Avro Manchester***FINISHED***

[DaveyGair]

Lovely job Pete, I don't think I'll have the spares for turrets when I do mine!

I had another look at mine and got the Caruna plans out from the Warpaint book to have another look.  I'd read elsewhere about the 28' tailplane thing. The Planet kit parts for both tailplanes are a perfect match on the drawings, but when I measured the overall width of the tailplane his drawing comes out at 30' 5" or there abouts!  The Planet fuselage halves seem to match up but are longer than the drawing (Manchesters were 6" longer than a Lancaster) so got a Revell fuselage half out of the box and it's more or less a good match.  Shows you shouldn't treat drawings as gospel!  

Of course I want to do a later 33' span aircraft!

 

 

Davey.

[PeterB]

Hi Mike,

 

Perhaps more like a Swan - on the surface gliding along the water serenely whilst under the surface it is paddling like the clappers, which is what I have been doing to get this finished by the deadline! The canopy together with the DF loop and radio mast went on last night so it is just about done.

 

Cheers

 

Pete

Edited May 26, 2020 by PeterB

[PeterB]

Both the Manchester and the Lancaster are now ready for a final coat of matt varnish - the turrets are just a push fit at the moment.

Appearance wise the canopy is a bit of a mess. In common with a number of other kits in this GB the windscreen is too rounded, but the main problem is the height although it actually seems about the same size as the one on the Lancaster. On the Airfix kit of the Lancaster the top of the canopy is decidedly “domed” whereas this is almost flat. That means that the vertical sides are too high and the lack of “rake” on the windscreen just makes it worse. I think next time I place an order with Hannants I might buy a replacement canopy, but for the moment this will have to do.

 

Could have been a disaster a lot worse! Once I have sprayed it I will glue the guns on to the ventral turret, glue the turrets in place and add the final part - the little blister covering the pivot on top of the nose turret.

 

Cheers

 

Pete

[PeterB]

On 5/26/2020 at 9:37 AM, DaveyGair said:

Lovely job Pete, I don't think I'll have the spares for turrets when I do mine!

I had another look at mine and got the Caruna plans out from the Warpaint book to have another look.  I'd read elsewhere about the 28' tailplane thing. The Planet kit parts for both tailplanes are a perfect match on the drawings, but when I measured the overall width of the tailplane his drawing comes out at 30' 5" or there abouts!  The Planet fuselage halves seem to match up but are longer than the drawing (Manchesters were 6" longer than a Lancaster) so got a Revell fuselage half out of the box and it's more or less a good match.  Shows you shouldn't treat drawings as gospel!  

Of course I want to do a later 33' span aircraft!

 

 

Davey.

Hi Davey,

 

The resin is pretty good though I had to use hot water to straighten out several bits.  I have strengthened the main undercarriage and tail wheel leg as the solid resin wings make it heavy and they are a bit fragile looking. The span of both the wing and tailplane is close to correct and the length is within a scale foot or so according to my rough measurements - slightly longer than my 2nd mould Airfix Lanc. The problem is with the clear parts. As I mentioned during the build, fitting the clear resin windows would be a real pain I suspect, but Krystal Kleer or something similar will work reasonably well. The nose blister and landing light cover were fine,  but I did not fancy the rear turret as it was split down the middle and would have left an obvious seam. I have already mentioned the problem with the canopy and that the nose turret is said by another modeller to have incorrect framing. As to the upper turret I have not used it but both of mine had slightly squashed tops though that is probably down to me, and they may well have been fixable by gentle pressure in warm water - at least they do give you 2 of everything!

 

If you want to use replacement turret glazing, the nose one is an FN5 as in the Lancaster ands Stirling, and the tail one is an FN4 from an early Whitley or Stirling according to one book, but another says it is the later modified FN20 Lancaster type, also used in later Whitleys and Stirlings - not much difference anyway. The upper one is an FN7 as used in the Sunderland and Stirling I or so I understand. So, in theory the turrets could all come from the Airfix Stirling kit, though exactly which version they use for the tail is unclear - there should be both FN4 for the Mk I and FN20 for the Mk III but they only give you one! Of course all the above is from my  book on turrets and other books may say different.

 

This is my first all resin kit and it has gone together better than I expected - I used 5 minute epoxy for the major joins - fuselage, wings etc and normal CA gel and then liquid for just about everything else. It may not be entirely accurate - few kits are, but except for the canopy and maybe the stretch of fuselage in front of it which may slope down a bit too much compared with the Lanc kit, I am rather pleased with it.

 

So when you do decide to build yours, it should be OK.

 

Good luck.

 

Pete

Edited May 27, 2020 by PeterB

[PeterB]

I have replaced the missing pitot and put yet more red lines on the Lanc, and finished masking both kits. I had hoped to do the spraying today but the weather is horribly humid so I have decided to see what it is like on Thursday. I knew trying to do both the Lincoln conversion and the Manchester in 3 months would be challenging, but it has slowed down my work in the various other GB a bit more than I would have liked. Anyway I have finally posted the last 2 of my "In The Navy" builds in the Gallery, and the Manchester will be following by the weekend I hope, so then I can get back to a bit more relaxed modelling - well except for the Buccaneer GB of course! Then I might just take a short breather before the Heller Classic starts. Given the size of my stash and my advancing years, I had set myself a target of at least 2 kits a month so it would be down to a reasonable size by the time I hit 80. On June 1st last year I decided to enter my very first GB, and since then excluding several refurbishments I have built 28 kits, 3 of which were rather difficult and time consuming, so I think I am slightly ahead of target!

 

Cheers

 

Pete

Edited May 27, 2020 by PeterB

[DaveyGair]

4 hours ago, PeterB said:

Hi Davey,

So when you do decide to build yours, it should be OK.

 

Good luck.

 

Pete

I hope I can do it justice, and it comes out as good as yours. 

I will have to modify the tailplanes so I get the 33' span for a later Mk I.  The trouble is I have a few Lancasters and an Airfix Stirling but I will be using the turrets on all of them, except the early upper on the Stirling as I will be doing a later B.III.

So it will be OOB as they say!  

 

Davey.

[PeterB]

Hi Davey,

 

Falcon do a canopy and turret set including the Stirling, Halifax and a couple of others if you want to splash out some money.

 

When I first started thinking of building this for the GB I was under the impression that the first 100 or more were built as Mk I with the short span tail and triple fins and the next batch were built as Mk Ia with the wider span and just the two larger endplates as in the Lanc, and that most of the early ones were retrospectively converted to Mk Ia config. I soon found out it was rather more complicated - according to at least one source only the first 20 or so Mk I were built with the short tail,  and the rest had the 33' span tail but retained the small endplates and central fin.  It also looks like that first batch had the ventral turret, and the second batch of Mk I had the dorsal turret, but although Planet provide the dorsal turret as an option with this kit, there is only the short horizontal tail, which appears to be incorrect. Other sources are a bit vague. The Profile on the Manchester seems to imply that my original thoughts were correct, but then as an aside says only the first 20 Mk I had the 28' tail!

 

Don't suppose adding the extra few feet will be that hard but if would be any help you are welcome to the  long tails from my conversion of the first mould Airfix Lanc to a Mk Ia Manchester which are in one of my many spares boxes together with the Lancaster endplates. Size and shape wise they seem a good match for those on the 2nd mould kit and would be good for either the last 80 Mk I or any of the Mk Ia. I even have the turrets though they are a bit crude - Lancaster nose and tail and Stirling I upper. Incidentally I have just realised that I still have the Lancaster canopy from the conversion - now there is a thought!

 

I believe Planet did a Mk Ia as well as the early Mk I, so presumably that did have the wider span tail and bigger endplates? Maybe CMK could let you have some if you ask them nicely!

 

Cheers

 

Pete

Edited May 27, 2020 by PeterB

[JOCKNEY]

Wonderful job Pete

 

I really can't understand why Airfix don't bring out a Manchester when it would only mean moulding additional parts to compliment their existing Lancaster.

I have a contrail conversion somewhere, I wonder what that would turn out like, and goodness knows where it's accurate or not !

Your Planet one looks the way to go and you have done it proud !

 

Cheers Pat

[Graham Boak]

Probably because unless the parts are arranged on the runner is advance with this in mind, they would need to make rather more than merely the wings, the engines with all the nacelles, the turrets, the fins and tailplanes.  Or, in other words,  an entirely new kit anyway.   And for how many sales?  Probably for less return than putting the same amount of effort and tooling into a well-known single-engined fighter  or even two (eg P-47, Tempest) or a decent twin (eg Boston, Oxford).  I would agree that the Manchester is probably the most important WW2 RAF type lacking in 1/72, but this isn't because it's s simple matter of  just clapping together bits together from another kit or two.  It's because it would cost a lot without much hope of a great return.

[PeterB]

Thanks Pat,

 

Back in the day Contrail were not as bad as Airmodel but not as good as Rareplanes IMHO. I guess your conversion includes wings, engines and maybe the tail if not a Mk Ia, but probably not the props and wheels and I am not sure about the upper turret either? The props and wheels were not the same as on the Lanc, though I used Lanc ones on my DIY conversion as per Airfix mag I think. I guess it would take quite a bit of work but would probably produce a decent enough result if you were not worried about panel lines and the like (unless you scribed them in). The main problem I found with vac-forms was supporting the wings and tail so that they did not droop over time - my F-89 Scorpion (Airmodel perhaps) had long thin wings and after a couple of years they were badly bent even though I put Polyfilla in them! I seem to remember that your Perth is a Contrail product, but at least the struts should help keep the wings in shape though a bit of metal rod/tubing as a spar might be an idea.

 

Hi Graham,

 

Take your point and I presume you were commenting on Pat's post not my previous one about the tail. If so then yes, it does rather depend on whether or not the original mould was designed with variations in mind as say with the recent Mitchell, Phantom and Buccaneer, and the sprues arranged accordingly, However I have had Spitfire Vc kits from Airfix where they just put in an extra runner with new wings on, but for the Manchester it would as you say, be well on the way to a new kit. Whether or not a new kit would be financially viable is a moot point - after all they did do two versions of the Shackleton in competition with Revell. However, I do not expect to see one in the foreseeable future, indeed if ever.

 

 As to this resin kit, when received in the box the parts were on very small runners - not more than 3 or 4 small parts or, like both the tails, were seperate with their own large pour blocks, so I am not sure if they use the normal "plastic" system of large multipart sprues/runners and then perhaps cut them up. I know that a lot of short run resin kits such as my Millicast tanks seem to be made in individual "rubber" moulds which have to be replaced after a say 20 or so "shots" and a new one cast from the "master". Hence my suggestion of approaching CMK.

 

Cheers

 

Pete

Edited May 27, 2020 by PeterB

[PeterB]

A.V. Roe began building planes in around 1907, and had considerable success with the Avro 504 series during and after WWI. Then, like many other companies they made a series of prototypes for the military, most of which were not accepted for production, whilst those that were, such as the Bison, were only ordered in small numbers. They once more had modest successs with the Tutor trainer in around 1930, but it was not until the Anson in 1935 that they really got going again.

 

Clearly it was a big jump in size from the Anson of around 8000lb all up weight to the 50000lb Manchester.

The step up to the Lancaster was not quite so big.

There was nothing seriously wrong with the airframe of the Manchester, the problem was the new RR Vulture engine specified by the Air Ministry. As with the Heinkel 177 it was hoped that by using 2 powerful engines instead of 4 smaller ones there would be savings in weight and drag. However, in both instances the new engine involved mating 2 existing ones, in the case of the Vulture it was a pair of Kestrels, and this led to all sorts of problems. Even when the Vulture worked it seldom delivered rated power and it had a nasty hablit of throwing pistons and catching fire! The chances of getting home on one engine were slim, but it did happen.

 

I dare say RR could have sorted it given time, but they were far too busy making Merlins and developing the Griffon, so production of the Vulture was abandoned. Contrary to some claims, Avro were never entirely happy with the prospect of the Vulture and started looking at alternatives early on. including a pair of Hercules and also 4 Merlins, so when the Vulture started acting up it was fairly easy to bring in the Manchester Mk III aka Lancaster.

 

This has not been the easiest of builds but not as bad as expected. I have enjoyed this GB and would like to thank the organisers for thinking it up. I will post a few pics in the Gallery, but for whoever it was who said they had never see a kit with a ventral turret, here it is in the fully lowered position with the seat and footwells down and the guns pointing under the tail - don't know if they had any form of cut-out to stop the tail wheel being shot off! I painted the sticky out bits undet the turret in tyre black to make a bit of a contrast.

 

 

 

Thanks for watching. and good luck to those of you still trying to beat the deadline.

 

Pete

Edited May 28, 2020 by PeterB

[Ventora3300]

Lovely job, Pete. This is definitely an under-modelled aircraft - now that we've seen yours, we'll all have a go! It's great to see it in context with the Anson and the Lancaster. It makes you think about the achievements of the aircraft designers and manufacturers back then. I've enjoyed this build - well done, sir! All the best. Mike.

[DaveyGair]

20 hours ago, PeterB said:

Hi Davey,

Falcon do a canopy and turret set including the Stirling, Halifax and a couple of others if you want to splash out some money.

Cheers

 

Pete

Hi Pete, lovely job mate.

This is what I want to avoid but could be an option, I'll try with the kit turrets first.

I doubt if CMK would oblige but when doing a Mk.1a they had the wider tail-planes and Lanc' fins anyway. Using a Revell Lanc' kit as the fuselage donor.

I've just finished reading the book by Robert Kirby 'The Avro Manchester: The legend Behind the Lancaster' and it's a great read.  Apparently at different times different aircraft, whether Mk.1 or 1a had the upper turrets removed. The ventral one was discarded early on. So some research or modellers licence is required. The Mk.1 I want to do from the Planet kit, L7301, ZN*D of 106 Sqn flown by Plt.Off L.T. Manser who was awarded a posthumous VC, doesn't have the blisters in the canopy, an upper turret and has the early short exhausts. I may just use the tail-planes as is, life's too short!

 

Davey.

[PeterB]

Hi Davey,

 

I have read that because the FN7 upper turret frame and glazing was asymmetric, whenever it was traversed it disturbed the airflow so much that the middle tail began to vibrate, causing damage or even breaking it off in extreme cases, which may be why it was removed in some cases. My kit does not have canopy blisters though some do seem to have had them according to pictures.

 

If you are intending to use the fusaelage from a Revell Lanc, could you not use the horizontal tails as well - they were identical to the 33ft Manchester ones AFAIK? If you are not fitting the upper turret than a Lancaster canopy and turret set would maybe be a better buy as you would solve the canopy problem as well, or maybe not if the vac form ones come with blisters already moulded in.

 

Cheers

 

Pete

[PeterB]

OK, not the best of photos but in the last 12 months I have built a Manchester, Lincoln and Shackleton and refurbished a Lancaster I built nearly 40 years ago. The other 3 had been in my stash for a combined total of around 80 years.

In this STGB I have glued together more resin that I have done in the rest of my modelling life of 65 years - the only other resin I currently have is detail parts like guns, wheels and the odd nose, except for the 1/72 Sopwith Dolphin kit which is all resin - now there is another aircraft which history seems to forget at times, must get that built before too long.

 

It has been both interesting and at times challenging, which as Enzo would rightly say is how it should be, but I think I will take a break for a while now and concentrate on smaller kits that I can build reasonably quickly - well except perhaps for the Buccaneer.

 

Good luck to all of you and happy modelling.

 

Keep safe and well!

 

Pete

Edited May 29, 2020 by PeterB