Jump to content

1/48(?) - DHC-1 Chipmunk by Special Hobby (?) - 3D modelled


172flogger
 Share

Recommended Posts

Once again, thanks 172flogger!

 

 

Anyway it's a good piece of news. To be followed.

 

V.P.

 

-----------------------------------------------------------

DHC-1_1.jpg

 

 

 

DHC-1_3.jpg

 

DHC-2_2.jpg

 

DHC-1_2.png

 

DHC-2_1.jpg

 

V.P.

Edited by Homebee
  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They are fine on the British version at the top. The ones in the lower rendering appear to be influenced by the modified ones that Art Scholl used as part of his ever-evolving Chipmunk, they certainly aren't standard.

 

However, it would only be five minutes with a saw and file to put them back to standard. Better to have it correct from the start though.

Edited by Work In Progress
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Checked up on those extended elevator horns in my hefty Chipmunk book, It seems that mainly the Canadian operated ones had them. ( Not a mod by civvy operators /owners).  Hence the bottom image shows the all clear blown canopy hood!

 

Still very much look forward to seeing a new 1/48th one as well as the 1/72nd ones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sadly, looking at the top 3D image I can already see an issue. In 1972 the shape of the LH battery access panel (upper rear fuselage) was changed, it became larger, a trapezoid shape and lower down (this was to accommodate the rather clever but bigger "two batteries in the one box" assembly). The RH hatch remained unchanged (although now arguably superfluous). But the drawing also has the "Canadian" exhaust (for the cockpit heater) which was only introduced in 1979, so the near vertical exhaust/two identical battery hatches combination is highly unlikely! Otherwise though, they seem to have done very well with the differences.

 

Paul J - thanks for the favourable comment about the Chipmunk tome. I think that the pointy elevator horns only applied to the final batch built for the RCAF, the DHC-1B-2-S5.

 

Not sure if I'm allowed to post this here, but there will be an article on Chipmunk differences appearing shortly on the HyperScale site.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Absolutely superb, Rod, many thanks and well done.. I have intermittently mucked about with half a dozen different Chipmunks over a 43 year period and thought I was reasonably knowledgeable about them but that's a massive overhaul of my understanding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/29/2017 at 8:44 PM, Rod Blievers said:

Sadly, looking at the top 3D image I can already see an issue. In 1972 the shape of the LH battery access panel (upper rear fuselage) was changed, it became larger, a trapezoid shape and lower down (this was to accommodate the rather clever but bigger "two batteries in the one box" assembly). The RH hatch remained unchanged (although now arguably superfluous). But the drawing also has the "Canadian" exhaust (for the cockpit heater) which was only introduced in 1979, so the near vertical exhaust/two identical battery hatches combination is highly unlikely! Otherwise though, they seem to have done very well with the differences.

 

Paul J - thanks for the favourable comment about the Chipmunk tome. I think that the pointy elevator horns only applied to the final batch built for the RCAF, the DHC-1B-2-S5.

 

Not sure if I'm allowed to post this here, but there will be an article on Chipmunk differences appearing shortly on the HyperScale site.

 

Hi Rod, 
I designed the CAD parts you see in those renderings posted by Freddie. As you may recall, you and I have been in touch while I was working on this design and all of your much-valued advice was followed. 

The enlarged port battery hatch is a known "issue" and was going to be "solved" during construction by adding a photo-etched panel. It would be too costly to make a separate port fuselage half in order to account for just one slightly larger engraved panel. ;-) 

HTH 

Radu 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Rod, no need to apologise. :-) your point was fair. I was only trying to explain the situation with the battery hatch.  This way a lot more versions can be made. 

Radu

Edited by radub
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 3 months later...
  • 1 year later...
12 hours ago, TEXANTOMCAT said:

I rather thought Airfix might have this in their sights! 🙂

A thought shared by many but maybe not while there are still Spitfire variants to be kitted or re-kitted.

  • Like 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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...