Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I just finished the second wing, left side. Same as the other, first glued 3 pieces of wing together, let them set up a bit then

pulled the top up until the kerf closed. I then added glue and tape. I also added some slivers of card stock to some gaps

near the rear flaps that wouldn't close, same as other wing. When it was set up I checked it with the same template flipped

over with the correct angle of 175 degrees written on this side, NOT 5 degrees! LOL. Now to putty it up.---John

RQbGJHC.jpg

HXHNIHY.jpg

xCYNCY8.jpg

 

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

Wings done and sanded. They measure to about 1/2 mm with each other, angle on them looks good.---John

bYBSPxV.jpg

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

There's been big discussions about the dihedral of the revell kit, but I don't know if they did get right or very wrong. In flight when under load there is obvious dihedral but on the ground and fully fueled the dihedral doesn't seem too apparent as in these two photos:

Lancaster at rest

 

 

Lancaster at rest

 The revell kit is going to be my next build as a post war ASR3. Model on boys

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, that's a lot flatter than I was told. Maybe Revell isn't that far off. I have the engine added to the nacelle but not closed up yet.---John

bSz0TZh.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

There were I'm sure some comparison images somewhere showing the Revell  Airfix and Hasegawa kit dihedral.   Looking good so far .

Great work 

Chris 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 30/01/2021 at 19:31, Ruskin Air Services said:

There's been big discussions about the dihedral of the revell kit, but I don't know if they did get right or very wrong. In flight when under load there is obvious dihedral but on the ground and fully fueled the dihedral doesn't seem too apparent as in these two photos:

Lancaster at rest

 

 

Lancaster at rest

 The revell kit is going to be my next build as a post war ASR3. Model on boys

 

Having looked into this recently (to help decide whether to go for the Revell or Airfix kits!) I'm of the view that the apparent difference on the ground is due to the angle of viewing compared to most in flight photos.  Seen directly head on, the dihedral is clearly visible on the ground, but few pics are actually at that angle.  In the pics above, the plan view taper of the wing combined with the angle of the aircraft is creating an optical illusion and appearing to straighten out the dihedral.  Comparing this view below (which is almost looking directly along the axis of the fuselage) to inflight images, there doesn't appear to be that much, if any, difference:

Avro_Lancaster_bombers_nearing_completio

This is actually AV Roe's own production line as opposed to one of the other builders & from the Lancaster wikipedia page.  There's also a more head on shot of S for Sugar at the RAF museum here:

https://www.rafmuseum.org.uk/cosford/whats-going-on/news/chelsea-fc-adopts-raf-museum-lancaster-bomber/

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bigbadbadge said:

There were I'm sure some comparison images somewhere showing the Revell  Airfix and Hasegawa kit dihedral.   Looking good so far .

Great work 

Chris 

Probably this review article of the Airfix kit: http://www.hyperscale.com/2013/reviews/kits/airfixa09007reviewmd_1.htm

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
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...