AZ Models Supermarine Attacker***FINISHED***

[PeterB]

A few years back I started on a batch of British post war jets, and got a bit of painting done before I had to break off to go into hospital for an op on my knee, and inevitably I was one of the supposed 1 in 40 who have complications. That resulted in a delay of several months before I started modelling again and then my wife became seriously ill (fortunately that is now under control), so the kits were put back in their boxes and went into my stash in the roof, where they have stayed until a few weeks ago.

 

I decided to use this KUTA to get some of the part built kits finished, and have already finished my Scimitar and am about to start on the Swift. That leaves the Vampire FB5 and my Supermarine Attacker, which I will now try and start again if I have time. Many years ago I built the old Frog kit with the solid cockpit and wheel wells. Later I saw an article in I think Scale Aircraft Modeller which did a conversion to make it more accurate, but I could not be bothered. However a few years ago I stumbled across this AZ Models kit of the prototype.

 

 

It seems AZ also produced a kit of the F1 and another kit of the FB2 but by the time I saw them only the prototype was available at about half price so I grabbed one.  Incidentally it looks like they have released them again. This is the only kit I have seen so far that actually warns you that as it is a short run one you will need to do a bit of cleaning up!

 

The Attacker was Supermarine's first jet to go into service and as such was a bit of a lash-up, being essentially the laminar flow wings of the Spiteful/Seafang (slightly enlarged) grafted onto a new fuselage containing a RR Nene jet engine. The tailwheel undercarriage was rare in a jet but actually had certain advantages in a carrier based machine as it both increased the angle of attack to generate lift on take-off and provide better aerodynamic braking during landing. The straight wing soon became obsolete but again was in some respects better than a swept one at low speeds. For its time it actually had a reasonable performance but was not built in large numbers and the only export customer was Pakistan. As stated in my parallel Swift build, the Attacker formed the basis of that aircraft once a swept wing and nose wheel undercarriage were added. It was built in 3 versions, the F1 (54), a handful of FB1 (6) and the FB2 (85). After problems were encountered with "tail stall" a dorsal fillet was added to the vertical tail of the F1 and following marks, which is included on the sprues, and apparently the intakes were lengthened. Other than that the only noticeable outward change seems to have been the framed canopy fitted to the FB2, which is not included but I have aquired a vacform set which I might use. The kit also includes the large ventral fuel tank, but no armament other than the normal 4x20mm cannon barrels in the wing leading edge. I believe the FB version could carry 2x1000lb bombs or up to 12 unguided rockets. It comes with decs for one of the 3 prototypes and the first production F1, though I shall probably only be using the national markings and some of the stencils.

 

More if and when I make a start.

 

Pete

Edited December 26, 2019 by PeterB

[PeterB]

I have made a start on the fuselage. 

The picture is over-exposed so you can pehaps see a bit better, but being black the cockpit is hard to make out. The instructions show the interior in RAF grey/green and that might be right for the prototype, but pics of an FB2 show it as black, so that is what I have done. I started by removing various ejector pin "towers" - there were a few but nowhere near as big as on the Xtrakit Scimitar. I glued together the exhaust complete with the blanking plate showing the fan, and whilst that was drying I fitted the panels that make up the "ducting" for the intakes - you can see them over the tailplanes and below the wings on my previous sprue shot.. As you will see I had to thin down the rear end quite a bit to get a snug fit for the tailpipe, but did not bother repainting as the interior cannot be seen. The outer end is angled so care is needed to get it in the right place!

 

AZ provide a resin cockpit complete with side consoles and seat. It is adequate as very little will be seen. The fitting instructions are rather vague, but after I had glued in the IP it seemed fairly obvious where it went. I glued the stick to the floor and filed quite a lot off the sides of the tub which was too wide (as asual I find with most resin cockpits), and it then fitted pretty well. I checked clearance on the canopy and it should be OK. I have now glued the fuselage together - the fit was not bad for a short run kit but the halves seem to be not quite the same size so I had to apply pressure from a clamp to reduce the overhang along the top and bottom seam. No doubt I will have to scrape/file/fill and sand it to get it smooth and then do a bit of rescribing, so it is a good job I have around 5 weeks left. I will post a pic when it is dry as at the moment you would not be able to see anything for tape and clamps.  If anybody is thinking of building one of these be warned, the little tab over the jetpipe on the port fuse is meant to be there - I almost cut it off!

 

I have also glued the wings together - they are not too bad a fit. Unlike my Scimitar and Swift, the instructions do not show a nose-on view so, unlike the Scimitar build, this time I have checked one of my books - the wings have a slight dihedral and the tail has quite a lot.

 

More as and when.

 

Pete

Edited December 28, 2019 by PeterB

[PeterB]

Using clamps to squash the fuselage together both horizontally and vertically seems to have worked as there is very little "overlap" on the seam. I have carefully scraped it down and put a little filler in and it looks ok - though once I prime it there may be more work to do. 

AZ moulded the intake lips separately so I have glued them on and will have to do a little filling. The wings look as if they will fit pretty well after a little fettling with a file - they and the stabs are butt fits but this type of plastic usually glues nicely and I will reinforce the joints with CA and probably a little filler..

 

The kit provides two versions of the vertical tail - the prototype used the plain one to the left, but production versions soon aquired a fillet as shown to the right, so that is the one I will be fitting. Once the wings and stabs are on there is really only the u/c to do., though I will have to paint it and put on the underwing serials first as they go over the wheel doors. I have aquired the old Modeldecal sheet 56 which has markings for 3 Attacker FB 2 together with the stencils. The kit decals look ok but whoever designed them clearly did not fully understand English, resulting in some howlers like " Keep wheel all from intake while engine is running" instead of "Keep well away from intake etc".

 

I suspect the Attacker was one of the first British jets to have an ejector seat fitted - the prototypes seem to have had the Martin Baker Mk1, and later versions had one of the variants of the slightly modified Mk 2 as I think did the Meteor F8 and the Swift.

 

Later I will do a little re-scribing then have a go at fitting the wings and stabs.

 

Pete

[PeterB]

Well, I have got the wings, tail, stabs and belly tank on but then I hit a problem.

So far it has gone together pretty well and the moulding seemed fine, but then I rather belatedly noticed a problem. Under the rear fuselage should be the well for the tail wheels and a recess for the "A" Frame arrestor hook. The latter is there but one side is very distorted, whilst the wheel bay is just a hole.

Looks like a moulding problem - short shot or something, but the roof that should be there is completely missing. Had I have noticed it earlier it would have been easier to fix but no big deal. I have used a heavy duty scriber to gouge out the arrestor hook recess, and managed to cut away some plastic so I could insert a piece of thin card into the wheel bay. Once the glue is set I will put a bigger piece in to roof in the hole properly, and put a cross member in between the bay and the hook recess to replace the part I cut out to get access. I should then have something to glue the wheel strut to. Incidentally, if anybody was thinking of building this kit, the numbers for the hook and frame (24 and 26) have been reversed on either the sprue plan or the instructions, and part 23, the gunsight, is not mentioned at all in the construction instructions though is shown in place later on. Also the stabs are both the same rather than handed, which means there are a couple of "rings" moulded on the top of one and the bottom of the other which seems wrong. AZ were a bit lazy there I suspect, which is a pity as the detail is actually quite good otherwise, Dimensionally it seems bang on as far as I can measure.

 

Pete

Edited September 27, 2023 by PeterB

[PeterB]

I have primed both the Attacker and Swift using “left over” paint – the Swift got the Tamiya “Dark Gray” I used as the US equivalent to Extra Dark Sea Grey for a recent RN F4U Corsair, and the Attacker is in Tamiya “JNA Gray/Green” I used on a “Pearl Harbor” Val and is quite close to Sky. The priming showed up a few joint problems so they were given another coat of Perfect Plastic Putty (henceforward PPP).

 

PPP is good in that it will fill small seams and can be smoothed with a damp finger so you do not sand away surface detail, but sometimes, if you are as ham fisted as me, you also take out the filler, so I have left it to dry and then sanded it at the wing/fuselage joints. They have since been re-primed and are not too bad.

I have shown you both planes in the one photo because it not only reduces my usage of the 1000 “free” pics I am allowed on Flickr but also shows the similarity between the Swift and what is in effect its “great - grandfather”, the Attacker. As I pointed out in the Swift thread, it was developed from the Supermarine Type 510 swept-wing Attacker and the Type 535 which had a longer nose and a nosewheel undercarriage. Believe it or not both have the same dihedral on the stabs but a combination of camera angle and the Swift having swept staps confuses the eye.

 

Pete

 

[Back in the Saddle]

Really enjoying your choice of kits for this GB!

[PeterB]

Thanks Matt,

 

If I have time I might just start my Xtrakit Vampire FB5, which is the last of the batch I mentioned starting then abandoning due to medical problems. That would just leave the Hunter which was going to complete the early British Post War jets, but as I did not start it I will not enter it in the KUTA - anyway I have decided to replace the 2 inaccurate Airfix Hunter FGA9 kits with the more recent Revell offering which arrived a few days ago - so much for reducing my stash!

 

Like your Victor - must get round to doing a rebuild of mine as a bomber.

 

Pete

[PeterB]

At the end of WWII most FAA planes would have been painted in the normal Extra Dark Sea Grey/Dark Slate Grey over Sky scheme or US equivalent paints (except Anti Sub planes and those in the North Atlantic which used white instead of Sky). The only fairly immediate change would be the painting of large black serials under the wings. According to an article by In Huntley in SAM in March 1982 entitled “Naval Colours 1946-1970”, the fin flash was soon dispensed with and a modified form of pre-war roundel was introduced, known to modellers as the “D” Type. This was part of a change dated Feb 6th 1946, but the full details were not worked out until somewhat later, so for a time existing stocks of paint were to be used up.

 

Instructions were eventually issued saying that A/S planes were to have EDSG uppers and White unders and everything else Sky unders and initially the demarcation between the 2 colours was to follow the so called “Pattern No. 1” which was low on the fuselage as in wartime machines. However, in a note issued on October 1st 1946 this was changed to “Pattern No 2” which had a high demarcation – Huntley says the EDSG went only ¼ the way down the fuselage but at least one other source suggests ⅓. Then, just to confuse matters, Huntley says that another instruction was then issued saying A/S planes should have Sky unders and everything else White and this was not eventually sorted out until 1948/49, so I guess various schemes could be seen until about the start of the Korean war.

 

The Attacker was finished in EDSG over Sky with the high demarcation, and no “wrap round” on the leading edges as that apparently was not introduced until June 1st 1954. Somewhere around 1959 (perhaps earlier for new machines like the Scimitar and Sea Vixen), the final change took place, substituting White for Sky and moving the demarcation to around mid height on the fuselage. There were of course numerous other detail changes such as the size and colour of the “ROYAL NAVY” marking. On the Scimitar this seems to have initially been black and quite small but ended up white and quite large. Incidentally, Huntley confirms that the terms Extra Dark Sea Grey and Dark Sea Grey were used indiscriminately both in documentation and in stencils on the planes, but the colour was EDSG in both cases – I have seen this queried in F-4K builds several times.

 

I can't say that Sky is one of my favourite colours paint wise – in spite of a light undercoat it has taken 3 coats of acrylic to get this far – worse than enamel which normally takes 2.

Quite a bit of touching up to do but after that it is decal time!

 

Pete

[jean]

Hi Pete,

 

it is rather motivating to see you tackling the whole Supermarine family tree, or so it feels!

The Attacker definitely has an oldie and goldie look, and your modelling really does it justice.

I have never built an AZ models kit, but I do have their TBD-1 Devastator in the stash. Are they tricky to build, or fairly easy? Just interested to have a heads up.

 

Congrats for this unusual build.

And a happy New Year to you and family.

 

JR

[PeterB]

Hi Jean,

 

Yes, a Happy New year to you also, The Attacker has been fairly easy to build for a short run kit - at least so far. No locating pins on the fuselage, wings or tail, but this sort of plastic seems to respond quite well to tube cement. It is missing a pitot tube which they tell you to make, and the strange mast in front of the cockpit which I have read somewhere might have been an aid to taxying, but both should be easy enough to make, as will be a few whip aerials. Perhaps as this is the prototype kit there are no pylons or stores. The only complaints so far are the ones I mentioned about the rear wheel well, and that is now fixed, albeit rather shallow - if I had spotted it earlier I could have done a better job - and also the poor rendering of some of the stencils. The panel detail is nice and light - no idea if it is accurate but what the heck.

 

As to the Supermarine family tree, I already have a Walrus and around 14 Spitfires/Seafires, with one or two to add - Heller Mk XVI in the Heller Classic GB perhaps, Italeri Mk VII to go with my Mk IV conversion, and the Xtrakit Mk 22 and Special Hobby Seafire 47 for the Spitfire/Seafire GB later this year. That will leave just 3 x MkIX unbuilt, 2 of which were intended as conversions to the MkVII and Mk XVI but have now been replaced. I might think of something else to do with them, but that will be low priority. If Serge had his way I would be building a Spiteful/Seafang, and the various other prototypes that lead to the Scimitar and Swift but I doubt that will ever happen.

 

Pete

[Aardvark]

On 12/29/2019 at 7:09 PM, PeterB said:

The kit decals look ok but whoever designed them clearly did not fully understand English, resulting in some howlers like " Keep wheel all from intake while engine is running" instead of "Keep well away from intake etc"

AZ models maked in Czech, of course English not his native language. 

On 12/31/2019 at 2:45 AM, PeterB said:

I have decided to replace the 2 inaccurate Airfix Hunter FGA9 kits with the more recent Revell offering which arrived a few days ago - so much for reducing my stash!

But Airfix have more accurate main wheel  then Revell. I’m even thinking of making copies in resin from the Airfix wheels and putting them on Revell.

On 1/1/2020 at 7:13 PM, PeterB said:

At the end of WWII most FAA planes would have been painted in the normal Extra Dark Sea Grey/Dark Slate Grey over Sky scheme or US equivalent paints (except Anti Sub planes and those in the North Atlantic which used white instead of Sky). The only fairly immediate change would be the painting of large black serials under the wings. According to an article by In Huntley in SAM in March 1982 entitled “Naval Colours 1946-1970”, the fin flash was soon dispensed with and a modified form of pre-war roundel was introduced, known to modellers as the “D” Type. This was part of a change dated Feb 6th 1946, but the full details were not worked out until somewhat later, so for a time existing stocks of paint were to be used up.

 

Instructions were eventually issued saying that A/S planes were to have EDSG uppers and White unders and everything else Sky unders and initially the demarcation between the 2 colours was to follow the so called “Pattern No. 1” which was low on the fuselage as in wartime machines. However, in a note issued on October 1st 1946 this was changed to “Pattern No 2” which had a high demarcation – Huntley says the EDSG went only ¼ the way down the fuselage but at least one other source suggests ⅓. Then, just to confuse matters, Huntley says that another instruction was then issued saying A/S planes should have Sky unders and everything else White and this was not eventually sorted out until 1948/49, so I guess various schemes could be seen until about the start of the Korean war.

 

The Attacker was finished in EDSG over Sky with the high demarcation, and no “wrap round” on the leading edges as that apparently was not introduced until June 1st 1954. Somewhere around 1959 (perhaps earlier for new machines like the Scimitar and Sea Vixen), the final change took place, substituting White for Sky and moving the demarcation to around mid height on the fuselage. There were of course numerous other detail changes such as the size and colour of the “ROYAL NAVY” marking. On the Scimitar this seems to have initially been black and quite small but ended up white and quite large. Incidentally, Huntley confirms that the terms Extra Dark Sea Grey and Dark Sea Grey were used indiscriminately both in documentation and in stencils on the planes, but the colour was EDSG in both cases – I have seen this queried in F-4K builds several times.

 

I can't say that Sky is one of my favourite colours paint wise – in spite of a light undercoat it has taken 3 coats of acrylic to get this far – worse than enamel which normally takes 2.

But early Attacker was other the border EDSG  & Sky on fin area:

On 1/2/2020 at 10:12 PM, PeterB said:

If Serge had his way

My way simply clear:

Supermarine Attacker F.1

Supermarine Swift  F.2

Supermarine Swift  F.7

Supermarine type 545

Supermarine type 508/529

Supermarine Scimitar.

From this list I do not have only Scimitar.

 

B.R.

Serge

 

[PeterB]

Hi Serge,

 

Never seen that box top before but I think it is wrong! Certainly the very early production Attackers without the dorsal fin fillet had that type of demarcation where the EDSG finished at the front of the fin, but I have looked again at all of the pics I have (over 20) of the later versions, and they all show the grey running all the way to the exhaust as I have painted it. It does however highlight the fact that in my version AZ have not included the "scoops" either side of the fin so I will use the "spares" from the Swift to add them.

 

This F1 of *00 Squadron on HMS Eagle is fairly typical.

Cheers

 

Pete

[Aardvark]

Hi, Peter!

34 minutes ago, PeterB said:

Never seen that box top before but I think it is wrong!

No, this box art is confirmed photo:

Long time ago I have some doubt too, but BM left me no doubt!

🤗

 

B.w., Peter, look at table stencil on wing area near cannons, such stencil are not found in any of the decals I know.

 

B.R.

Serge

 

[PeterB]

Must have been an interim scheme then. I note that as I suspected from my pics, not all had the intakes either side of the fin - this one clearly does not so the box is wrong in that respect it seems. Incidentally the book mentioned in your link is now £65 on Amazon so I won't be buying it, interesting though it sounds. Incidentally I agree about the stencils - not on the Modeldecal sheet which are usually pretty well researched.

 

Cheers 

 

Pete

Edited January 4, 2020 by PeterB

[Aardvark]

1 hour ago, PeterB said:

not all had the intakes either side of the fin - this one clearly does not so the box is wrong in that respect it seems

Ah, of course You right about intake's! On box art mistake with intake...."mistake with intake" almost as poetry 😁..... I thought You dispute the border colour camouflage in this scheme!

1 hour ago, PeterB said:

Incidentally the book mentioned in your link is now £65 on Amazon so I won't be buying it, interesting though it sounds.

Thanks, but no actually now, then on Scalemodels.ru dropped to my scan this book.

Unfortunately, the scan is not available right now, because over the past three months I have broken two PC and a laptop.

So now I'm without my aircraft electronic library.

😣🤗

2 hours ago, PeterB said:

Incidentally I agree about the stencils - not on the Modeldecal sheet which are usually pretty well researched.

But, what is this tablet, what is written on it, what does it look like?  Maybe it can be taken from other models decal?

 

B.R.

Serge

[PeterB]

As I no doubt mentioned earlier my intention was to make the kit up as an FB2 using the Modeldecal sheet, for 1831 RNVR Squadron. However, before comitting myself I will see how I get on with the replacement vac form canopy. If I make a mess of it I will use the kit canopy and model an F1 - the stencils and national markings will be the same and I just have to run off some new serials. In truth I would prefer an operation carrier squadron such as 800.

 

Later- Well that was not much fun but all options remain open. The canopy is only about an inch long so gripping it with my arthritic hands and rubbing it down was a pain - literally as I sanded one of my fingers and drew blood! Anyway, it is done and seems to fit well enough It was made by Mark 1 accessories, and was rather "deeper drawn" than I am used to with other makes as they left it 2mm proud of the sheet, so nearly 3mm had to be removed. Could have been worse I suppose.

 

Pete

Edited January 4, 2020 by PeterB

[Aardvark]

1 hour ago, PeterB said:

In truth I would prefer an operation carrier squadron such as 800.

"Reserve" also not for my, I like operation carrier squadron, too!

 

B.R.

Serge 

[PeterB]

Hi Serge,

 

At least the Reserve and Training Squadrons had a badge on the nose - can't see anything similar on the "service" machines in my pics - have you got anything interesting in your files?

 

Pete

[Aardvark]

10 hours ago, PeterB said:

At least the Reserve and Training Squadrons had a badge on the nose - can't see anything similar on the "service" machines in my pics

Of course You right! 

B.w.  what do you think mass art on "service" machins RN  beginning in period Suez war or early? I don't remember mass art in Korea war period.

10 hours ago, PeterB said:

have you got anything interesting in your files?

About service art?

Absolutely nothing interesting in my files I don't remember. For Reserve and Training Squadrons I see interesting little art "mouse" on nose Attacker, it's was published on pages  "Aviation New's - Warpaint" 

but my copy very poor it is impossible to consider the details of this mouse-art.

Therefore I standing on "J 107"

🤗

 

B.R.

Serge

[PeterB]

Thanks Serge,

 

I suppose that like the Air Ministry, it took some time for the Admiralty to relax the rules on Squadron markings. Perhaps they were less concerned about the RNVR so turned a blind eye when they put badges on somewhat earlier than the front line Squadrons. According to Bowyer, the RAF started to allow colourful unit marking in around 1950 on silver Meteors. The only "colourful" Attackers I have seen were the ones with the red rose with the tapering "stripe" running back to the cockpit, and I think they belonged to 1833 RNVR. By the time I have put the many stencil decs on, and with the Scandinavian GB approaching I may just use the Modeldecal markings - at least the reprinted ones have individual decs rather than a continuous film all over the sheet. As I already have a Meteor F8 in the markings of a Reserve Squadron, I might as well have a Naval Reserve plane as well.

 

Pete

[Aardvark]

5 hours ago, PeterB said:

The only "colourful" Attackers I have seen were the ones with the red rose with the tapering "stripe" running back to the cockpit, and I think they belonged to 1833 RNVR.

Have a "colourful" Attacker from PrintScale:

http://www.printscale.org/product_841.html

http://www.printscale.org/product_842.html

But PrintScale have  

bad reputation on BM.

 

This can be seen even in the pictures presented.  The instruction shows FB.2 where it is F.1 or FB.1, version Attacker F.1 "J 107" does not have code "J".

 

I have own analyses decals from this "company" and I published him later in topic on link.

 

B.R.

Serge

 

[PeterB]

Mine will be either 810 or 176 of 1831 as in the top left pic on the first set of instructions, with the yellow greyhound on the nose. Not sure I want to add the tiny head with a red bone dome for the CO's machine 810 so probably 176.

 

Pete

Edited January 5, 2020 by PeterB

[Ray_W]

Pete,

 

Your builds of post war British jets has got me very interested in the subject. I'll have to part with some money and build something. A little larger 1/48 but a must do. 

 

Ray

[PeterB]

Hi Ray,

 

Once I get the Sea Hawk, Vampire and the Hunter done I will have at least one version of everything prior to the Lightning, except for an early Canberra - I have the Airfix PR9 to build but that is relatively late. Good luck finding 1/48 versions - you are OK with the Sea Vixen and Hunter but I am not sure what else is out there,

 

Cheers

 

Pete

[Aardvark]

40 minutes ago, PeterB said:

prior to the Lightning

Yeppp, with Shark teeth, with Shark teeth!!!

 

42 minutes ago, PeterB said:

Good luck finding 1/48 versions - you are OK with the Sea Vixen and Hunter but I am not sure what else is out there,

Attacker from Trumpeter, no?

 

B.R.

Serge