fjaweijfopi4j48 Posted February 9, 2019 Share Posted February 9, 2019 A build from 5 years ago, posted as always with its original text. (At that time I didn't know a couple tricks to photograph the models in a convincing snowy environment, so these images will have to do for now): The somewhat strange lines of the Fairchild Super 71 bushplane seem to suggest an exercise on making a fuselage out of beer cans. The whole appearance is further enhanced by the shinny finish and the presence of a pair of floats/skis that any bush plane deserving its worth should be able to wear. The Execuform vacuformed kit is a simple approach to the matter, providing the basic shapes, a plan, resin parts that make for the stub wings where struts attach and a vacuformed clear canopy. As usual you will have to get the engine, prop, decals and detail bits by yourself. In the photos you can see the Aeroclub engine, the scratched interior and home-made decals. The Super 71 that has been restored and is exhibited at a museum shows servo tabs on the rudder. I wasn’t able to find anything like that on the photos I have of the original machine; but again, I was able to find about a dozen images, all not great in quality. In the museum the external sections of the wing are separated by a gap, in the original a metal strip fairing covered that gap. There was a time when the Super 71 was on skis. Since I have been posting here numerous articles dealing with the building of vacuformed models, all there is to be said has been already said, so I’ll keep this one short, but there are a few points to be considered nevertheless. The wings are molded as entire sections, upper and lower. The wing has an inverted gull dihedral which is portrayed in the kit parts. The wing halves, in order to have that dihedral, have been located in the backing sheet on a pedestal. It is advisable to mark and cut the wings from the “inside”, the other side of the backing sheet, not the side where you usually cut –see images- since the dividing line is more visible on that side. Be very careful with the slips of the cutter, since there is almost no guide line. Do not hurt yourself. Cut a tad further out from the actual dividing line; that will give you some slack to refine and sand later on. There are two front cowl parts, one depicts the more usual “cover-all” cowl, and the other represents one that looks more like a NACA cowl and accompanied in the original an engine shield. Study your reference material. The original stub wings were partially corrugated, so I decided to scratch them instead of using the resin ones provided. For that I made a pattern and joined part plain styrene sheet and part “corrugated” styrene sheet. The teardrop tips were made from long forgotten kit bombs, I am always happy finding other uses for them. The polished metal surfaces (fuselage) and the silver doped, fabric-covered flying surfaces should be painted accordingly to differentiate them. I went for the ski version (although it is not depicted or catered-for in the kit) for several reasons: a) Because I have a tendency to depart from the standards b) It requires a bit less struts (so they are limited to only 28 😉 c) It adds a color note (wood) to the otherwise overall metal finish d) It makes the display of the model easier (no water, no dolly) e) When I am pretending to fly the model in the house I no longer have to take off and land in the sink or bathtub, but can use the freezer instead. I would like to thank another vacuformed kit maker, Lars Opland of Khee-Kha Art Products, for his help with data about the original plane. While waiting for some parts to dry I worked on the decals and got them ready to be home-printed. A new stabilizer was made from scratch in order to be able to show the ribbing of the original. Same for the rudder. For the abundant struts on this model brass “Strutz” were used, and a very big “thank you” goes to Andrew Nickeas. of the lands of Nottingham, since -due to the shutdown of the Aeroclub Internet store- without his help no “Strutz” would be now among my scratchbuilding supplies. The Super 71 was used mostly as a cargo plane, so I depicted the interior with bulkheads, cockpit and floor. A few battens –gas tank area reinforcements- were added to the lower wing, as well as gas caps on the upper wing. Aileron cable leads and balances were fabricated too. There were two ducts that run parallel on the upper fuselage from behind the engine to the canopy; those were also represented on the model. Exhausts were made from styrene tube and solder. A little bit laborious but worth every hour of dedication. As the song goes, it never rains in Southern California -and much less snows- but we live in hope. 30 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
busnproplinerfan Posted February 9, 2019 Share Posted February 9, 2019 Very nicely done. I have two of these kits not built yet. One will be AUJ, the other will be one of the two RCAF ones. I assisted with the restoration of this plane during the mid to late ninties. I helped work on the wings and did a lot of the rivet bucking in the floats. I got busy with life and then saw it finished a few years ago, was quite something to see in person finished. The model looks quite correct, just need the Canadian Airways logo, although it may have not had it when new, not sure on that. The Royal Air Museum, formerly WCAM is now closed. They were so eager to get out of the existing building and were going to build a new one. They didn't raise enough money in time even though they have big name corporate sponsors(not plundering companies) and now the collection is scattered around the airport and hopefully the wood aircraft are inside someplace. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dogsbody Posted February 9, 2019 Share Posted February 9, 2019 That's a real beauty! Canadian content is always appreciated. Up here, it's the law. Chris 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fjaweijfopi4j48 Posted February 9, 2019 Author Share Posted February 9, 2019 22 minutes ago, busnproplinerfan said: The model looks quite correct, just need the Canadian Airways logo, although it may have not had it when new, not sure on that. I couldn't find a photo of -AUJ on skis with the logo, and I see other photos of it on floats also without the logo. It may have been there for a certain period only. I am sure it was a thrill to be part of that restoration endeavor, good for you! Cheers 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
busnproplinerfan Posted February 9, 2019 Share Posted February 9, 2019 It was a fun time, learned a lot, back then I wanted to become an aircraft mechanic, couldn't afford pilot training. Learned a lot from the older guys there, some of whom worked for Canadian Airways during the '30s '40s. Went to work for Air Manitoba for a short time before they closed up(there C-46s are at Buffalo now) Went to Aero Recip who rebuilds radial engines for a month when they were busy. I got out of it then, nopt competirive enopugh and not nomadic. At that time in Winnipeg, there wasn't much for aviation jobs until you went someplace else for training, now there is, but I'm a bit on the older side and they want young kids who won't ask questions. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Courageous Posted February 9, 2019 Share Posted February 9, 2019 Very interesting looking aircraft. Stuart 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RidgeRunner Posted February 9, 2019 Share Posted February 9, 2019 Magnificent 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Learstang Posted February 9, 2019 Share Posted February 9, 2019 Enough great job Claudio on another interesting aeroplane! It certainly has unusual lines, but I quite like it. If someone ever came out with it in IM plastic, I would be tempted to buy it. Best Regards, Jason 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fjaweijfopi4j48 Posted February 9, 2019 Author Share Posted February 9, 2019 (edited) 2 hours ago, Learstang said: If someone ever came out with it in IM plastic, I would be tempted to buy it. Best Regards, Jason Me too, Jason. It is a portly thing, even in 1/72. Edited February 10, 2019 by Moa 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andwil Posted February 10, 2019 Share Posted February 10, 2019 Another interesting subject and a great build. Keep ‘em coming Moa! AW 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazey Posted February 10, 2019 Share Posted February 10, 2019 I like the metal finish you've achieved on this, Moa. Of course, it's a lovely model and an interesting subject. Regards, David 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
busnproplinerfan Posted February 10, 2019 Share Posted February 10, 2019 Only three were built. (I now found out four were made, no.2 never flew)This one and two for the RCAF. the 71P. The AF ones had the cockpit ahead of the wing, much like the Super Universal. They were numbered 665 and 666. 666 crashed and some small parts from 666 were used or for patterns on AUJ. It's hard to believe, but they were still mapping northern Canada's coast into the '40s. Read that in some stories from bush pilots, there was still ships leaving caches of fuel in remote lakes. After the war, they got some used mosquitoes which are much faster and better for that use. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dogsbody Posted February 10, 2019 Share Posted February 10, 2019 Here's the RCAF aircraft: Images are from here: http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/lac-bac/search/images Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
busnproplinerfan Posted February 10, 2019 Share Posted February 10, 2019 That's it, From what I remember there was just a few parts of the tail that they had, tailplane and vert. fin. All steel parts, not aluminum. Lots of the early Fairchilds, maybe others were steel tube fuselages. The Super 71 fuselage and floats are as you can see is all aluminum. I also helped a bit on the bell reskinning, it was damamged. The strut mounts are steel and we had to put a seam sealer on before bolting them to the fuselage, that's when I learned about steel and aluminum reactions. Factoid useless info I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wlad Posted February 11, 2019 Share Posted February 11, 2019 Great build, as usual, Moa. Looking are the designs from the '20s and '30s, it makes me wonder what some designers had against pilots. The visibility was so poor on the prototype, AUJ, that the RCAF requested the cockpit to be moved ahead of the wings, as seen in the pictures above. And they called the F4U Corsair the "hose nose"... Cheers, Wlad 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dogsbody Posted February 11, 2019 Share Posted February 11, 2019 Other pictures of the RCAF machines: Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fjaweijfopi4j48 Posted February 11, 2019 Author Share Posted February 11, 2019 23 minutes ago, dogsbody said: Other pictures of the RCAF machines: Chris Too many military now, me thinks. It would be better to open another thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dogsbody Posted February 11, 2019 Share Posted February 11, 2019 Sorry! Didn't mean to steal your thread. Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pheonix Posted February 11, 2019 Share Posted February 11, 2019 Yet another of your seemingly endless supply of little gems. That does look rather portly though. The finish is superb for ll metal and I for one am convinced that it is on snow! P 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fjaweijfopi4j48 Posted February 11, 2019 Author Share Posted February 11, 2019 52 minutes ago, dogsbody said: Sorry! Didn't mean to steal your thread. Chris Chris, no problem whatsoever, I know you are super good, and had good intentions on your part to add info. It is just that I like civil-related content to remain so. Long to explain. No harm done at all. Cheers 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baldy Posted February 11, 2019 Share Posted February 11, 2019 Simply stunning model of a very interesting, if a little odd, design. How on earth the pilot could see to land is a mystery - I guess mainly operating from flat wide open spaces this wasn't too much of a problem but if aiming for a runway?! The RCAF versions look much more sensible and conventional in this regard. Cheers Malcolm 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fjaweijfopi4j48 Posted February 11, 2019 Author Share Posted February 11, 2019 37 minutes ago, Baldy said: How on earth the pilot could see to land is a mystery As said in The Matrix: "There is no airstrip" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noelh Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 Oh That's something. I know you reject the notion that what you do is art. But your body of work is surely more than the sum of it's parts? We've discussed this before. I could print one your pictures and hang it on my wall as art. Am I wrong? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fjaweijfopi4j48 Posted February 12, 2019 Author Share Posted February 12, 2019 46 minutes ago, noelh said: Oh That's something. I know you reject the notion that what you do is art. But your body of work is surely more than the sum of it's parts? We've discussed this before. I could print one your pictures and hang it on my wall as art. Am I wrong? You are not wrong, and for the same token, nope, it's not art 😉 But here is my proposed common ground: it is aesthetically pleasing, it has aesthetic qualities and provokes in you some kind of pleasurably aesthetic response. A bird, a butterfly, a landscape, can do the same, and yet they are not art. Before the distinguished fellow modellers and enthusiasts jump on my throat (this has happened many times in similar contexts, modelers are very jealous of their creations), I would like to humbly clarify that I am a university-graduated artist with decades of producing, selling and teaching art, that may give my statements a modicum of validity. Cars, planes, etc., all may have some aesthetic value (let's think for example Farman Jabiru), but that alone does not turn them automatically in art. Cheers (ducking and covering) 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
busnproplinerfan Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 Could this be why models are never in the same sentence as art? as in paintings, sculptures etc? Something I've wondered. 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