1/48 ESCI SKYRAIDER AEW Mark 1 ROYAL NAVY

[Orion]

HISTORY

Under the MDAP (Mutual Defence Assistance Program) the Royal Navy received , from 1951 onwards, a total of fifty Douglas Skyraiders AD-4W. The Royal Navy changed their designation into AEW. Mk1. (Air Early Warning mark one.) Tasking was mainly providing over the horizon radar coverage to protect the British fleet from attack. By doing so they became the first dedicated frontline AEW system. The AN-APS 20 radar was placed in the dome and weighed about one ton. If working properly, it had a range of more than 100 nautical miles. Although , they provided sterling service, they actually saw only combat service during the Suez Crisis in 1956. Normally a "flight" of four Skyraiders were assigned to one carrier.

Crew: Pilot, in the Back Office radio/radar assistant and the LT. Observer.

 

THE KIT AND CONSTRUCTION

The Esci model  (1979) is very basic. I chose the option to build the Royal Navy version in the Suez Crisis paint scheme. Furthermore ; I decided on folded wings and the port (left) side of the Wright Cyclone motor clearly visible. I started with separating the wings on the folding line with a dental instrument (probe). This task is taking a long time, but the outcome is promising. By using a diamond saw , you will lose too much plastic detail. With Evergreen plastics, I filled the four ends of the separated wings. The Waldron punch and die set provided the nuts and bolts. This job done , I focused on the cockpit. Mainly adding 3D vision with the help of Waldron switches and clear plastic covers for the clock instruments.

The sides went together quite well. The AN-APS dome was a real problem. There was no alignment of the two parts, so I placed a strut broad-wise, just to make a sturdy contact with the main frame. Glued in place and hardened out , I welded a rod from Evergreen with micro weld into place. This made the whole connection extremely smooth and sealed all the gaps at the same time. The same finishing touch was given to the bulge on the upper deck. All parts were sprayed separately in silver (Revell 90). This gave me the chance to see any mishaps in alignment. Continued with Xtra colour number 121 (Gloss Sea Blue).

With the help of Tamiya Tape (6mm), I sprayed on the yellow and black Suez recognition stripes. Decals in the box are good enough to be used. They took set and sol from Microscale

 

The simple engine in the box was updated with wire and Evergreen bits and pieces.. Exhaust pipes were connected to the  cylinder system. I added the “firewall and connected the engine to the firewall. The Wright Cyclone in place I turned my attention to the “open hood”..

The plating surrounding the engine was divided on the centreline. The starboard side was glued in place and the port side was opened with a thin metal hinge. Finally,  I added the landing gear.

Factory fresh build, with no weathering. ready to be delivered to the Fleet Air Arm.

 

 

 

 

 

During the Suez Crisis the A Flight was stationed aboard HMS Eagle. The flightdeck of the carrier was marked with the identification "J" as from Juliett. 

The Skyraider did sterling service, but was replaced by the Fairey Gannet after a very short career in the Royal Navy.

Specialists on this forum are maybe willing to answer the following question: What was better- The Skyraider or the very complicated Gannet. 

 

 

 

 

Regards,

Orion / The Netherlands.

 

 

 

Edited January 9, 2020 by Orion

[Spitfire31]

A magnificent brute! The detailing and the smooth finish really put it in a class by itself.

 

Perhaps I'd have expected some hints of the typically massive exhaust staining and discolouring…

 

Great modelling!

 

Kind regards,

 

Joachim

 

[Orion]

Hello Joachim,

Thanks for the kind words.

As mentioned, factory fresh. Ready to be delivered to the Royal Navy.

Regards, orion.

[Work In Progress]

1 hour ago, Orion said:

Specialists on this forum are maybe willing to answer the following question: What was better- The Skyraider or the very complicated Gannet.

Gannet all the way, and it's not Ed Heinemann's fault at all.

 

I love the Skyraider to bits, it's a magnificent beast and a wonderful design by Heinemann, one of the all time greats. And I love your model, nicely done and an infrequently seen kit.

 

But for any aircrew serving over hostile, mountainous, forested, or big wet areas, especially at night, then there is absolutely no contest.

 

Because it's about the power source.  The R-3350 is a great romantic monster but you'd be mad to trust your life on one big complex piston engine, one of the types most easily damaged by careless engine handling, if you can instead choose a turboprop, an engine which by its fundamental design is much simpler and more reliable.  Even more so if the light weight and compact size of the turboprop means you can pack not one but two, each driving its own prop, each capable of getting you back to the carrier or some other safe place,  in an airframe which makes single-engined operation as easy as it possibly could be.

 

Another factor which would make me choose the Gannet is its exemplary view over the nose. Landing in any confined space, especially a moving one, is vastly easier when you can see it clearly. The Skyraider is a lot better in that regard than a Seafire or Corsair but the Gannet is a huge improvement again. 

Edited January 9, 2020 by Work In Progress

[Rob K.]

Beautifully done Orion, this old kit was nicely brought back into the 2020’s Amazing work. Love the Suez scheme and the folded wings.

[RMCS]

Superb 

[Orion]

Hello Work In Progress,

 

Thanks for taking the effort to answer my question so swiftly and specifically , regarding the Gannet or Skyraider choice. Very much appreciated.

I am not a specialist, but do fully understand all your plus points (turbine/view over the nose) from the Gannet.

Did the maintenance or troubleshooting had the same pluspoints, or was it a nightmare to work on. ( Turbine propulsion/design double Mamba)

 

Regards, Orion.

 

  

[Orion]

7 hours ago, Rob K. said:

Beautifully done Orion, this old kit was nicely brought back into the 2020’s Amazing work. Love the Suez scheme and the folded wings.

Hello Rob,

Thanks. Not a bad result from a box out of 1979.

Regards, Orion.

2 hours ago, RMCS said:

Superb 

Hello RCMS,

Thanks. Appreciate your comment.

Regards, orion.

[Work In Progress]

10 hours ago, Orion said:

Did the maintenance or troubleshooting had the same pluspoints, or was it a nightmare to work on. ( Turbine propulsion/design double Mamba)

 

I can't provide any specific proof but can offer some reasonable supposition based on logic and circumstantial evidence.

 

Gannet aircrews absolutely loved the aeroplane, that I do know. I've never met anyone involved in maintaining one, but by all accounts the aircraft was highly serviceable and I've not been able to find serious criticism. The airframe itself is very conventional and very much in the tradition of a bigger, fatter Firefly. The Mamba engine was always well regarded and I am only aware of there being one accident attributable to engine failure in the Double Mamba combination.  That was due to the one factor they had in common being the oil system, so a bearing failure in one engine contaminated the oil for both.

https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/161056

 

The accessibility of the engines appears very good if you look at aircraft with the cowlings removed. Turboprops generally require far less maintenance than complex piston engines, there are so few moving parts and what there is simply goes round and round rather than stopping and starting and reversing direction 50 times a second as on a piston engine. 

 

I am aware of another couple of minor accidents in which an undercarriage leg failed to retract properly or to extend properly, and there are other accidents which might be attrributable to human error or technical issues associated with other parts of the system, including launch failures, mid air collisions and flying into other solid objects. But in general it seems to have a good record for reliability and safety considering it was a 1950s / 60s carrier type, an era when carrier ops had very high accident and casualty rates even in peacetime.

Edited January 10, 2020 by Work In Progress

[CJP]

Nice job on an old kit - looks impressive

[Rabbit Leader]

There is something special about old kits being built up to ‘perfect’ standards. To me, it is a different class of modelling and the greatest advertisement that all models scrub up well with a little (or a lot of) TLC. This is modelling excellence of the highest order. 
 

Cheers.. Dave 

[Orion]

10 hours ago, Work In Progress said:

I can't provide any specific proof but can offer some reasonable supposition based on logic and circumstantial evidence.

 

Gannet aircrews absolutely loved the aeroplane, that I do know. I've never met anyone involved in maintaining one, but by all accounts the aircraft was highly serviceable and I've not been able to find serious criticism. The airframe itself is very conventional and very much in the tradition of a bigger, fatter Firefly. The Mamba engine was always well regarded and I am only aware of there being one accident attributable to engine failure in the Double Mamba combination.  That was due to the one factor they had in common being the oil system, so a bearing failure in one engine contaminated the oil for both.

https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/161056

 

The accessibility of the engines appears very good if you look at aircraft with the cowlings removed. Turboprops generally require far less maintenance than complex piston engines, there are so few moving parts and what there is simply goes round and round rather than stopping and starting and reversing direction 50 times a second as on a piston engine. 

 

I am aware of another couple of minor accidents in which an undercarriage leg failed to retract properly or to extend properly, and there are other accidents which might be attrributable to human error or technical issues associated with other parts of the system, including launch failures, mid air collisions and flying into other solid objects. But in general it seems to have a good record for reliability and safety considering it was a 1950s / 60s carrier type, an era when carrier ops had very high accident and casualty rates even in peacetime.

Hello W.I.P,

 

Thanks for your extensive answer and the update on the aviation safety net.

Much appreciated.

Regards, Orion.

1 hour ago, Rabbit Leader said:

There is something special about old kits being built up to ‘perfect’ standards. To me, it is a different class of modelling and the greatest advertisement that all models scrub up well with a little (or a lot of) TLC. This is modelling excellence of the highest order. 
 

Cheers.. Dave 

Thanks Dave,

Many more "oldies"on the shelf. Mainly Monogram.

Regards, Orion

[F-32]

Great work, that's a cracking build! I always loved seeing the example down at Flambards in Cornwall, we'd go every summer and it was always something I looked forward to.

 

Skyraider by tony_inkster, on Flickr

[Selwyn]

19 hours ago, Orion said:

Hello Joachim,

Thanks for the kind words.

As mentioned, factory fresh. Ready to be delivered to the Royal Navy.

Regards, orion.

 

19 hours ago, Orion said:

Hello Joachim,

Thanks for the kind words.

As mentioned, factory fresh. Ready to be delivered to the Royal Navy.

Regards, orion.

Well......... not quite factory fresh as the Suez markings  were  applied long after delivery.  "Well maintained"  I would say.

Gorgeous build by the way!

 

Selwyn

[stevej60]

Beautiful build and finish Orion I love this aircraft and Esci's kit I built it about a year ago for one of our Group builds,I want to build the 

standard Skyraider in the early blue USN scheme in the future.

https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235050447-skyraider-aew-1ark-royal-1958/

 

[Buzby061]

A fine display of exceptional modelling skills. Fantastic job!

 

Pete

[jeaton01]

I had no idea the ESCI kit could look like that!

[mick b]

As said previously an excellent build of an old kit which I have recently added to my stash.

 

I do believe the armour plate under the cockpit should be removed though as per the picture supplied above.

 

Mike

Edited January 10, 2020 by mick b

[Lord Riot]

Stunning that, beautifully made and painted. 

[Mark Strasser]

Very nice build Orion!

Mark

[Orion]

 

On 1/10/2020 at 12:26 PM, Selwyn said:

 

Well......... not quite factory fresh as the Suez markings  were  applied long after delivery.  "Well maintained"  I would say.

Gorgeous build by the way!

 

Selwyn

Hello Selwyn,

Correct all the way.

Edited January 17, 2020 by Orion

[Orion]

Dear Fellow Modellers,

 

Thanks for the kind words regarding this very, very old kit from ESCI. Without Evergreen plastics (rod) it would not have been possible to get it right in one time. This almost without sanding and the use of putty.

On to the next one in line.

Regards to all,

Orion, The Netherlands.