Jump to content
This site uses cookies! Learn More

This site uses cookies!

You can find a list of those cookies here: mysite.com/cookies

By continuing to use this site, you agree to allow us to store cookies on your computer. :)

Navy Bird

1:72 English Electric Canberra PR.9 "End of an Era" - Finished!

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Navy Bird said:

Great photos, thanks. The pedestal is quite prominent - one photo I've seen shows what looks like a white (or tan) canvas sheet that runs from the bottom of the recce instrument panel down to the base of the pedestal. Have you seen that before? Mud guard against dirty boots? 

 

I was working from a photo that had a full cover over the periscope lens, not just a shroud. I could put a round silver decal in place to try and replicate the lens. I'm liking those cable harnesses that connecticate the aeroplane with its proboscis, too. That would look pretty cool in the model. 

 

That's the first I've seen of an actual human in the navigator's chair - yikes! That looks far worse than I thought. I hope the day/night indicators have screens - wouldn't want it to get too bright inside. Good area to stash the girlie mags, though.

 

Cheers,

Bill

You da man when it comes to these things and I hate to throw suggestions your way, but could you drill a small shallow hole in the orange part, then drop a good dollop of crystal kleer in there to replicate the lens?

 

I can't say that I've seen that canvas sheet in the nose Bill, but I've seen very little of the operational PR.9.

 

I took a sequence of shots of XH169, it was the only time I got to witness a PR.9 being prepared and launched for a recce sortie.  At the rear it has a ventral triangular 'bump' which I think was a temporary data link thingy.  Typically it was a crap day, my camera was in repair and I only had my partners cheapy compact camera on me.

Both crew were more 'seasoned than I was used to seeing, but were fantastic chaps and really accommodating.

I can post more pics here if you think they might come in handy for details, however I don't want to clog up your thread.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe it's a map holder?

 

http://ipmscanberrasig.webs.com/apps/photos/photo?photoid=121664257

 

A nice chap who likes his aircraft Soviet just sent me a rather nice cache of Canberra photos. Going through them now...

 

Cheers,

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry was writing as you posted, could be a map holder, or holder underside of a desk, it looks pretty solid and that it may pull up towards and level with the nav.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Arrrr...so there be wood underneath that there canvas! Or cloth, I guess, as the case may be. Can the navigator's desk be extended into its operating position when on the ground and the nose is open? You know, in case someone was reading the latest issue of Zoo? And judging by the look of the brace between the bottom of the nose and the fuselage, that's the extent of how far the nose can open? I was kinda hoping I could pose it open a little wider than that...oh well. 

 

The desk doesn't appear in most of the photos I've seen - was it not used that often or removed (maybe when all the navigator's got GPS smartphones)?   :) 

 

I think John has alluded to this somewhere, but the variations even within the same mark of Canberra are amazing. I see so many detail differences - the plane must have gone through a lot of mods. How do you keep it all straight? 

 

Cheers,

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How Bill? Easy, you don't 😊 The desk slides back under the view finder so it can stord out of the way when not in use. The mod state of any individual aircraft is a constant couse of wonderment 😊

John

Edited by canberra kid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Navy Bird said:

And judging by the look of the brace between the bottom of the nose and the fuselage, that's the extent of how far the nose can open? I was kinda hoping I could pose it open a little wider than that...oh well. 

 

The desk doesn't appear in most of the photos I've seen - was it not used that often or removed (maybe when all the navigator's got GPS smartphones)?   :) 

 

I think John has alluded to this somewhere, but the variations even within the same mark of Canberra are amazing. I see so many detail differences - the plane must have gone through a lot of mods. How do you keep it all straight? 

 

Cheers,

Bill

The nose doesn't open very wide, however how you've done it looks good from a modelling perspective. I think the brace could be disconnected for ground servicing etc.

 

I think the problem is is that most pics of the PR.9 nav station were taken when the aircraft was withdrawn from service, including my two showing the nav panel on XH135, so the table may have been removed then.

 

32042239204_891cd5d496_c.jpgCanberra PR.9 XH169 Aug 01 by James Thomas, on Flickr

You can just make it out in this shot

 

I think generally speaking the table was fitted in service. Johns pic above is of XH134 so I would, if you can, incorporate it in your build - it would save doing that pedestal!

 

 

As mod. states go, PR.9s were particularly good examples of being fairly individual, especially in regard to sensor and avionic fits.  A bit of Googling around will reveal just how different the bellies could look, and even the same airframe could look different over a few months due to the sensor fit carried. 

You can see the extra tail bump on XH169 below.

 

32761194871_134687751e_c.jpgCanberra PR.9 XH169 Aug 01 by James Thomas, on Flickr

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now I've done it. Just got home, got an Ikea chest of drawers to build, but I've opened up BM and am now transfixed by this education on the Canberra. Worse still, there's no beer in the house...

 

Justin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, canberra kid said:

An AP drawing that may come in useful? 

 

@canberra kid all of the drawings you post are useful! Keep them coming, we'll make the definitive PR.9 reference thread.   :)

 

OK, getting close to closing up the fuselage. Any gotchas (significant modifications) with the Airfix kit before I do this? Not asking about panel lines or the tailplane root attachment debacle...

 

From photos, XH134 in her retirement scheme doesn't have the antennae by the nose gear doors (the long rod on three stand-offs, I assume it's an antenna of some kind) so I'm not going to drill out those mounting holes. XH134 looks to have two rather large-ish intake scoops, one on the lower starboard front fuselage ahead of a hinged access panel, and another on the port side just below and towards the rear of the canopy. A similar intake scoop appears in photos of other aircraft in the mirror position of the one on the starboard side, but XH134 in her scheme doesn't seem to have that one.

 

Blade antennae get added much later...

 

Cheers,

Bill

 

PS. @Martian Hale Remember the question early on about the fit of the canopy on the Xtrakit model? I just test fit the windscreen on the Airfix kit, and I was greeted with a rather large gap. The cross sectional curve of the bottom of the windscreen doesn't match the fuselage very well. I wonder if that is what you were recalling? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Navy Bird said:

PS. @Martian Hale Remember the question early on about the fit of the canopy on the Xtrakit model? I just test fit the windscreen on the Airfix kit, and I was greeted with a rather large gap. The cross sectional curve of the bottom of the windscreen doesn't match the fuselage very well. I wonder if that is what you were recalling? 

Can't be that as I never bothered getting the Airfix kit and consequently not reading any reviews on it, having gone straight for their 1/48 kit instead.

 

Martian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will keep posting Bill, the best thing with the aerial fit is look at as many potos of her at the time as you can, but you know that. The other but unles James beats me too it I'll post some photos tomorrow.

John

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're lucky Bill in that you have picked a fairly precise (and well photographed) timeframe in XH134s life, ie summer 2006, so ascertaining the precise fit is relatively straightforward, some nice pics here

http://www.on-target-aviation.com/Marham_06.html

 

I think the lower port towel rail antenna had been removed by the early 2000s, you can see where it has been removed and the supports plated over in one of the shots of '169 above.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/13/2017 at 1:45 PM, 71chally said:

You da man when it comes to these things and I hate to throw suggestions your way, but could you drill a small shallow hole in the orange part, then drop a good dollop of crystal kleer in there to replicate the lens?

 

Done!   :)

 

Should it be orange? Mine's red at the moment.  

 

Cheers,

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Orangy-red!

 

These are the only pics I've got of XH134 in your chosen scheme Bill, they were taken after it came out of service and before it was repainted etc.

They're not very good, but I've uploaded them at full rez so that you can click and enlarge them - quite handy for stencil data an the various probe and aerial locations.  Hope they help a bit.

 

32071834664_eb9db85543_c.jpgCanberra PR.9 XH134 by James Thomas, on Flickr

 

32071835914_d3505d2c65_c.jpgCanberra PR.9 XH134 by James Thomas, on Flickr

 

32874131186_e6099e5f38_c.jpgCanberra PR.9 XH134 by James Thomas, on Flickr

 

32071838194_b03909c143_c.jpgCanberra PR.9 XH134 by James Thomas, on Flickr

 

32534298570_30917c8621_c.jpgCanberra PR.9 XH134 by James Thomas, on Flickr

 

32071836724_0df88dd8f1_c.jpgCanberra PR.9 XH134 by James Thomas, on Flickr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent photos, James @71chally! They will be quite helpful I'm sure.

 

Fuselage being bundled up as we speak - Airfix say that 45 grams of weight are necessary behind the cockpit. The Pavla resin pit weighs 11 grams by itself, which I suspect is quite a bit more than the Airfix cockpit. I'll get out the tape and put everything together to make sure I add enough weight. Even though I can't put any weight in the nose, there is more than enough room aft of the cockpit.

 

Cheers,

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Bill

I've sorted out some nice under side shots of her for you, this is the sensor configuration in the kit also some interesting weathering if you fancy :)

Gash52%202_zps12j6nt4q.jpg

Gash76%202_zpsmyhn6muo.jpg

Not 134 at the front she's behind in grey, but the one in front is the same fit and you can see the B(I)8 wing pylon plates. 

Canberra_5170%202_zpsd7g8bzqf.jpg

This her in grey which I quite like

Canberra_5233_zpshz7lf5pe.jpg

As you can see the paint is removed from the underside of the spar cap too

Canberra_5268%202_zpslhw9zgmt.jpg

John

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lovely shots John.

It's amazing the colours XH134 went through in a relatively short time, Hemp & light grey until early 2000s, all over grey for Afghanistan ops to Spring 2006, then hemp & light grey with the tail art for the summer of 2006.  And now it's silver of course!

Edited by 71chally

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi mates,

 

After putting all of the pieces together with masking tape, I determined that the 45 grams that Airfix would have you set on top of the nose gear well is not exactly correct. In fact, it's a bit of an overkill - the amount required to get my Cranberry to balance on her three legs was a mere 44 grams. Silly Airfix! This includes the 11 grams contributed by the resin cockpit. (Just for giggles, I weighed the kit's styrene cockpit parts, and they measure about 1 gram.)

 

The model is actually a bit nose-heavy with the weight added, but that's OK. Better safe than sorry.   :)

 

The fuselage halves were then closed up, and no one will ever see the detail in the navigator's cabin again. If you look in the front, you can see that there is a seat of some sort (if you squint), but the cables and controls are lost to the ages. 

 

I sanded off the erroneous tailplane root fairings, in preparation for taking the "easy way out." I will not be going the Full Monty on the tailplanes, I'm just going to extend the top inner edges of the tailplanes a bit to meet the fuselage. 

 

IMG_1113

 

IMG_1114

 

The fuselage fit together pretty well. I was surprised at how well the cockpit cover fit, not only because of the resin cockpit, but also because this is the type of design that usually doesn't fit well for one reason or another.

 

IMG_1115

 

Next up, her wings were attached, and again the level of fit was very nice. I don't think the wing roots will need any filler at all, just some light sanding.

 

IMG_1117

 

IMG_1118

 

Before we close up the belly, I took a shot of the ballast. Why? I don't know.

 

IMG_1121

 

However, we don't want things to go too smoothly! A close inspection of the resin rudder from SBS yields a disconcerting problem - she no tall enough! Arghh.

 

IMG_1120

 

Unless, of course, there is supposed to be a large gap between the bottom of the rudder and the fuselage. Based on photos, I don't think that's the case - but I could be wrong. I can go back to using the Airfix rudder (filling all of the superfluous panel lines and lamenting the loss of my hard earned cash in purchasing the SBS part) but a quick test fit shows that it is too fat - the thickness at the hinge line is more than the fuselage. It just looks odd. But there is no gap at the bottom!

 

So I can add a slice of styrene to the bottom of the SBS rudder, or fool around thinning and filling the Airfix rudder. Such a decision I make never! 

 

Cheers,

Bill

 

PS. Is it just me, or is the horn of the SBS rudder (the part that points forward) not quite long enough? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Navy Bird said:

PS. Is it just me, or is the horn of the SBS rudder (the part that points forward) not quite long enough? 

 

If it doesn't conflict with accuracy maybe you could sand back the fin's trailing edge a little so that the length below the horn matches up - also you might by look of things simultaneously achieve a smaller gap between rudder & fuselage that way.

 

-Jay

Share this post


Link to post
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...