gingerbob Posted March 13, 2018 Share Posted March 13, 2018 Might you be referring to the spar strap, running- what a surprise!- along the spar line, but not the least bit flush? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Boak Posted March 13, 2018 Share Posted March 13, 2018 It appears excessively deep for a strap. See photos on the other C-45 thread http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235034663-beech-c45-expeditor/&page=2 Posts 28 and 33. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob Lyttle Posted March 13, 2018 Author Share Posted March 13, 2018 @gingerbob, there's a picture of G-BKGL in the April Flypast mag that is raising questions. Very clear underside photo shows something quite noticeable that isn't even hinted at in the 3 view drawings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob Lyttle Posted March 13, 2018 Author Share Posted March 13, 2018 Something going on under here too, but hard to make out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Boak Posted March 13, 2018 Share Posted March 13, 2018 Thinking of it a strengthening structure for spar life-extension purposes, normally a flat plate attached to the external skin does the job. I recall a story that British Phantoms had to have a series of such plates one on top of the other as the aircraft continued in service, up to six being noted. Not sure how true this number was. More familiar to WW2 modellers would be the external strengthening plates on the Seafire's fuselage. If one thin plate wouldn't do, then a thicker one could be substituted, but a bit of structural knowledge will tell you that you would get greater strength not from a thicker plate but by something like an I-beam. The same amount of metal but greater depth. That could be what is happening here - the metal rod acting as a strengthening piece mounted at some depth below the spar. However this appears to be a very complex and expensive way of solving the problem. Alternatively, how does the fuel system work on a Beech 18? Could this be a way of transferring fuel from one wing to the other in the event of single-engine failure? A post-war solution to some certification problem? Either way, why does it widen dramatically as it nears the nacelle? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob Lyttle Posted March 13, 2018 Author Share Posted March 13, 2018 16 minutes ago, Graham Boak said: A post-war solution to some certification problem? I notice my 3-view drawing by Granger is dated 1945. So it could be a.modern update. Who would believe that underside photos are so few and far between?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gingerbob Posted March 14, 2018 Share Posted March 14, 2018 Here- see the photo down a few of "the other fixes". The website in general will be of interest to you, too. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob Lyttle Posted March 14, 2018 Author Share Posted March 14, 2018 @gingerbob, good result! Mystery solved I reckon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Boak Posted March 14, 2018 Share Posted March 14, 2018 Yes, the photos look like the Hamilton fix. However, the odd date would have helped - and would still help. At least we know it is not on the wartime examples, and probably not the postwar builds either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gingerbob Posted March 14, 2018 Share Posted March 14, 2018 Yeah, certainly has an "emergency retrofit" feel about it. It was in answer to an Airworthiness Directive. Either the linked page or elsewhere on the site talks about it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Boak Posted March 14, 2018 Share Posted March 14, 2018 The page doesn't give dates but elsewhere the site says that the AD was issued in 1975. The problem was noted in wartime and postwar ones had a stronger spar. There is a statement that in this period a gusset (strap) had been fitted to some aircraft (implying wartime C variants?) but the later problems that inspired the AD apply to all Beech 18 variants. However there's no suggestion that all Beech 18s flying after 1975 had the same modification as that shown in the photos and described as Hamilton. So it really is a case of check the individual aircraft if you are modelling a post-1975 example. Or even a wartime example in postwar use? In that case it would be just a strap. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob Lyttle Posted March 14, 2018 Author Share Posted March 14, 2018 1 hour ago, Graham Boak said: So it really is a case of check the individual aircraft if you are modelling a post-1975 example. That's if you can find the photo references for underside! Remarkably few around when you're looking for them. When did production stop? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JWM Posted March 14, 2018 Share Posted March 14, 2018 Really not easy to get clear shot from bottom... Here is some museum machine Above without, below with 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Boak Posted March 15, 2018 Share Posted March 15, 2018 N552B appears to have one of the strap mods, judging from the fairly obvious large rivets. Interesting aerial fit on the Canadian one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob Lyttle Posted March 21, 2018 Author Share Posted March 21, 2018 Thought I'd paste up my solution to the tailplane arrangements for the C45. This is the underside of the elevator, ... with just a little of the telescoped action showing. Top view... The rudders are well in hand, but I probably won't fit until later, as they're a bit more knockable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob Lyttle Posted March 24, 2018 Author Share Posted March 24, 2018 Well, I got the tailplane arrangements all buttoned up. A rewarding bit of plastic bashing. I think it was worth going the extra mile for such a pretty plane. One of Walter Beech's best...? Well I'd like to have one! Thanks again all, for insight and expertise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now