9f9462_b.jpg

FM Halifax by Mark Maclean, on Flickr

 

Back to the Revell Halifax. I've decided which version I want to do and I'll build TL S from R9441 which is MK.II from 35 sqn. This aircraft has the bulky turret on top so I removed it and dry fitted it to the fuselage and it didn't

look right so I did a photo comparison.

48738020522_27b4801213_b.jpg

Turret Comparison by Mark Maclean, on Flickr

 

As you can see the shape of the turret is good but it sits too high. On the lower half at the front the hexagonal panel is not marked on the turret so this will need masking off when painting. I think the plastic ring it sits on (part 213) may need to be either thinned down or mounted lower and the hole for the turret will need to be made wider in order for the turret to sit correctly as it is currently too wide to do so. Probably a victim of the tooling for multi versions.

While we're on the subject of gun turrets the guns for the upper and front turrets (Parts 193) are short shot as can be seen in the pic below. The error is apparent when compared against the rear guns which were ok.

48738023307_7baf61f212_b.jpg

Halifax guns by Mark Maclean, on Flickr

 

I'd be interested to hear if anyone else has this problem.

I thought while I am putting all the effort into this kit I might as well cut out the wing bays and I'm make some bulkheads for them. The wing spars on the fuselage should help box it in.

48737838621_8653665221_b.jpg

Wing Cells by Mark Maclean, on Flickr

 

The interior looks very impressive for one that is out of the box and knocks the fictitious Matchbox one into a hat. There are a couple of things to point out though. I don't think there was a door next to the flight engineers panel but I might be wrong. As pointed out before the Flight Engineer didn't have a seat in this position. The Radio Operators table is too small and the radio transmitters are not bulky enough but not a lot will be seen of this anyway. I also think there should be a double folding seat near the Navigators table

48737510613_7f6835e8aa_b.jpg

Interior by Mark Maclean, on Flickr

 

As some versions of this aircraft will require filling of the porthole windows heres a little tip to help you do this.

The kit sprue is a tiny bit wider than the windows so just run a file round it then slice off a piece of sprue and glue in place with the cement of your choice and sand flush when dry. You then have spare clear discs in case you need them.

48738021047_46048923d5_b.jpg

Portholes by Mark Maclean, on Flickr

 

 

Sorry to be the bearer of more bad news. I know that the effort involved in correcting this kit is either going to be expensive in terms of hours required to build an accurate kit and or aftermarket goodies when they come out and might be above and beyond what people are prepared to do to update this kit. I for one wont be buying a many as I intended as there are easier kits to do.

So to sum up, if we want a decent Halifax at the moment we have three choices.

  1. Build the Revell halifax accepting the errors as it will look like a Halifax to most people.
  2. Try and make the best of a bad job as I am an others no doubt will do as there's not much else out there in the line of Halifaxes.
  3. Wait until someone brings out a more accurate kit which will be easier to assemble. (when they do I'll by many of them.)

Dave I came with this kit and a swordfish when I went to the model shop and foolishly decided to build this one first. :wall:

Edited by FZ6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Revell Halifax progress was slow over the weekend as I did a bit of work to this 1:48 bad boy while I am all fired up and Halifax inspired. I think the work required to get a decent model from this kit makes the Revell one look like childs play.

FMHalifax.jpg

Dave I came with this kit and a swordfish when I went to the model shop and foolishly decided to build this one first. :wall:

Is that the Sanger vac? I want you to do that one first! :whip:

cheers

T

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see what you mean about the turret :(

Great tip for the port holes, thanks Mark, I shall be using this !

That interior does look very good, scratch building all that lot is a time consuming task, so mating this to Airfix wings is a great way of getting a good MkIII.

Great start to your FM pics too, wouldn't mid seeing more as you progress :) Always on the look out for tips so I can pluck up the courage to get one !!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Graham that is an impressive list and I'll get it added to the first post in the thread so all the info is in one place.

I've corrected it regarding the curve upwards on the underside of the nacelle. The actual shape is a bit more complex but those interested can study the photos and the plans. If you are going to edit your first post there is rather more than can be said about the faults - for example the spinners are too long, too wide, and the wrong shape. You might like to look at the threads on Modelling Madness and 72nd Aircraft sites. I don't think anyone here has mentioned that the auxiliary intakes are undersized on the Revell and better replaced by reworking the crude chunks provided in the Matchbox kit. There is of course much more to be said about the faults/crudities in the Matchbox kit, but I think that would be better in a separate thread.

I had short-shot guns too, but as I'm doing the Series 1a with no top turret it didn't matter to me. There are spare guns anyway. That the turret sits high is a useful tip. I'm not that impressed with the front of the turret, as it seems a bit bulbous at the top, but I'd have to dig out the MPM Hudson one to compare: it may still be the best available. I do have Aeroclub ones but the transparency has yellowed.

I'm not too concerned about the cockpit interiors, but at first glance I thought the fitting of the bombs in the bombbay didn't match the arrangement shown in the CD. You should be able to get three abreast, so the even spacing of two across the bay seems wrong. I'm not yet about to go back to that area of the kit. Mine will be full of the supply containers anyway, courtesy of Heritage Aviation. Even putting together the kit carriers and the WEM ones I may still not have enough, and I may just have to accept leaving them out on the grounds that they wouldn't be seen, anyway.

Does anyone know what colour the supply containers were? I'm assuming the ordnance green.

Re Vickers guns (two pair are needed for the Mk.I beam positions) I have the Kora set, which is ok but expensive, and Coastal Craft also do a set of four, which I am about to order.

This was my list of options:

Route 1: give up and make the kit as stands - as others point out, that's how the majority will be built anyway but that's not satisfactory to me.

Route 2: round off and reshape the kit nacelle parts, accepting that they'll be too fat. I'm taking this route, but remain unhappy about it and reserve the right to change my mind later on. I will be using Matchbox parts for the auxiliary intakes.

Route 3: substitute Matchbox nacelle/cowling parts. These need considerable reshaping anyway, and are a very poor fit on the Revell wing. If possible, retain the Revell undercarriage but with the WEM wheels.

Route 4: slim down, reposition and reshape the Revell nacelles and cowlings with aftermarket (not yet available) propellors and spinners - Matchbox spinners will do well enough. This would be particularly difficult for the Series 1 version with the central lip for the oil cooler. I'm very tempted by this route but am havering over whether it is really feasible.

Route 5: scratchbuild. if you can consider that you don't need to follow this thread.

I should add the Route 6 from above: sit and wait for a better one! I was following Route 2 but have decided to switch to 4 - I wish I'd done that before gluing the wheel well box together.

There is a comment above that the Hercules installation had wider nacelles, but this is not true at least when it comes to the wheel well area. In modelling terms, the Airfix is the same as the Matchbox. It may be possible to argue from Merrick's plans that the true shape is somewhere in between: Revell may be too large but the other kits too narrow. If this is backed up by further study than at least it makes the narrowing job easier.

Edit: three bombs abreast not four, but the bombs have their own faults.

Edited by Graham Boak
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's the FM Kit although I do have a Sanger Vac as well. Think the FM kit is nearly as much work

I have a Sanger kit - not too bad in fact but admittedly I have not examined it minutely all over. Yes quite a bit of work but then it is almost a scratch build!

Sorry if this is a high jack but here is a picture of what I have done thus far but of course now stalled completely. The only "original" parts are the fuselage sides, incidentally - no stringers etc.. Added bit of grey primer on just so I could see the blemishes. The sides are a bit distorted and hence the "frames" etc. needed to encourage them into the correct shape. I think one would need to re do the clear parts as they are not that clear (a bit misty in fact) and the canopy needs a bit of "adjusting".

Sanger8.jpg

Let me know if it is not appropriate and I will delete it.

Edited by miduppergunner
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to throw in another slighty wobblely I think that the three blade Rotol prop blades have two root profiles. But which is the 12' 9" and which is the 13'? The difference is very slight but noticeable. There have been two main drawings published for the Halifax, the MAP and Granger. Most others are copies of one or the other. The MAP ones which pre-date the Granger by many years, have a good number of differences to the nacelles when compared with the Granger drawings and I think are not as accurate. From what I can work out the thrust line on the outer engines is lower on the chord section c/l than on the inners which are higher.

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting that you should say that, but shouldn't there be three different Rotol 3-bladers? The Mk.I had the smallest, and the Mk.II had two different sizes - 12ft 10in and 13 ft from memory because I can't find the reference in what I have to hand. I would assume that the different prop went with the different engines, but that's perhaps a dangerous assumption.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to throw in another slighty wobblely I think that the three blade Rotol prop blades have two root profiles. But which is the 12' 9" and which is the 13'? The difference is very slight but noticeable. There have been two main drawings published for the Halifax, the MAP and Granger. Most others are copies of one or the other. The MAP ones which pre-date the Granger by many years, have a good number of differences to the nacelles when compared with the Granger drawings and I think are not as accurate. From what I can work out the thrust line on the outer engines is lower on the chord section c/l than on the inners which are higher.

John

That's good, the mods I've made to the Matchbox outers should be suffice.

I have a Sanger kit - not too bad in fact but admittedly I have not examined it minutely all over. Yes quite a bit of work but then it is almost a scratch build!

Sorry if this is a high jack but here is a picture of what I have done thus far but of course now stalled completely. The only "original" parts are the fuselage sides, incidentally - no stringers etc.. Added bit of grey primer on just so I could see the blemishes. The sides are a bit distorted and hence the "frames" etc. needed to encourage them into the correct shape. I think one would need to re do the clear parts as they are not that clear (a bit misty in fact) and the canopy needs a bit of "adjusting".

It's a shame you've lost your modelling mojo David, this looks like a great start. Hope you get bored of not doing models and come back to finish it for everyones pleasure :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for sharing your Sanger build miduppergunner. You've got further with it than I have with mine. If you finish yours I'll do mine. :) I think I'll look at mine some time after I've built the FM kit.

Thanks for the Further comments Graham. The more I look at the Revell Nacelles the more wrong they look. When you work on your nacelles please feel free to share your efforts in this thread whichever route you take. Are the auxiliary intakes the ones you're referring to on the top of the inboard nacelles as these are almost non existant on the Revell nacelles or are you refering to the ones on the sides of the engines. I must admit I haven't got round to looking closely at these yet.

As I mentioned in my previous post I wanted to build the wing bays open seeing as I was putting all this work into the engines and wings I might as well go the whole hog.

I initially thought I could use the kit wing spar as part of the interior box section in the wing bomb bays but they are a touch too short.

 

48738020287_1688a84f99_z.jpg

Wing Box by Mark Maclean, on Flickr

 

I made an aerofoil shaped template for the area between the spars and made four identical bulkheads and two strips of plasticard to made the box section. It fits perfectly between the wing spars, th e undercarriage bays and the fuselage. I then cut out the criss cross members of the forward wing spar.

 

48737508773_0ac993a57d_z.jpg

Wing Box fitted by Mark Maclean, on Flickr

 

Here the box section can be seen inside the two wing halves. A bit of cleaning up, internal details and some doors and this area should look great.

48738020077_6b7ffd382f_z.jpg

Box in Wing by Mark Maclean, on Flickr

 

I had some success last year in making a laminated wooden propeller for my Wingnut Wings Albatros. so I've had a go at making prop blades for the Halifax to see if I could do it.

I laminated a couple of pieces of spruce together and once try I cut out the prop blade shape then trimmed down the angle of the blade. It wasn't that bad to do but I need to do a few more to get the hang of them as the shape needs a little work. The last one was made with a coffee stirrer but the wood isn't as good to work with and the finished article is a bit rougher. I'll keep you posted how I get on.

 

48737838566_c1f6c87d47_z.jpg

Wooden Prop blades by Mark Maclean, on Flickr

 

Thanks to everyone for the words of encouragement so far. Hopefully the engine mods will be a success.

Cheers,

Mark

Edited by FZ6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mark

If you are going to try carving prop blades I strongly suggest the use of what in aeromodelling circles is generally known as bass (it is the wood of the lime tree) rather than spruce or whatever coffee stirrers are made of. It is far smoother, more consistently grained and easier to carve, file and sand, and to get a nice surface finish on with some sanding sealer. I use it to make larger props for electric RC scale models. Drop me a PM with your address if you would like some offcuts to play with.

Edited to say, hah, I see David has beaten me to it while I made the coffee.

Edited by Work In Progress
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mark

If you are going to try carving prop blades I strongly suggest the use of what in aeromodelling circles is generally known as bass (it is the wood of the lime tree) rather than spruce or whatever coffee stirrers are made of. It is far smoother, more consistently grained and easier to carve, file and sand, and to get a nice surface finish on with some sanding sealer. I use it to make larger props for electric RC scale models. Drop me a PM with your address if you would like some offcuts to play with.

Edited to say, hah, I see David has beaten me to it while I made the coffee.

Thank you WIP - no sugar in mine please, just a little cream!

As a matter of interest do you/did you build the flying models.

By the way Mark you can get "Bass" in model shops but it is not cheap - I have plenty so do shout if you need any.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...