Jump to content

Gloster Gladiator Monoplane mashup 1/72


AltcarBoB

Recommended Posts

For quite a while I have been intrigued by thoughts of a Gloster Gladiator Monoplane a whatif model thrown together by Glosters when a small foreign power asks for a cheap monoplane because all its neighbours are getting shiny new 300mph fighters. Glosters were still building Gladiators so using as many parts from stock as possible a cheap and cheerful mono is produced. Unfortunately War were declared and Ruritania is invaded and cannot pay or receive the order so the Fleet Air Arm takes on the finished planes.

 

Last night I was in my local Hobby Craft to buy some paints and I also picked up an Airfix 1/72 Gladiator for £6.50 in a slightly damaged box. I already have the alternative wing sprue from a Fokker DXXI kit and all I will need to do is scratch build retractable undercarriage though I am thinking of a different engine cowling and maybe lengthening the fuselage to move the cockpit aft of the wing. They also had an Airfix Hurricane kit for £8 which I might get for spares.

 

All I have so far is the Airfix sprues

49520799906_d234d49a2b_c.jpgIMG_20200211_123912609 by Stuart, on Flickr

 

and the Fokker wing sprue from an MPM kit

49520279408_f182dab967_c.jpgIMG_20200211_123927735 by Stuart, on Flickr

 

I must say at first glance I am not too impressed with the Airfix sprues compared to the MPM sprue. The MPM is thinner harder plastic with much better panel detail the Airfix is softer, thicker and feels greasy even after I have washed it.

 

Hopefully the two plastics will talk to each other when solvent is applied.

 

Any suggestions welcome and if anyone has a spare NACA Bristol Mercury cowling from maybe a Bristol Blenheim build I will happily take it off your hands.

 

 

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

🤔 I have been thinking what if I fit a Bristol Hercules engine 🤪 I mean what could possibly go wrong replacing a 900 pound engine with a 1900 pound engine 🤣 the aircraft would land nose first.

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because both types were designed for 2000hp engines?  And are a lot bigger and heavier and stronger as a result?  Extra fuel, extra cooling, bigger tails...  Also heavier armament, because they could.

 

It wasn't a Twin Wasp in the P-47 but a Double Wasp. You just might have got a Twin Wasp into a Gladiator with acceptable changes but it would have been pretty hairy and why bother when you could try a Merlin?  It'd still be slower than a Hurricane with even less endurance and half the firepower.  Though I suppose they could make the upper wing guns standard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Graham Boak said:

Because both types were designed for 2000hp engines? 

Realistically speaking, I think at take-off power it probably would twist itself off the airframe (or turn it into a pretzel) but I don't think pinpoint accuracy is the name of the game here ;)

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, alt-92 said:

but I don't think pinpoint accuracy is the name of the game here ;)

No it won't be pin point accuracy the best I can do is 6 inch nail point accuracy.🤪

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Twin wasp double wasp they’re close cousins.

 

Not that up with aero engines but, I suppose my point is that it’s not that unusual to see fighters designed with the biggest (hp wise) engine available. 
 

The Merlin would have been the engine if the time, and an in-line engined glad would certainly look different.

Edited by Marklo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Pritch said:

Didn't the real thing use a Bristol Mercury IX?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gloster_F.5/34

As far as I can tell the F5/34 didn't have much in common with the Gladiator apart from the designer. I am going to build the fuselage much as real life but add a monoplane wing and possibly Hurricane or scratchbuilt undercarriage.

 

I could use the original Gladiator Dowty sprung wheels and legs just move them to the wing to retract inwards. It's very much going to be designed on the hoof as I build.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It wouldn’t be uncommon for fighter prototypes of the time to have fixed undercarriage eg the super marine precursor to the spitfire if the gloster  lancock among others.

 

Actually the gloster F.5/34 looks very like your build.

Edited by Marklo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Examples predating the Gladiator and with less powerful engines offering much lower speeds than required. For this timescale, better examples might be the Avia B.35 or Fiat CR.42., but why think about anything so sluggish at this time?

 

The Miles M.20 might have been the last British flying prototype with a fixed undercarriage, but as an emergency design for perilous times not an otherwise serious attempt.  The Folland design competing against the Barracuda also had a fixed undercarriage, as did the Supermarine "Dumbo" but that owes rather more to the extreme stringency of the requirements than any sensible reason.  Then there was the Ki.115...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, AltcarBoB said:

F5/34 didn't have much in common with the Gladiator apart from the designer

True but designers tend to reuse the same concepts eg Folland with the se5, nighthawk, Grebe, gamecock etc there are echoes of the previous in each new design, even though each is not derivative of the earlier design.(if that  makes sense) 

 

An interesting (but possibly not true) idea is that the hurricane came about as an attempt at a monoplane fury.

 

And totally unrelated (but may actually be true) the predator movies were a result of the comment after making the last Rocky movie that he'd have to fight an alien if they were ever going to make another sequel.

Edited by Marklo
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is absolutely true that the initial project drawings for the Hurricane were titled "Monoplane Fury", but whether the design could fairly be described as "an attempt at a monoplane Fury" could be overstating it a little.  More perhaps an attempt to cash in on the fame of its predecessor.  The name did not stick for long.  The structural methods used for the design were those of all Camm designs of the period, as you (correctly) suggest as a general statement. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have made a start and I am up to the "Oh my god what a mess it will never look any good" stage. I have fixed the wing and need to do a lot of filling to blend the wing inot the fuselage, I perhaps should have fitted the wing further up into the fuselage to make it an easier transition.

 

49526190688_07fc4206f0_c.jpgIMG_20200212_191615779 by Stuart, on Flickr

49526189663_84f07f8be9_c.jpgIMG_20200212_191554057 by Stuart, on Flickr

49526922872_b7bcd285a8_c.jpgIMG_20200212_191602591 by Stuart, on FlickrIMG_20200212_191615779 by Stuart, on Flickr49529414813_e082e10c1d_c.jpgIMG_20200213_132512406 by Stuart, on Flickr

Edited by AltcarBoB
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

U/C legs looking a bit wonky but they arent glued in place yet

 

49529420723_5dd8a88855_c.jpgIMG_20200213_132605708 by Stuart, on Flickr

 

 

Still filling all the holes and gaps meant for the top wing fitment

 

49529919401_443b685a9f_c.jpgIMG_20200213_132518299 by Stuart, on Flickr

Edited by AltcarBoB
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been thinking a bit more about the back story of my mash up. Let me know what you think.

 

The Royal Navy were rather unwilling to buy the 52 Monoplane Gloster fighters but they were desperate for anything that flew and the Gloster fighters were not wanted by the RAF. There was a thought that they could be used as trainers to get Bi-plane fixed undercarriage pilots used to the newer retractable undercarriage mono-planes. After initial testing the RN realised they had a pretty good fighter on there hands it was 45 mph faster than the Bi-plane Gladiator had 8 x Browning .303s and could turn inside a Hurricane all day. With a new constant speed propeller fitted and the engine modified to take +10psi of boost it could also outclimb a Hurricane below 12,000 feet. It was decided the original name Gladiator Monoplane was too much of a mouthful and could cause confusion. The new name chosen was the Gannet MkI

 

After the losses of carriers and planes in the first 10 months of the year and with the new Fairey Fulmar a distance away from service the Gloster Gannet went into service on RN carriers just in time for service in the Mediteranean. RN pilots found that the new Gannet was superior to the Italian Fiat CR32 and 42s and was more than capable of handling the latest Italian monoplane fighters and bombers. With only 52 aircraft losses to enemy and accidents soon whittled the Gannets down to a handful but for nearly a year they ruled the Mediteranean skies.

Edited by AltcarBoB
Changed name to Gloster Gannet MkI
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To get the filler even when I am forming the wing root I have made a little former out of card. The left hand edge runs up against the fuselage the bottom edge against the wing. I am using Vallejo putty which doesnt like being applied too thick so a first layer is drying and probably need to skim the joint at least twice before its right.

 

49530458432_e4f4fd93ec_c.jpgIMG_20200213_144822007 by Stuart, on Flickr

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rudder held on with masking tape, canopy and cowling balanced on. I think its coming together and looks quite P36 ish

 

49530079543_ec04d13ca6_c.jpgIMG_20200213_161313589 by Stuart, on Flickr

 

49530583551_6e0faa7237_c.jpgIMG_20200213_161329370 by Stuart, on Flickr

 

49530078208_440e8f778e_c.jpgIMG_20200213_161322634 by Stuart, on Flickr

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In side profile, it's got a Re.2000 feel to it. Britain was in negotiations with Italy to buy some.

 

From Wikipedia:

 

British interest[edit]

In December 1939, a British commission, led by Lord Hardwick and Air Ministry representatives, arrived in Italy for the purpose of purchasing various pieces of military equipment; aside from items such as marine engines, armaments and light reconnaissance bombers, the delegation sought to procure of around 300 Re.2000s.[14] During January 1940, the Director of Aircraft Contracts confirmed the British order. The German government issued its approval of the sale in March of the same year, but withdrew its approval during the following month.[14] In light of this, the Italian and British governments then decided to complete the contract through the Italian Caproni’s Portuguese subsidiary as to side-step Germany's objection; however, the British order was cancelled as a consequence of Italy's entry into the Second World War on 10 June 1940.[15][16]

 

 

 

Chris

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have always been a bit suspicious of the story of the Re2000 order. It seems to be an internet legend to me I have never seen any documentation from the British government nor from Regiane.

 

Why would Germany okay an order for its enemy to buy fighters and why would Italy even ask for permission.

 

It just doesn't ring true though I am prepared to be amazed if anyone finds documents. Maybe it was an MI6 diversion to cover payment to Italy to try and keep them out of the war.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks good so far. Reminiscent of many 1930s planes.

 

I've tried Vallejo filler don’t like it at all. I admire your patience, I’d have used milliput as it builds up well and sticks to anything.

Edited by Marklo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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...