Bomber Commands Lumbering Twin - Frog 1/72 Whitley

[woody37]

After a period of doing ...well not much in terms of modelling, I've been motivated by all the Dambuster media and a day spent under Hendons Lanc with the Bomber Command SIG guys to start on Frogs ancient offering - the Whitley. Whilst the Fly kit is out, the lack of decent transparancies plus a sadistic streak led me this way ! As I get into it, I'm beginning to realise that it's gonna take a while because everything needs re-doing on it. I built one many years ago which still resides on the shelf, but it isn't good enough to sit with her Bomber Command sisters on the SIG displays. Whilst I've got some decals in various after market sets, I haven't chosen a scheme yet, so open to some ideas and inspiration from Britmodeller

Here's the plan:

• The transparencies will be replaced with Falcon ones
• Rear end widened as per BM discussions. If I remember this is also mentioned in the Falcon instructions because I did it in the old one too.
• Smudge2's resin engine replacements - may just use the front section, to be decided
• Airwaves etch plus some scratch building
• Complete rescribe and some method of improving the fabric effect on the wings (got an idea for this)
• Scratch build gear bays to replace the horrid Frog set up. Some head scratching here, but already started so no going back !
• Cut out side windows and door
• Possibly open bomb bays up.

As usual, I'll make loads of mistakes and correct them as people notice them and point them out, but hopefully it will turn into something quite pleasing after a Britmodeller team effort! Here's the start. I've already done some scratch building in the gear bays. Bit of artistic license here, but little will be seen. The wings were quite warped, but were bullied straight. Next step to scribe panel lines in and build the fabric effect up.

Cheers, Neil

[Val]

Looking forward to seeing this bad boy take shape

[perdu]

This will be nice

Always liked the downhill flier

b

[chaddy]

I'm pulling up a chair, opening a bottle of Wainright, and settling down for this.

[Jonny]

At last!

I've been hoping someone would start this - I've the kit and the replacement engines so here's hoping I can follow you, Neil. I'm not sure about the transparencies although the kit ones are quite dire. I was wondering about the etched cockpit set too. All of which means I'll be several steps beind the 'In Progress'.

[Neil Lambess]

Can i just quickly point out that there was a big discussion on here within the last couple of years pointing out that the Frog kits rear fuselage/turrent width WAS accurate (somebody measured the surviving Whitley rear turret ) and that its just an badly drawn plan /internet myth that it does need to be widened.....!

if i recall the thread had Armstrong Whitworth sourced plans that matched the guys measurements.....

[Neil Lambess]

found the thread ...starts at about post #50

http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/79881-anyone-got-the-fly-172-whitley-yet/page-3?hl=whitley

so looks like the Frog width is fine

those resin engines are a definate must tho ! i got some for the FLY kit....

[woody37]

Cheers guys,

I'll have to look more into this. As I'm using the Falcon rear turret, it may need widening to make the proportions look right. Some dry fitting should reveal the best solution.

Jonny, I used the etch set on my previous one along with Falcon set, definitely recommend them. The only thing to consider is that the Falcon nose transparency is moulded as one piece when in fact there is a moveable turret and a fixed clear rear fairing. I think I'll be trying to create a new front turret and just cut away the supplied Falcon part to make room for it. I haven't committed to this yet, see how things go.

Got some primer on one of the resin engines last night. They will need some tidying up but are much better than the kit parts

[Martian]

The Whitley is my favorite WW2 bomber so I am especially looking forward to seeing how this one progresses.

Martin

[gingerbob]

That's an unusual statement, Martin.

I have to admit when I looked at the bits and thought about it I found myself thinking a 48th one would be nifty... but I can't really see that being first on any model company's list! (and no, I don't really fancy tackling one of those vacs that has bulges vaguely reminiscent of the overall shape of a Whitley...)

When I saw "Lumbering Twin" my first thought was Manchester, but several types fit the description.

Press on!

bob

[Honeybee]

Woody

Glad to be of service with the nudge in the right direction. I suggest using thin strips of decal sheet to represent the fabtic effect,

Regards

Paul

[Ed Russell]

I'd chuck the Falcon rear turret away (and maybe the front one!). It's modelled on a Lancaster turret and is, unusually for a Falcon set, all wrong. Whitleys mostly used FN4A turrets although there are incorrect articles saying they used the FN20 - both books and internet - and this probably sent Falcon in the wrong direction. Although, to be fair, Whitleys did use more than one sort of rear turret, you can't squeeze a real FN20 turret in there.

Neil above is quite correct, measuring a real Whitley turret showed the Frog (and Fly) one to be dimensionally accurate.

I'm planning a Whitley twin set sometime so I'll watch with interest.

Edited May 21, 2013 by Ed Russell

[woody37]

Woody

Glad to be of service with the nudge in the right direction. I suggest using thin strips of decal sheet to represent the fabtic effect,

Regards

Paul

I had a first attempt by masking and spraying primer to build up the ribs, but never built it up enough. I'll try that next, or perhaps solar trim to see which looks the best

Cheers

I'd chuck the Falcon rear turret away (and maybe the front one!). It's modelled on a Lancaster turret and is, unusually for a Falcon set, all wrong. Whitleys mostly used FN4A turrets although there are incorrect articles saying they used the FN20 - both books and internet - and this probably sent Falcon in the wrong direction. Although, to be fair, Whitleys did use more than one sort of rear turret, you can't squeeze a real FN20 turret in there.

Any idea where to get the right turret ?

[Jonny]

Got some primer on one of the resin engines last night. They will need some tidying up but are much better than the kit parts

I have the resin engines. I'm a bit worried about the flash in the radiator outlets which *definitely* needs cleaning up. Any iseas about how to do that? The radiator fronts look super, infinitely better that the Frog offering!

Oh - thanks for your reply - I'll see about buying the Etch set. Not sure about Falcon having read the recent comments!

[woody37]

I've started to clean the engines up Jonny. I had a big blob of resin in the radiator outlets so cut it away with a modelling scalpel. I was thinking of using some thin plasticard to overlay the flap and slot (ooo er !!) to give it more definition. That would hide any imperfections in the surface. As it will more than likely be black, it won't be too noticeable either way.

I wouldn't fear about the Falcon set. I may still use the rear turret if I can't make my own. Here's the one I did years ago using the Falcon set:

[general melchett]

Nice choice Neil, I'm hoping to start one of these at some point too since Geoff handed me the old DB resins Tiger engine replacement set, (managed to wrestle it from Honeybees grasp at MK !). I also represent the fabric effect using decal strips too but Solar film is a good idea, a lot of folks seem to represent the whole area using 5 thou card scribed from the rear.The Frise type ailerons are wrong too as the top one is the same size as the lower and needs resizing and the chin under the nose is incorrect having a lip that shouldn't be there, you'd be better off cutting the area out and replacing with card, I'd also heard that the rear and front Falcon turrets were wrong, the wheels are naff too, but hey where to stop.......have to dig out my Whitley books.

All good fun....

[Forlornhope]

G'day Neil, its been awhile. I picked this kit up myself a few weeks ago so I'll be watching how you go with yours

I really like the one you have built already though. Hope ya well

Cheers Callum

[Martian]

That's an unusual statement, Martin.

Why so? Everyone knows I am a bit wierd and as such tend to go for the wierd and wonderful in the way of subject matter. This was also one of my favortie kits as a kid. I think it was inspired by my reading Leonard Cheshire's autobiograpy.

Martin

[Ed Russell]

When the Fly kit came out I compiled a list of Frog defects as an aide-memoire. This amended list is largely based on Robert Rensch's list in 72scalemodeller forum.

1. The engines are canted upwards at the wrong angle.
2. The engine cowlings themselves are incorrectly shaped and need refinement, especially the radiator intakes, which need opening out and detailing.
3. The ailerons should be of the Frise variety - they should be narrower on the upper surfaces than on the underside..
4. The bomb-aimer's transparency is too narrow and offset to one side of the nose
5. The nose turret should be a complete transparent unit
6. There is a bulkhead at the rear of the side transparencies with a circular window in its centre.
7. There is an outlet vent on top of the fuselage, just above and behind the wireless operator's position, moulded on the centre-line. It should be offset to port.
8. The cockpit canopy is thick and distorted. There is a vac-formed replacement from Falcon/Squadron which could be used. Unfortunately the nose turret from the same set cannot be used because it doesn't include the rear half of the dome (as mentioned above) and tail turret is too wide (FN.20).
9. The propellers and spinners are unlike those of a Whitley, the shape of the blades wrong, the diameter too small and the spinners too small and pointed.
10. The instrument panel is mounted too far back inside the cockpit, beneath a coaming that shouldn't be there at all. The cockpit opening follows the v-shape formed by the windscreen, with the instrument panel situated at the point.
11. The fins need reducing in height immediately in front of the tops of the rudders. This allows lateral movement of the large rudder mass-balances, which will need to be added

[woody37]

Some very useful info here guys, cheers.

Callum, how you doing mate, been a while. Hope you're well ?

Is it the lower or upper ailerons that need modifying ? I'm kinda hoping the lower !

I did a bit of experimenting last night and found that masking off the ribs and over painting with a brush build them up quite well. I tried the decal way, but got sick of the decal moving !!

If it's the upper aileron that needs correcting, then the ribs that I've already done will need redoing.

Whilst I agree with Ed's comments above, there may be some sacrifices to be made. See how we go. Skill, patience and sanity can be limiting factors

Edit...note to ones self. Get your Warpaint Series out and use that you plonka, that's what you bought it for !!!!

Upper Aileron does indeed need correcting....poo !

[kev67]

Great start, my dad done his training in these, jumping out a small hole in the back, which he said if you did not jump properly you would probably loose a few teeth

[general melchett]

Sorry Neil but it's the top one that needs resizing, should be narrower in chord than the lower, ( not sure exactly by how much though),.....the long list is a bit depressing I know but you'll make a great job of it.

[johnd]

Well,

there's certainly a feeling of bad news/good news about this thread. The bad news is that list of faults and the knowledge that the rear fuselage is in fact not too narrow (rendering my wangled Lancaster rear turret useless) - the good news is that woody is going to sort it all out and all will be explained (no pressure).

John.

[tonyot]

Great start, my dad done his training in these, jumping out a small hole in the back, which he said if you did not jump properly you would probably loose a few teeth

Hiya Kev,

They used to call it `ringing the bell' if you clocked the exit hole in a Whitley, which was the opening for the old belly turret. If you went at it too eagerly you bashed your face on the opposite rim and if you slipped over the edge like a wet kipper your parachute pack didn`t clear the hole behind you and tipped your face right into the opposite rim again, so you had to time it just right......they used to call the resulting cuts, broken noses and missing teeth `Whitley Rash'!! No wonder they were glad that the Dakota arrived upon the scene with its more gentlemanly side door exit, although people were still ringing the bell well into the 1960`s aboard Beverley`s and the Balloon, although these had much bigger holes to jump through!

Neil,

Nice to see you doing a Whitley mate, and I`m sure you`ll do just as good a job as your other bombers, I`m really looking forward to seeing this one come to life! Personally I`d have been delighted with the previous one that you made, it looks brilliant! Any idea which scheme you are going to do it in?

Cheers

Tony O

Edited May 23, 2013 by tonyot

[Viking]

Nice to see you are continuing the Bomber Command project Neil. I always like the look of the Whitley but it seems you have your work cut out on this one!

Keep posting, I want to see progress here and I'm sure you'll do the old girl Justice.

Cheers

John