RB-57 F canopy

[CarLos]

I acquired the Mach 2 kit of the "long wing Canberra" but it came without canopy. No problem at all as we're talking about Mach 2 "transparencies", but will the Falcon replacement intended for the Italeri B-57B be appropriate? And does it fit well the Mach 2 kit?

 

Plan B is to carve a mold and vacuform one, but that Falcon set is interesting for other subjects.

 

Thanks in advance!

Carlos

[Lusitanian]

Canopy was identical on all American B-57B and derivative versions.

[CarLos]

3 hours ago, Lusitanian said:

Canopy was identical on all American B-57B and derivative versions.

 

Obrigado!

 

[Hook]

I have just checked, and the Italeri canopy matches the Mach 2 kit. 

 

Cheers,

 

Andre

[CarLos]

2 hours ago, Hook said:

I have just checked, and the Italeri canopy matches the Mach 2 kit. 

 

Cheers,

 

Andre

Thank you Andre!

[canberra kid]

Italeri transparencies.

 

John

 

[CarLos]

Thanks John, and congratulations for the great model!

[Thomas Bell]

Sorry I'm late here, but I've written one book and several magazine pieces on the B-57. I spent two days in NASA's hangar In Houston for an Aircraft Monthly article on the WB-57F. While I was there, they were changing the stock main landing gear for F-15 gear and wheels. That left only the nose gear, forward fuselage and canopy as the only original equipment. Also, oddly. most of the cockpit is stock.

[canberra kid]

2 hours ago, Thomas Bell said:

Sorry I'm late here, but I've written one book and several magazine pieces on the B-57. I spent two days in NASA's hangar In Houston for an Aircraft Monthly article on the WB-57F. While I was there, they were changing the stock main landing gear for F-15 gear and wheels. That left only the nose gear, forward fuselage and canopy as the only original equipment. Also, oddly. most of the cockpit is stock.

The cockpit isn't quite stock, new ACES II ejection seats, Glass cockpit, new GPS and Autopilot. From frame one back to the tip of the tail the fuselage is still very much Canberra, the tail plains are modified but still Canberra, the fin is all new as are the wings. Unlike the D model the F retains the 'bomb bay' roof though all the associated plumbing has been removed. The RB./WB.57F though is not a Canberra in the legal seance, it is a General Dynamics RB./WB.57F the percentage on new GD parts is grater than the Martin parts. 

 

John   

[Thomas Bell]

6 minutes ago, canberra kid said:

The cockpit isn't quite stock, new ACES II ejection seats, Glass cockpit, new GPS and Autopilot. From frame one back to the tip of the tail the fuselage is still very much Canberra, the tail plains are modified but still Canberra, the fin is all new as are the wings. Unlike the D model the F retains the 'bomb bay' roof though all the associated plumbing has been removed. The RB./WB.57F though is not a Canberra in the legal seance, it is a General Dynamics RB./WB.57F the percentage on new GD parts is grater than the Martin parts. 

 

John   

You are, of course, correct on all counts. That's what I get for relying on my memory, which is faulty even in the short term, and my visit to NASA that particular time was in 2007. At that time,, the a/c still had the Stencil seats and the panel still had tge original steam gages. I have a disk here with tons of detail shots my photographer took on that trip. I remember they had several of the bomb bay payload pallets lying around the hangar, and was told the contractors had to design their instruments around those pallets. The F-15 wheels are quite distinctive. Did your kit include them?

Another tiny detail are the little wooden blocks under the wingtips, which tell the ground crew if the aircrew dragged a wing on the ground. I was also told that the guys would occasionally stuff grass under the wood as a joke on the last person to fly the beast.

[canberra kid]

32 minutes ago, Thomas Bell said:

You are, of course, correct on all counts. That's what I get for relying on my memory, which is faulty even in the short term, and my visit to NASA that particular time was in 2007. At that time,, the a/c still had the Stencil seats and the panel still had tge original steam gages. I have a disk here with tons of detail shots my photographer took on that trip. I remember they had several of the bomb bay payload pallets lying around the hangar, and was told the contractors had to design their instruments around those pallets. The F-15 wheels are quite distinctive. Did your kit include them?

Another tiny detail are the little wooden blocks under the wingtips, which tell the ground crew if the aircrew dragged a wing on the ground. I was also told that the guys would occasionally stuff grass under the wood as a joke on the last person to fly the beast.

Thomas, The kit owes a lot to the Italeri kit, which is a big shame as it's possibly the worst place to start! Not only does it not have the F.15 wheels, but it has the undersize Italeri ones. The seats are wrong being the original B.57A/B Mechanics Inc. seat which is OK if you want to build the prototype F but all others up to this latest NASA mod should have ESCIPAC seats. But having said that it's the only show in town, so what can you do! The NASA F's have had a lot of thought put into optimising all available space for science, plus the addition of not only standard wing pods but also the ex TR.1/U.2 super pods which look very spectacular! 

 

John       

[Thomas Bell]

14 minutes ago, canberra kid said:

Thomas, The kit owes a lot to the Italeri kit, which is a big shame as it's possibly the worst place to start! Not only does it not have the F.15 wheels, but it has the undersize Italeri ones. The seats are wrong being the original B.57A/B Mechanics Inc. seat which is OK if you want to build the prototype F but all others up to this latest NASA mod should have ESCIPAC seats. But having said that it's the only show in town, so what can you do! The NASA F's have had a lot of thought put into optimising all available space for science, plus the addition of not only standard wing pods but also the ex TR.1/U.2 super pods which look very spectacular! 

 

John       

I agree on the Italeri kit. I built it when it first appeared in the '80s and had been looking forward to it. Besides the errors you mention, it was very basic IIRC. Still, your model looks great.

Tom

[canberra kid]

The kit was/is a big disappointment, from the forward transport joint back the kit is a mess, except the tail plains. The cockpit is based on the B.57E, that's not even an option in the kit! 

The Mack2 RB.57F shares all these errors. 

John

[Thomas Bell]

I recall the Italeri kit being based on the B-57C trainer variant, which had dual controls, unlike the the B model. Did the E have a stick and throttle in the rear cockpit?

BTW, I was able to locate the DVD my photographer compiled on our assignment at NASA in 2007. It is extremely detailed, since the two birds were being refurbished at that time, giving us access to innards that otherwise would have been inaccessible.

I no longer have any use for this disk, so if anyone wants it, send me a note. My PC has gone u/s so I have to mail the DVD, which is no problem.

I also remembered my old pal Dan Swint, fighter pilot and then chief of aircraft ops at NASA-Houston, telling me they were going to refurbish a third WB-57F from the desert boneyard, where it had lain for almost 40 years. It sounded outlandish to me, but by golly they did it, and now there's talk of a fourth airframe being resurrected.

The WB's are only about 10,000 ft. lower in max altitude then the ER-1/U-2, but can carry a considerably larger payload. Also, there's a back seat for the systems operator. So the WB's are very popular with universities and other paying customers doing high-altitude research and systens testing.

I'd also forgotten about a later expose I'd written about how the WB was flying military missions in Afghanistan under the cover story of "searching for natural resources." NASA is a civilian-only agency, so they weren't happy with me blowing the whistle on them.

Edited September 27, 2022 by Thomas Bell

[canberra kid]

1 hour ago, Thomas Bell said:

I recall the Italeri kit being based on the B-57C trainer variant, which had dual controls, unlike the the B model. Did the E have a stick and throttle in the rear cockpit?

BTW, I was able to locate the DVD my photographer compiled on our assignment at NASA in 2007. It is extremely detailed, since the two birds were being refurbished at that time, giving us access to innards that otherwise would have been inaccessible.

I no longer have any use for this disk, so if anyone wants it, send me a note. My PC has gone u/s so I have to mail the DVD, which is no problem.

I also remembered my old pal Dan Swint, fighter pilot and then chief of aircraft ops at NASA-Houston, telling me they were going to refurbish a third WB-57F from the desert boneyard, where it had lain for almost 40 years. It sounded outlandish to me, but by golly they did it, and now there's talk of a fourth airframe being resurrected.

The WB's are only about 10,000 ft. lower in max altitude then the ER-1/U-2, but can carry a considerably larger payload. Also, there's a back seat for the systems operator. So the WB's are very popular with universities and other paying customers doing high-altitude research and systens testing.

I'd also forgotten about a later expose I'd written about how the WB was flying military missions in Afghanistan under the cover story of "searching for natural resources." NASA is a civilian-only agency, so they weren't happy with me blowing the whistle on them.

@Thomas Bell First off yes please to the DVD! PM inbound. The E was very much a Jack of all trades, designed as a Target Tug Martin had the good sense to keep it fully combat capable including Nuclear, it was also able to be re configured to a two stick trainer with little work, so yes, the E could have two sticks and duplicated controls. The retention of the weapons capability was to pay dividends when many were re worked to replace combat losses in SEA.  In the kit the rear cockpit instrument panel is based on the B.57E the front is generic, but as with all Canberra's be they British or American, they were in service for so long that unless you pick one type at one time the best you can do is be generic. The NASA F's are indeed a fantastic research tool, for academia and government, The work in Afghanistan from what I understand was working as a Communications relay platform in support of ground operations. I wasn't aware of the plans for a fourth F being put back in service, but it makes a lot of seance! One thing is for sure, we need a family of accurate Canberra's!   

 

John       

[Thomas Bell]

John:

Please forgive me for not replying immediately to your "yes" on that disk of photos. Please PM me with a mailing address.

You'd last post jarred my memory on a lot of B-57/Canberra issues. For example, I wasn't aware until that NASA visit that the canopy on the WB-57F is the stock xanopy for the B and E models, and the thing weighs 800 lbs.

I also wasn't aware at the time that the auxiliary turbojet engines had been removed.

Though I now livev in NYC, Houston is my home town. I spent a lot of time at Ellington Field, where NASA Aircraft Ops is located. NASA is at one end of the field while an Air National Guard interceptor squadron was at the other end. While I couldn't beg a ride from NASA in those post-Challenger days, the Air Guard were quite generous in providing me rides in their F-4 Phantoms. (I believe my thumbnail ophito with the poo-poo-eating grin was shot after one of those flights.)

I spent a lot of time watching NASA's oddball fleet come and go, including the bizarre Super Guppy and the GS II Shuttle simulator, along with their squadron of T-38s the astronauts still use for hacks..When I first saw the WB-57Fs, they had all four engines and were in natural metal finish. They still bore the USAF's rather disingenuous tail stripe in blue and yellow with the 'Weather" designation painted on it.

But I blather on. Let me dig out that disk for you.

TOM

[Britman]

Try a Tomcat canopy!

 

Keith 

[Thomas Bell]

Just remembered something about the B-57E. When I was researching my Osprey book on the B-57 in Vietnam, I was rather stunned to find that I could get almost no official documents on the super secret program that flew B-57E's under the call sign/code name  "Patricia Lynn." What could these ostensible recce/ELINT-modified birds have done that bore top secret classification after fifty-plus years?

While I spoke with dozens of air and ground crew in the B-57B/C, who were very eager to finally have their story told, I could not find a single Patricia Lynn crewman.

One thing virtually every one of the  B-57B pilots told me: The B-57E model was "the Cadillac" of the entire American Canberra series. High praise indeed for what was designed as a lowly target tug. Now, the Patricia Lynn birds were painted a sinister matt black, and in addition to a very large nose radome -- the B-57B was strictly no-frills, lacking both radar and air refueling capability -- the whole E-model jet was a virtual antenna farm.

TOM

[canberra kid]

3 hours ago, Thomas Bell said:

Just remembered something about the B-57E. When I was researching my Osprey book on the B-57 in Vietnam, I was rather stunned to find that I could get almost no official documents on the super secret program that flew B-57E's under the call sign/code name  "Patricia Lynn." What could these ostensible recce/ELINT-modified birds have done that bore top secret classification after fifty-plus years?

While I spoke with dozens of air and ground crew in the B-57B/C, who were very eager to finally have their story told, I could not find a single Patricia Lynn crewman.

One thing virtually every one of the  B-57B pilots told me: The B-57E model was "the Cadillac" of the entire American Canberra series. High praise indeed for what was designed as a lowly target tug. Now, the Patricia Lynn birds were painted a sinister matt black, and in addition to a very large nose radome -- the B-57B was strictly no-frills, lacking both radar and air refueling capability -- the whole E-model jet was a virtual antenna farm.

TOM

Hi Tom,

Martin through everything at the B.57E, though its primary role was target tug, the clever chaps in Baltimore decided that aside from the TT equipment the E model should also remain fully combat capable with a full nuclear capability, but it didn't end there, the E could also be converted in a short time to a full trainer, the same as the B,57C but better! 

AS for the RB.57E, Patrica Lynn later re named in line with the other spooks Rivet Lock/Rivet Lass, not to be confused by the much simpler RB.57E's operated by the ANG. 

I really can't think why she would still be classified, perhaps they just haven't got around to de classifying it yet? At the time the sensor suite was defiantly worthy of secrecy of the highest order. As you probably know the sensors were pre loaded on to modified bomb bay doors at GD's plant at Fort Worth and shipped out to the far east to be installed on the aircraft in theatre, this was a clever idea as it meant modifications and changes of specification could be tested and test flown before being deployed. The sensors were from nose to tail,

36" KA-1 Oblique camera

AN/APR-25 Antenna

AN/APR-26

KY-28

APN-102 radar

It was also capable of using wing mounted ECM pods, also wing mounted IR pods.

The bomb bay pallets could carry an array of sensors.

6" KA-2 or 36" KA-1 vertical camera,

a Kin-Tel TV camera that fed live images to a VR-7 real time viewer 

KA-79A or KA-82A panoramic camera,

36" KA-1 oblique camera,

RS-10/10A Scanner,

all these were used in various combinations.

John

The wings contained Chaff dispensers. 

    

[Britman]

I should explain myself regarding the F14 canopy suggested earlier. Around 1980 I wanted a B57 and so I began a search for bits and bobs to make it happen. I became aware that a spare Airfix Tomcat canopy was almost a perfect fit with a fairing scratched at the back. Having scratched a new nose full of radar and other sensors I was very happy my B57G Patricia Lynn if I recall.

Oh and if you wanted a Tornado F2, a Mig 25 radome helps immensely!

 

Keith