China (Nationalists): Curtiss Hawk III

[Old Man]

I will be doing a model of this mainstay of the Chinese fighter arm at the start of war with Japan in 1937.

Here, for those unfamiliar with the type, is a picture of the first batch delivered, taken at Nanking late in 1936:

I will be using the Special Hobby 1/72 kit of the type, a fairly recent re-working of the original MPM limited run kit.

[Col.]

Not only an unusual choice of machine but also from a little-known conflict that interests me. Excellent choice

[CliffB]

It's a weird beast Old Man, with that early adoption of a retractable u/c.

Was it worth the effort do you know, given all the drag that a biplane has anyway?

Cliff

[Old Man]

Not only an unusual choice of machine but also from a little-known conflict that interests me. Excellent choice

Thank you, Sir. These had a mixed record. At the start, they did very well intercepting unescorted bombers, but not so well over Shanghai as attack planes opposed to even obsolescent Japanese Navy fighters. Once the Mitsubishi Type 96 monoplanes came into service, they were put at a great disadvantage.

It's a weird beast Old Man, with that early adoption of a retractable u/c.

Was it worth the effort do you know, given all the drag that a biplane has anyway?

Cliff

Thank you, Sir. You ask an interesting question, and of course, whether it was worth it requires the further question 'compared to what?' Despite the difference in profile about the nose, this was still basically the U.S. Navy BFC-1 Goshawk, which in turn was basically a P-6E with a radial instead of a Vee motor, and that was basically the old P-1 with a more powerful Vee motor: Curtiss design in the Hawk line really did not change much from the early twenties, except for motors and small tweaks here and there. The Hawk III could manage 225mph, well above the Goshawk (and P-6E), which got a bit over 200mph, but some of that, relative to the Goshawk, was a more powerful motor, and some of it relative to the P-6E was lighter weight. This speed compared well with that of some well-regarded contemporaries, such as the Fiat Cr-32 and the Polikarpov I-15 and Gloster Gauntlet, though Kawasaki's Type 95 Army Fighter biplane managed about 250mph, and with fixed gear, while the monoplane Boeing P-26 and Polikarpov I-16 were faster, the latter by a great deal. In the U.S., Grumman was already providing retracting gear biplane fighters (the two-seat FF-1) to the Navy, and the Navy wanted this feature in future equipment, so Curtiss had to accommodate the customer. There were many problems with the Navy version of this machine (in fact, it was an abominable and dangerous failure), though its faults did not involve the landing gear much. While the Curtiss was faster than the two-seat Grumman, it was slower than the single-seat Grumman biplane that eventually went into service (the F2F). Grumman got the Navy's single-seat business, though Curtiss could still sell them dive-bombers. Compared to the original P-1 Hawk, which used the same basic structure including wing-plan, the Hawk III, the final Hawk, was half again as fast, and more than half again the horsepower.

So something certainly was gained by the retracting landing gear, but only enough to keep an old design able to compete with some newer ones, and there was nothing more that could be wrung out of the form: all the tooth-paste was out of the tube at last, and that was that....

Edited December 22, 2014 by Old Man

[Panoz]

You've probably seen this one before:

Not the following ones though...

Notice that unlike the top photo the bottom of the fuselage of these Hawks is painted light grey.

Just FYI...

[Old Man]

Thank you for the pictures, Sir. Much appreciated.

The two close shots of nose and pilots I recall seeing some years ago; someone had posted up an album of an elder relative on a now defunct site, and I lost to a hard-drive crash the machine I had many saved to. I think they were taken in training.

The line-up headed by No. 41 I have seen, with caption information suggesting it is a training unit later in the war, which would accord with the two digit number, which I understand was standard marking practice for such.

The wreck of a '24xx' I saw on a Chinese modeler's site. I read it as light grey undersurface as well, and thought some pictures of the much-photographed '2503' there also showed such on the under-surface.

I am not sure what to do about it, in terms of finish. The monochrome is pretty well established as standard CNAF practice. In the '41' line-up, the paler tone seems confined to the fuselage; the roundel blue shows paler than the rest of the under-surface wing-tip. I would be glad of your thoughts on the question of coloring here.

One possibility is that when Soviet equipment arrived after 1937, some paints were supplied or made up, and some elements of Soviet practice followed when machines were refurbished.

At this point I am leaning towards Col. Kao's 'IV-1', which I feel safe in doing as monochrome dark green.

[Panoz]

The line-up headed by No. 41 I have seen, with caption information suggesting it is a training unit later in the war, which would accord with the two digit number, which I understand was standard marking practice for such.

The wreck of a '24xx' I saw on a Chinese modeler's site. I read it as light grey undersurface as well, and thought some pictures of the much-photographed '2503' there also showed such on the under-surface.

I am not sure what to do about it, in terms of finish. The monochrome is pretty well established as standard CNAF practice. In the '41' line-up, the paler tone seems confined to the fuselage; the roundel blue shows paler than the rest of the under-surface wing-tip. I would be glad of your thoughts on the question of coloring here.

One possibility is that when Soviet equipment arrived after 1937, some paints were supplied or made up, and some elements of Soviet practice followed when machines were refurbished.

Looking again at the lineup headed by 41, I think that only the bottom of the fuselage is light grey; undersurfaces look to be dark green.

By examining the photo more carefully I noticed that the other Hawk IIIs are dark green overall.

My Nationalist Chinese AF references are practically none existent but I have seen a photo of a Hawk II being pushed out of the CAMCO factory after refurbishment and it's gloss dark green overall so maybe photos 2,3 & 4 in my post show the aircraft as supplied from the US (notice that upper surfaces of those aircraft are noticeably lighter).

Edited December 31, 2014 by Panoz

[AaCee26]

Hi Old Man and Panoz!

I have also been planning to built this same model so it is very interesting to see this discussion and those great photos!

IV-1 seems to be overall green in Old Man's photo, a couple of colour profiles and also the replica in the Chinese aviation museum is painted that way. Only exception is the drop tank in a Chinese profile looking like natural metal,.

Cheers,

AaCee

[Old Man]

Hi Old Man and Panoz!

I have also been planning to built this same model so it is very interesting to see this discussion and those great photos!

IV-1 seems to be overall green in Old Man's photo, a couple of colour profiles and also the replica in the Chinese aviation museum is painted that way. Only exception is the drop tank in a Chinese profile looking like natural metal,.

Cheers,

AaCee

A worthy project, Sir. Hope this helps. I intend to address a couple of issues on this kit in the build log; this is not my first pass at it.

Looking again at the lineup headed by 41, I think that only the bottom of the fuselage is light grey; undersurfaces look to be dark green.

By examining the photo more carefully I noticed that the other Hawk IIIs are dark green overall.

My Nationalist Chinese AF references are practically none existent but I have seen a photo of a Hawk II being pushed out of the CAMCO factory after refurbishment and it's gloss dark green overall so maybe photos 2,3 & 4 in my post show the aircraft as supplied from the US (notice that upper surfaces of those aircraft are noticeably lighter).

I agree with your take on the '41' line-up. One further thing which identifies these as training machines is the bare workings of the tail wheel. This was not a feature of first-line machines early in the fighting.

U.S. influence is certainly a possibility on late training use. But when the Hawks were purchased and delivery began (1936), U.S. practice was yellow wings, with blue fuselages for the Army and silver for the Navy. Temporary camouflage finishes were envisioned, but these were disruptive patterns in several colors, on both upper and lower surfaces. I agree those close-up shots with pilots look quite like U.S. Olive Drab over Neutral Gray, which only became a standard U.S. finish around 1940.

Here is another shot, probably of the same training unit as the '41' line-up, judging by the font:

Here is another picture of the wreck of 2408:

Judging by the shadows, it seems the sun is just about over-head, and this suggests that the seemingly lighter under-surface area might be an artifact of the light, resulting from strong light directly on some surfaces and not on others.

Here is a picture of a mass display, certainly pre-war, but probably not by much:

Even allowing for shadow, these look dark over-all. This is the Group commanded by Col Kao, of IV-1.

Here are two pictures of the well-photographed '2503', which became a sort of tourist attraction after coming down on the Shanghai race-track.

Note the intact cover of the tail wheel works, as well as the seeming mono-chrome. This plane was part of the same Group as 24th squadron.

Here is a link to a short film of the wreckage of 2503 (it may take a little while to load), which shows under-surface of a lower wing clearly, among other things...

http://www.t3licensing.com/license/clip/635031_009.do

Edited January 2, 2015 by Old Man

[Old Man]

Under way on this in earnest now, Gentlemen.

Here is the kit shot....

This kit is basically a 'do-over' of the old MPM offering, and while it is improved in some ways, remains an old-line limited run offering in many ways.

First order of business was correcting the face-plate.

The picture shows an unaltered piece at the top, one altered for this build at the bottom, both butted up against a straight edge. Note how the un-altered piece would have the motor tipped off the line of flight.

To correct this I cut away the face-plate, and sanded back a bit to get the front square. Once the fuselage is assembled, it will be built back up a little.

I have also pierced proper slots for the retracting gear main legs.

The motor has been cut off its resin blocks, and is resting in the assembled cowling.

I am starting on the interior now.

For reference, here is a link to an exhaustive walk-around of a surviving Hawk III in Thailand: the Thai version differs in some small detail from the Chinese, but the pictures are of great use for anyone wanted to try and super-detail a model of this machine:

http://scalemodels.ru/modules/photo/viewcat_cid_580.html

[Old Man]

Gotten in a good start on the interior here. This was something of a production with Curtiss Hawk biplanes....

Here is the port side prepared with a solid attachment for the floor, and a scratch-built rear bulkhead. The kit makes a decent stab at the cockpit, but comes up far short. It provided a build-up at the upper edges of the opening which is hugely overstated, (and would prevent closing the fuselage if the seat were properly placed). I took this down a great deal.

Here is the basic cockpit 'tub', using the kit floor and seat, the latter thinned considerably and mounted on a block of scrap. Curtiss lined the inside of the cockpit walls with aluminum sheet, which enclosed structural members and some mechanisms, and shielded the pilot from engine fumes. Enclosures for some structural members on the sides remain to be added, as well as some other detailing.

Here is the 'tub' fitted into the port fuselage half. Note the scratched side-pieces nets in under the thick bit at the cockpit rim (which enclosed the upper longeron).

Next order of business will be finishing the cockpit and closing the fuselage.

[Col.]

That interior is a bit different from what I expected to see from an aircraft of this era. Good work against what you are given, or not given as the case may be, in the kit.

[CliffB]

Nice attention to detail Old Man, which will make a big difference with that open cockpit

Cliff

[Old Man]

That interior is a bit different from what I expected to see from an aircraft of this era. Good work against what you are given, or not given as the case may be, in the kit.

Thank you, Sir. The 'lined cockpit', eliminating drafts and fumes for pilot comfort and shielding mechanisms and structural elements from exposure, was a selling point for Curtiss salesmen. In some of their interior resin sets, the Starfightyer Decals people come closest to getting it right, though RS models in their Hawk II/Goshawk model comes very close.

Nice attention to detail Old Man, which will make a big difference with that open cockpit

Cliff

Thank you, Sir. Unfortunately, less of this is visible once the fuselage is closed than you might expect; it is a fairly small opening....

[Old Man]

Bit of an update, though unfortunately picture-less owing to press of other matters on the home front. I do want to make it clear this is very much a live project, however. Cockpit is complete. This coming week I will have some bits to give a positive attachment for the landing gear in, and get the fuselage closed up, at a minimum.

[Old Man]

Here is how the cockpit construction appeared when the 'pictureless' up-date was posted:

Here it is tucked into place in the port fuselage half....

Here it is with final bits of color in....

Instruments are pieced together from various decal instrument panels.

The next thing was to make proper representations of the recesses in the wheel wells, and by doing so, provide a positive attachment for the main gear legs in future. More detail will become apparent at a later stage, but much had to be done before closing the fuselage.

Here is the fuselage closed....

Instructions would have you attach the piece that goes between the lobes into which the gear retracts after joining the fuselage halves, but this is a bad idea. Fit of the piece is not too good. It needs a good deal of test-fitting and careful adjustment of mating surfaces, and should be glued to one fuselage half or the other before the halves are put together. The piece at the front is the engine mount from an RS Models Hawk II; using this piece saved some time, and the kit is earmarked for a conversion that would not use this piece.

Here is the motor fit into the borrowed engine mount:

A little trimming was required, but this puts the motor at the right height and alignment.

Finally, here is a look into the finished cockpit....

(on the sidewall are the charger handles for the starboard gun, and the crank for retracting the landing gear)

Next step should be attaching lower wings and tail surfaces....

[CliffB]

No mistaking that it is Curtiss now

Cliff

[Old Man]

No mistaking that it is Curtiss now

Cliff

It is a distinctive profile, Sir, isn't it?

I got in some solid work on this one over the week; in fact it is ready for a coat of primer, and some color....

Here some bits that had to go on the nose. The small tear-drop blister comes with the kit, it is for the U.S. and Chinese versions (the Thai version had a different, much larger bump here, and that was one of the problems with the earlier MPM kit, that it had the Thai blister moulded on, and so needed some conversion to make a Chinese model). I do not know what the white vertical bit is, but it shows up in photographs. The kit is supposed to have a piece for this (the instructions show it) but it was not on the sprue; I don't know if it was a short-shot or the the wrong sprue packed or what, but I am pretty sure I did not lose it, and it was not hard to make an acceptable replacement. The bit at the top is a carburetor intake: this is included in the U.S. Navy boxing, but does not seem to be in the Chinese one (it is not in the instructions or the parts diagram). Photographs show it, however, and it seems to have been standard with Cyclone motors. So I made one, taking initial dimensions from a Monogram Goshawk kit. I have done some test-fits with the motor in place and lit looks like it will work with cowling (I was not able to make it fit when I did the U.S. version a while back, which is why I did some of the work on the nose I have done this time).

The wings and tail surfaces are straight butt-joints, and not much fun, that latter particularly. Oddly, both should have 'panel lines' at the joints, for the wing roots because there was no continuity between the metal fillet and the fabric wing, and at the tail because the incidence was variable, and it pivoted on the rear spar, so there was actually a hair of daylight every where but where the spars passed into the fuselage.

The wing pieces had hugely oversized 'walkways', with I sanded down, and once attached, needed to have proper trailing edge cut-outs trimmed in (both flaws were present in the old MPM kit too).

Here is a look at the odd 'tunnel' belly of this machine, one of its most distinctive features....

Note the disturbed plastic near the wing-tips. The wings come with bell-crank fairings moulded on, but unfortunately, they rise within the area covered by the 'sun' marking, and there is no way a decal could be put down over them properly, as they are about 3mm long, near 2mm wide, and over 1mm high. I have trimmed them off and preserved them in the bag containing the clear pieces, and will put them back on after the decals go down (when they will have to be poainted to match...)....

[CliffB]

I hadn't appreciated that the underside of these aircraftwas that shape. As you say Old Man, very distinctive.

I'm looking forward to seeing the paintwork start

Cliff

[Speedman]

Although the aircraft has some very unusual lines, there's something appealing about the overall look of it. Great job on the cockpit

[Tom Cooper]

Thought the same: very unusual but good-looking.

And cool work on cockpit and details, Old Man.

[Old Man]

Thank you, Gentlemen. It is true this has 'interesting' lines, A very distinctive aircraft.

Test-fitting left me in no doubt the cowling would have to be enlarged. This is not based on any drawing comparison, but simply on the relation of the part to the nose; there is simply no way the cowling provided would accommodate the various exhaust stubs that pass between it and the fuselage, as well as over-lap the carburetor intake. So I cracked it open and added shims....

This has to be done at four locations or it turns the circle to an oval. The diameter has been increased by about a half millimeter, which seems adequate tor the purpose. Since the engine was already undersized for the cowling, it has been necessary to shim up the tops of the cylinders (at the 'horns' of the Cyclone heads) by almost a half millimeter, increasing the diameter of the motor by a full millimeter.

With the cowling in hand, I started painting. First the model got a coat of white primer, and then I began applying thin coats of color. Here is what thew initial stages looks like (natural light)....

Two coats have been applied, first a Model Master NATO green, second a PollyScale British Dark Green. Both have been heavily cut with Future, rendering them translucent (and removing any danger of brush marks). Each has been gone over with a 3000 grit polishing pad after drying.

Next came a coat of home-mixed 'Chinese Green'. This was made by mixing British Dark Green with Neutral Grey (at about three to one) and then adding a touch of Insignia Blue. After this was on and got the polish pad, a final, very thin coat of straight British Dark Green was put on....

There is not going to be very much weathering on this. I intend to depict it at the opening of hostilities, and it was after all the mount of a colonel in command of four fighter squadrons, so it seems fair to suspect it was maintained to a high standard. The metal panels will get a bit of a dark wash, but that is about all.

Here is a look at the cowling in color, with the motor in on a test fit....

The motor has been sprayed silver, and will be finished with various tints and washes....

Edited March 22, 2015 by Old Man

[CliffB]

It is very nice to see some colour going on Old Man

Cliff

[AaCee26]

Two coats have been applied, first a Model Master NATO green, second a PollyScale British Dark Green. Both have been heavily cut with Future, rendering them translucent (and removing any danger of brush marks). Each has been gone over with a 3000 grit polishing pad after drying.

Next came a coat of home-mixed 'Chinese Green'. This was made by mixing British Dark Green with Neutral Grey (at about three to one) and then adding a touch of Insignia Blue. After this was on and got the polish pad, a final, very thin coat of straight British Dark Green was put on....

Thank you, Old Man, for this great reference!

Is there any information about the tone of the green colour over the old colour picture? I think that these kites were painted single dark green in the factory but how about possible re-painting?

Cheers,

AaCee

[Old Man]

Thank you, Old Man, for this great reference!

Is there any information about the tone of the green colour over the old colour picture? I think that these kites were painted single dark green in the factory but how about possible re-painting?

Cheers,

AaCee

There is a surviving relic of a Hawk III (2503, which is pictured early in the thread) preserved in Japan.

Here is a 'chip' of the color:

Both these are from Mr. Nick Millman and his 'Aviation of Japan' site:

http://www.aviationofjapan.com/

How the paint may have weathered I am not competent to say, but a lessened intensity and some chalking and yellowing seem likely. Another good mix for the tone is 3 parts British Dark Green, 2 parts RLM Brown Violet, 1 part IJA Light Grey

.

Soviet equipment came finished to Red Air Force specifications, but when refurbished/repaired received Chinese finish. Fabric had to be replaced at intervals, the length depending on the quality of the cloth and the characteristics of the dope/paint used. Colored dopes could require fabric replacement after a year or less; aluminum doped fabric could last several years.

I do not know why some Hawk III types (photographs earlier in the thread), had pale undersides. It may well have been that those operated late in the war as trainers were finished with U.S.A.A.F. paints when repaired/refurbished.

Edited March 23, 2015 by Old Man