British Corsair Wing Mods.

[spaddad]

Hi peeps,

just been looking on the Fundekals website & really fancy doing a British Corsair  using the Tamiya 1/32nd F4U-1A but that would involve clipping the wings,anybody have experience of doing this or offer any clues as to what his would involve, level of difficulty etc.?

Thanks in advance,

spad

[tonyot]

I did the Tamiya 1/32nd scale Birdcage Corsair as a British one (which still retained the full span wings) and I`m pretty sure from memory that there was a score line along the wingtip interior and maybe a `British' clipped wingtip in the parts,....... I did a WIP here on BM so it might feature?

Good luck,

              Tony

 

Edit,.... although the early part of it has fallen foul of the Photobucket fiasco, here is my WIP; 

 

And yes, the kit does have separate wing tips,...... I just cannot remember whether clipped tips are included? 

 

Edited November 3, 2018 by tonyot

[72modeler]

38 minutes ago, spaddad said:

Hi peeps,

just been looking on the Fundekals website & really fancy doing a British Corsair  using the Tamiya 1/32nd F4U-1A but that would involve clipping the wings,anybody have experience of doing this or offer any clues as to what his would involve, level of difficulty etc.?

Thanks in advance,

spad

Try this discussion for reference; it's a very easy mod to do; just scribe or mark a line 8" inboard of the wingtip and cut or file back to the line; round off the upper and lower edges slightly and Bob's your uncle, as you UK types like to say! ( We Texans say "Slicker than goose s--- through a tin horn!")

Mike

 

 

Edited November 3, 2018 by 72modeler
added link

[85sqn]

Just to add to this; exactly what the guys have said above and a quick search on this section (WWII) or the ready for inspection will show some examples. Tony has made some lovely corsairs which are on here. 

 

We did a corsair group build two years back which had a mixture of Tamiya kits, Hobbyboss etc which were converted to FAA versions.

 

I've done a couple as well though all are 48th:

 

 

 

Apologies if any photos are missing, Photobucket to blame.

 

It's a great subject and all the best if you go for an FAA corsair.

 

Nick

[Dana Bell]

Hi SpadDad,

 

I'm afraid the subject of British Corsair wingtips is a bit more complicated than what we're used to reading.  There were three different wingtips on British Corsairs, and some aircraft wore each of the three at different times in their careers.

 

The original wingtip was the standard USN version.  There was no separate tip - the outer wing panel was built as a complete unit.  This was the wingtip delivered on all Mark I Corsairs, Mark II Corsairs prior to JT425, and Mark III Corsairs prior to JS543.

 

The second style wingtip was called the "short" wingtip.  It was standardized at the factory on JT425 and subsequent Mark IIs, and on JS543 and subsequent Mark IIIs.  It was also retrofitted to nearly all surviving earlier aircraft.  Interestingly, one of the discussions noted above involved some joking about using a hacksaw to remove the original wingtip, but that was exactly what the factory instructions called for.  The fabric (which ran all the way to the wingtip) was softened with dope thinner, cut, and peeled back so the wing spar and ribs could be cut back with a hacksaw.  An Andover Kent fiberglass wingtip was then fitted into place, the fabric was brought back to the edge, trimmed, stitched, redoped, and covered with enamel camouflage paint.

 

The newer generation of British aircraft carriers had even shorter hangar decks than the older carriers, so Corsairs with short wingtips still wouldn't fit.  This led to the "short short" wingtips , which removed the earlier short tips (or any surviving USN tips) and fitted a new Andover Kent fiberglass unit.  This was retrofitted to most surviving Mark IIs and Mark IIIs, but apparently not to Mark Is.  All Mark IVs were delivered with the short short tips.

 

If you look at the original wing, the modeler's version of the short tip would trim away about half of the USN tip outboard of the inner edge of the navigation light.  The short short tip trimmed away about 3/4ths of the original tip outboard of the original light.

 

There are drawings on page 59 of a recent book on the Corsair, but I'm not allowed to advertise the book on BritModeler.  [Mods, if this note went too far, please just delete this paragraph, leaving the information above.]

 

Anyhow, check your photos to see which tip is appropriate for the aircraft you're modeling at the given time in its operational career.

 

Cheers,

 

 

Dana

[stevej60]

3 hours ago, spaddad said:

Hi peeps,

just been looking on the Fundekals website & really fancy doing a British Corsair  using the Tamiya 1/32nd F4U-1A but that would involve clipping the wings,anybody have experience of doing this or offer any clues as to what his would involve, level of difficulty etc.?

Thanks in advance,

spad

Tamiya 1/32 scale Dave? You won the lottery then?

[spaddad]

1 minute ago, stevej60 said:

Tamiya 1/32 scale Dave? You won the lottery then?

Not exactly.

[Graham Boak]

I presume the later generation of RN carriers is a reference to the Light Fleets, which did operate Corsairs whereas Indomitable (with one-and-a half hangar decks) only operated Hellcats and Implacable/Indefatigable (with two full hangar decks) Seafires.  I presume that this wouldn't mean that the short-short wingtips wasn't seen on the three Illustrious class ship.

[spaddad]

The subjects under consideration are JT427, 47th Naval Fighter Wing HMS Victorious Oct. 1944 or JT383, 1834 Sqd. HMS Victorious Oct. 1944

[Dana Bell]

31 minutes ago, Graham Boak said:

I presume the later generation of RN carriers is a reference to the Light Fleets, which did operate Corsairs whereas Indomitable (with one-and-a half hangar decks) only operated Hellcats and Implacable/Indefatigable (with two full hangar decks) Seafires.  I presume that this wouldn't mean that the short-short wingtips wasn't seen on the three Illustrious class ship.

Hi Graham,

 

I can't say that short short tips weren't used on the Illustrious class.  They might not have been necessary, but there are May 1944 orders calling for the replacement of all short tips with short short tips.  Kits were provided for ALL aircraft, but that doesn't mean they were all modified, nor does it clarify when they were modified.  I can only imagine that having two types of wingtip would force some fairly complicated management of the inventory, just to avoid sending the longer planes to the shorter ships.  Also, any Mark IVs sent to the Illustrious class would have had short short tips from date of delivery...

 

Cheers,

 

 

Dana

 

 

[Dana Bell]

31 minutes ago, spaddad said:

The subjects under consideration are JT427, 47th Naval Fighter Wing HMS Victorious Oct. 1944 or JT383, 1834 Sqd. HMS Victorious Oct. 1944

Hi SpadDad,

 

While I'd guess short short by October 1944 (the kits would have been available for over 4 months), it's going to come down to a photo of the aircraft to pin down what actually was fitted.

 

Cheers,

 

 

 

Dana

[spaddad]

9 minutes ago, Dana Bell said:

Hi SpadDad,

 

While I'd guess short short by October 1944 (the kits would have been available for over 4 months), it's going to come down to a photo of the aircraft to pin down what actually was fitted.

 

Cheers,

 

 

 

Dana

Thanks Dana, The Fundekals website has the illustrated instructions with photo's including a couple of (admittedly fuzzy) wingtip shots but as I don't really know what I'm looking at I can't say which tips are fitted but I think they may be 'short short'

[tonyot]

I hope that Dana doesn`t mind me posting this here from his excellent book,...... if so then I will gladly delete it.

 

It was retrieved from a PM  that I sent a while back to another BM`er and have posted it here in case it is of use;

 

 

Cheers,

        Tony 

Edited November 4, 2018 by tonyot

[spaddad]

Thanks Tony, just the job.

[spaddad]

1 hour ago, tonyot said:

I hope that Dana doesn`t mind me posting this here from his excellent book,.

 

 

 

 

 

 

       

What book is this from?

[Troy Smith]

36 minutes ago, spaddad said:

What book is this from?

Dana Bell's recent monographs on the early Corsairs

http://www.hyperscale.com/2015/reviews/books/f4u1vol2bellbookreviewse_1.htm

 

Stunning books!

[Sonoran]

You can’t build any Corsair model until you get Mr. Bell’s two books.  

[spaddad]

Thanks Troy, off to check it out now.

[72modeler]

11 hours ago, Sonoran said:

You can’t build any Corsair model until you get Mr. Bell’s two books.  

I totally agree! I am keeping my fingers crossed that Dana will continue this outstanding series to cover all the variants; I have left space on my bookshelf for volume 11, (F4U-4) volume 12, ( F4U-5) and volume 13 (F4U-7/AU-1) No, I didn't skip one- volume 10 is his outstanding monograph on the many permutations of U.S. olive drab, and is a must-have for any aircraft modeler. Standard disclaimer- other than being a big fan of everything Dana does, I receive no compensation whatsoever for ranting and raving about his books, but I might be the president of the Texas chapter of the Dana Bell fan club! Ha!

Mike

[Corsairfoxfouruncle]

Wish i could afford his and other books. 

[EwenS]

14 hours ago, Dana Bell said:

Hi Graham,

 

I can't say that short short tips weren't used on the Illustrious class.  They might not have been necessary, but there are May 1944 orders calling for the replacement of all short tips with short short tips.  Kits were provided for ALL aircraft, but that doesn't mean they were all modified, nor does it clarify when they were modified.  I can only imagine that having two types of wingtip would force some fairly complicated management of the inventory, just to avoid sending the longer planes to the shorter ships.  Also, any Mark IVs sent to the Illustrious class would have had short short tips from date of delivery...

 

Cheers,

 

 

Dana

 

 

Dana / Graham

US carriers all had a hanger height of at least 17'. The wartime classes (Essex, Midway and escort carriers) were designed at 17'6" with the prewar classes and Independence class being a few inches less. Lexington and Saratoga had 20' clearance.

From the mid 1920's the British standardised on a 16' hangar height up to and including the 3 Illustrious class. Implacable & Indefatigable had this reduced to 14' to squeeze more aircraft onto a similar tonnage. Indomitable was a hybrid with 14' upper hangar and 16' lower hangar. Then in 1942 when the next generation of British carriers were being designed, it was realised that we would need to use US aircraft. From 1942 therefore our carriers were designed to the same 17'6" standard as US carriers. The first class so built were the Colossus class light carriers completing from Dec 1944. All heights are under the girders supporting the decks above.

According to my sources a F4U-1 Corsair had a wingspan of 41' and a folded height of 16'1" and so needed modified to fit the hangars of the Illustrious class. So 8" (some sources say 6") was removed from each wingtip reducing the overall wingspan to 39'8" or 39'10". Unfortunately I don't have a folded height for the clipped wing variant. It is also worth noting that, as you are no doubt aware, as a Corsair unfolds its wings the overall height increases slightly. So there would not have been any problems fitted unmodified aircraft into the Colossus class hangar.

There is a comment in Hobbs British Aircraft Carriers that they would need to spread their wings in the hangar.

So here is a theory for the "short" and "short short" wings. The "short" wing was to allow a folded Corsair to fit under the 16". Then when they got them aboard the Illustrious class they decided that they needed an even shorter wing to allow unfolding beneath the hangar beams.

Someone with detailed drawings should be able to see if this holds water given the timescales of the modifications.

Anyway 2 more books added to the Christmas list

 

EwenS

 

 

[Troy Smith]

13 hours ago, spaddad said:

Thanks Troy, off to check it out now.

 

1 hour ago, EwenS said:

Anyway 2 more books added to the Christmas list

 

 

Not always easy to source in the UK,  I got mine from the Aviation Bookshop in Tunbridge Wells

Stock price is (or was ) £16.99,   but they usually do a 25% off weekend during the year, which is when I got mine

shop contact

https://www.aviation-bookshop.com/contact.htm

 

the site is not very good, the shop is one of the most wonderful places I have ever been if you like books about aircraft and aircraft model kits, they usually have an excellent selection.....   though I find I end up wandering around in a daze...   and then spending a lot of money.

Though it is the only place I have seen stock items like Corsair books, and JaPo titles.    

 

As for Dana, well I had his USAAF Camouflage and Markings ETO-MTO 1942-45 back in 1982, when it was one of my first really specialist books,  so it was a very pleasant surprise when I rekindled my aviation interest to find Dana a member of sites like this! :

 

2 hours ago, 72modeler said:

I am keeping my fingers crossed that Dana will continue this outstanding series to cover all the variants; I have left space on my bookshelf for volume 11, (F4U-4) volume 12, ( F4U-5) and volume 13 (F4U-7/AU-1)

Dana mentioned at some point that he had a load of the F4U-4,  but not much on the -5.

OK, here

 

On 6/3/2016 at 14:55, Dana Bell said:

I've back off on the F4U-4 project for a few more months. My first week of research found enough new material to justify a book on the aircraft (while also proving that I'll have to pass on the F4U-5 for lack of material). Publishing delays and the need to pay the bills have pushed me to some fun other projects for a while. Current projects of my own will include a camouflage book on OD and Neutral Gray, a second camouflage book on the two Blue Grays, Dark Blue, and Light Gray (a story I can't believe has been missed all these years!), a book on B-17 variants before the B-17E, and the long-awaited F4U-4.

Last Tuesday was the ten anniversary of my retirement. I knew the joys of the Archives were worth retiring for, but so far the materials there have proven to be worth way more than I had dreamed they might. I'll try to continue dropping some of those discoveries here from time to time...

Cheers,

Dana

 

 

I must see if the above shop has the OD book on my next trip

 

 

[EwenS]

Troy, decided I couldn't wait until Christmas and splashed out at the Aviation Bookshop for both volumes. Just received them this afternoon and looking forward to a detailed read later. Half the price quoted on Amazon!

 

Going back to my previous post, a quick look revealed drawings with the various dimensions from the company records which immediately knock my earlier theory for six. The max height with wings vertical is given as 18'3.2". So even taking 8" off the wingtip won't allow wings to be spread under the beams of an Illustrious class, which themselves were about 7' deep.

 

Having studied Dana's drawings of the "short" and "short short" wingtips, the difference appears to me to be about 2-3 inches. Does this account for the discrepancy in the published sources that I noted?

 

Also I note that the sources vary about the height of a Corsair. I quoted 16'1". Dana's drawings of the "birdcage" Corsair in vol 1 quote 16'2.3" with a note that wing fold strengthening took this to 16'6" which is what is quoted for the F4U-1C in vol 2. The latter also refers to that dimension being +1"/-2". These came from the manufacturer. Dana also notes that the objective was to reduce the height below 15'10" to allow for ship movement and the flexibility of the undercarriage.

 

I also seem to recall reading somewhere that after the undercarriage was modified to eliminate the bounce, it slowly expanded again while parked which would affect the height. Visions of getting it into the hangar and then not back out again!!

 

So theory number 2 is that, with these dimensional variations, they found that once they got the bird to sea in the Illustrious class the original trim just wasn't enough and they had to go back for a second bite at the cherry. The first squadron to go onto an Illustrious class was 1830 on 9th Dec 1943 followed by its sister 1833 a couple of weeks later, both on Illustrious herself. She sailed for the Far East at the end of that month encountering some rough weather en route to Gibraltar. Victorious then got 1834 and 1836 in Feb and early Mar 1944 respectively, and went to the Home Fleet to operate in rough northern waters. That would fit with there being a problem found and a solution working its way up the chain of command to produce orders in May 1944 for "short short" tips to be fitted as Dana noted.

 

There are only inches involved in all of this but it clearly made enough of a difference to lead to factory mods. Another illustration of just how "tight" a design the Illustrious class was as naval aviation moved forward in WW2.

 

Here is a link to an IWM photo of Illustrious' hanger in 1944 packed with Corsairs highlighting the lack of room.

https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/205156196

 

Just another one of those undocumented WW2 puzzles that are here to intrigue us nowadays!

 

[Troy Smith]

1 hour ago, EwenS said:

Here is a link to an IWM photo of Illustrious' hanger in 1944 packed with Corsairs highlighting the lack of room.

https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/205156196

 

there is an official embed code for this BTW

WITH AN EASTERN FLEET CARRIER. 5 TO 27 MAY 1944, ON BOARD HMS ILLUSTRIOUS IN THE INDIAN OCEAN WITH THE EASTERN FLEET.. © IWM (A 24278) IWM Non Commercial License

blinkin  IWM

only give the mid size jpg... so right click, open image in new tabe, then replace the 'mid' with 'large' in the address line and we get this  

 

As for the different tips, interesting observations. 

Some of our FAA buffs maybe able to add some detail to this, @iang  @85sqn 

 

Don't know if @Dana Bell might know more?

[gingerbob]

18 hours ago, EwenS said:

I also seem to recall reading somewhere that after the undercarriage was modified to eliminate the bounce, it slowly expanded again while parked which would affect the height. Visions of getting it into the hangar and then not back out again!!

 

For the purposes of eliminating bounce, "slowly" could be measured in seconds.  Oleos certainly CAN hold at a certain point and then relax, or be made to relax, but they wouldn't gradually creep from compressed to relaxed while sitting in the hangar.