Not quite another Delta - Lightning F Mk 6

[PeterB]

For a change I thought I would not make a delta, though having said that I seem to recall at least one book/article I read where the author described the wing as being like a delta with a triangle cut out of the rear wingroot!

 

Assuming it gets done, this will be the fourth Lightning I have built, the first being to original Airfix F1 from around 1963. This was followed by a Frog F6, though I can't recall if it was the reboxed Hasegawa one or not, and both of these builds have long gone, or at least I can't find them. A good few years back I build the Airfix F3, which I still have, and now I have this, bought at least 10 years ago, probably from e-Bay.

Yes, it is the Donetsk version, ex Frog in a lovely Chocolate coloured plastic! I gather from Serge @Aardvark's comments in another build that the history of this kit is a bit complicated, in that it seems Frog had been considering making a kit themselves, but then found that when they teamed up with Hasegawa it was cheaper to just rebox their mould. However once the agreement ended, they once more set about making one, though it may well be that it is a modified copy of the Hasegawa one. Whatever the case, at some point they came to an agreement with Novo for it to be made in Russia, possibly whilst it was still being produced over here as well. This is one moulded by DFI in Donetsk I gather though it just says "Made In Russia" on the sprue, so whether they were making it on behalf of Novo or in their own right I do not know. It is of course a very basic kit so I will have to do some work on the interior, possily involving aftermarket bits and pieces, but more on that later. I have not yet decided on the markings so I will have to have a look though my stock of decs - I imagine the kit ones will be shot!

 

More if and when I find time to start.

 

Cheers

 

Pete

Edited December 23, 2020 by PeterB

[theplasticsurgeon]

Nice one PeterB,   lovely colour.

Sprues look just like those for my Revell Lightning of last year.

Best of luck with this build.

[Ratch]

I'd certainly be very wary of the kit decals 

[PeterB]

AFAIK, the Revell offering is perhaps the Matchbox one according to Scalemates, though another source says they released the Frog one - maybe they did both! Did it have the option of an F2A or F6 which I believe the Matchbox one did?

 

I do not expect the decals to be any good so I have a Modeldecal set in my stash for 56 Squadron, virtually identical to my F3 in the same markings, and also a set of an awful lot of Xtradecal Lightning stencils for both NMF and camo. In fact if anybody wants any stencils I can probably spare some! I do like the Firebirds, and already have an F-4 in their markings, plus I believe a Tornado F3 in my stash, though I could be wrong about the latter - may be confusing it with my old Matchbox F3. When I was a lad back in the last century I painted their insignia on my push bike!

 

Pete

Edited December 23, 2020 by PeterB

[theplasticsurgeon]

9 hours ago, PeterB said:

AFAIK, the Revell offering is perhaps the Matchbox one according to Scalemates, though another source says they released the Frog one - maybe they did both! Did it have the option of an F2A or F6 which I believe the Matchbox one did?

 

The origination of Revell Lightnings has been done to death in my GB threads.

This Revell Lightning is originally derived from the Frog kit, and very similar to what you're building, and produces a gunless F6 model.  

It has the Frog code F266 stamped onto sprues.  It has VERY similar parts to the 1967 Hasegawa kit, but a different sprue layout, part numbers and instruction sequence.

 

This 2007 Revell Lightning is the 1989 Hasegawa kit and produces an F6 - now with belly guns, instrument panel, cockpit floor, stick and hook.

 

Neither is the Matchbox kit, which has strange blocks at the aileron joints.  Neither Revell kit offers an F2A option.

 

 

[Col.]

Always room for another Lightning in this GB  

[PeterB]

The Pavla cockpit set has arrived - it is said to be for the Hasegawa/Revell kit but hopefully it will fit without too much work.

If nothing else it will add a bit of weight to the nose, though I will still have to put some lead in.

 

So, a bit of background.

Back in 1947 it seems the Ministry of Supply issued Experimental Requirement 103 for an aircraft capable of transonic and low supersonic speeds up to Mach 1.5 according to Martin Bowman's Crowood book on the Lightning. In response Fairey started work on their FD 2 and English Electric started on their P.1. Whilst Fairey went for a delta wing, Petter at EE rejected that due to concerns about the handling under certain conditions and went for a somewhat unusual highly swept wing, which as I mentioned earlier was a bit like a delta with a triangular “bite” taken out. In mid 1949 a new spec F23/49 was issued for test prototypes to look at the possibility of a supersonic fighter and the design of the second P.1 would be modified to cover that. It was helped considerably by the Short SB.5 research aircraft which first flew in 1952, and was used to test various wing and tail layouts.

 

The P.1 (later renamed P.1A) first flew in August 1954 and was a strange looking machine. Two engines were mounted on top of each other, the wing was swept at 60º, the cockpit was very shallow to make it almost flush, and the nose intake was sort of triangular, without a shock cone.

 

The second prototype flew the following year and was fitted with 2x30mm cannon, being christened the P.1A, as by that time an order had been issued for 3 modified P.1B prototypes fitted with cannon, and provision for 2 Blue Jay (later Firestreak) missiles and radar. This resulted in a major redesign - Ferranti AI 23 (Airpass) radar would be fitted, the intake would become annular with a cone, the canopy would be raised, the flaps and airbrakes modified, and much more powerful 200 Series RR Avon engines with 4 stage reheat would virtually double the power. Slightly later the vertical tail would also be increased in size by 30%. An order was received for a production run of the improved P.1B, to be called Lightning F 1, and the first of the prototypes flew on April 4th 1957, exceeding Mach 1 without reheat on its maiden flight. On the same day, the Minister of Defence Duncan Sandys announced a White Paper cancelling just about all manned combat aircraft as they were to be replaced by missiles! Fortunately it was decided to continue with the Lightning but many other projects were scrapped.

 

More another day.

 

Cheers

 

Pete

 

[PeterB]

As I mentioned earlier the Pavla cockpit set is intended for the Hasegawa kit and so required some butchery modification to fit. The tub and seat were not bad, but the combined IP and front coaming was a real pain. You will note I have added a bit of weight in front of the cockpit although the weight of the resin tub might have been enough.

Nothing a bit of filler can't fix, likewise the fuselage joint.

Sorry for blurry Macro pics as usual. I know I should have added the yellow and black striped grab handles to the top of the seat but my hands are not up to it!

 

So on with the very simplified history!

The Lightning F1 was armed with 2x30mm Aden cannon above the nose, and interchangeable packs under the nose that could house the wiring and rails for 2 Firestreak missiles or another pair of Adens., whilst a further option was pack fitted with 48x2” unguided air to air missiles which were popular at the time. I believe 20 were produced, to be followed by 28 improved F1A which had plumbing installed for a removable IFR probe and various other internal changes.

 

The next “interim version” was the F2 which introduced fully variable reheat, and this was followed by the F3 which had a cropped tail of increased area and could use the new Red Top missile which was capable of head on interception but dispensed with the guns. The T4 was a 2 seat trainer version of the F1A and the T5 was based on the F3. The Lightning was always short on fuel, and provision was made on the F3 for overwing drop tanks though I gather they were never used and a small number of F3A were built with an enlarged belly tank. The next fighter version was the F6 which not only had the overwing tank provision but also a much larger belly tank which could be converted to house a pair of Adens in the front – something which an American commentator in a documentary I saw thought was ruddy dangerous. It also had a cambered wing which had an extended leading edge. Some F2 were retrofitted with the large tank and other features of the F6 to become F2A, and some of the F3 were also converted to F6. There were also a number of export versions both of the trainer and fighter, the latter being capable of carrying bombs and rockets under the wings, and I believe the Saudi's did actually use theirs for ground attack a few times.

 

The Lightning was a typical interceptor of that period - fast and highly manouverable with a spectacular rate of climb, but with relatively weak armament and short legs. It was eventually replaced by first the F-4 and later the Tornado F2/3, but anybody who has seen and heard a silver Lightning roaring down a runway and then going virtually straight up will never forget it - I certainly won't! In terms of sheer speed at altitude, rate of climb and roll rate it was comparable if not better that many later fighters according to many sources.

 

Cheers

 

Pete

Edited January 8, 2021 by PeterB

[Ray_W]

Hi Pete,

 

I always enjoy your builds - seems like you're running a channel "A Brief History of 1/72 Plastic Models."

 

9 hours ago, PeterB said:

I know I should have added the yellow and black striped grab handles to the top of the seat but my hands are not up to it!

 

See if you can pick up pigment ink pens for the black on the grab handles. Easier to support the hand and control. Wipe off the error if need me. Here's my current selection, the Faber-Castell Ecco's should work well, the Copic Multiliners are super fine:

 

 

There are some quite exotic solutions in well-equipped art stores these days.

 

Ray

 

 

 

 

[PeterB]

Thanks Ray,

 

Unfortunately the seat is fairly crude and does not actually have any handles of foot restraints, and if it did I would almost certainly have broken them off by now! If I could make some and put them on I could probably paint them, but a combination of arthritic hands and poor eyesight means I am not going to bother. As to my "lectures", I tend to research each kit before I start building it and it seems a waste not to write down a few salient points - when I first started modelling info was scarce on all bar RAF WWII planes and one or two of the ones I build are still not that well known these days so it might be of interest to a few of my "readers" I guess.

 

Cheers

 

Pete

 

 

Edited January 8, 2021 by PeterB

[PeterB]

Well, that did not take too long.

As you can see I had to use a bit of filler, but the fit is actually not that bad. I will give it a wash and then a witness coat of primer to show up what needs a bit more work - bound to be something! Painting the Natural Metal finish will be the thing that takes the most time, followed by the decals if I decide to use the full stencil set I have. You will see that I have stood it on white tac as there is no clearance due to the ventral fins until the main wheels go on after spraying. Having learned from my first few attempts with the AK Interactive Xtreme Metal spray paint, I will paint the anti dazzle panel and the white part of the spine before I spray, thus hopefully avoiding masking over the Aluminium and having problems with any bleed under the tape - as I mentioned elsewhere I would rather have had normal brushing consistency paint that I could thin down for spraying as this stuff is too thin to touch up afterwards with a brush! To save on the somewhat expensive airbrush cleaner/thinners I will not spray it until I can do the F-86D at the same time.

 

The plastic not only is a rather unpleasant colour, but it is not very nice to work with - brittle and it seems as if it has a coat of grease on it in places - perhaps from the mould. That is the sort of thing Serge @Aardvark would probably know about as it was made in his neck of the woods as it were, but he seems to be off the air at the moment and has not posted for over a month. I hope he is OK as the part of the Ukraine he lives in is a potentially dangerous place at the moment, and I don't just mean Covid-19!

 

Cheers

 

Pete

[PeterB]

Just a thought - in 1967 an arrestor hook was fitted to the F.6 for use in barrier landings - Frog did not provide one so I dug one out of my spares boxes. It is not 100% accurate but will give the impression! I could probably lash up some cannon muzzles in the front of the tank as well but I don't think I will bother as not all F.6's carried this mod, and even then not all of the time I gather.

 

Pete

[Col.]

Good progress again Pete  

[theplasticsurgeon]

1 hour ago, PeterB said:

The plastic not only is a rather unpleasant colour, but it is not very nice to work with - brittle and it seems as if it has a coat of grease on it in places - perhaps from the mould.

PeterB, that horrible colour reminds me so much of a bagged Gannet kit that I built in 1993ish.  Probably of the same origin as your Lightning.  

The release agent disolved the first coat of paint!  Yes - it went from painted, back to brown!  I'd never seen anything quite like it.

Where I suspect any problems with release agent now,  I give the model a good wash with neat washing-up liquid and a toothbrush, followed by a good rinse.

Hope this helps.

 

[PeterB]

Thanks Col,

 

I do try - in fact some might say I can be extremely trying😄!

 

Seriously though, I do my best and am really enjoying this GB though I know that it may be a little problematic. All airborne  Interceptor aircraft are of course also fighters, but are all fighter aircraft potentially Interceptors? Judging by a post I have seen recently on another GB, I know that at least one modeller thinks some of the participants in this GB are bending the rules a bit, but frankly I could not care less - it is meant to be fun! As it happens all of my entries so far are in fact just about "pure" Interceptors from the period just after WWII when the threat of nuclear armed bombers was on the minds of designers and air forces on both sides of the Iron Curtain, but before long the fast climbing single purpose aircraft began to fall out of favour and was replaced by the "multi purpose" plane, which made more economic sense but as the old saw says "Jack of all Trades, Master of none"! The boundaries are blurred as pretty well all aircraft could, if needed, have bombs etc added for ground attack, or even just use their guns to strafe targets on the ground -  as I said in my reply to said post, even the Sopwith Camel could and did carry bombs at times! A relatively modern example would be the Hornet which was initially designated F/A-18 - both fighter and attack capabilities.

 

Nil Carborundum!

 

Pete

Edited January 9, 2021 by PeterB

[Col.]

Glad to know you're enjoying our GB Pete. This hobby should be fun otherwise what's the point in participating in it. Think I know the post you've mentioned and while I feel everyone is welcome to their own opinions I didn't appreciate the critical tone used or the implication their GB would be more focused so therefore purer and better. Or perhaps I'm simply being over-sensitive and miss-reading the post  Either way I'll continue to run a more inclusive GB that allows mass participation with a wider variety of subjects to increase the fun potential for everyone involved.

[PeterB]

Hi Col,

 

Sounds like the same post. If he thinks this GB has strayed over the boundaries, he almost certainly will not like the GB he was posting in as that will be a hard one to "police". Oh well, if he does not want to play he can always take his bat home as we used to say in Yorkshire. I certainly intend to have fun!

 

Pete

Edited January 9, 2021 by PeterB

[PeterB]

Well, that looks a bit less horrendous colour wise.

I have given it a light coat of primer to highlight problems, tried to fix them, and then given it another coat and it is nearly there - the nose  ring has blended in quite well but the tail exhaust section was not the best of fits and it a bit rough still. The cockpit transparencies are not very good though a dip in Klear/pledge helped., and for some reason the actual canopy is a little narrower than the windscreen. I will have to dig out my previous F6 which I found up in my study roof yesterday and see if that canopy is any better. I know I said I was not going to bother with the cannon but I noticed that the illustrations on the Modeldecal sheet showed that the one I intend to model had them, so I have made a couple of gun troughs - you can't see them in the pic, and they will not be obvious until the final painting is done. I will fit some of the gear doors, the pitot and the refuelling probe before I spray the silver, to avoid problems touching up later.

 

Cheers

 

Pete

Edited January 10, 2021 by PeterB

[PeterB]

Spot the difference!

My memory is not as good as it used to be, but I am pretty sure the old kit in the foreground is the Frog reboxing of the original Hasegawa mould. Unfortunately it has been repainted quite thickly at least once so the detail not as clear as it was, but there seem to be one or two very minor differences between that and the "new" kit which is the reworked Frog version as produced in Donetsk. For example the new kit has a raised horizontal line near the bottom of the ventral fins where the lower part was painted black on some planes. As to the canopy and windscreen on the old model, they are much clearer and fit perfectly, and there seems to be a small raised fairing on top of the canopy which is not on the new one. Does anybody happen to know what other differences there were between the genuine Hasgawa one and the Frog remould?

 

Cheers

 

Pete

[theplasticsurgeon]

8 hours ago, PeterB said:

Does anybody happen to know what other differences there were between the genuine Hasgawa one and the Frog remould?

Different sprue layout, part numbers and build sequence  -  but I'd wager that the parts can be interchanged.

[theplasticsurgeon]

10 hours ago, PeterB said:

I know I said I was not going to bother with the cannon but I noticed that the illustrations on the Modeldecal sheet showed that the one I intend to model had them, so I have made a couple of gun troughs - you can't see them in the pic, and they will not be obvious until the final painting is done. I will fit some of the gear doors, the pitot and the refuelling probe before I spray the silver, to avoid problems touching up later.

I thought that the forward section of the belly tank was exchangable.  One day an aircraft has cannons - the next not.

[PeterB]

21 hours ago, theplasticsurgeon said:

I thought that the forward section of the belly tank was exchangable.  One day an aircraft has cannons - the next not.

That is what I think too, but I am not sure just how often they were used - I did not want to put cannon on until I was pretty sure that the one I am modelling did actually have them. Anyway I have changed my mind again as I have now realised I would have to add bulges to the tank where the breeches are, complete with gas vents, and I don't think I could manage that properly now the kit is assembled as it would be hard to get in to sand etc. As you thought the canopy and winscreen from the old kit fits perfectly and is a lot better.

 

Cheers

 

Pete

Edited January 11, 2021 by PeterB

[PeterB]

Normally, when building kits I leave things like the wheel doors and pylons off until the end, but as I have mentioned in recent build threads, I find that it is best to get as much as possible glued on before spraying with the AK Interactive Xtreme Metal paint, as it is very difficult to touch up afterwards. So everything is now on the Lightning except the main wheels and doors, the missiles and the pitot tube.

I have also found that although it does take masking tape without serious problems if left to harden for a few days, it is probably best to paint things like anti glare panels, and in this case the white part of the spine before spraying, so they are painted and all masked up. Now I just need my other half to not be in the kitchen baking or whatever so that I can spray under the extractor fan. Not today by the look of it!. I have found that when using this paint for a "Silver" finish it is best to work in as much natural light as possible as so far every time I have sprayed I end up having to respray bits that were not covered properly, usually under the wings for some reason, perhaps because I spray that whilst holding the kit by the tail, and then do the upper surfaces with it standing on a box - may have to change my technique!

 

Cheers

 

Pete

[PeterB]

First coat of aluminium paint on and not too bad - I will have to do another coat as I have missed a bit!

That was the easy bit - adding a few panels in various other shades will be a bit slower as I have found it best to leave the paint to harden for about a week before applying masking tape. Still, there is no rush.

 

Pete

[PeterB]

Second and final coat on, and masking removed.

I will leave it a couple more days to harden properly then put on a coat of varnish to protect it. After that I will mask and paint the nose, exhaust and various panels. This is going to take a while.

 

Pete