1/48 - Curtiss-Wright P-40C Hawk 81-A2 / Tomahawk Mk.IIB by Bronco Models - released - new boxing AVG aces

[Óttar]

The person who posted the photograph agrees that the workers feet are on the stringers, just like mine were, and can be seen by the position of his legs in the cockpit.

But most obvious explanation is that this picture confirms what is written in manual

Airfix - it's only CAD at the present, so nothing to comment. But the main problem with their earlier kits are panel lines/surface details. They make even 99,9% accurate kits like 1/48 Spitfire Vb look as a toy. I would be only too glad, if this would not be the case with Tomahawk.

[MIkeMaben]

Question: If the top of the wing surface is the actual floor, as opposed to a

plate on top of the floor :

1.) then the rivets indicated by arrow 1 would have to be drilled out in order

to seperate the wings. (they look like rivets to me)

2.) what is the clear difference at arrow 2 ? It looks like 2 different materials/pieces

as would be the case if there was a panel on top of the wings surfaces.

Also, this item in the manual seems to indicate that there 'is' a plate on top of the wings join.

It's hard to know what the size of the plate is.

Is it the narrow strip up the center ? (are those screws , not rivets ?)

or is it a wider plate ? (that ends at arrow 2).

[Basilisk]

1.) then the rivets indicated by arrow 1 would have to be drilled out in order

to seperate the wings. (they look like rivets to me)

1. Because it is assembled as a ONE PART wing.

2.) what is the clear difference at arrow 2 ? It looks like 2 different materials/pieces

as would be the case if there was a panel on top of the wings surfaces.

2. Looks like some protective sheeting placed over the wing surface. Can be seen on the left half of the wing as well.

Amazing that there is still doubt that the top of the wing is ALSO the cockpit floor after seeing all the pictures here.

Cheers, Peter

Edited May 13, 2016 by Basilisk

[Mike Esposito]

Pretty obvious that the cockpit floor is indeed the wing.

Trumpy and Bronco "blew it" bigtime..

Edited May 13, 2016 by Mike Esposito

[sharkmouth]

Well, my friends over at HARP (Historic Aircraft Restoration Project) seem to have fun going through their references to see proof of the floor. Instead, one sent me this page from a booklet published by the Curtiss Aeroplane Division (New York), Export Sales Division, Curtiss-Wright Corporation . The booklet is called "Detailed Specifications for Curtiss Hawk 75-A Airplane" and there is "No. 6895-A" at the top right. I have boxed in the pertinent text since the 'deep cockpit' P-40 are in essence inline engined P-36 (Hawk 75):

For those unable to read the text, or see the image, it states:

The floor of the cockpit is the upper surface of the wing. It is continuous across the lower portion of the fuselage.

Regards,

Edited October 3, 2016 by sharkmouth

[Calum]

Well, my friends over at HARP (Historic Aircraft Preservation Project) seem to have fun going through their references to see proof of the floor. Instead, one sent me this page from a booklet published by the Curtiss Aeroplane Division (New York), Export Sales Division, Curtiss-Wright Corporation . The booklet is called "Detailed Specifications for Curtiss Hawk 75-A Airplane" and there is "No. 6895-A" at the top right. I have boxed in the pertinent text since the 'deep cockpit' P-40 are in essence inline engined P-36 (Hawk 75):

For those unable to read the text, or see the image, it states:

The floor of the cockpit is the upper surface of the wing. It is continuous across the lower portion of the fuselage.

Regards,

I'm sure Ottar will find a way to explain how this wrong

[occa]

But but the description says the sky was black, it cannot be blue,

I simply refuse to look up and check ...

[BS_w]

on the P36/H75 to P40/H87, the floor was the upper side of the wing. It was for this reason which there was wearing plates, riveted on the skin of upper surface of the wing. The factory technical drawings show these wearing plates and their number part.

[MIkeMaben]

1. Because it is assembled as a ONE PART wing.

Key word there is 'assembled'. Yeah it's obvious it wound up as an integral unit.

First, I wasn't asserting that it wasn't. Second, I wasn't asserting anything, I was

posing questions throughout my entire post. I was the one who posted the second

image in your post.

2. Looks like some protective sheeting placed over the wing surface. Can be seen on the left half of the wing as well.

Amazing that there is still doubt that the top of the wing is ALSO the cockpit floor after seeing all the pictures here.

Cheers, Peter

That was my point, not that the floor was 'not' the surface of the wing, but that there was something

on top of the wing.

In the end I found the answer to my questions anyway. The image below shows the skid plates

that were the second arrow in my question.

This image shows where the wing join is bolted (not riveted) together...

Questions answered...no doubt.

[BS_w]

Details:

the "wearing plate"

and the wing assembly (upper)

Edit:

I forgot , on this model,the shapes of rudder, elevator are not accurate, the paneling on the wing is incorrect..

Edited May 13, 2016 by BS_w

[sharkmouth]

On 5/13/2016 at 4:30 PM, MIkeMaben said:

That was my point, not that the floor was 'not' the surface of the wing, but that there was something

on top of the wing.

In the end I found the answer to my questions anyway. The image below shows the skid plates

that were the second arrow in my question.

This image shows where the wing join is bolted (not riveted) together...

Questions answered...no doubt.

Sorry that I didn't get a chance to answer your questions. I see you found the answer.

On 5/13/2016 at 5:19 PM, BS_w said:

the "wearing plate"

and the wing assembly (upper)

Thanks BS_w for the input and images. I was trying to gather some references to answer them even though we have strayed away from the kit in question. As a shark mouth fanatic, it should be no surprise that I love the Curtiss Hawks (Tomahawk, Kittyhawk, and Warhawk).

Regards,

Edited August 23, 2019 by sharkmouth

[BS_w]

Now we have a P-40N. Follow along the top edge of the hatch and see where the cockpit sill is now. Ten inches lower.

I resized the two drawings at the same scale then overlayed them( their proportions are verified and comparison with data planform)

black lines: H87 and blue lines H75/81

The dark lines red and blue are the slide rail of canopy (not the edges of cockpit)

the height between them is around 9"

What he explained was that the seat rails on the Tomahawk are vertical

(the seat on aircraft are adjustable) so there is room to sit 'normally'

while later versions of the P-40 have a cockpit which is ten inches shallower

causing the pilots legs to be out in front, nearly horizontal.

I've sent an e-mail to Tom Cleaver to ask for clarification.

On every model, H75 to H87, the tubular mount seat was inclined (13.5°) parallel along the frame Sta 5.

On some H87, (late), the seat are not adjustable in flight but on the ground.

Edited May 14, 2016 by BS_w

[sharkmouth]

Thank you BS_w for the explanation. As I wrote, I don't have experience with the early Hawks so I interpreted what Tom Cleaver wrote. good to know the exact angle and depths variance.

Regards,

[sharkmouth]

First eBay offer...

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Bronco-1-48-FB4006-Curtiss-P-40C-Hawk-81-A2-Fighter-AVG-Flying-Tiger-/252389291891?hash=item3ac392f773:g:qpgAAOSw7W5XNqMv

Also there is a die cast model so make sure to get the correct one by Bronco:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Bronco-Die-Cast-Flying-Tiger-AVG-P-40C-Tomahawk-1-48-airplane-model-new-48bk004-/191864415397?hash=item2cac02a4a5:g:tp8AAOSwrXdXKr3~

Regards,

[rbeach84]

Interesting! So that was trolling? Ottar, I mean.

It is disappointing to see from Bronco, assuming it is their own work and not a rebox of Trumpeter's tooling.

R/ Robert

[HBBates]

The Curtiss Hawk 75,81,87 (P36,P40-C, P40D-N) has no separate floor ...the cockpit floor is the wing top...

if I wasn't in the middle of moving I provide you blueprints photographs and documentation...

Trumpeter and this kit put a false floor they didn't exist on the real aircraft at the upper lower fuselage datum line for some reason

[gingerbob]

Boy, I can't wait 'til we get to the colour under the rear glass

[sharkmouth]

Boy, I can't wait 'til we get to the colour under the rear glass

Why, is there a controversy were it doesn't belong? It is the outside color. In many images, the rear quarter Plexiglas (added after painting) makes it seem lighter and even gray but it is the outside exterior color.

Regards,

Edited May 24, 2016 by sharkmouth

[gingerbob]

Try convincing some people of that

[Homebee]

In-box review: http://www.hyperscale.com/2016/reviews/kits/broncofb4006reviewbg_1.htm

V.P.

[ICMF]

Interesting! So that was trolling? Ottar, I mean.

Yes. Extremely obvious, yet depressingly effective trolling.

[mhaselden]

In-box review: http://www.hyperscale.com/2016/reviews/kits/broncofb4006reviewbg_1.htm

V.P.

Brett certainly wasn't a fan of the kit. Overdone fabric sagging, incorrect windscreen, inaccurate cockpit (too shallow...dare I raise that issue again?) and a few shape concerns around the wingtips and rudder. Nothing unfixable but will be interesting to compare with the new Trumpy and Airfix offerings.

[sharkmouth]

I was informed that the Trumpeter release is all new and not based on their previous efforts (32nd & 48th scales) but I am leaning towards Airfix to be the one to get. What a strange thing to write since I wouldn't have believed I would a few years ago. Airfix will probably be better than Trumpeter and Bronco. What about AFV Club? < This is how rumors start so... stop it!

Regards,

[mhaselden]

Yep, Trumpy is rumoured to be releasing an all-new tooling of the long-nose Hawk. Comparisons between Bronco, (New) Trumpy and Airfix will be interesting. I just hope Airfix resolve some of the issues that were perceived in the CAD images. I truly want Airfix's P-40 to be a major success.

[HBBates]

Page 43 of the manual posted by Laurent clearly distinguishing cockpit floor from "upper surfaces of the wing within the cockpit"

http://www.avialogs.com/viewer/avialogs-documentviewer.php?id=3132

Óttar you reference the above link on Page 43 (really manual Page 42) use of the term "cockpit floor"

Please see photo below ..I took a different manual photo of the wing top that has labels and and took the linked manual Page 42 references to "cockpit floor" and pasted them on this photo .. you will see they are on the wing top ...

Edited May 26, 2016 by HBBates