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

[Paulaero]

7 hours ago, Paulaero said:

Sadly (not) I have just recently found a box with a load of ATC stuff in, including my 3822 will dig it out and find the date and A/C reg.

 

Always wanted to do a model of it in attitude..... 

 

6 hours ago, Fritag said:

XX829.  She was the T-Bird on 6 sqn in the late 80's as 'ET' and I flew her many times - front and back seat.  It was (yet) another check ride in order to become a back-seat captain on the T-bird and by and large only the squadron QFI's QWI's and IRE's were qualified.

I've posted this piccie before, so for them as has seen it before  forgive the repetition.  One of the few times (probably the only time) I was pleased to be in the front seat of a T-bird on a check ride was when a (big) bird strike at low level did this.

 

I could see the proverbial square root of f**k all out the front after that, but matey in the back could see over my head to land it.  This was ET, but I'm not sure  without checking my log book whether it was XX829 or another T-bird wearing the same code letters.

 

RAF QFI's were trimming fascists.  IIRC the mnemonic was PAT (Power Attitude Trim).  Trim, trim, trim, trim bl**dy trim.  Drummed (sometimes literally) into your poor - already maxed out - brain until it became second nature.  But consistent accurate flying (absent cheating with an autopilot ) is just about impossible unless you trim properly; and good instrument flying is utterly impossible.

 

Bog off.  None needed - you know that.

 

The oracle has spoken  Ditto - to one and all.  I'd be mortified if anyone ever took me seriously.  It's such an unknown phenomenon.....

Does that mean I have to do some modelling now?    Or maybe can I start some avoidance activity by challenging the use of the phrase 'silly jet' for the beautiful Hawk? 

Know about the drumming My Instrument instructor would quite literally  drum on the hood I had on until we were perfectly trimmed but good help me if I changed attitude just using the trim wheel 

[Paulaero]

22 hours ago, Ex-FAAWAFU said:

Gib Flight Lynx in 1987?  I think I know who you were flying with; he was my instructor on my Lynx conversion 2 years later (I was still flying the mighty Sea King in 87).

 

Sigh.

 

Happy days. 
 

[And I am SO with you on swapping all those check rides, Steve!]

So it was Lynx ZD258 25/07/87 not sure what mark it was but it was fairly new and impressive. Can't make out the signature looked like the shape of a violin and was LT ?

 

Love to do it in 1/48 but am sure I would have to back  date the Airfix one , guess you would be able to tell me what needed doing ?

 

Paul

[Ex-FAAWAFU]

It isn’t that hard to backdate the Airfix HMA8 to HAS3; RotorCraft do an excellent conversion kit (released in several versions with varying decals), and I’m pretty sure Belcher Bits do as well.

 

Or you could go a stage bigger and just build the Revell 1/32 HAS3!

Edited October 19, 2019 by Ex-FAAWAFU

[Fritag]

Ok so.  Seeing as its Telford next weekend; and seeing as I intend to go to the show; and seeing as it’s faintly possible that I’ll bump into someone as has met me before; and seeing as I’d like to pretend to be an active model maker so as to fit in (altho’ I’m still not gonna wear a fleece)....I did a bit of model making - although it’s a bit of a sorry tale.

 

The Hawks had leading edge stall strips.  Presumably to improve the handling at the stall/increase the pre-stall buffet (I’m just guessing - but the Hawk did if I remember correctly handle beautifully ‘on the buffet’).

 

Can’t say that I remember anything about the stall strips.  Presumably we were taught about them at Hawk groundschool; but I’d have probably had my head full trying to remember the start checks and had little capacity left for small aerodynamic devices.....

 

I found that I had some stall strips on a Hawk fret (one of Eduard’s think) that I’d picked up during a burst of pre-build enthusiasm and found that I didn’t really want or need....until now!

 

 

Bit of a conundrum how to fix them to the wind leading edge tho’.

 

I thought I’d hit on a clever solution by recycling an idea I used to make the NACA ducts (those with long memories and/or who have an inexhaustible capacity for trivia may remember that I used a heated brass master to stamp a NACA shaped divot in the surface) Here: 

 

So I used a bit of spare fret to make a suitable tool:

 

 

Heated it:

 

 

Bit stupid really, bringing hot plastic melty metal into close proximity to your plastic melty pride and joy.  But it seemed to work out all right (I drilled some holes to help with lining-up the hot melty metal....it was a once-only shot and I’m not entirely stupid).

 

 

But then the little voice in my head that had been telling me all along that stall strips are not flat plates replicable by etch, started to shout so’s I couldn’t ignore it anymore...

 

And I did what I should have done before - which is look at a reference photo (I think this is from the BM walkaround) - and belatedly realised that the stall strips are triangular in cross section.

 

 

So out with the flats etch bits and in with...what?

 

As it happened I had some 0.5mm x 0.5mm square cross section rod and seeing as I already had slits in the leading edges of the wings I figured I could probably enlarge the slits and glue lengths of the rod at a crafty angle so as they protruded triangularly.  Complicated?  Over the top?  YES - but I already had the slits in the wings didn’t I? And you try getting tiny triangular cross section plastic rod....

 

Anyways.  Duly enlarged ‘oles:

 

 

(At least the wing fences and VG’s look nice)

 

And 4mm lengths of 0.5mm square rod:

 

 

Do you know how difficult it is to cut this stuff to a consistent length and with nice square ends?  And do you know how many ping off into the maws of the great carpet monster when cut?

 

And at last......

 

 

 

(Might squeeze a bit of PPP in those gaps)

 

Now I’m the first to admit that fairly trivial aerodynamic devices do not warrant such a lot of work - and that such an insignificant step forward in the build does not warrant such a long post with so many photo’s.

 

But hey.  It’s all I’ve got   And Telford is nearly on us.......and it’s active (ish) model making.......

Edited November 5, 2019 by Fritag

[Terry1954]

Model making it is and pretty neat too!

 

Terry

[keefr22]

27 minutes ago, Fritag said:

Now I’m the first to admit that fairly trivial aerodynamic devices do not warrant such a lot of work - and that such an insignificant step forward in the build does not warrant such a long post with so many photo’s.

 

I don't think you should admit any such thing Steve - very enjoyable update, and as these  will undoubtebly be the ultimate 1/72nd Hawk models, every little helps!

 

Keith

[CedB]

Perfect, as always. Sickening. 

[xffw45343tg]

Mmmm. Nice Toblerones!

[perdu]

Yes

 

In answer to your q. do you know how?

 

Yes we know

Yes we love the way you have done it

 

Super work as per usual

 

See you soon meister

[hendie]

Long way for a shortcut Steve.  Nice out of the box recovery though

 

2 hours ago, CedB said:

Perfect, as always. Sickening. 

 

Have to agree there Ced - that last shot of the starboard wing there in all its immaculate glory, - and knowing that the other one is equally as good.  Yes, sickening.

[Robin-42]

3 hours ago, Fritag said:

Can’t say that I remember anything about the stall strips.  Presumably we were taught about them at Hawk groundschool; but I’d have probably had my head full trying to remember the start checks and had little capacity left for small aerodynamic devices.....

 

Now I’m the first to admit that fairly trivial aerodynamic devices do not warrant such a lot of work - and that such an insignificant step forward in the build does not warrant such a long post with so many photo’s.

 

But hey.  It’s all I’ve got   And Telford is nearly on us.......and it’s active (ish) model making.......

You just demonstrated something that surprises non-pilot enthusiasts. If we can’t control it or there is no procedure for dealing with an issue, we study it and promptly forget about it. For example my current work ride can have GE or Pratt engines. Can I tell which one it has by looking at it, nope, not unless there is a decal on the side. Can I fire the fire bottles if required, yup. Procedure is the same. As a modeller, this is appalling. “I just spent more on resin engines than the kit is worth to get the correct ones for the fin I am doing and bloody driver can’t even tell!!!”

 

Long “trivial” posts are why I like it here, especially when they are about trivial aerodynamic devices. Look at the trailing edge of a lot of 40’s 50’s and 60’s rudders for example.  There is a thread buried in here somewhere about them. 

[giemme]

6 hours ago, Fritag said:

(Might squeeze a bit of PPP in those gaps)

Sure, they look messy and you should really try harder ....  

 

Who am I kidding? Impressive job and lovely saving/lateral thinking    

 

Enjoy Telford!  

 

Ciao

[Fritag]

On 11/5/2019 at 12:10 PM, Robin-42 said:

For example my current work ride can have GE or Pratt engines.

When I was at MacDill in 1990 the F16Cs/Ds had either a GE or Pratt engine IIRC.  Not sure why - presumably for political reasons?  I don’t remember there being any real difference in looks or performance or owt, but memory may have failed on that score.   IIRC there were some minor - p‘raps trivial - differences  in the check lists etc.

 

The fact that I can’t remember any real difference either proves your point or proves I’ve a cra*p memory 

 

Anyways.

 

I rather surprised myself by making some more progress on the Hawks.

 

It has a small exhaust/vent low down on the starboard fuselage - as here in another (I think) photo from the BM walkround:

 

 

The old airfix effort was, let’s say, impressionistic:

 

 

It seemed to me that some 1mm nickel tube should do the trick.

 

Trying to put a bend in the tube would just cause it to collapse completely so I put some 0.8mm brass tube inside it to help it resist complete collapsing on bending, thus:

 

 

Of course I had to drill out the 0.8mm tube after I’d bent it 

 

 

Definitely looked better on the scrap fuselage:

 

 

And when fitted to the actual model:

 

 

 

I don’t need or want them painted so I’ll pop em somewhere safe and only fix them in place when the painting’s done.

 

I think it’ll be an eye catching little mod that one....

 

There.  Definitely active modeller now 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited November 6, 2019 by Fritag

[Ex-FAAWAFU]

Positively racing along.  With your characteristic precision, obvs...

[giemme]

25 minutes ago, Ex-FAAWAFU said:

Positively racing along.  With your characteristic precision, obvs...

Agreed!

 

Ciao

[Rizon]

On 11/5/2019 at 2:10 PM, Robin-42 said:

For example my current work ride can have GE or Pratt engines. Can I tell which one it has by looking at it, nope, not unless there is a decal on the side. Can I fire the fire bottles if required, yup. Procedure is the same.

Recently I had a chat with a F-35 test pilot, the guy who gave the first non-US demo at Fairford a few years back. Apparently when being strapped into an F-35 you wont know if you are in the A, B or C model, unless you twist your head to the 6 o'clock position and try to figure out if the lift fan is installed or if longer / folding wings are there. They all fly the same and Billie himself often does fly all 3 variants in the same day and there is hardly ever a need to conciously take note of which one you fly. That is ynless you fly VTOL or carrier ops ofcourse....

 

R

[Terry1954]

3 hours ago, Fritag said:

 

Of course I had to drill out the 0.8mm tube after I’d bent it 

For a moment there i thought that picture showed your new innovative right angle miniature drill bit.....🤣

[Martian]

3 hours ago, Ex-FAAWAFU said:

Positively racing along.  With your characteristic precision, obvs...

Indeed, at this rate they will be ready for Telford 2029. Only if he pulls his finger out mind! 🤞

 

Martian 👽

[CedB]

Very nice tubey things, very nice indeed!

[Fritag]

Thank you Ced; good to know that a chaps tubey things are appreciated 

 

There are now 2 tubey things and they both seem to fit as desired into the appointed tubey thing receptacles:

 

 

And they now reside with all the other completed bits and bobs - which I’m beginning to run out of excuses to fit 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited November 6, 2019 by Fritag

[xffw45343tg]

Stop making excuses and get 'em fitted!  

[perdu]

OK a somewhat divisive note here Steve et al

 

This

looks more representative of a 120º bend rather than a 90º bend, the front section runs out at an angle not at a firm point

 

Sorry and does not detract from how brilliant it is anyway, just Mr Pedant expressing himself again

 

(Stir crazy at the mo, G isn't letting me out with this lung infection so everybody gets to share the misery...)

[Brandy]

Bloody hell, 2 jobs done in as many posts. Steady on or you'll have these done before page 200!

 

Ian 

Edited November 6, 2019 by limeypilot

[Fritag]

9 minutes ago, perdu said:

OK a somewhat divisive note here Steve et al

.........

looks more representative of a 120º bend rather than a 90º bend, the front section runs out at an angle not at a firm point

Divisive, Bill? Nay.  Not sure you’ll be able to tell whether it’s 120 or 90 degrees when fitted as you can’t see enough of the bend.   
 

But tis true that the pipe exits at a slight angle and not parallel to the fuselage.
 

I may or may not fix it like that later on.  It may depend on whether or not I think you’ll remember it should be! 

 

 

[perdu]

Senor, I know nothings...

 

And trust you implicitly