Jump to content

1/48 - Republic P-43/A/B/C Lancer by Dora Wings - released


Homebee

Recommended Posts

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 1 month later...
19 minutes ago, gavingav said:

i have not been able to access the modeling madness website for a couple of years, it always comes back as server not found .

Have you tried changing your DNS? 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Homebee changed the title to 1/48 - Republic P-43/A/B Lancer by Dora Wings - first boxing released
  • 4 weeks later...
  • Homebee changed the title to 1/48 - Republic P-43/A/B Lancer by Dora Wings - P-43 & P-43A released
  • 3 months later...
  • Homebee changed the title to 1/48 - Republic P-43/A/B Lancer by Dora Wings - P-43 & P-43A released - P-43B/C in March 2021
  • 3 weeks later...

Release - ref. DW48034 - Republic P-43B/C Lancer

Sources:

https://www.facebook.com/dorawingsofficial/posts/2988597581370799

https://dorawings.com/shop/index.php?route=product%2Fproduct&product_id=101

 

166510905-2988596301370927-6378411342107

 

 

And some pics from a finished model

http://www.hyperscale.com/2021/reviews/kits/dorawingsdw48034apreview_1.htm 

 

P-43-480342.jpg


01-fs.jpg


07-fs.jpg


05-fs.jpg

 

V.P.

Edited by Homebee
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Homebee changed the title to 1/48 - Republic P-43/A/B/C Lancer by Dora Wings - released
  • 6 months later...

Thanks for posting this, @Homebee

 

Regarding this RAAF variant... I reckon there might be something crook.

 

The prominent blisters near the tail. Are these the camera blisters noted as being removed on the ADF Serials site?

 

"The first quartet of RAAF P-43Ds in Australia was modified at RAAF Base Laverton by removing the camera blisters. The second RAAF quartet, all P-43Bs, arrived with the standard two lower K-24 camera fittings."

 

The first pic on their site clearly shows shows no blister, instead an aluminium plate in the shape blanking the void. Where were the "standard two lower K-24 camera fittings"?

 

I've just ordered the variant in ROCAF service, cos it was on special, and intend converting it into RAAF guise.

 

Investigating this further.

 

addendum: Investigations suggest the K-24 cameras were fitted in the rear cockpit with ports on the underside either side of the exhaust trunk just forward of the turbocharger. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Maginot said:

Thanks for posting this, @Homebee

 

Regarding this RAAF variant... I reckon there might be something crook.

 

The prominent blisters near the tail. Are these the camera blisters noted as being removed on the ADF Serials site?

 

"The first quartet of RAAF P-43Ds in Australia was modified at RAAF Base Laverton by removing the camera blisters. The second RAAF quartet, all P-43Bs, arrived with the standard two lower K-24 camera fittings."

 

The first pic on their site clearly shows shows no blister, instead an aluminium plate in the shape blanking the void. Where were the "standard two lower K-24 camera fittings"?

 

I've just ordered the variant in ROCAF service, cos it was on special, and intend converting it into RAAF guise.

 

Investigating this further.

 

addendum: Investigations suggest the K-24 cameras were fitted in the rear cockpit with ports on the underside either side of the exhaust trunk just forward of the turbocharger. 

 

Like you say they blanked off the side cameras position and just used the vertical one, but I didn't know there were two vertical cameras, I just though there was one on the left side just forward of the turbo as that what seem to be in the kit.

 

Here's the left side vertical port. I'm guessing the right side camera was in the same place on the right side?

 

p43_08.jpg?w=1100

 

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks a heap, @Tbolt Most interesting.

 

The K-24 cameras referred to were American, manufactured by Eastman Kodak, developed from the British F24 designed in the 1920s. They were versatile cameras which use included being paired together to produce stereoscopic negatives. It seems they were mounted very closely together but aligned slightly differently to provide a lateral overlap of 10°. So I wonder if they shared the same port? 

 

From the ADF Serials site, here's a pic of a pranged A 56-5 showing part of the belly on RHS forward of the turbocharger. There is no sign of a second camera port corresponding to the other side.

 

A56-5.jpg

photo credit ADF-Serials

 

I think this is a K-24 camera being installed or removed from a Lancer. Looks quite spacious in there, doesn't it? Room enough for the two K-24s required for paired stereoscopic photography.

 

Republic-P-43-camera-x3.jpg

 

Here's the single camera port LHS bottom and erroneous rear fuselage camera blisters on the Dora Wings Lancer RAAF version, taken from their Farcebook page:

 

Lancer-Aus-Dora-Wings-7-x3.jpg

 

Solved? Well, maybe... not sure that belly port looks big enough to accommodate two K-24 lenses. Lots of further reading is required to inform my limited knowledge of the equipment and methods used in this period. I'm fascinated by photo reconnaissance (PRU) aircraft and I much prefer to model them without the nasty guns and bombs that mess up an otherwise clean airframe.

 

But I must say that those camera blisters on the rear fuselage are weird. What an odd spot to carry cameras. The ports seem to be facing aft and it's not a good place on an airframe for weighty equipment. No wonder we Skips gave em the flick.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Maginot said:

Thanks a heap, @Tbolt Most interesting.

 

The K-24 cameras referred to were American, manufactured by Eastman Kodak, developed from the British F24 designed in the 1920s. They were versatile cameras which use included being paired together to produce stereoscopic negatives. It seems they were mounted very closely together but aligned slightly differently to provide a lateral overlap of 10°. So I wonder if they shared the same port? 

 

From the ADF Serials site, here's a pic of a pranged A 56-5 showing part of the belly on RHS forward of the turbocharger. There is no sign of a second camera port corresponding to the other side.

 

A56-5.jpg

 

I think this is a K-24 camera being installed or removed from a Lancer. Looks quite spacious in there, doesn't it? Room enough for the two K-24s required for paired stereoscopic photography.

 

Republic-P-43-camera-x3.jpg

 

Here's the single camera port LHS bottom and erroneous rear fuselage camera blisters on the Dora Wings Lancer RAAF version, taken from their Farcebook page:

 

Lancer-Aus-Dora-Wings-7-x3.jpg

 

Solved? Well, maybe... not sure that belly port looks big enough to accommodate two K-24 lenses. Lots of further reading is required to inform my limited knowledge of the equipment and methods used in this period. I'm fascinated by photo reconnaissance (PRU) aircraft and I much prefer to model them without the nasty guns and bombs that mess up an otherwise clean airframe.

 

But I must say that those camera blisters on the rear fuselage are weird. What an odd spot to carry cameras. The ports seem to be facing aft and it's not a good place on an airframe for weighty equipment. No wonder we Skips gave em the flick.

 

I'll be interested in what you dig up. I love PR aircraft and get a bit frustrated when companies like  Eduard keep producing fighter version of Spitfires and ignore all the PR versions. At least they have given us an F-6D.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Maginot said:

Thanks a heap, @Tbolt Most interesting.

 

The K-24 cameras referred to were American, manufactured by Eastman Kodak, developed from the British F24 designed in the 1920s. They were versatile cameras which use included being paired together to produce stereoscopic negatives. It seems they were mounted very closely together but aligned slightly differently to provide a lateral overlap of 10°. So I wonder if they shared the same port? 

 

From the ADF Serials site, here's a pic of a pranged A 56-5 showing part of the belly on RHS forward of the turbocharger. There is no sign of a second camera port corresponding to the other side.

 

A56-5.jpg

 

I think this is a K-24 camera being installed or removed from a Lancer. Looks quite spacious in there, doesn't it? Room enough for the two K-24s required for paired stereoscopic photography.

 

Republic-P-43-camera-x3.jpg

 

Here's the single camera port LHS bottom and erroneous rear fuselage camera blisters on the Dora Wings Lancer RAAF version, taken from their Farcebook page:

 

Lancer-Aus-Dora-Wings-7-x3.jpg

 

Solved? Well, maybe... not sure that belly port looks big enough to accommodate two K-24 lenses. Lots of further reading is required to inform my limited knowledge of the equipment and methods used in this period. I'm fascinated by photo reconnaissance (PRU) aircraft and I much prefer to model them without the nasty guns and bombs that mess up an otherwise clean airframe.

 

But I must say that those camera blisters on the rear fuselage are weird. What an odd spot to carry cameras. The ports seem to be facing aft and it's not a good place on an airframe for weighty equipment. No wonder we Skips gave em the flick.

 

 

I managed to get to my PC and pulled these of my hard drive showing the camera installations.

 

Vertical cameras.

 

51593846942_760319df52_o.jpg

 

51594660186_42f187ce7a_o.jpg

 

51594882443_a15d5f1e38_o.jpg

 

51595545425_208323f35d_o.jpg

 

Rear facing cameras.

 

51595327704_a858f1beda_o.jpg

 

 

51595324234_5e44f9862f_o.jpg

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks very much, @Tbolt. That's outstanding!

 

Hmm... those twin vertical cameras are not sharing the one port. So where is the second port? Must be RHS.

 

And that rear mounted camera is... crazy. It's a sort of semi-oblique position.

 

Some great weathering hints. Love the shoes the pilot is wearing.

 

Great pics.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Maginot said:

Thanks very much, @Tbolt. That's outstanding!

 

Hmm... those twin vertical cameras are not sharing the one port. So where is the second port? Must be RHS.

 

And that rear mounted camera is... crazy. It's a sort of semi-oblique position.

 

Some great weathering hints. Love the shoes the pilot is wearing.

 

Great pics.

 

I guess it must have been on the right side, but I wonder how many aircraft actually used a camera there?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I received my Dora Wings Lancer a while ago and yesterday, a Special Hobby Buffalo in 1/48. Both types served concurrently in No.1 Photographic Reconnaissance Unit RAAF, which is how I intend modelling them.

 

In light of our discussion above, @Tbolt, I thought it worth noting the camera layout in Special Hobby's Brewster Buffalo 339-23 in RAAF service. It would appear the three cameras (see below) are as per the original modification by No.1 Aircraft Depot RAAF, documented on the ADF-Serials Republic Lancer page. Two cameras are paired in the stereoscopic installation similar to the one in the Lancer pictured in your earlier post. But just to chuck a cat among the pigeons, the Buffalo camera fit was reduced from three to one after deployment to north-west Western Australia.

 

1AD RAAF also modified the Lancers. Did they similarly fabricate a second camera port to accommodate the "standard two lower K-24 camera fittings"?

 

  Special-Hobby-Buffalo-camera-installatio

Special Hobby Buffalo 3 cameras and camera ports; note the stereoscopic pair

 

Dora-Wings-Lancer-camera-port.jpg

Dora Wings Lancer single camera port

 

I'm thinking it likely and it's a straight-forward modification.

 

BTW, nice kits these two.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Maginot said:

Special Hobby's Brewster Buffalo 339-23 in RAAF service

Thanks for pointing that one out - weren't those the ex-ML-KNIL late orders? I knew those were appropriated by USAAC in 1942 after the fall of NEI and then redistributed, but wasn't aware they were used as PR birds. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

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...