DH60 Gypsy Moth...

[Scratchbuilder]

Hi, can anyone recommend the best drawings from which to make a DH60 Gypsy Moth as Amy Johnson's "Jason", please? And where I might obtain same.

 

Cheers,

Martin

[Roger Holden]

 

5 hours ago, Scratchbuilder said:

Hi, can anyone recommend the best drawings from which to make a DH60 Gypsy Moth as Amy Johnson's "Jason", please? And where I might obtain same.

 

 

See here:

https://www.modelflying.co.uk/forums/postings.asp?th=50576

https://aerofred.com/details.php?image_id=80713

[Scratchbuilder]

Many thanks, Roger, those , with the modifications are excellent.

Cheers,

Martin

[galgos]

OK, since Martin's posted his plea for good drawings for a DH60, I desperately need the same for a DH82 Tiger Moth!  Anybody help please?

Max

[AMB]

5 hours ago, galgos said:

OK, since Martin's posted his plea for good drawings for a DH60, I desperately need the same for a DH82 Tiger Moth!  Anybody help please?

Max

Get the Warpaint book on the Tiger Moth from Guidelines Publications. It has detailed drawings in it.

[galgos]

Thanks Adrian, I'll look into that.

Max 

[John Aero]

Detailed drawings do not necessarily mean that they will have accurate outlines. The Tiger Moth is another well known aeroplane which has been poorly treated (think Spitfires for another example) by various illustrators and model companies. I probably have every scale plan of the Tiger that has been published and they all vary in some way with many being downright hopeless.

 

I started drawing up the Tiger in stages over a number of years usually in association with improving my own kits which were initially made with commercially available drawings. The basis of my drawings were a mix of DH rigging data and true life measurements. DH three views are not always technically accurate

 

Due to my protracted cancer illness over the last year I decided to withdraw from most Internet communication and as a diversion I have been working on some of my drawing projects, including the Tiger Moth.  But with some good news I have decided to write again. I have recently brought my Tiger drawings to fruition at the request of a European model company for a possible kit.

 

Fortunately the Tiger is an easy subject to work on especially as my nearest local example is partially stripped down and the aircraft's datum is the top surface of the top fuselage frame tube and not as many have drawn it, through engine thrust line, which actually sits 2.5 inches above the datum line. On the Warpaint drawings the thrust line is about 4" and so this effects the rest of the nose contours.  There is a similar error on the original Aeromodeller drawings. but there is a more serious error on both the MAP drawings in that the main struts have been drawn too long. Hence the problem with the Matchbox kit's lower wing dihedral.

 

Photographs set in a computer drawing program can reveal some useful data as a guide, but only for parts, and not a whole fuselage side view and again only if the photo is taken from a long distance. Then again only if the plane is perpendicular to the lens bore sight. The camera will have distortions and any angular movement on the subject will create real errors with especially  tail surfaces.  There is no substitute for measuring the real thing and transferring the data onto a computer drawing program.

 

The original question was about the Gipsy Moth and there are fewer drawings around of this Moth. The problem with drawings is that any apparently detailed and "looks good" drawing quickly becomes the standard for the next interpretation and thus any untruths in the shape are perpetuated.

 

If I had to recommend one DH.60 drawing, I would probably pick the old G.A. Cox Aeromodeller one. I would however use  a Tiger Moth tail plane drawing and not the drawn one.  Beware that there are slatted and unslatted wings which have differing wing rib spacing on the top wing.

 

In the book, Moths, Majors and Minors, all the Moth types appear as good looking drawings, collected by an ex DH employee, but beware some of them don't match scale on the same page and others don't even have wings perpendicular to the fuselage datum in plan view.

 

John

 

Please don't request information on the old Aeroclub products line as it's in process of closure.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[galgos]

Thank you for that helpful update John, I'm so glad to see you "back in circulation" again and wish you continued good health.  I suspect the European model company is the same one that I've been helping, I haven't heard anything from them for a few weeks but I know they've had a lot on their plate with another kit they are issuing shortly.  That said, I sincerely hope that the Tiger Moth kit comes to fruition, I'm sure it will sell in shedloads.

Regards

Max

[dnl42]

45 minutes ago, John Aero said:

I have recently brought my Tiger drawings to fruition at the request of a European model company for a possible kit.

One can only hope and pray... 

While on the subject, 1/48 scale, please.

[galgos]

35 minutes ago, dnl42 said:

One can only hope and pray... 

While on the subject, 1/48 scale, please.

1. Amen!

2. Hmmmm?

[John Aero]

I can't comment on the destinations or scales of my drawings but I think that at some point all will be satisfactory.

I did have a look at the Moth references in Roger's post above and I note that the German drawing is Cirrus Moth based (in my opinion) on part of the Cox drawing which features both the earlier Cirrus Moth and the Gipsy Moth. 

 

The early Cirrus and Gipsy Moths both have different thrust lines and there are other little mine fields with these aeroplanes.  Jason was a wooden fuselage Gipsy Moth.

 

John

[72modeler]

John,

 

Off-topic, to be sure, but I just wanted you to know how great it was to see your two most recent posts. I was sorry to hear about your medical issue, but so glad to hear you are back among us. I know I speak for all of us in wishing you continued good health and thanking you for all the wonderful contributions you have made to the hobby. Enjoy your projects and share what you can when you can. Godspeed, sir!

Mike

[Mr T]

 Nice to see you back John and nice to talk at Telford. I was going to suggest the Cox drawings although the copy I have came in the Jan 1980 'Scale Models' so do not if they suffered at the hands of the printer. I think it is worth mentioning that DH60s come in different flavours and one of the big differences is that some, like 'Jason' had plywood  covered fuselages and some like  the ones used by th RAF had fabric covered metal fuselages. 

[Eric Mc]

Great to hear you are on the mend John. Sadly, I had to miss Telford this year because my wife has had serious health issues.

[John Aero]

Thank you gentlemen for your comments and likes. Eric, you were missed and best wishes for your wife's health.

 

I just dug out another Tiger drawing which appeared in Wingspan magazine and it looks quite good but I haven't had time to put it on the light board or scan it, However the main struts are again drawn over long, which makes me think that they have roots in the MAP (Aeromodeller/ Scale models) drawings. The Scale Models drawings were much improved but it still has the strut error.

 

The Gipsy II powered Metal Moth (60.M) and the Tiger have a pure lineage. It was a DH 60.M which was modified with deeper front cockpit doors to facilitate a parachute exit which was then called the 60 T (Trainer).

A 60 T fitted with a Gipsy III engine was then used to experiment with even better ingress and exit from the front cockpit, by staggering the wings.  Further trials, produced by stages the 60 T ( now T for Tiger Moth), with it's unequal wing stagger and unequal dihedrals, but still with the deeper front doors and fabric /stringered aft decking. It became the DH 82 Tiger Moth with B condition number E6. The main production Tiger then reverted to the smaller front cockpit doors.  It became the DH 82a Tiger Moth 2 when fitted with the Gipsy Major and a plywood aft top decking.  I think a lot of the drawing errors stem from the early DH publicity material issued during the metamorphosis.

 

John

[Roger Holden]

6 hours ago, John Aero said:

 Cirrus Moth based (in my opinion) on part of the Cox drawing which features both the earlier Cirrus Moth and the Gipsy Moth. 

 

The early Cirrus and Gipsy Moths both have different thrust lines and there are other little mine fields with these aeroplanes. 

 

 

Cox's Cirrus Moth drawing represents G-EBLV as it exists today (and was the basis for A-Model's 1/48 & 1/72 kits).  But it was re-engined in 1937 (I think), with a Cirrus II installation (lower thrust line) from a DH 60X. Thus it's now a 'short wing' 1926 Moth with a 1928 front end and a hybrid unlike anything which came from the factory.

[John Aero]

Coincidentally the first model I have made  in 36 years for pleasure is a Gipsy Moth. It's one of my 1:48 DH 60 M's which I have modified by flattening the fuselage sides to make a 60 X.  The figures with the exception of the one on the left are my own resin castings.

 

The vehicles are part of my collection of 1:48 diecasts.   It's not widely known that quite a number of the Dinky range from the forties and fifties are actually 1:48 ( not 1;43). The Ford T is a Lledo model with the original paint work but with my cast metal wheels. The Bug is an early Matchbox car. All of the Dinky Super toys lorries were again to 1:48. A few of the Yesteryear's are 1:47 to 1:50 scale

 

The scenario.. The lady pilot is the Hon Leticia (aka Titti) Longshaw, (daughter of a a cotton magnate) who has just flown her new Moth through a flock of small birds and has her engineer, Pop Rimmer, from Hooton and mechanic Eddie check out her Moth for damage. Looking on is the club chief flying instructor I.A.M. Hardley Keen (late Capt R.F.C.) who has brought Leticia's race trim Bugatti over. The boys brought the Ford T pickup.

Well I needed something to take my mind of my woes during the dark days.

 

John

 

By the way the diminutive for Leticia is quite correct as used in the original Swallows and Amazons, by Arthur Ransome. Also should anyone doubts a race trim Bugatti would be seen on the road, when I was leaving the last Woburn Abbey, Moth rally, I was overtaken on a quite narrow road by a scruffy racing Type 35, driven by a bare armed hat less individual, which then bellowed off down the M.1.  Lancelot aka 'Pop' Rimmer and Eddie (a hero of mine) were real people.

 

 

 

[galgos]

Love it John, I do like a model with a story!

Max

[cngaero]

On 11/16/2018 at 3:17 PM, John Aero said:

Coincidentally the first model I have made  in 36 years for pleasure is a Gipsy Moth. 

That's a lovely little diorama John with a nice back story, a beautiful Gypsy Moth and a gorgeous colour scheme. 

Thank you for sharing it. 

 

Edited November 20, 2018 by cngaero

[72modeler]

Looks like you haven't lost a step, John. Very nice build, diorama, and back story. Loved the Bugatti, too,  but a Morgan would have been even better!

Mike

[dnl42]

On 11/16/2018 at 7:17 AM, John Aero said:

Coincidentally the first model I have made  in 36 years for pleasure is a Gipsy Moth

Bravo! That is a wonderful diorama!

[John Aero]

As a total diversion during my treatments for my malaise I started to collect a number of diecasts cars which I'd owned, known or driven to replace a collection which was stolen some years ago. It just got out of hand.. I then refined my quest for vehicles around 1:48 scale  so literally anything from 46th to 50th. I was surprised with just how many there are or can be modified for civil and military purposes. You might be right in guessing that I do have a small library of vintage and classic vehicle plans and books 

 

Just to illustrate a few of the vehicles that can be used in 1:48 by modifying toys. These are all cheaply available Lledo (Days Gone) promotional vehicles for which I would expect to pay no more than £4.00. For instance the yellow Taxi on the right is an out of the box (supposed to be)  Ford Model A . The wheels are too small and it's slightly under scale for 1:48.  However just a coat of Black paint and new wheels and it becomes a nice in scale late Ford Model T. (centre).  Take it one stage further,to the left, and we have a Morris Bullnose Cowley.

 

I used the Ford body, shortened at the rear and the engine bonnet/hood  filed round at the top. I cast a Bull nose radiator which could easily have been Miliput or polystyrene. Each side, had a shim of Litho plate glued on to the inside with a straight top edge so that I could profile with Plastic Padding Liquid Steel.  Liquid Steel is my go to filler for all my metal repairs or mods. It sets quickly and it can be carved whilst soft and when set it will file well. The modified body was then married to a  scrap Lledo van chassis which has the right wheelbase. The lot was then mounted on another type of my cast wheels.

 

In the background can be seen a number of Ford T vans some of which have had no more than the radiator centres painted and my wheels substituted for the under size toy wheels. Glazing has still to be added to some models.

 

The Long chassis Ford T Tanker, which Hardley-Keen, (painted by my good friend Alan Simpson, up in darkest Caledonia). is standing by, is an out of the box model which has had the fuel tank just clicked off  and my wheels fitted and some of the brass work dulled with paint. This truck also comes in the short wheelbase version and as a Royal Mail Air Mail van, again useful for 1920's/30's backgrounds.

 

Brooklands was a great place in the 30's with Aircraft manufacturing companies, light aircraft and then racing cars whizzing around the banked perimeter. Hence the 'work in progress MG cars'.  In the foreground is a Lledo MG driven by a Gargoyle, it's (supposed to be) a six cylinder K,3 Magnette, but it's actually nearer to a MG. Q Type four cylinder racing car. Again the addition of a few new remodeled bits makes it much more acceptable but it still has a long way to go. 

 

Perhaps this should be a separate thread but the post is really for the attention of aircraft modelers rather than Die cast collectors.  Just a tip, many of the early diecasts are made of Mazak or Zamak metal and it's pretty unforgiving if it's stressed by bending.

 

John

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[noelh]

On 11/16/2018 at 3:17 PM, John Aero said:

 

 

 

 

As G-AAJT is obviously still extant. You could legitimately replace the Model T with a something like a Range Rover and call it a scene from Woburn one Summer recently. The Bugatti could stay obviously for the reason you mentioned. 

Almost a timeless scene.

You wouldn't get away with calling the lady 'Titti' this time despite her ample assets.😉

Love the original though.

Edited November 21, 2018 by noelh

[John Aero]

Indeed it is still extant.

 

Thanks to all for your comments.

 

John

 

 

 

[Britman]

What a smashing looking Moth. Isn't it peculiar how a painting of dubious attraction can command millions and yet here is a work of quality that may only attract thousands. I am very glad that you are finding things of interest for your recovery time and may your health continue to improve. If I may ask one question of you which I presume would be right up you street, and that is if I wished to "scratch" a Dh 50 , would a Dh 4/9 be a good starting point? I have tried to find the origins of this type and can only guess.

 

Keith.