Jump to content

A pair of Airfix Hawks in 1/72. Finished.


Recommended Posts

Nice work there, Steve, looking forward to the rest getting some paint now.

 

Interesting to see you using Tamiya matt white as a primer, I've just done likewise on the cowling for my Hellcat. I initially tried priming it with UMP white (as I'd had a lot of success with the black on my Arado build), but that just ran like crazy. Wiped most of it off while it was still wet, cleaned the last off with some IPA, then used the Tamiya XF-2 thinned 50/50 with their own thinner. A far better result with less hassle.

 

James

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

On 6/23/2022 at 11:03 AM, Terry1954 said:

I'm sure Steve wont mind me sharing a pic I shared with him a while back, all hanging off a good old Buccaneer......

 

IMG20220114081330

 

 

The centre of the three piccies is the one I used as a canvas when designing the CBLS in Fusion, Terry.  I think I said thanks at the time. I hope I said thanks at the time.  If I didn't say thanks at the time I was either neglectful or forgetful.  Neither would do me any credit.....

 

On 6/23/2022 at 1:14 PM, 81-er said:

used the Tamiya XF-2 thinned 50/50 with their own thinner.

 

I used XF-2 thinned 50/50 with Mr Colour levelling thinner James.  Not sure I have any really good reason for thinning Tamiya with Mr CLT save that it mixes quickly and easily and goes smoothly and easily and I've just never had any difficulty airbrushing it or had any needle clog or any of that stuff that I'm too impatient with airbrushing to want to be bothered with...

 

Anyroadup. A pre-hols pre-painting stock take.

 

These (save for the canopies,  the pylon/CBLS/bomblet combo and the the various aerials etc.) are all the subassemblies and/or remaining bits to be added, mostly after painting.

 

85EF7A38-AB64-4E30-A3F5-645EC473EABD

 

The white things at the bottom right are in fact plastic tubes reamed out and thinned to represent the jet pipes.

 

The double slotted flaps were a right pain to scratch using casting resin and plastic strip.  They be much easier now with Fusion and the Mars 3.  Ditto the wheels.

 

The only real decisions left to be made concern the undercarriage doors.  I've got kit parts (the curiously shaped bits of plastic at the top left are (IIRC) Airfix's strange offerings as the nose wheel doors), some aftermarket resin that is a bit thick and ill-defined and some odds and ends of etch from sets various.  Dunno yet what I'll use.  I expect inspiration will strike - but in any event it can wait until after main painting.

 

In parallel I've been giving some thought to my next build....

 

When we were down at the 453rd BG Museum on the 11th June,  Jim the proprietor handed me this:

 

EB58CBAB-4276-4BA0-BCBE-A001B7494760

 

I thought p'raps it was just something he had and he didn't want.....

 

But it turns out the USAAF, 8th Airforce did have a couple of Defiants; TT MkI's -  DR945 and DR944 that served with the 11th Combat Crew Replacement Centre at Bovingdon.

 

So the next build will be another museum build :D

 

This is DR945:

 

A2B98378-0A0B-47EB-8BF2-8C5DE1CD900F

 

 

And DR945's markings are quite well known:

 

D5A2055E-C281-4CB6-9AE0-61C0072ED2E9

And indeed I now know that Classic Airframes did a 1/48 TT Mk1 and what's more included markings for DR945.

 

And what's more ebay has provided me with a set of the Classic Airframe decals - and Amazon has provided a few references:

 

454A7B05-41FF-41D4-B2E1-728B03641A1C

 

BUT.  There's always a but ain't there.  We don't want to do DR945 do we?

 

Nope.  We want to do DR944 don't we?

 

Yep.  First of all cos someone stuck a sharks mouth on it:

 

A54ABE62-0A3F-4B69-B284-21EAD24FBAD0

 

And second (and  most decisively) of all cos someone later did this with it:

 

2337D724-AF18-44A8-8BB7-E2D6F0EB4665

 

That grainy photograph is a photograph taken on 11 May 1945 of Martin Baker's first ever airborne test of a Martin Baker ejection seat (with a dummy - as many/most of us will know that the first manned ejection was from a Meteor).  And the test aircraft is DR944.  After its service with the USAAF DR944 was given to Martin Baker to be used as an ejection seat test aircraft!

 

Well I couldn't ignore the serendipity of a Martin Baker connection now could I?

 

So DR944 it will be.  Trouble is I don't know and haven't yet been able to find out what Unit markings DR944 carried (DR945 was JW-U but DR944?).  So if anyone has any idea please do tell.

 

The other thing of course is that the Airfix kit is a MkI and the TTMkI not only had the turret removed and the rear fuselage built up, but it was also based on the Defiant MkII, which had the merlin XX engine with a longer nose than the MkI to accommodate it.

 

But such differences are why God invented Fusion 360, Chitubox and the Mars 3 ain't it?  And that's why I needed the above plans.

 

So that's a sneak preview of the next build.

 

Of course I'll probably repeat most of the above introduction in the first post of that build - which will be rather boring for you - but on the other had, seeing as I'll have to finish the Hawks first, you'll probably have forgotten it by then and it'll seem new and fresh.....:D

 

 

 

Edited by Fritag
typo
  • Like 17
  • Haha 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, the Hawks are dangerously getting close to the painting stage (and if I say so myself....  :D ) and the new project is already enticing enough :tasty:. I'll have to get my second museum build underway myself,  need a new excuse for another trip to Old Buckenham... :winkgrin:

 

Ciao 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Fritag said:

The centre of the three piccies is the one I used as a canvas when designing the CBLS in Fusion, Terry.  I think I said thanks at the time. I hope I said thanks at the time.  If I didn't say thanks at the time I was either neglectful or forgetful.  Neither would do me any credit.....

 

 

You did indeed say thanks Steve, more than once I think, so your credit rating remains good! 😁

 

The next 453rd BG Museum build looks very interesting indeed, and I say that as the fairly recently appointed (I volunteered 🥴) secretary to the IPMS Target Facilities Special Interest Group. Details here: https://ipmsuk.org/directory/target-facilities/ 

The group comprises a small band of modellers who share an interest in all things Target Facilities related. We hope to display at Telford for the first time this year. One day maybe we will be able to answer such questions as yours on DR944's US service. I can't help with information on that atm and as I'm sure you have found, most internet references bring up the Martin Baker trials period, but other members of the SIG might. They are mostly BM members, and I'm pretty sure they are following this build anyway, but if any of @Martian, @corsaircorp, @Corsairfoxfouruncle or @general melchett can shed any light DR944 in US service, I'm sure they will.

 

Those Hawk bits look thirsty for paint!

 

T

 

 

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Terry1954 said:

 

You did indeed say thanks Steve, more than once I think, so your credit rating remains good! 😁

 

The next 453rd BG Museum build looks very interesting indeed, and I say that as the fairly recently appointed (I volunteered 🥴) secretary to the IPMS Target Facilities Special Interest Group. Details here: https://ipmsuk.org/directory/target-facilities/ 

The group comprises a small band of modellers who share an interest in all things Target Facilities related. We hope to display at Telford for the first time this year. One day maybe we will be able to answer such questions as yours on DR944's US service. I can't help with information on that atm and as I'm sure you have found, most internet references bring up the Martin Baker trials period, but other members of the SIG might. They are mostly BM members, and I'm pretty sure they are following this build anyway, but if any of @Martian, @corsaircorp, @Corsairfoxfouruncle or @general melchett can shed any light DR944 in US service, I'm sure they will.

 

Those Hawk bits look thirsty for paint!

 

T

 

 

I don't have much mostly what you have. I did find this quote from the following page. 
 

DR944 & DR945 were used by the USAAF. The relevant section of DR944's entry reads - 'deld to 46 MU 9.8.42; USAAF Bovingdon (no 11 CCRC) 1.9.42; 10 MU 7.7.44.' That for DR945 has 'deld to 46 MU 9.8.42; USAAF Bovingdon (No 11 CCRC) 1.9.42 coded JW-U; to RN charge at 10 MU 12.12.44.“


https://www.key.aero/forum/historic-aviation/40623-indian-air-force-boulton-paul-defiants?page=1

 

I’ll see if I can find anything else ? 
 

Dennis

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Corsairfoxfouruncle said:

DR944 & DR945 were used by the USAAF. The relevant section of DR944's entry reads - 'deld to 46 MU 9.8.42; USAAF Bovingdon (no 11 CCRC) 1.9.42; 10 MU 7.7.44.' That for DR945 has 'deld to 46 MU 9.8.42; USAAF Bovingdon (No 11 CCRC) 1.9.42 coded JW-U; to RN charge at 10 MU 12.12.44.“

 

Mercy Buckets Dennis.

 

So DR944 and DR945 were both delivered to 46 MU on 9/8/42.  Presumably straight off the production line.  Now I think 46 MU was at Lossiemouth (wikipedia) - which is another little link to me cos I did both the Jag OCU and QWI courses at Lossie :D

 

 And then they both went to USAAF Bovingdon on the same day - 1/9/42.

 

So if DR945 had the code JW-U does it seems reasonable to think DR944 was a JW-? too?

 

According to Wikipedia the squadron codes JW-  were assigned to the Central Fighter Establishment and 44 squadron.  Not sure if that helps :hmmm:

 

Added by edit:  If you look at the photo of DR944 above, I can persuade myself that I can see the bottom portion of a fuselage code on the rear starboard fuselage peeking out below the wing.  Something thin.  Possibly the bottom of a ‘V’ or maybe any of the letters with a single vertical upright. Summat anyway…

 

 

Edited by Fritag
addition
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Fritag said:

So if DR945 had the code JW-U does it seems reasonable to think DR944 was a JW-? too?


I think it would. 
 

1 hour ago, Fritag said:

According to Wikipedia the squadron codes JW-  were assigned to the Central Fighter Establishment and 44 squadron.  Not sure if that helps 

 

Makes some sense, I checked the page below all the way to the 12th Air force and couldn't find a JU code ? So possibly the Defiant was still wearing their RAF codes ? 

 

 

https://www.worldwarphotos.info/usaaf-codes/

 

While checking out the 11th CCRC found a photo of a defiant from the opposite side. Its listed as DR945 and is at the bottom of the page. 
 

https://www.americanairmuseum.com/unit/2

 

This page lists the 11th as training for B-17’s and the 12th CCRC for B-24’s. 
 

http://www.303rdbg.com/h-england-map.html

 

Dennis

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks again Dennis.

 

From more internet research  including the links Dennis provided, it appears that the 2 Defiants were initially on the strength of 326th BS and then subsequently the 11th CCRC.  According to wikipedia the 326th (which deployed to the Bovingdon with B-17Fs) was directed to set up the 11th CCRC.

 

The relevance of this is that Dennis’s link to the USAAF code page:

 

https://www.worldwarphotos.info/usaaf-codes/

 

Lists the 326th as having squadron codes ‘JW’.  

 

Can’t be coincidental so must explain why DR945 is pictured with the codes JW and strongly implies that DR944 would have worn them too.

 

Also this page:

 

https://www.americanairmuseum.com/unit/854

 

List DR945 as having been on the strength of the 326th

 

Still leaves the problem of the individual aircraft code for DR944.  There don’t seem to be any pictures showing the codes.

Edited by Fritag
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Fritag said:

If you look at the photo of DR944 above, I can persuade myself that I can see the bottom portion of a fuselage code on the rear starboard fuselage peeking out below the wing.  Something thin.  Possibly the bottom of a ‘V’ or maybe any of the letters with a single vertical upright. Summat anyway…

 

 

I can also see the bottom of a code in that picture. My thinking says maybe the codes were allocated in sequence, ascending so JW-T for DR944 then JW-U for DR945, but then as you perceive, it does look more like the bottom of a V. If any logic were applied back then, one would think that the codes might have been in close sequence, so T and U or V and U.

 

Not much help, just ideas from my somewhat old brain!

 

T

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Terry1954 said:

I can also see the bottom of a code in that picture. My thinking says maybe the codes were allocated in sequence, ascending so JW-T for DR944 then JW-U for DR945, but then as you perceive, it does look more like the bottom of a V. If any logic were applied back then, one would think that the codes might have been in close sequence, so T and U or V and U.

 

Not much help, just ideas from my somewhat old brain!

 

Almost exactly my thinking too Terry; including the last bit (applied to me) :D  If nothing more definite comes along I’ll probably go with ‘V’ - although I could be persuaded to ‘T’.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Fritag said:

Added by edit:  If you look at the photo of DR944 above, I can persuade myself that I can see the bottom portion of a fuselage code on the rear starboard fuselage peeking out below the wing.  Something thin.  Possibly the bottom of a ‘V’ or maybe any of the letters with a single vertical upright. Summat anyway…

My eyes, admittedly very old organs, don't see a straight upright on that photo but they do see a very familiar RAF letterform in use on pre-owned aircraft.

 

I see a V and that is my opinion, so there.

 

So  a treat in store as you show me how to loft a complete Defiant Mk2 TT fuselage in Fusion360.

 

Wow

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, hendie said:

Is this the monthly vacation or the weekly vacation?

I am obviously sitting at the wrong bar!

 

I would also concur that the code is more than likely to be V, going both from logic and the above photo.

 

Ian

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Brandy said:

I would also concur that the code is more than likely to be V

I totally agree - to the point of saying that if you ask me, that is definitely the bottom of a V you see in that pic.

 

Ciao 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has any one noted that DR945 in the above photo has red surround to its US fuselage markings but the decals have a blue edge ?

Red edge was used briefly in summer of 1943

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Black Knight said:

Has any one noted that DR945 in the above photo has red surround to its US fuselage markings but the decals have a blue edge ?

Red edge was used briefly in summer of 1943

I only see a black and white photo, did I miss one somewhere?

 

Ian

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Black Knight said:

Has any one noted that DR945 in the above photo has red surround to its US fuselage markings but the decals have a blue edge ?

Red edge was used briefly in summer of 1943

 

Profile (yes I know about trusting them) shows a yellow surround - suggesting an overpainted RAF roundel....

 

1 hour ago, Brandy said:

I only see a black and white photo,

 

Which appears to show a lighter surround to the fuselage star and bar.

 

Keith

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/23/2022 at 8:21 AM, Fritag said:

 

 

 

 

30C6537E-C8C8-4041-AE9C-C88DDE56445F

 

 

35E7B120-3C05-47BB-A4BE-BB19C627E643

 

CBLS

 

E3E0C299-E37E-4E2E-965A-56DE7B52E458

 

BAA4AAB4-37A3-4435-A4F6-958B3450A7DD

 

Bomblets

 

E06C3FF3-9759-4931-AD5F-9E027C141F72

 

Bomblets fitted to the CBLS.  That’ll do me in 1/72 scale.

 

F042E496-458A-46D3-BF8F-4AA1E52127B3

 

 

 

Me want....me want.....me want.....

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Haha 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, keefr22 said:

Which appears to show a lighter surround to the fuselage star and bar.

It's tonal, and depends entirely upon the lighting and exposure. Take one of your models and photograph it in black and white under different lighting and angles and you will see that the same colour appears totally different, sometimes looking light, sometimes dark. There is no way you can tell a colour accurately from a black and white photo!

 

Take a look at this then tell me you can pick out the areas that are blue from just looking at the black and white picture!

 

 

 

Ian

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Brandy said:

It's tonal, and depends entirely upon the lighting and exposure. Take one of your models and photograph it in black and white under different lighting and angles and you will see that the same colour appears totally different, sometimes looking light, sometimes dark. There is no way you can tell a colour accurately from a black and white photo!

 

 

And what type of film was used too - orthochromatic, panchromatic, whatever, whether the photograher used a filter (or two!), did any adjustments in developing etc.. I agree completely with what you say and it's entirely supposition! Which is why I said ''appears...lighter'' :)

 

Keith

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Terry1954 said:

just goes to show such things are never just black and white ......... 🤭

........ just 50 shades of grey

 

Cheque please

 

Box on

 

Strickers

  • Haha 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Morning all.

 

Had a great time on hols in Nova Scotia and Newfoundland.  Thoroughly recommended.  Impressive coastal scenery, excellent cycling and hiking, plus whales, sea eagles and puffins (2 of the 3 at the same time/in the same photo).   Oh and a nice little aviation museum in Halifax n’all.  Honourable mention to all the local brewery’s as well - both places had an impressive range of locally brewed beer; personal favourites being the citrusy IPAs to be had in St John’s.  Oh, and good food too - not surprisingly the sea food is excellent.

 

Anyways.  Back to the reality of the day job….

 

And the Hawks.

 

The last (I think) bits and bobs of components that I haven’t done any work on are the undercarriage doors.

 

The Airfix offerings are pretty crude and in several ways just the wrong shape.  I think I can cobble together the main undercarriage doors from some resin and etch sets I’ve got; but for the nose wheel doors it’s back to Fusion and the printer…

 

Not the biggest job in the world:

 

C5D7115F-8B81-443D-8D60-E8435E293AB6

 

And Individually.  Rear door.  This hinges behind the nosewheel leg and attaches to the leg by those 2 protruding struts.

 

BA11A92F-1175-4B86-9FFA-CB3848DCF9BE

 

Starboard side door with hinges drawn in.

 

37BA89EB-ACF6-4D71-B2FA-3299C33F67D9

Seen one side nosewheel door seen’m all - so I’ll spare you a picture of the port door :D 

 

The design is obviously simplified given the constraints of 1/72 scale; but even so they’re small and thin/delicate parts and it’s a challenge to give them adequate support for printing without the supports then being impossible to safely or cleanly remove.

 

My effort at a solution for printing such delicate parts, which I’ve had some success with before, is to design in a support frame in Fusion rather than do it in the slicing software.  I took it a stage further here and provided support all around the doors as follows:

 

Rear door:

 

9C82003E-D56F-4D93-81DA-3B9FFAD88FA9

 

 

Side door:

 

18AAA0D9-F2A3-49AF-8C2F-FA822E8019CF

 

Easily done in Fusion with simple sketched shapes and extrusions.  The rods supporting the parts vary from 0.15 to 0.19mm in diameter.

 

In the Chitubox slicer  software all I needed to do was to apply a few chunky supports to the frames and then slice and print:

 

Rear Door:

 

79E9010B-F348-4ABE-9EFA-7C4F305AFA1F

 

 

2F3EA02F-ED5F-4AE2-8C77-C4E762C47B9C

 

Side Door:

 

4CFA3986-B1C0-467A-8DB2-C5D69D28EDE6

 

6AB2BCB1-9F28-457B-A84A-3497ACF1412E

 

9CA9477B-E1D3-4060-8468-CE753EC12ADE

 

A good thing is that the thin doors (0.2mm thick) are supported all the way around and so have printed without any warping or bending.

 

It’s easier and cleaner to cut through the Fusion designed/placed supports connections than it is to remove Chitubox added support stubs:

 

0F9B8CE7-C4C3-402F-A9B5-50739665E8F0

 

E00E5F81-F7A9-4309-AD96-7571D7486A90

 

And I’ve also got better/more accurate control of where to place the supports in Fusion than Chitubox.

 

I’ll probably at least part cure the doors with a few of the connecting rods still uncut, so as to minimise the chances of bending/warping pre-cure.

 

One more job done….

 

  • Like 17
  • Thanks 1
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...