Troy Smith Posted October 3, 2018 Share Posted October 3, 2018 (edited) 31 minutes ago, michael_hase said: For the Mk. IIc my fisrt (and very personal) option is the AX Mk. IIc which again has some issues to be corrected, but still is no. 1 for me. I am still struggling with the AZ-(KP-models Mk. IIc which is too short in length and also has a very thick wing. Do you mean an Airfix boxing of the old Heller IIc kit? (also boxed by Smer) That is salvagable The Airfix IIc from about 10 years ago is unsalvagable garbage, because it is based on what should be respectable plans, (probably with FK Mason's name on them) which it matches very well, but are the plans are very wrong... this is why I posted the article by Arthur Bentley, and the how and why of so many bad Hurricane plans.. A brief rundown, tail too small, wrong rudder shape, fuselage spine wrong angle, wing shape wrong, elevators wrong, wrong fuselage panelling, pencil nose, awful prop.... and that's from a quick inspection. compare it's a travesty.... Edited October 3, 2018 by Troy Smith spelling 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael_hase Posted October 3, 2018 Share Posted October 3, 2018 (edited) Yes and no... The points you are mentioning are correct, however dimensions and the shape of the fuselage are not so bad. I have compared these with AB´s plans and albeit there is some work to do it is far more accurate than the AZ-thing. The wings I haven´t checked yet but will do so quickly... We have a holiday today in Germany (Re-unification day) so there will be some time. The old Heller thing is not the worst one, too, I still have one done in the 80ies as SEAC-aircraft, wrong as most of us did then concerning paintwork, but still a nice Hurricane... M. Edited October 3, 2018 by michael_hase Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Headroom Posted October 3, 2018 Share Posted October 3, 2018 Here is my Airfix IIc paint mule experiment My only mod was to remove the most of the trench-like panel lines in the wings. Otherwise it’s warts and all 😬 Trevor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dogsbody Posted October 3, 2018 Share Posted October 3, 2018 Just to clarify a point, it is NOT an oil cooling ring behind the prop on a Hurricane. It is an oil deflector, to keep oil from the propeller pitch control spraying back onto the windscreen. Chris 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael_hase Posted October 3, 2018 Share Posted October 3, 2018 Of course, it was added later and particularly used with Mk. II-IV. Please forgive my poor English Cheers M. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dogsbody Posted October 3, 2018 Share Posted October 3, 2018 (edited) On 10/3/2018 at 11:40 AM, michael_hase said: Of course, it was added later and particularly used with Mk. II-IV. Please forgive my poor English Cheers M. No worries. Your English is fine and easily understood. It's just me being an old anal-retentive son of a dog's mother. Chris Edited October 4, 2018 by dogsbody 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevSmar Posted October 6, 2018 Share Posted October 6, 2018 I found this in the Pilots Notes: I’ve looked at the scant images I have of the 90 gallon tanks, and unfortunately they don’t show the cockpit decking modification that would have been done to fit the filler for the oil tank. I’d definitely interested to see images of this modification... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevSmar Posted October 6, 2018 Share Posted October 6, 2018 A nice article on tail markings: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troy Smith Posted October 6, 2018 Share Posted October 6, 2018 A few interesting points, but if you have been studying the Hurricane for 40 years then you would know there is no "mkIa" which makes me wonder how much attention the author has paid. @StevSmar perhaps you can link the author with Ducimus scans? I don't do farcebook so can't do this. Its late, and I'm tired and crabby.... Good to see you back though Steve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Boak Posted October 6, 2018 Share Posted October 6, 2018 On 10/3/2018 at 10:00 AM, michael_hase said: Yes and no... The points you are mentioning are correct, however dimensions and the shape of the fuselage are not so bad. I have compared these with AB´s plans and albeit there is some work to do it is far more accurate than the AZ-thing. Michael: I thought the AZ Hurricane was pretty good, among the best if not the best 1/72 kit available. My copy of the Bentley plans is not readily accessible, so I compared it with the Hasegawa kit which I know does match the plans. The fuselage matched very well, though the wings were a little short in span (if otherwise fine). But this is the AZ Mk.IV. I believe this is a more recent tooling than the Mk.IIc. Steve/RE: The reason for the early variation in the fin flash is because they were introduced in May 1940, and the Air Ministry was not precise enough in describing what they required. So units and manufacturers had to paint their own aircraft to their own interpretation. Having the flash the full fin depth and width was perhaps the most common. This matter was tidied up when convenient to be the familiar rectangle backing up to the rudder. I suggest that anyone interested should track down the Ducimus Camouflage and Markings publication on the Hurricane. I gather this is available as a pdf. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevSmar Posted October 7, 2018 Share Posted October 7, 2018 (edited) @Troy Smith and @Graham Boak Thanks for reminding me about the Ducimus booklet on camouflage and markings, I’ll have to re-examine my copy again in light of you recommending it’s accuracy. ( @Troy Smith, I have been less active on the forum. Mainly because I’ve been having a great deal of fun over summer playing with my Hurricane 3D solid model. I hope to share some images of the bare fuselage framework as soon as I finalize a few more parts) Edited October 7, 2018 by StevSmar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dogsbody Posted October 7, 2018 Share Posted October 7, 2018 19 hours ago, Graham Boak said: Michael: I thought the AZ Hurricane was pretty good, among the best if not the best 1/72 kit available. My copy of the Bentley plans is not readily accessible, so I compared it with the Hasegawa kit which I know does match the plans. The fuselage matched very well, though the wings were a little short in span (if otherwise fine). But this is the AZ Mk.IV. I believe this is a more recent tooling than the Mk.IIc. Steve/RE: The reason for the early variation in the fin flash is because they were introduced in May 1940, and the Air Ministry was not precise enough in describing what they required. So units and manufacturers had to paint their own aircraft to their own interpretation. Having the flash the full fin depth and width was perhaps the most common. This matter was tidied up when convenient to be the familiar rectangle backing up to the rudder. I suggest that anyone interested should track down the Ducimus Camouflage and Markings publication on the Hurricane. I gather this is available as a pdf. The Ducimus Camouflage and Markings booklet can be viewed here: https://boxartden.com/reference/gallery/index.php/Modeling-References/Camoflage-Markings/03-Hawker-Hurricane Chris 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevSmar Posted October 11, 2018 Share Posted October 11, 2018 In Richard Franks “The Hawker Hurricane, a comprehensive guide” there is an interesting diagram on page 99 showing the MET modifications to the Hurricane. I finally came across a photograph showing what I believe is this modification in Philip Birtles “Hawker Hurricane, The multirole fighter”!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Work In Progress Posted October 11, 2018 Share Posted October 11, 2018 "Vertical assents"? Is the rest of the book that bad?? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevSmar Posted October 13, 2018 Share Posted October 13, 2018 On 10/11/2018 at 3:03 AM, Work In Progress said: "Vertical assents"? Is the rest of the book that bad?? Unfortunately there are quite a lot of grammatical errors.... BUT- it has a picture of a MET Hurricane, a first for my collection!!! (I agree, the Hurricane seems to be pointing the wrong way for a vertical assent...) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Procopius Posted October 13, 2018 Share Posted October 13, 2018 On 10/11/2018 at 3:03 AM, Work In Progress said: "Vertical assents"? Is the rest of the book that bad?? It's pretty bad. Not a lot of focus to it, a very meandering operational history of the Hurricane. I found it deeply disappointing. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevSmar Posted October 31, 2018 Share Posted October 31, 2018 I found the bomb racks used on this Hurricane interesting: From: https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/C352372 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dogsbody Posted October 31, 2018 Share Posted October 31, 2018 3 hours ago, StevSmar said: I found the bomb racks used on this Hurricane interesting: From: https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/C352372 Looks to be a standard Light Series Bomb Rack, as you might see under the rear fuselage of a Blenheim bomber or on the winglets of a Lysander. Chris 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClaudioN Posted October 31, 2018 Share Posted October 31, 2018 On 10/13/2018 at 3:42 AM, Procopius said: It's pretty bad. Not a lot of focus to it, a very meandering operational history of the Hurricane. I found it deeply disappointing. On 10/13/2018 at 2:22 AM, StevSmar said: Unfortunately there are quite a lot of grammatical errors.... BUT- it has a picture of a MET Hurricane, a first for my collection!!! (I agree, the Hurricane seems to be pointing the wrong way for a vertical assent...) Partly agree with both. Text is not an easy read (in some places it looks like a collection of snippets), but there are some pictures I had not seen before. I guess dealing with the Hurricane must not be easy. Claudio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClaudioN Posted October 31, 2018 Share Posted October 31, 2018 1 hour ago, dogsbody said: Looks to be a standard Light Series Bomb Rack, as you might see under the rear fuselage of a Blenheim bomber or on the winglets of a Lysander. Chris Not a standard fit on a Hurricane, I suppose? Claudio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Boak Posted October 31, 2018 Share Posted October 31, 2018 They were used by 33 Sq in the desert, claiming to be the first Hurribomber unit. Using old Mk.Is. The Light Series Bomb Carrier was intended to be used on any aircraft. Later Hurribomber were strengthened wing Mk.Iis with the larger Store Carrier partially internal in each wing, taking up one of the machine gun bays. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gazontipede Posted November 1, 2018 Share Posted November 1, 2018 (edited) Nice photos! I seem to recall this desert early 'Hurribomber' modification being mentioned in one of the Chris Shores books on the Mediterranean Air War. I believe he also mentioned a load-out of 24(?) anti-tank bomblets on these Mk.I(trop) conversions too. However, I've never for the life of me been able to pin down exactly what these were meant to be. Some sort of sticky bomb (No. 74 grenade) lashup?? The only other thing I can think of, the 9lb AT bomblet (Puffball?) was much later and never saw service IIRC. Any ideas anyone? Edited November 1, 2018 by Gazontipede wrangling of the grammar, probably unsuccessfully Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackster Posted November 6, 2018 Share Posted November 6, 2018 Hi I would like to build Hurricane Mk1 V6985 at Dyce airfield in March of 1941. It belonged at that time to 111 Sqn who had the Sqn code JU. Is there any way that I can find out the aircraft letter used, or are these lost in the mists of time? For the kit I am using the Airfix 1/48 Mk1 with a three blade prop, are there any mods I need to do to the kit? Regards Kevin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Boak Posted November 6, 2018 Share Posted November 6, 2018 I don't know that one, but in February V6701 was JU.F, with the large Rotol spinner. Source Fighter Squadrons of the RAF, a photo on p239. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
72modeler Posted November 6, 2018 Share Posted November 6, 2018 Here's one you don't see every day! At first I thought this was a photo of a Mk IV, but I can just make out the gun ports for the eight .303's and the fact that the landing lights aren't faired over, and the radiator appears to be the unarmored type; note the spinner! No date or location was listed- any ideas as to what, where, and when? Neat modeling possibility, but a shame the serial is not visible. Mike https://www.worldwarphotos.info/gallery/uk/raf/hurricane/hawker-hurricane-69-with-rockets/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now