North American FJ-2 Fury

[Courageous]

Oh dear...this is not sounding good . 

@MVW, do you know where the extra 2.3mm is along the fuselage?

[Tailspin Turtle]

21 hours ago, Sabrejet said:

All FJ-2s had slats and that 'wedge' part at the inboard end: it was part of the ammo bay door, rather than a separate piece on F-86Fs etc. So yes, in effect a slatted 6-3 wing and rather like the Canadair Sabre 6 in that respect. For info the root chord was 10.31 ft measured at the fuselage centreline (extend the leading adge and trailing edge to meet at the CL; while the tip chord was 5.34 ft. I haven't checked those dimensions against the kit...yet.

The FJ-2 and early FJ-3 (slatted) wings were not the 6-3 wing. However, your dimensions are correct for the slatted FJ-2/3 wing. The later, Cambered Leading Edge "hard" FJ-3 wing was the 6-3 planform.

[Sabrejet]

VMF-235 “Death Angels” were assigned to MAG-15 at MCAS El Toro with F9F-2 Panther, converting to the FJ-2 in March 1954. Initially it had plain markings, with just the "WU" code and modex numbers applied. However within months a scheme of red bands with two rows of white stars appeared. 

 

In July 1954, four VMF-235 FJ-2s deployed to the USS Hancock as part of Operation Steam (often misquoted as Project Steam) as it sailed off San Diego. Op Steam was an at-sea evaluation of steam catapults. Aircraft used were BuAer Nos. 131979 (22/WU), 132003, 131998 and 131996. Two of the latter were coded 21/WU and 23/WU.

 

VMF-235 deployed to Atsugi, Japan in December 1954, the FJ's travelling as deck cargo aboard the USS Corregidor. At Atsugi, the unit came under MAG-11 and converted to the FJ-3 in 1957 concurrent with a move back Stateside to MCAS Beaufort. VMF-235 was another FJ-2 unit to deploy gull gray/white FJ-2s.

 

Photos courtesy USN Official, Tailhook and Bob Dorr:

 

MCAS El Toro circa May 1954: 

 

 

 

 

 

Operation Steam, June 1954:

 

 

Atsugi:

 

 

 

 

[Robert]

Another great set of photos  . Strange that they did not have the barrier things on the slats.

 

Hopefully a decal manufacturer is taking notes.

 

Robert

[MVW]

1 hour ago, Courageous said:

Oh dear...this is not sounding good . 

@MVW, do you know where the extra 2.3mm is along the fuselage?

If I had (and ever dare) to cut the fuselage then it would be 8mm in front of the fuselage joint. The section there is quite uniform and impact on the engraving minimal.

Something which makes me thinking about this issue:

There is enough basic information available to have this issue right from the start. Tailspins Blog is running for years, the Ginter, Detail & Scale books and the Sabre / Fury by Robert F. Dorr book have been published years ago and all refer to this wing issue. Why does it happen? Is there any hint how any of us can help the kit manufacturers to get it right? I'd be glad to help with my references collected over the past 30 years. I know manufacturers have to be a bit secretive about their new kits until they can be sure to be in the front row in releasing them. A tiny bit o more research won't break the budget as AMK shows with their Kfir and L-29.

 

Martin

[72modeler]

6 hours ago, Sabrejet said:

Photos courtesy USN Official, Tailhook and Bob Dorr:

MCAS El Toro circa May 1954: 

 

Oboy, oboy, oboy! Thanks, SJ! The color photos are perfect for getting the various metal tones correct. Much obliged!

Mike

Edited October 18, 2017 by 72modeler
removed redundant photos

[Gene K]

16 minutes ago, 72modeler said:

Oboy, oboy, oboy! Thanks, SJ! The color photos are perfect for getting the various metal tones correct. Much obliged!

 

 

Mike, with all respect, there's no need to repost a series of photos that were  posted just above your post! It only takes a second to edit your reply before hitting "Submit"!!!

 

Gene K

[Tailspin Turtle]

18 hours ago, Robert said:

Strange that they did not have the barrier things on the slats.

 

Robert

I'm pretty sure that the FJ-2 entered service before the need for barricade catchers on most swept-wing carrier-based jets became apparent. And since they were rarely operated from carriers, having been assigned to shore-based Marine Corps squadrons, my guess is that the Navy decided not to bother with adding them like they did to the FJ-3s.

 

Oops - Sabrejet posted pictures with which I am familiar of FJ-2s retrofitted with the barricade catchers on the wings. Mea culpa.

Edited October 18, 2017 by Tailspin Turtle
Correcting senior moment...

[Tailspin Turtle]

12 hours ago, MVW said:

Hello,

First a big thank you to all who contributed to this thread, especially Sabrejet. I really appreciate the input from all.

 

I got my FJ-2 kit last weekend and I think there is some “flesh” behind the discussion about the wing. After looking through my Fury and Sabre references, I’m pretty sure the wing supplied by Sword is a 6-3 wing in planform engraved as a standard wing with slats. You can check this by extending the leading and trailing edges of the wing to the aircrafts centerline and measure the distance between them. For the FJ-2 it is 10.31 feet {43.6mm in 1/72} (Detail & Scale 68, page 27 dimensional drawing) for a 6-3 wing it is 10.85 feet {45.9mm in 1/72} (Model Art #302: F-86F). The Sword wing has 45.8mm. By using a 6-3 wing and to keep the proportions, the fuselage is stretched by this additional 2.3 mm which corresponds with Sabrejet’s findings (difference of the aforementioned dimensions scaled to 1/72).

 

I’m as yet undecided if I will (try to) correct this or not. I’ll wait for the FJ-3 and see …

 

Martin

 

Martin,

 

I just compared Sabrejet's photo of the wing above to my layout of the FJ-2 wing using the NAA digital data (root and tip chords, wing sweep angle at quarter chord). They match perfectly. I've provided that to Sabrejet. There may be a camera-lens parallax effect that makes this particular comparison invalid but I suggest that we wait for Sabrejet's assessment before anybody starts to rework Sword's FJ-2 wing chord.

[72modeler]

4 hours ago, Gene K said:

 

Mike, with all respect, there's no need to repost a series of photos that were  posted just above your post! It only takes a second to edit your reply before hitting "Submit"!!!

 

Gene K

Sorry- I didn't realize what I had done until it was too late. my mistake!

Mike

[Sabrejet]

7 hours ago, Tailspin Turtle said:

Martin,

 

I just compared Sabrejet's photo of the wing above to my layout of the FJ-2 wing using the NAA digital data (root and tip chords, wing sweep angle at quarter chord). They match perfectly. I've provided that to Sabrejet. There may be a camera-lens parallax effect that makes this particular comparison invalid but I suggest that we wait for Sabrejet's assessment before anybody starts to rework Sword's FJ-2 wing chord.

And here it is: a good graphic demonstration of the wing (many thanks @Tailspin Turtle ). Minimal/no parallax, so again Sword have done a great job!

 

 

[Sabrejet]

Fourth USMC FJ-2 unit: VMF-312 “Checkerboards”. The squadron was assigned to MAG-32 at MCAS Cherry Point with F9F-4 Panther and re-equipped with FJ-2s in November 1954. Unit markings consisted of a 'WR' code with black&white checkerboards on fuselage, tailfin, horizontal stabilizer in the form of bands outlined in black; and also sometimes the drop tank fins also had checkerboards painted on them.

 

In February 1955, the squadron deployed to Roosevelt Roads, Puerto Rico for two months of gunnery and tactics exercises; VMF-312 converted to the FJ-3 in 1956.

 

Photos below are my personal collection, USMC Official and courtesy of Tailhook Association:

 

 

 

 

Often mis-identified as FJ-3s, these VMF-312 FJ-2s were photographed during Marine training at Onslow Beach, NC:

 

 

 

And finally a few well-worn examples, note the wing leading edge barrier guards on some aircraft:

 

 

 

 

 

Edited October 18, 2017 by Sabrejet

[Courageous]

Great work by those who proved the Sword wing as correct and lifted some of us out of our gloom, I still think that Sword missed an opportunity with the slats.

 

Have the same great minds worked out if the fuselage is indeed 8mm too long as measured by @Sabrejet in post #32, this is a big error if it is confirmed?

 

 

Edited October 18, 2017 by Courageous
Typo

[MVW]

5 hours ago, Sabrejet said:

And here it is: a good graphic demonstration of the wing (many thanks @Tailspin Turtle ). Minimal/no parallax, so again Sword have done a great job!

 

 

 

Hello,

there is one thing I'd like to discuss: Where do you measure the 5.34 of wing depth? In your picture, Tailspin & Sabrejet, you measure it at the complete wingspan by exending leading & trailing edge over the the wing-end fairing. On the dimensional drawing in Detail & Scale 68 (I hope the link works) and Modelart 302 about the F-86F this dimension is measured at the structural end of the wing and not after the wing-end fairing. I based my result on this. It's a tiny detail but will change the whole result. What do you think and what is correct?

 

Martin

Edited October 18, 2017 by MVW
writing errors

[Gene K]

1 hour ago, Courageous said:

...  I still think that Sword missed an opportunity with the slats.

 

Yes, but they thus bypassed the slat "trough" problem.

 

1 hour ago, Sabrejet said:

note the wing leading edge barrier guards on some aircraft:

 

Are the "barrier guards" the very small strakes on each slat section?

 

Gene K

Edited October 18, 2017 by Gene K

[Tailspin Turtle]

1 minute ago, Gene K said:

 

Yes, but they thus bypassed the slat "trough" problem.

 

 

Are the "barrier guards" the very small strakes on each slat section?

 

Gene K

Yes - they snagged the straps of the barricade (as opposed to the Davis barrier) to keep the airplane from slewing around and perhaps off the deck. See http://tailspintopics.blogspot.com/2016/07/non-aerodynamic-wing-fences.html

[Gene K]

18 minutes ago, Tailspin Turtle said:

Yes - they snagged the straps of the barricade (as opposed to the Davis barrier) ... .

 

I should have checked your site, Tommy! As usual, you have the perfect in-depth answers in your gold mine. 

 

My question was based on my incorrect assumption that we were talking "barriers" versus "barricade" (I have to go review your site further). Still, I'm amazed those little "thingees" could contribute so much to stopping those airplanes (aided, of course, by the other strap snaggers).

 

Thanks again.

 

Gene K

Edited October 18, 2017 by Gene K

[Tailspin Turtle]

2 hours ago, MVW said:

 

Hello,

there is one thing I'd like to discuss: Where do you measure the 5.34 of wing depth? In your picture, Tailspin & Sabrejet, you measure it at the complete wingspan by exending leading & trailing edge over the the wing-end fairing. On the dimensional drawing in Detail & Scale 68 (I hope the link works) and Modelart 302 about the F-86F this dimension is measured at the structural end of the wing and not after the wing-end fairing. I based my result on this. It's a tiny detail but will change the whole result. What do you think and what is correct?

 

Martin

The FJ-2 drawing in Detail and Scale does appear to depict the chord of the wing before the tip. However, in accordance with standard aerodynamic practice, the root chord is measured at the centerline of the fuselage, not the side of the fuselage, and the tip chord is measured with an extension of the leading and trailing edges to the tip of the wing.

[MVW]

Hello,

thank you very much for your input Tailspin Turtle. On my opinion the discussion about the FJ-2's wing shape remains inconclusive at the moment. I'm still towards a 6-3 wing shape with engraved slats. The root chord measurement is closer to a 6-3 wing from the FJ-3 than the FJ-2. Today I ordered my FJ-3M kit from Hannants and we'll see what kind of wing this kit has. Below some pictures so that anyone can take own measurements / guesses and see where my opinion originates:

- FJ-3 dimensional drawing from Detail&Scale #68 page 57

- my own measurements on the real FJ-2 wing from the Sword kit graphically described

- a measurement template for anyones own work. The size of the squares is 5mm. You can download the full size picture on Flickr.

Martin

 

[72modeler]

I'm still waiting for my FJ-2 and FJ-3M to arrive- they have been ordered. On the FJ-2 wing chord discussion: if the 1/72 Airfix and Hasegawa F-86D kits are both considered as having correct slatted non 6-3 wings, can somebody who has a Sword FJ-2 and either or both of the Sabre Dog kits compare the wings to see if Sword got the wing chord correct? I do have both and will make the comparison as soon as my dash-2 and dash-3M  kits show up.

Mike

 

Tommy and Sabrejet- on behalf of all of us, we are so grateful for all of the information and references you have so generously shared on this topic; haven't seen this much universal excitement and interest in a new release in quite a while! Much obliged, podnuhs!

 

Edited October 18, 2017 by 72modeler
corrected spelling

[Tailspin Turtle]

1 hour ago, MVW said:

Hello,

thank you very much for your input Tailspin Turtle. On my opinion the discussion about the FJ-2's wing shape remains inconclusive at the moment. I'm still towards a 6-3 wing shape with engraved slats. The root chord measurement is closer to a 6-3 wing from the FJ-3 than the FJ-2. Today I ordered my FJ-3M kit from Hannants and we'll see what kind of wing this kit has. Below some pictures so that anyone can take own measurements / guesses and see where my opinion originates:

- FJ-3 dimensional drawing from Detail&Scale #68 page 57

- my own measurements on the real FJ-2 wing from the Sword kit graphically described

- a measurement template for anyones own work. The size of the squares is 5mm. You can download the full size picture on Flickr.

Martin

 

 

 

 

Thanks for that picture. I eliminated a tiny bit of parallax and scaled it to my 1/72 layout developed from root and tip chords, wing sweep at 25% chord, and wing span. Since I still haven't settled on a new photo-hosting service, the result is provided here: http://tailhooktopics.blogspot.com/2017/10/sword-fj-2-preliminary.html

 

Basically, the Sword wing appears to have a bit too much span and not quite enough sweep. There appears to be a bit too much chord at the side of the fuselage but not as much as the 6-3 chord. The tip chord looks about right. There is some uncertainty about the exact location of the trailing edge of the kit part, which would make a little difference in chord. Overall, however, I'd say the Sword wing is well within my tolerance for error.

[Tailspin Turtle]

2 hours ago, Tailspin Turtle said:

Thanks for that picture. I eliminated a tiny bit of parallax and scaled it to my 1/72 layout developed from root and tip chords, wing sweep at 25% chord, and wing span. Since I still haven't settled on a new photo-hosting service, the result is provided here: http://tailhooktopics.blogspot.com/2017/10/sword-fj-2-preliminary.html

 

Basically, the Sword wing appears to have a bit too much span and not quite enough sweep. There appears to be a bit too much chord at the side of the fuselage but not as much as the 6-3 chord. The tip chord looks about right. There is some uncertainty about the exact location of the trailing edge of the kit part, which would make a little difference in chord. Overall, however, I'd say the Sword wing is well within my tolerance for error.

I just tweaked the analysis a little and updated the post because the kit's wing wasn't exactly square to the grid...

[Gene K]

21 hours ago, Tailspin Turtle said:

... I'd say the Sword wing is well within my tolerance for error.

 

Nice analysis and conclusion, thanks.

 

Now, about that extra fuselage length ... looking forward to a similar breakdown from you (and others with good refs). Can you conclude anything from the  sprue shots?

 

Gene K

[Tailspin Turtle]

1 minute ago, Gene K said:

 

Nice analysis and conclusion, thanks.

 

Now, about that extra fuselage length ... looking forward to a similar breakdown from you (and others with good refs). Can you conclude anything from the  sprue shots?

 

Gene K

I'm waiting on the kits as I'm reluctant to conclude much from the sprue shots, certainly not anything as difficult to measure as the length. Sabrejet posted a picture with a measurement and then a correction it I remember correctly. I'll take a look at that.

[Courageous]

If what @Sabrejet has measured and it is indeed 8mm too long, how are we going to rectify it from modelling perspective? SJ's analysis suggests that the fuselage has been stretched which crudely means a number of 'cut-and-shut' operations and although is doable, not for the faint hearted.