Westland Wasp HAS 1: 'Ambuscade Flight: XT778'

[Serkan Sen]

Very impressive start for 2024 Tony! I am also in big trouble printing the clear parts. Although the Blackbird and Oxcart clear parts are significantly smaller than Wasp I wasn't able to get clear parts printed nicely. I have used several clear 3d resin products without having an acceptable success.After printing the parts I soaked the parts in Future or clear epoxy resin, sprayed parts over with 2K clear coat, sanded the surfaces with 3k to 12k grit polishing papers, polished them with Tamiya polishing compounds. Each method has some pros and cons but none of them was perfect.

My next try will be to print a canopy with proper base for casting, polish it as much as possible, use it as silicone mold master and cast the clear parts with PU or epoxy clear resin. Unfortunately for my project vacuform seems not to be an option.

Serkan

[bigbadbadge]

Crikey, I have missed seeing those fantastic renderings, great work as usual Tony, it sll looks superb .

Happy belated New year to you and yours and I do hope you're okay too.

Chris

[giemme]

Happy New Year to you, Tony! 🥳

 

Amazing ypdate, as usual  

 

Ciao 

[keefr22]

Marvellous stuff to kick off 2024 Tony, that CAD artwork would look good on any wall....!! 

 

Keith

[hendie]

HNY Tony.  Brilliant stuff (as always).  I can only gaze in awe at the level of skills on display here.   

 

If you ever get around to doing a 1/24 Wessex, just make sure it's an HC2....    

[TheBaron]

Morning all <flexes knees>

I'm pleased to say that recent efforts have seen (barring the AS.12 installation) the exterior designs for the Wasp now completed.

 

Answerphone messages first though as usual:

On 13/01/2024 at 16:47, perdu said:

I like the idea of slotting the kick panel windows into a fixed location, I suppose then you might be able to add the fixing screws afterwards, the damned things are making me wake up with another yet approach to try next...

One of those parts that looks superficially easy until you get your hands on it isn't it Bill? There's a nice view of the panel in isolation here:

https://www.ebay.ie/itm/305368614587

As it's all a single and rather thin unit I've had to include the strip around the transparency in the vacform design so if the screws on it look naff, I'll file them of and reinstate manually.

 

Your miniature of it  looks excellent btw!

On 13/01/2024 at 18:09, Serkan Sen said:

Although the Blackbird and Oxcart clear parts are significantly smaller than Wasp I wasn't able to get clear parts printed nicely. I have used several clear 3d resin products without having an acceptable success.After printing the parts I soaked the parts in Future or clear epoxy resin, sprayed parts over with 2K clear coat, sanded the surfaces with 3k to 12k grit polishing papers, polished them with Tamiya polishing compounds. Each method has some pros and cons but none of them was perfect.

In terms of the amount of effort required to achieve an acceptable appearance it's still a frustrating process isn't it Serkan? 3D printing is kind of 90% of the way there for transparencies at present but there remains that final gulf which it is incapable of bridging for the kind of work we do. 

 

On 13/01/2024 at 19:49, bigbadbadge said:

Crikey, I have missed seeing those fantastic renderings, great work as usual Tony, it sll looks superb .

Ta Chris. Things seemed to spend ages recently stuck at that frustrating point of finding lots of exterior details I'd overlooked/ignored until now but thankfully the items have been ticked off the list in recent weeks.

On 14/01/2024 at 07:25, giemme said:

Amazing ypdate, as usual

I like that typo Giorgio and may modify it as a 'yepdate' to indicate when reporting on something going well!

On 14/01/2024 at 07:59, keefr22 said:

that CAD artwork would look good on any wall

Sending the stencil to Banksy as we speak Keith....

On 14/01/2024 at 14:44, hendie said:

If you ever get around to doing a 1/24 Wessex, just make sure it's an HC2

Help!

 

Still the cockpit interiors and APX sight to do of course but what follows is a visual summary showing the final stages of detailing the exterior of the vehicle.

 

With the roof and nose areas done, the remaining areas to be filled in were the sides and undersides of the cabin section that sits between the engine deck and nose unit. In such cases it always makes sense to handle all the symmetrical details first on one side -  as I've done here with the starboard features - so that once done, they can be mirrored across to port for any asymmetric additions to be made:

Tucked away on the mid section just forward of the jury beam on either side are the diminutive and slightly odd-shaped navigation lights:

In contrast to the large areas of transparency (where it didn't work), such small transparent details as these will be a good candidate for printing using AC's High Clear resin, due the small surface area requiring polishing up. With those small lights done, it was then on to the downward identification and larger landing light on the underside beneath the nose:

Yes there are lightbulbs in there under the lenses - these should just print from AC HC at 1/24, though I'm less sure about 1/32 but will try anyway. In homage to the classic Airfix method of mounting undercarriage legs, I added a substantial mounting pivot for the landing light so it can swivel downward like the real thing:

Directly in front of the fairing for those lights sit these two rectangular transparent amber light-like fittings:

As one of a series of such puzzles on this build, I had to scour the maintenance manuals in order cross-reference parts numbers from drawings to  - I think (though open to correction as always) - discover their purpose:

The honeycombed nature of these RADALT fairings should also lend themselves to reproduction with Anycubic's High Clear stuff.

 

A couple of rendered views to summarize progress at that point:

 

There is quite a lot of detail on the central section of the underside that is not straightforward to discern due to the maintenance drawings being largely oblique views, and with the same issue overlaid by wide-angle lens distortions in photographic references. However, in being blessed with both @bootneck's and @Anthony in NZs source imagery for this region, I've managed to minimize inaccuracies of shape and disposition as far as possible from such material. 

 

As the torpedo/bomb carriers themselves provided a valuable central datum to begin work, I used their position to rough out as always a sketch map of the required topography:

In examining the various images I had of the torpedo release gear, many of them were close-ups without surrounding context to identify what side and angle they were taken from, whilst more distant contextual airframe shots didn't show enough detail (either due to distance or shadow) to act as confirmation. For a period then I was confused that I was looking at two different variants of the release gear as they looked so different. The PN's however were clear (without reference to any subsequent Mods) that in the case of both the Mk.44 & 46 torpedo layout, the EM/EF 100/1000 carrier was preferred method for upsetting submarines:

Interestingly enough, the Weapon Stations loadout diagram preceding this makes it clear that aside from the capability to carry Mk.44s on both sides,  a sole Mk.46 was only carried to Stbd.

 

By cross-referencing source images I was able to confirm that the contradiction in features on closeups of this gear resulted purely from their being a different arrangement of details on either side of each carrier, a fact finally nailed down by locating identical ID plates on two different sets of images:

The visual giveaway on more distant shots are the lighter features which stand out (once you understand the close-up details); the prominent silver cylindrical fuzing unit to the rear of the stbd side of the carrier, with the long rectangular ID plate on the port side indicating that aspect.

Stbd:

Port:

It then occurred to me that the torpedoes themselves make for an additionally useful scale/position reference for surrounding features, so I spent a week down the torpedo rabbit hole as it were, firstly on the Mk.44:

For print purposes this was divided into warhead/fuel-tank/afterbody/propellors (x2) and parachute bag sections.  A centering channel down the middle for brass rod helps everything align along the longitudinal axis during assembly, with a similar side channel to line the sections up laterally:

 

This process was then repeated for the Mk.46. Whilst their diameters are the same, the 46 is longer than the 44, with different propellor, parachute and guidance features, as well as different port/surface features:

At the rear, the prominent battery unit and fire control sockets are visually similar, and, as far as the RN/RNZN are concerned, the same Type-C suspension bands were used for both variants:

Again on the Mk.46, the same kind of alignment channels are used for assembling the parts correctly. In terms of fixing the torpedo(es) to their carrier, the release hook of the real thing obviously wouldn't be strong enough in itself to suspend either torpedo body so in order to make mounting them in place as strong yet unobtrusive as possible, a brass pin is used to pierce both carrier and torpedo in a manner that should be largely invisible to the eye when assembled.

The sway braces themselves will also be glued into place along the fuel tank for added strength.

A Mk.44 and carrier combined:

 

 

Both variants compared:

 

 

With those prominent items as landmarks, I could then start filling in the various small fittings and fuzing units &etc. underneath the cabin:

 

 

I must confess to a considerable amount of eyestrain in having to redraft several of those features until they resembled more closely what photography revealed.

 

I call this feature a 'step' only because it resembles one but as it's only present to port, that can't be it's real function:

In the realms of wider speculation I briefly considered that this might be a parachute mounting for the diagonally-slung WE.177, but can't see that as the case:

Up front beside the landing light fairing is the 'coffee-can' shape of the I-band transponder, with the pitot inboard of it:

The front diagonal brace of that transponder seems to have an odd 'kink' in it:

I thought my images just showed the same damaged one but this seems present on multiple airframes. I wonder is that so that it follows the contour of the airframe when the transponder is in stowed position?

With carriers fitted:

 - and a Mk.44 along for the ride:

 

 

 

Renders to finish:

 

 

 

I need to stop staring at rivets for a while. Am currently addicted to Le Bureau des légendes after getting withdrawl symptoms from Slow Horses....

 Hoping this finds you well,

Tony

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited February 2 by TheBaron
Apparently has the spelling ability of a five year old

[perdu]

A way better speller than me then boyo.

 

Fabulously updated again, cheers maestro

[Pete in Lincs]

Superb update once again, Tony. And now we even have weapons.

This will certainly enhance the play value at bathtime and ensure that you can sell even more!

Rivet strain of the eyeballs. Sounds serious. I think gazing at one of your sunsets should prove relaxing. 

Take care and stay warm. Pete

[giemme]

Definitely another yep-date

 

Amazing 3D job, once more  

 

Ciao 

[Navy Bird]

Awesome stuff. And a great shout-out to Eno and Byrne. I have a first edition CD of that record, including the song where the vocals are provided by Algerian Muslims chanting the Koran. I understand why that selection was removed from later editions, but it is a really cool tune nonetheless.

 

Cheers,

Bill

[bigbadbadge]

Great update Tony and more fantastic renderings,  I am not surprised you have some eye strain, crikey amazing details.

Great work

Chris

[heloman1]

Looking good, very good...

 

Colin the Wessex nut.

[hendie]

I can only reiterate wot my colleagues stated above.  How much longer before it rises from the primeval goo?

[Brandy]

Not much else to add.

More stunning CADery, plus a lesson in watery weapons.

 

The thread itself is enlightening. The CAD work even more so.

 

Have a great weekend Tony!

 

Ian

 

[Terry1954]

Another awesome update. Those CAD drawings are a source of reference for other Wasp modellers in their own right. Fantastic stuff. Best detail I've yet seen on Mk 44 and Mk 46 Torpedoes too.

 

As for the pic of that wee Wasp carrying a WE-177. I do wonder whether the poor aircrew (probably just the pilot with all that other weight) really stood a chance if they had to "drop" one of those for real. Can hardly imagine a Wasp exiting the area fast 😓

 

Terry

[Chewbacca]

Superb, simply superb.

 

1 hour ago, Terry1954 said:

As for the pic of that wee Wasp carrying a WE-177. I do wonder whether the poor aircrew (probably just the pilot with all that other weight) really stood a chance if they had to "drop" one of those for real. Can hardly imagine a Wasp exiting the area fast 😓

 

Terry

 

I've often wondered about that.  When we flew with that 600lb bomb in the Lynx, thee was a very clear two man rule such that one person couldn't drop it.  There was a Bomb Release Safety Lock buried deep beside the outside of the pilot's seat which I couldn't reach, and main weapon release on the lower left hand side of the radar which the Pilot couldn't reach.  Both had to be activated to release the weapon.  Yet I am sure that talking to some of the Wasp pilots on 829 Sqn when we were dual Lynx/Wasp, they always used to say that carrying the bomb resulted in about 8 minutes endurance with no Aircrewman. 

 

However, I don't quite get how those numbers stack up.  The Wasp was ~1566 kg unladen and 2495 Max All Up Mass.  The weapon was 272 kg.  So aircraft + bomb + Pilot (average weight for A/C weight calculations is 93 kg per aircrew including flying kit) is 1931 kg, leaving 564 kg for the Aircrewman, fuel and anything else they may have added on.  Now I've not been able to work out how much fuel a Wasp could carry nor what its fuel flow rate was, but it cruised at 90 kts and had a range of ~260 nm which equates to about 2 hrs 50 min.  A Lynx carried 802 kg of fuel when pressure refuelled of which 702 was usable in normal operations, and burned fuel at anything from 250 to 275 kg per hour depending upon a variety of factors.  If one assumes that the Nimbus engine in the Wasp burned fuel at roughly the same rate as a Gem in the Lynx, that would give ~125 kg per hr which multiplied by 2 hr 50 min would equate to roughly 360 kgs fuel so say 460 kg with a 100 kg reserve.  That means that by my calculations, a Wasp ought to be able to carry a 600 lb bomb, two crew and still have enough capacity for full fuel.

 

I must chat to one of my former Flight Commanders who flew Wasp before he transferred Lynx and see what his thoughts are. 

 

However, still not a job I would have fancied, even in a Lynx with our 150 kt getaway speed.  I was profoundly glad when that weapon was taken out of service  .

 

 

[Terry1954]

2 hours ago, Chewbacca said:

I've often wondered about that.  When we flew with that 600lb bomb in the Lynx, thee was a very clear two man rule such that one person couldn't drop it.  There was a Bomb Release Safety Lock buried deep beside the outside of the pilot's seat which I couldn't reach, and main weapon release on the lower left hand side of the radar which the Pilot couldn't reach.  Both had to be activated to release the weapon.  Yet I am sure that talking to some of the Wasp pilots on 829 Sqn when we were dual Lynx/Wasp, they always used to say that carrying the bomb resulted in about 8 minutes endurance with no Aircrewman. 

 

However, I don't quite get how those numbers stack up.  The Wasp was ~1566 kg unladen and 2495 Max All Up Mass.  The weapon was 272 kg.  So aircraft + bomb + Pilot (average weight for A/C weight calculations is 93 kg per aircrew including flying kit) is 1931 kg, leaving 564 kg for the Aircrewman, fuel and anything else they may have added on.  Now I've not been able to work out how much fuel a Wasp could carry nor what its fuel flow rate was, but it cruised at 90 kts and had a range of ~260 nm which equates to about 2 hrs 50 min.  A Lynx carried 802 kg of fuel when pressure refuelled of which 702 was usable in normal operations, and burned fuel at anything from 250 to 275 kg per hour depending upon a variety of factors.  If one assumes that the Nimbus engine in the Wasp burned fuel at roughly the same rate as a Gem in the Lynx, that would give ~125 kg per hr which multiplied by 2 hr 50 min would equate to roughly 360 kgs fuel so say 460 kg with a 100 kg reserve.  That means that by my calculations, a Wasp ought to be able to carry a 600 lb bomb, two crew and still have enough capacity for full fuel.

 

I must chat to one of my former Flight Commanders who flew Wasp before he transferred Lynx and see what his thoughts are. 

 

However, still not a job I would have fancied, even in a Lynx with our 150 kt getaway speed.  I was profoundly glad when that weapon was taken out of service 

 

Sobering reading Ralph. Much respect to you and your colleagues for the job you all did back in the day.

 

T.

[TheBaron]

1/6th of the way round the sun since the last update here and I'm shamelessly blaming interstellar debris as an excuse...

(This - interestingly enough - from an issue of Flight magazine published in the early 50s.)

 

Work on the Wasp has in fact been continuing in the background of the business of living in these times, so best to recount some of the key developments before what's happened and why get lost in the fog of the now.

 

Essentially I've been gradually working my way through the plethora of parts which amassed in CAD form over the past few months and which were long-overdue for translation into solid objects. Due to the combination of extreme thin-ness and compound curves on things like doors and so forth, this required a lot of troubleshooting with resin types and orientations in order to maximize part strength and avoid striated surfaces due to poor orientation of such curvatures in space. It also took a lot of customization of support types in VDT, which I have to say has proven itself a godsend for the variety of shapes involved here in terms of facility. Here are the final results of all these various print runs en masse:

And lest anyone gain a false impression that over time you ever get good enough for your efforts to succeed first time on more than a single part, this rarely rarely happens as the image below demonstrates in terms of the the level of failures required to iron out flaws and reach that point above:

The usual caveat applies to the following images in that they are shown freshly printed i.e., resin washed off but none of the print-support stumps sanded from surfaces.

 

The design of the rear wall of the cabin was revised in Fusion compared to the printed version shown here in previous updates, in that it now has the angled rear-window panels on either side of the central panel integrated into the one design:

It turned out to be feasible in the end to print these as one component and will, I think, prove a more accurate solution than trying to glue them on separately at the right angle during assembly:

All of that surface details remains present in the 1/32 version shown below as well, so my guesses about minimum feature size in the 1/24 version to survive scaling down seem to be holding up pretty consistently across the model so far:

Pretty much the same for the doors; both front:

 - and rear:

 - retaining equal levels of detail when scaled down to 1/32:

Door pillars too will look even nicer with the naviagtion lights installed later:

Too fragile to reproduce in 8k resin, the sliding windows for pilot/obervers had their frames printed using eSun Hard Tough resin:

Again the 1/32 version of these also survived the Alice in Wonderland treatment and printed as well. Amongst a number of other components requiring the black eSun resin for strength were the jury struts onto which the floation gear attaches as the front:

On the 1/24 version shown here you can see from the translucency down the sides just how thin the edges of that I-beam shape are. In this view below the translucency also betrays how thin the walls of the recess which the float gear struts fit into are as well - even after I added a small reinforcing panel inside of there on either side:

These features also reproduced at 1/32 quite pleasingly:

 - however the walls of the strut recesses were just so molecularly thin at 1/32 that it necessitated them being largly filled in as a compromise between being present but not causing the print to fail in those regions (as it had done in tests):

Driveshafts from main to reduction gearboxes were also done up in black stuff as they'll be helping to support and align the entire engine/gearbox asssembly later on:

The rear cabin framing at 1/24:

 - and at 1/32 both required the stronger resin to avoid breakage during kit assembly:

I wasn't sure if the door handles (on the right end) would work at 1/24 but they did:

More improbably however they also printed at 1/32 using the smallest feasible tree support I could devise in VDT:

Enormously pleased with how the nose parts came out in the 8k resin at both 1/32:

 - and 1/24:

Some residual striation around the drain holes (necessary to avoid suction issues during printing) on both to tidy up at the same time the holes are filled. Detailing along the top surfaces was everything I hoped it would be, despite my heavy handling during support removal resulting in some breakages along the cheek window guttering (though these are easy enough repaired with some tape and the UV laser):

Underside and RADALT enclosures:

The weapons loadout had some attention in the form of prints for the Mk44&46 torpedoes:

Mk.44 first - this performed nicely at both scales:

I wasn't worried about support structures for that annular feature at the rear on the 1/24 scale:

But VDT came through again in allowing for some very fine structures to support it at 1/32 scale without causing undue damage to the torpedo casing in the process:

I just noticedthere's still a revision to do there at 1/32 as you can see the supports for the fins themselves weren't strong enough.

The propeller assemblies of the '44 at the smaller of the two scales:

Mk.46 behaved itself equally well at both scales, with no features failing:

Parifcularly pleased with part definion on the props for both sets, 1/24 looked nice:

 - yet 1/32 turned out far less of a problem than I'd feared in terms of effective support processes:

The same story regarding all the fiddly detail on the carrier racks and sway braces which took so long to do up in CAD: in printed form there were no features missing or compromised at either sale (shown here at 1/24):

 

Suspension bands on the torpedo bodies also nice and crisply rendered:

Also added to the pile at this time were the landing light assemblies and transponders in both scale:

Fairing seen here in 1/24:

With no detail absent from the 1/32 version in relation to its larger cousin:

For reasons which as modellers I hope you'll understand, I couldn't resist doing a mockup of the Mk.46 torp at 1/32nd scale the other night, 'just to check' that the parts fitted together Ok:

 

 

 

Over the weekend I sat down and drew up a snag sheet for all the parts still needing to be designed in CAD:

The bulk of this as you can see involves the cabin & cockpit interiors, to whit I have the reference mosaics done up ready to start preliminary sketches for those areas:

Particular thanks need to go to @Ex-FAAWAFU, @Terry1954, @Anthony in NZ for imagery of the interiors which they've shared with me from their collections that will prove invaluable in the next phase, as well as all those positng stuff in the BM Walkaround for the Wasp.

 

Thanks for reading as always and hoping this finds all here in good form.

Tony

 

 

 

 

[Gondor44]

1 hour ago, TheBaron said:

 

 

That looks like an upside-down section of rollercoaster! So many Struts!

Gobsmackingly fantastic work though.

 

Gondor

[giemme]

This progress report was totally worth the wait!

 

Ciao

[perdu]

Somewhere between amazing, impossible and awe inspiring there is a plethora of Waspable resins.

 

Love the new update thanks Tony.

[Terry1954]

Definitely worth the wait Tony. Fantastic progress update, and all things in it are looking rather splendid.

 

It feels unfair to single out any one component as they are all such masterpieces in their own right, but I am particularly taken with the Torpedo carrier racks, complete with sway braces. Works of art!!!

 

Terry

[bigbadbadge]

It's Alive !!! It certainly is coming to life Tony, wow what an update.   Those parts look phenomenal,  the thinness of the I beams for example, a real joy to see the parts being printed. Great work

Chris

[geedubelyer]

Good gracious!

 

These models are set to be a benchmark in 3D creation. 

The detail is incredible.

 

Congratulations on your progress. This is all quite amazing to me.

[heloman1]

Exquisite cast parts, the torpedo looks like a piece of jewellery!

Looking at the render with the glazing added, will you be able to print that or will it be vacu-formed? I'm thinking roof and bulged rear doors.

 

Colin