Jump to content

As a result of the close-down of the UK by the British Government last night, we have made all the Buy/Sell areas read-only until we open back up again, so please have a look at the announcement linked here.

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. :)

LorenSharp

1/48 XB-70A Its finally COMPLETED!

Recommended Posts

That does put it a tad mildly Kev. I believe I created a few new "colourful metaphors" as they say at this discovery. But Overcome,Improvise and Adapt, Surrender ain't in my creed. I'm starting from the front and just work to the back and make sure it all fits right. I'm just going to ignore politely the instructions now and follow my instincts. I was wondering why they would show the individual sections  done in photos gear bays etc. but not completed whole sections. And I don't think I've even seen one built at least like the B-36 and future B-52H. hmmmm. The plot coagulates me thinks.😯

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, LorenSharp said:

That does put it a tad mildly Kev. I believe I created a few new "colourful metaphors" as they say at this discovery. But Overcome,Improvise and Adapt, Surrender ain't in my creed. I'm starting from the front and just work to the back and make sure it all fits right. I'm just going to ignore politely the instructions now and follow my instincts. I was wondering why they would show the individual sections  done in photos gear bays etc. but not completed whole sections. And I don't think I've even seen one built at least like the B-36 and future B-52H. hmmmm. The plot coagulates me thinks.😯

Well, you know the old saying...

 

"Invention is a mother.... when it's a necessity" 😉

 

Just remember - the instructions are only someone else's guidelines 🙂 I read them and then re-write them to suit my ideas and methods. Most of my kits in the stash have at least one A4 page of 'alternative instructions' that I've written.

 

I look forward to seeing the plot thicken.

 

Kev

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like to say 'structions? We don't need no stinkin' 'structions! But i figured this time with what this beast cost I'll try to follow them. Wrong. I'll stick with my intuition, or the Force. Either is good.

P.s thats 8th or 15th Force😎

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sanding,sanding and more sanding. happy, happy, joy, joy!😫

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know it's hard sometimes to remember just how BIG this plane really is. Here is a photo when it was rolled out at North American back in 1965

 

30128024747_805d822a9d_b.jpg

 

 This the second test Vehicle or as it was designated A/V2

Biggest difference from this and A/V1 externally is the wings have a +5 degrees dihedral. lesson learned from the first one.

That is a lot of rolling stock. And they built it without a computer. Just sliderules. For you youngsters, thats an early calculator,just ahead of an abacus.

Edited by LorenSharp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, LorenSharp said:

You know it's hard sometimes to remember just how BIG this plane really is.

And heavy... I think you know that she’s maximum weight is about 236 tons 😮

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, LorenSharp said:

Hmm... Just wondering if it would be feasible to replace the front end and the leading edges using a sheet of brass? That may give you the opportunity to correct some of the 'twist' and get the required air slicing look at the leading edge.

 

Having thought of that I shall now have to dig out my Italeri XB-70 and see if that needs that extent of surgery...

 

Kev

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had that thought when I first discovered this. The twist goes back 45%. Ideally, the entire bottom half should be replaced. To do only half way would cause a weakness  at the join that would cause it to break much too easily, I don't know if I can make it strong enough and still keep the design integrity. Right now the lower portion and the wing weigh out to almost a kilo, Landing gear, tail and forward fuselage will almost double that amount. Being a fibreglass/resin composite negates using hot water or a heat gun/hairdryer to soften and retwist back.

 

Nickolay, you are certainly correct about being heavy. had the designers gone with there original plans it would have been nearer to 375 tonnes or 750,000 lbs.  made up of a bomber with 2 detachable outer wings. they were additional flying fuel tanks to be dropped near target for high speed dash. General Lemay nixed that plan because it wasn't a bomber but a 3 plane formation.

Edited by LorenSharp

Share this post


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

I had that thought when I first discovered this. The twist goes back 45%. Ideally, the entire bottom half should be replaced. To do only half way would cause a weakness  at the join that would cause it to break much too easily, I don't know if I can make it strong enough and still keep the design integrity. Right now the lower portion and the wing weigh out to almost a kilo, Landing gear, tail and forward fuselage will almost double that amount. Being a fibreglass/resin composite negates using hot water or a heat gun/hairdryer to soften and retwist back.

Ouch - that is long way back and I concur with the potential weakness problem. The only other thing that occurs to me is using some stainless steel rods to 'brace' the section, but that would not be a task for the faint-hearted. Getting the alignment right would be fraught with difficulty. I suspect your original plan of "doing what can best be done" is the prime solution.

 

Kev

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most would not notice the  defect. I certainly didn't until I looked closely and started doing some measurements. This won't be a contest quality model by any means. Just big. If I can get it to look impressive from 2-3 feet I'll consider it a win. I'll know its there and that I can't correct it. But should any other soul be so inclined to get one of these be warned. There are pitfalls working with this type of material.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, LorenSharp said:

I had that thought when I first discovered this. The twist goes back 45%. Ideally, the entire bottom half should be replaced. To do only half way would cause a weakness  at the join that would cause it to break much too easily, I don't know if I can make it strong enough and still keep the design integrity. Right now the lower portion and the wing weigh out to almost a kilo, Landing gear, tail and forward fuselage will almost double that amount. Being a fibreglass/resin composite negates using hot water or a heat gun/hairdryer to soften and retwist back.

Too much unplanned works... I wish you a good luck! As love this airframe too, I think I’ll get the Italeri’s XB-70 someday - I hope it hasn’t so many problems.

 

2 hours ago, LorenSharp said:

Nickolay, you are certainly correct about being heavy. had the designers gone with there original plans it would have been nearer to 375 tonnes or 750,000 lbs.  made up of a bomber with 2 detachable outer wings. they were additional flying fuel tanks to be dropped near target for high speed dash. General Lemay nixed that plan because it wasn't a bomber but a 3 plane formation.

375... It’s an engineering wonder. And the speed is amazing too... Unfortunately, the time of the beautiful things is seems to be gone.

 

1 hour ago, LorenSharp said:

This won't be a contest quality model by any means. Just big.

Just build it, before an inspiration gone!

 

Cheers! 🤝

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Too true NIkolay. Damn the martinis! Full speed ahead! Forward into the fog! But in all seriousness. aircraft of today are just as beautiful. The Mig-29,Su-35,our own F-22,or F-35.Heck even the F-23. They are a product of their times. Granted Those lines were created in a Computer algorithm. but that doesn't make them any less beautiful. The aircraft of tomorrow will probably be even more exotic they all will have their special place in history. Right now I'm completing a vac for a group build on another site, an XP-67 Moonbat. 1941 creation of Mcdonnell-Douglas. First instance I know of, of a "blended airfoil System" almost no straight lines on the entire plane. wing,and fuselage blended together to create an efficient low drag high speed interceptor. the most beautiful lines I've ever come across.

Unfortunately it was coupled with the worst engine ever devised. An inverted aircooled low RPM 12 cylinder that caught fire if you looked at it wrong. And that happened a lot. Destroying both prototypes and killing the project. But if it had worked. who knows what aircraft of today would look like had it gone into production. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Nikolay Polyakov said:

Too much unplanned works... I wish you a good luck! As love this airframe too, I think I’ll get the Italeri’s XB-70 someday - I hope it hasn’t so many problems.

Hi Nikolay, I'll have a look at mine over the weekend and let you know of any pitfalls I find. I've just bought Brengun's PE detail set, which looks great, and I would recommend it as an add-on for the Italeri 72nd kit.

 

1 hour ago, LorenSharp said:

But in all seriousness. aircraft of today are just as beautiful. The Mig-29,Su-35,our own F-22,or F-35.Heck even the F-23. They are a product of their times. Granted Those lines were created in a Computer algorithm. but that doesn't make them any less beautiful. The aircraft of tomorrow will probably be even more exotic they all will have their special place in history. Right now I'm completing a vac for a group build on another site, an XP-67 Moonbat. 1941 creation of Mcdonnell-Douglas. First instance I know of, of a "blended airfoil System" almost no straight lines on the entire plane. wing,and fuselage blended together to create an efficient low drag high speed interceptor. the most beautiful lines I've ever come across.

Unfortunately it was coupled with the worst engine ever devised. An inverted aircooled low RPM 12 cylinder that caught fire if you looked at it wrong. And that happened a lot. Destroying both prototypes and killing the project. But if it had worked. who knows what aircraft of today would look like had it gone into production. 

Nice to see another advocate of missed opportunities in aviation. I'm keen on some of the apparently missed chances - The Hawker P.1154 (Supersonic Harrier), The Martin Baker MB.5, The BAC TSR.2 and the various flying wings from the Hortens to the Convairs and beyond.

 

Not so enamoured with the F-22 and F-35, but know that they are the way of the future. Excellently engineered but not really attractive. Mind you the Eurofighter Typhoon is not a pretty bird, either. Oops... time to duck and run....

 

Kev

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LorenSharp said:

But in all seriousness. aircraft of today are just as beautiful.

It’s true, too! But these extraordinary projects was something out-of-time 🙂 The good thing is that the life of an airframes is relatively long: the MiG-29 is from 1977 and the YF-22 and 23 - from the 1990!

 

1 hour ago, LorenSharp said:

Unfortunately it was coupled with the worst engine ever devised.

Unfortunately, there is not a rare situation...

 

The Myasishchev M-50 never reached its performance characteristics due to lacking of power:

22-1.jpg

 

A few weeks ago I sawed her in the museum (guess what, it’s standing there from the 1968! Under the sky, as pictured above) and she’s big. Giant!

 

Sorry for picturing your thread, again 🤝

Edited by Nikolay Polyakov

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, modelman182 said:

Hi Nikolay, I'll have a look at mine over the weekend and let you know of any pitfalls I find. I've just bought Brengun's PE detail set, which looks great, and I would recommend it as an add-on for the Italeri 72nd kit.

Thanks @modelman182, it would be very interesting!

 

18 minutes ago, modelman182 said:

Nice to see another advocate of missed opportunities in aviation. I'm keen on some of the apparently missed chances - The Hawker P.1154 (Supersonic Harrier), The Martin Baker MB.5, The BAC TSR.2 and the various flying wings from the Hortens to the Convairs and beyond.

The TSR.2 is a masterpiece! Sadly, all these airframes shared the one fate.

 

Thanks! 🙂

Edited by Nikolay Polyakov

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No Worries Nickolay. Remembering is always appreciated. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/3/2018 at 10:03 PM, Nikolay Polyakov said:

Thanks @modelman182, it would be very interesting!

 

Hi Nikolay

 

I started in on the assessment of the Italeri kit, but found this thread by another forum member which covers all the difficulties I identified. So rather than repeat all his advice, here's the link to his thread - well worth a read if you wish to tackle the Italeri kit. Nothing has changed since his 2009 thread - my kit is the latest release [2014] and it's identical.

The General produced a truly wonderful result from this kit, but admits that it fought him all the way. Hope this info helps you - it certainly doesn't deter me.

 

LorenSharp - sorry if this is a bit of 'kidnap ' of your excellent thread. I shall desist and get a new thread started on the 72nd version as soon as I get to it.

 

Kev

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Kev I'll give a look I never refuse advice or a good idea. I don't consider it a "kidnap" at all. Please call me Loren its easier to type.🙂

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sometimes I have to wonder about Servers. Spent the last half hour trying to reconnect to reply but got the aggravating message "unable to connect Timeout error" grrr. Anyways had to stop for a bit because my airbrush compressor took a dive on me. Switch I think,

Awaiting new one to wire in so this gives me a chance to investigate new avenues to finish the great white beast. But do not fear there will be further exciting adventures in a couple of days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, modelman182 said:

I started in on the assessment of the Italeri kit, but found this thread by another forum member which covers all the difficulties I identified. So rather than repeat all his advice, here's the link to his thread - well worth a read if you wish to tackle the Italeri kit. Nothing has changed since his 2009 thread - my kit is the latest release [2014] and it's identical.

Thanks Kev, it’s would be a great read for an evening 🙂

 

1 hour ago, modelman182 said:

I shall desist and get a new thread started on the 72nd version as soon as I get to it.

I’m excited!

 

24 minutes ago, LorenSharp said:

Sometimes I have to wonder about Servers. Spent the last half hour trying to reconnect to reply but got the aggravating message "unable to connect Timeout error" grrr. Anyways had to stop for a bit because my airbrush compressor took a dive on me.

Sometimes when I write the answers on this forum with all the quotes, external links and other interesting stuff, the «Submit Reply» button is stopped to work an my message is going to nowhere 😮

 

Thanks guys 🤝

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The General's build is very informative and thoroughly entertaining. The final paint scheme both original and interesting. I ironically have the Amt kit in my stash as well.My original intention was to scratch build a 1/48 scale version, granted it does seem like I'm doing that now. Although I do have a Bear 95 that I want to do the same thing too as I doubt anyone would make a 1/48 version.  Don't what I'll do with it now sits in storage like something out of raiders of the lost ark.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think when I was trying to post earlier today it would have been the time of day when everyone was at home and finished supper and all got online at once. 1.30PM here 6.30pm there. hence the bottleneck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well Time for more exciting adventures of The Great White Resin Beast, When last we saw our intrepid hero. His close inspections revealed all kinds of nasty ways resin and fibreglass can try to scupper ones build. Here at the intake opening the intake walls have been thinned and the base of the intake built up filled and smoothed.

31452186978_e5833e9576_b.jpg

45326231711_72995f7dd2_b.jpg

45326230721_c43c632277_b.jpg

45326232071_d6a59c32d9_b.jpg

 

And looking at the slight twist,I may not be able to remove the twist but I may be able to create a brace to spread the intakes are at least parallel make the twist less obvious. Now the fun part is making the brace so that it blends in with the intake shafts.

Kev your suggestion about the brass sheeting might be just the ticket to make that work.Thin enough to be unobtrusive and strong enough to keep everything even. 

Edited by LorenSharp

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

×
×
  • Create New...