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. :)

Olivier de St Raph

Missouri Armada P-51D Mustang: documents and partial scratch from the Tamiya 1/48 kit

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, antonio argudo said:

I remember about a small panel near the windshield that should be deleted from the tamiya kit ( in the green circle)

Very well observed, Antonio, it is wrong indeed, as the docs 101 (post#312 p.13), 104a, 118a and 137c show clearly. 

About the fasteners, I am gonna do trials on my second A9 part and I will see if I represent that or not...

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Despite little defects (red arrow, fe) that will be easily corrected with my new homemade sanding tool, the result is quite convincing. I used the Trumpeter scraping tool.

X6jdRq.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, antonio argudo said:

keep in mind they look different the top ones (/) than the lower panels(+)

Antonio, I don't see these lower panels with (+) screws. 

What I see on the enlargement below is that most of the screws are (/) but some (green arrows) seem to have just a point in the middle:

Can you precise please?

Thanks

Olivier

 

btcwHR.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Olivier, sorry to interrupt. I think you're looking at the Dzus fasteners for the cowling panels, There were several types I think, some with just a plain screwdriver slot ( / ) and some with a hexagonal hole in the centre which was probably fastened with some sort of Allen key. Having said that, I wonder if they would have had more than one type on the same aircraft. I'm sure that someone will be able to tell us.

 

John

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks John, for these précisions. I will take inspiration in the great Jolie Hélène pics Antonio brought us, but maybe there were indeed variations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hi Olivier,

the fasteners with the shape (/) are located in the removable panels around the engine cowling to access for maintenance, the ones with shape (+)  are located in the fuselage and wing join and , there are also some variation in size as this pictures shows, hope this  help

cheers

 

walkaa.jpg

walkaaa.jpg

Walkaround_H_307_Dutch_Air_Force_2015_16

1945_LEISTON_P_51_D_G4_A_PASSION_WAGON_D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I used the Magic Dust 21, combined with the anaerobic cyano 21 (medium viscosity), to fill the wrong panel Antonio mentioned with right above. I first place small drops of cyano in the hollows, and then I bring a bit of powder (I use a syringe to dispense the powder accurately). The mix gives an hard filler that you can sand immediately. I used my new sanding tool with first 400 grit and then 1000 grit 2,5 mm round pellets mounted on my tool. I finally applied a thin coat of acrylic Tamiya XF-23 to check: the panel has completely disappeared, the rivets around have not been affected by the sanding job, and all that was done in less than 30 mn.

 

O71v6g.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, antonio argudo said:

hope this  help

It does, Antonio, it does! ;)

Thanks again for your help...

Though if we consider the small scale (1/48), it will not be possible to represent the (x) on the screws concerned. Look at the first pic you posted just above, if you don't enlarge it, you just see a point in the middle:

qrg7dN.jpg

 

It is only when you enlarge that you can see the cross:

4Fn90N.jpg

 

That is why I will just represent a point on the concerned fasteners.

 

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gt8dvZ.png

 

N.B: we can see on the 3rd photo of the Antonio’s post#456 above the « cold weather solid plate » mentioned in the comment of this doc 139.

But on the Missouri, like on most of the cases, the panel was perforated.

 

This perforated panel is very poorly represented in the Tamiya kit:

TcJyWa.jpg

 

Pity, Eduard did not provide this part in its PE sets. It is while a part that would have been represented advantageously by a thin metal PE part, with all the accuracy Eduard is able to get.

So, I tried to improve the Tamiya panel. 

Imho, the first thing to do if you want to do that is to decrease the thickness of the plastic by the inside to get a thickness of about 0,4 mm if possible, and only then to use a 0,4 mm drill to drill the holes.

o28Z6b.jpg

 

If you drill without decreasing first the thickness,

1) you may break your drill (that's what happened to me with the very fragile Tamiya 0,3 mm drill :worry:)

2) the result will not be convincing.

 

68oLes.jpg

 

The result I get for now is a compromise, acceptable and much better, but if you have a better idea, it will be welcome...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My favorite method to improve an element of my build is to do precision comparison photos. I often used that technique with the Fiat (ask Hannes... ;)). So, here is the comparison between my last result and the real perforated panel:

 

kYaQ6J.png

 

We can see that, even much larger than the initial holes, most of mine are still too small. In the same time, I will try to get more regular holes sizes. And I will try to decrease a bit more (carefully) the thickness of the plastic by the inside (the alu sheet was very thin).

Something I can't improve, pity: there should be more room between the holes and the limits of the panel (!! on the pic)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My comparison (pic 110 above) has been vey helpful to improve my perforated panel. I first have decreased still more and with care the plastic inside the panel up to 0,3 mm thickness (the plastic thickness was initially 1,2 mm thick in this area), checked with my precision manual caliper. Then, I have increased the holes up to 0,5 mm diameter. The most difficult was maybe to eliminate the dust of removed polystyrene. I inserted in each hole a 0,54 mm needle, the bottom dipped in Tamiya liquid cement.

Now the result is, if not perfect, very acceptable considering the scale (this panel is 7,76 x 3,95 mm) and the starting point (pic 107 above). I have just to do the same on left side, and this panel is maybe just 0,1% of the whole build!!

Juan has taught me to consider each detail as a model in itself. 

Conclusion: I am mad, modelers are mad!! :lol:  ... but we have fun!

 

N.B: this precision caliper is made by Prodont Holliger, a french dental manufacturer. It costs about 28€ on the net. Very useful in model making as in dentistry...

 

YcOBaU.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe some of you think: why did Olivier left his left panel, finishing so, with the right one after, the cockpit, to work on other parts?

the reason is that I have realized that it was a big mistake to go on with these very fragile elements added (see my pic 76, post#272, p.11) while they would be probably damaged (and they have been, pity, when working on the canopy rail) with all the riveting and stressing surface fuselage job.

The work planning is probably for me the most difficult (and however essential, avoiding discouragement due to delicate work to redo!) task. 

If I had to redo completely this kit, I would begin probably by this job on the outside of the aircraft, because it requires time but won't be affected by the job on the inside panels. You learn to your depend.

That is why I would recommend to a modeler who would intend to use this thread (a good idea, definitely!) :lol:  to read it first completely, taking advantage so of my errors to avoid them.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The preparation of this front part of the half left fuselage is nearly over. Some (/) are still missing on the lower part, that I will have to add. 

pfsPpo.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just popping in to say I’m following with interest. Appreciate all the documentation work you are doing. Thumbs up! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hi Olivier,

there is another detail that should be deleted for  this  precise aircraft (green circle) comparing with the reference photos.

 

cheers

armadaaaa.jpg

armadaa.jpg

armadaaa.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are absolutely right, Antonio, and I will remove that part.

I think I forgot to say in the thread that I had ordered the Aires cockpit set for Tamiya (on Antonio's recommendation). I have got it today, and I will come-back on it soon, it looks very good, especially the rail... ;)

More soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎13‎/‎02‎/‎2018 at 22:07, antonio argudo said:

there is something I remember about a small panel near the windshield that should be deleted from the tamiya kit ( in the green circle), I will find info about it to be certain

Dear Antonio, I have seen this panel on some pics. It seems to exist on some versions. Difficult to be 100% sure it was missing on the Missouri... In the doubt, it will not be represented on my model.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear Olivier , there´s a website called " Large scale planes "where you can find some interesting builds of the Mustang in 1:24 scale .

Because I owned all of the Airfix WW2 planes in 1:24 in the 70´s , I feel a bit nostalgic when looking at these threads .

BTW : Great work !   Hannes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear Hannes,

I had a look at this website, I found wonderful models but no P-51D, pity.

Furthermore, me too, I remember with nostalgia these old 1/24 scale Airfix P-51D of my childhood...

we remain big children... ;)

 

Best greetings 

 

Olivier

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A post dedicated to the question of upper and underside colors of the Missouri Armada. Reading that O'Leary mentions in his book that Olive Drab and Neutral Grey were the official camouflage colors, I remembered that these were not the colors suggested by EagleCals:

CntBpg.jpg

 

Doing researchs on the subject, I found this info (from LPS hobby, another decal manufacturer):

XI8FV3.jpg

 

So it seems that, for the P-51D of the 357th FG, because of paint supplies issues, RAF Green and Medium Sea Grey have probably been used instead of Olive Drab and Neutral Grey.

I should follow the most probable option, the one indicated as by EagleCals, as by LPS, as by Superscale (doc 21 above), all suggesting the RAF colors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Olivier de St Raph said:

Dear Antonio, I have seen this panel on some pics. It seems to exist on some versions. Difficult to be 100% sure it was missing on the Missouri... In the doubt, it will not be represented on my model.

Hi Olivier,

I have asked  Christian, a  respected expert on Mustangs,  "Missouri Armada" was a P-51D-10-NA , and that panel first appeared with the P-51D-20NA, before that you had to remove the whole panel in front of the windshield in order to access the hydraulic fluid tank.

so, we are sure about it now Olivier :) be relax!

cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks to you and to Christian for this important info!

I found also in the O'Leary book, on p. 161, this:

"Installation of the K-14 gun sight became effective in production on and after airplanes P-51 D-20-NT AAF 44-12853 and P-51 D-20-NA AAF 44-72227."

I have 2 questions about this mention:

- what difference between the NT and the NA?

- in such conditions, are we sure that the P-51 D-10NA (and so among others the Missouri) were equipped with the K-14?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Olivier de St Raph said:

what difference between the NT and the NA?

I quote myself because I found the answer to this question in Wikipedia: the NA sufix means that the aircraft was made in the Inglewood factory, the NT suffix means that the aircraft was made in the Dallas factory of the North American Aviation company.

Furthermore, I read that the K 14 gun sight was introduced from the middle of 1944. But when the Missouri Armada was built precisely?

I think most likely the Missouri was equipped with the K 14 in the spring of 1945 (initially mounted or adapted), but if someone could confirm this, it would be fine.

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

×