Jump to content

1/72 Handley Page Victor K.2 (Airfix A12009)


Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, RaceAddict said:

 

Just free-handed it. I don't have one of those overpriced (IMHO) template things. I started with the black primer, then turned the air pressure way down, mixed up some Light Aircraft Grey, thinner than normal... approx. 2-1 thinner/paint ratio (think skim milk) - and started laying it down. I did a few passes really close to the surface for fine lines, and then a last pass further away for a more cloudy effect. Once that was done I started "filling in" each panel with more conventionally mixed layers of paint.

Thanks - the effect looks really good - the hard work paid off!

 

Al.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, David H said:

I have two ideas as to why: First, obviously it makes integration of a wingtip navigation light easier, as some have said. Secondly, i think the B. Mk. 2 actually had its wingtips and ailerons shortened as part of the tanker conversion process. There was also some re-rigging of the ailerons to reduce flexing loads on the outer wings. I remember this because i have the old SCALE MODELS issue with the article on converting the Matchbox kit. I have the B. Mk 2 in my stash and my guess would be it might have slightly different clear wingtips and ailerons.

 

I don't claim to be an expert on the Victor, but those aspects stuck in my head.

The wing tips were cropped by 18 inches each side as part of the K. 2 conversion programme and the ailerons were uprigged by 2 degrees to reduce wing bending moments.  After the Falklands War the ailerons were uprigged by an additional 2 degrees to further eke out available fatigue life.

 

The Airfix Victor K. 2 kit has both the original B. 2 wingtips and the cropped K. 2 tips to allow for the SR. 2 and K. 2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looked at the airframe this morning before leaving for work and noticed an error in what the Airfix diagrams show vs what I'm seeing in reference shots. On the instructions the LAG goes all the way to the end of the empennage, following a "line" under the airbrakes. However in the reference photos I have from ODS (from the dstorm.eu site) show the LAG stops just ahead of the tail strike guard (I'm assuming what the little bump back there is).

 

I'm guessing the instructions are based on the current paint scheme applied at the museum, as the photos I've seen that correspond to the instructions are relatively modern pics of a very clean and glossy airframe, while the ODS photos show a dirty, much more matte paint.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, stever219 said:

The wing tips were cropped by 18 inches each side as part of the K. 2 conversion programme and the ailerons were uprigged by 2 degrees to reduce wing bending moments.  After the Falklands War the ailerons were uprigged by an additional 2 degrees to further eke out available fatigue life.

 

The Airfix Victor K. 2 kit has both the original B. 2 wingtips and the cropped K. 2 tips to allow for the SR. 2 and K. 2.

I seem to remember my Victors' aerilons sit slightly up, I think Airfix may have just copied what they scanned with those

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Moggy said:

Interesting. What's uprigged? 🤔

 

TIA 🙃

 

Cheers, Moggy (saddled with two Matchbox Victors plus a lot of extras)

All flight control surfaces should be rigged. Usually they will be rigged so that they are all in a neutral position, meaning the aircraft flies straight and level, and so that you will get full deflection of the control surface if needed. A bit like tracking on a car. 

 

The uprigging means that the ailerons would've been rigged at an upwards angle. So instead of being flush with the rest of the when the aircraft is straight and level they would be angled upwards. Which would've prolonged fatigue life. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Should have just put the things back into production at that point instead of getting every last minute of life out of them 😂 don't care how unrealistic that is, just think about how awesome it would be to still have Victors flying around!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Adam Poultney said:

Should have just put the things back into production at that point instead of getting every last minute of life out of them 😂 don't care how unrealistic that is, just think about how awesome it would be to still have Victors flying around!

 

Evidently only Russia digs out old tooling and jigs to resurrect old airframes: https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/43852/russias-first-new-production-tu-160-blackjack-in-decades-makes-its-maiden-flight

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, milli21 said:

All flight control surfaces should be rigged. Usually they will be rigged so that they are all in a neutral position, meaning the aircraft flies straight and level, and so that you will get full deflection of the control surface if needed. A bit like tracking on a car. 

 

The uprigging means that the ailerons would've been rigged at an upwards angle. So instead of being flush with the rest of the when the aircraft is straight and level they would be angled upwards. Which would've prolonged fatigue life. 


Someone has to ask, may as well be me! Why does having the ailerons slightly upwards prolong fatigue life? And once the Victor was flying wouldn’t they just be trimmed level anyway unless climbing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Lord Riot said:


Someone has to ask, may as well be me! Why does having the ailerons slightly upwards prolong fatigue life? And once the Victor was flying wouldn’t they just be trimmed level anyway unless climbing?

Ooooo yey I get to explain something with things I've learnt at uni, Aerospace Engineering degree is being useful! Give me a few minutes 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hand written and not the best images but here's a basic explanation why. you can just ignore the approximations for where CoL is idk why I included those

c5f9d2e9839bc102b49ee1ea6a8a4aec.jpg

ea0941fcb682af97e80ff57f48f32de7.jpg

Also added about the shorter wings

 

 

 

Edited by Adam Poultney
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Lord Riot said:

Someone has to ask, may as well be me! Why does having the ailerons slightly upwards prolong fatigue life?

Ailerons generate a roll moment by differential deflection - deflect one down it increases the lift, deflect the other up it reduces the lift.

If you deflect both ailerons up this reduces the amount of lift on the outboard section of both wings, so no roll moment. To compensate for the loss of lift the inner sections of the wing will have to generate more lift.

You're therefore moving the lifting forces inboard, increasing the wing loading inboard and reducing it outboard, which will reduce the bending moment on the wing spars.

Reduce the bending moment on the spars and you'll increase their fatigue life.

 

1 hour ago, Lord Riot said:

And once the Victor was flying wouldn’t they just be trimmed level anyway unless climbing?

Rigging is in effect a fixed trim applied to controls on the ground.

In flight trimming is an adjustment to the control surfaces that enables the pilot to maintain a specific flight attitude with the joke/wheel/joystick/pedals in the neutral position. With the ailerons this will generally be wings level, so if there is some force causing the aircraft to bank one way, eg more fuel on one side than the other, the pilot can adjust the aileron trim to bring the aircraft back level. 

 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 2
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...