Jump to content

Canberra B.2 to B-57B/E?? 1/72


RidgeRunner

Recommended Posts

 

 

Tell me I'm crazy or help me along the way, please :).

 

I want to eventually build a B-57E. However, I know the Airfix offering is not really worth considering and while the Italeri kit is okay it suffers from a poor back end ;), some forward fuselage issues, wrongly set wings and incorrect panel lining. Now I have one of the latter and I'm prepared to put the work in to getting her done but I wonder if it would be less painful and less messy to stick the Italeri nose on the front end of an S&M Canberra B.2 (which I have). That way most of the panel lining is recessed and correct already, the wheels are better(?), the backside is the correct shape, etc.....

 

Any thoughts??? 

 

Thanks chaps.

 

Martin

 

 

Edited by RidgeRunner
added text
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Sonoran said:

What is your source of information on the Italeri kit?  That's quite a list of problems, not a single one of which I have ever heard before today.  

It is based on a WIP on Britmodeller last year and his references to @canberrakid. Looking at the panels on the wings they look pretty generic, but then I'm not a Canberra expert.

 

 

Martin

 

 

Edited by RidgeRunner
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@RidgeRunner An interesting project Martin, yes it would be achievable, but a big task, it would make for a generally more accurate Canberra than the Italeri kit although the wings on the S&M kit aren't the best in fact I suspect they are quite close the the Italeri wing in plan? I'd be tempted to to keep the the S&M B.2 as is, or build it as an EB.57A which would be easier. Then look online for a cheep FROG or a repop B(I)8 use the wings and fuselage and Italeri nose from that for an even more accurate B.57 Canberra. This is how I did mine which is a wee bit more complex  Early RB.57E build The wheels are wrong on all kits, no one as yet has done an accurate representation of the Martin main wheel and unless you do a pre 1974 EB.57E/B you will need to find some ESCAPAC seats. 

xxdNP5.jpg

xxdfFP.jpg

 

xxd22F.jpg    

 

 

@Sonoran Take a look at this which I did some time ago, and the link to my RB.57E build above to give you an idea of what is wrong with it. It boils down to just about every thing apart from the nose/cockpit. but out of the box it looks like a Canberra give or take! 

  italeri-1-72-b-57-canberra-musings

 

John

 

 

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, RidgeRunner said:

It is based on a WIP on Britmodeller last year and his references to @canberrakid. Looking at the panels on the wings they look pretty generic, but then I'm not a Canberra expert.

 

 

Martin

 

 

Martin as you will see from my build the panel detail is quite diferant as are a number of the fuselage ones, apart from Classic Airframes 1/48 B.57B's no one has come close to getting it right. 

 

John  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks John. I reckon I'll follow your more expert advice and tackle the Italeri. I may adopt Cookies approach on the wings. Do you have a 3-view for the B-57 that you'd be happy to share? I will then get out the scriber and a spend a few Autumn nights scraping ;).

 

i'll be building an early 1960s target tug so hopefully the seats will be okay. 

 

all the best, 

 

Martin

Edited by RidgeRunner
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@RidgeRunner, I can send you some drawings. One thing you need to decide on Martin is which one you want to build, If you go for an EB.57B you may have to decide between a .50 Cal 4 gun wing or a 20mm Cannon wing, I'm not sure if any of the .50 Cal B's made it to the EB conversion but the FY number will tell you. If you go for the EB.57E you will need to modify the tail cone as I did with my RB.57E, all E's were 20mm Cannon armed. 

 

John 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, rickshaw said:

Personally, I'd use the High Planes Canberra/B-57 kits. 

Other than the RB.57D I've not built any of the HP B.57's. On the D the detail is generally quite good but is a bit inaccurate or missing in places, the fuselage shape wise is street's ahead of the Italeri kit! 

 

John 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, canberra kid said:

Other than the RB.57D I've not built any of the HP B.57's. On the D the detail is generally quite good but is a bit inaccurate or missing in places, the fuselage shape wise is street's ahead of the Italeri kit! 

 

John 

Personally, I am much more interested in the shape of the model and the colour scheme/markings that it wears, rather than any detail you believe should be on it.  From my experience, all detail disappears after about 5 metres from an object and that includes aircraft.  I don't believe you should outline panels, stuff like that - it all disappears generally.   It is much more important to get the shape right and the markings correct IMO.

 

I have built about half a dozen different Canberra models, most from High Planes.  They are IMO streets ahead of all the others, most particularly Frog and Matchbox.   Airfix is the next closest and Italeri after them.   That I can go to High Planes and order an accurate Canberra B.2/B.6/B.20/B.21/T.4/B-57B/B-57D is IMO excellent.  If I want an Airfix/Italeri/Matchbox/Revell/Frog one of any of the three or four versions they have made over the decades, I need to search around EvilBay/Second-Hand kit sellers to find them.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, rickshaw said:

Personally, I am much more interested in the shape of the model and the colour scheme/markings that it wears, rather than any detail you believe should be on it.  From my experience, all detail disappears after about 5 metres from an object and that includes aircraft.  I don't believe you should outline panels, stuff like that - it all disappears generally.   It is much more important to get the shape right and the markings correct IMO.

 

I have built about half a dozen different Canberra models, most from High Planes.  They are IMO streets ahead of all the others, most particularly Frog and Matchbox.   Airfix is the next closest and Italeri after them.   That I can go to High Planes and order an accurate Canberra B.2/B.6/B.20/B.21/T.4/B-57B/B-57D is IMO excellent.  If I want an Airfix/Italeri/Matchbox/Revell/Frog one of any of the three or four versions they have made over the decades, I need to search around EvilBay/Second-Hand kit sellers to find them.

They are good accurate kits, no arguments from me on that point, they are not an easy build so not every modeller would be happy taking one on, as for detail that is a matter of personal test, I can live with it or without it, but if it is there and I know what is right or wrong about it I want it right. If a manufacturer is going to do a lot of a type then they should do the best to get it right, unfortunately some fall way short of that as we all know! 

John

Edited by canberra kid
my phone can't spell
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, canberra kid said:

They are good accurate kits, no arguments from me on that point, they are not an easy build so not every modeller would be happy taking one on, as for detail that is a matter of personal test, I can live with it or without it, but if it is there and I know what is right or wrong about it I want it right. If a manufacturer is going to do a lot of a type then they should do the best to get it right, unfortunately some fall way short of that as we all know! 

John

 

I agree that they are more "old school" than most more modern kits.   I don't think they are appreciably more difficult to build though, if you have any sort of experience at building kits.   Just needs a little more care and a little more trial and error before gluing.   I wouldn't attempt one straight off the street as a newby, though, I agree.   That an aircraft as well known as the Canberra, even today, still can't be got right by the likes of Airfix/Frog is IMO a worry.  That it can be got right by a small-scale producer like High Planes suggests that the big companies need to extract their digits.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have built a couple of HP kits, the Me 262 V1 and the Gloster E28/39 but not a Canberra,  I put this comment in my RFI for their Me 262 prototype

The kit has a ‘health warning’ on the box saying that it is for experienced modellers only and some cutting ,filling and sanding is required. Substitute ‘much’ for ‘some’ and that sums it up

I suspect that this may well apply to the their Canberras but well worth the effort

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You chaps are instilling fear in to me now ;). Having decided to go Italeri and scribe the panels I then changed my mind, favouring a S&M with an Italeri cockpit. Now HP! What'll I do? :(..... Then, once decided, how do I get the best B-57 wheels? Diameter and thickness most important as I think - just think - I could scratch them in to B-57 hubs..... I may be wrong!!!!! 

 

Martin

Edited by RidgeRunner
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Martin another big hole in the B.57 kit world, accurate wheels, the hubs in the Italeri kit are a very simplified attempt at them but they are more B.57 like than the other kits, but the tiers are a joke and not a very funny one at that! wrong profile and too small. These are the ones I first considered as replacements, right to left are, Italeri, Matchbox and Airfix B.57 non were were used in the end.

xsuz5b.jpg

In the end I decided to use the Italeri hub and insert it into a FROG tire, it looks like HP did something along the same lines with their B.57's.

xsuDZX.jpg

 

John

  

Edited by canberra kid
re written in English :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks John. A bit of a mire! ;). You didn't mention the S&M offering. Are they not okay, either? As I said, I have an S&M B.2 that I am now considering as the basis for a B-57B, or E, conversion. I don't have either a Matchbox or Frog kit :(.

 

M

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, canberra kid said:

Hi Martin another big hole in the B.57 kit world, accurate wheels, the hubs in the Italeri kit are a very simplified attempt at them but they are more B.57 like than the other kits, but the tiers are a joke and not a very funny one at that! wrong profile and too small. These are the ones I first considered as replacements, right to left are, Italeri, Matchbox and Airfix B.57 non were were used in the end.

xsuz5b.jpg

In the end I decided to use the Italeri hub and insert it into a FROG tire, it looks like HP did something along the same lines with their B.57's.

xsuDZX.jpg

 

John

  

 

Sorry John, one more thing. Have you transposed things in your post above. You say in the line up that the Italeri is on the left and that you used those hubs. However, you show the Airfix hubs in the lower image?

 

Martin

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
×
×
  • Create New...