Blackburn Roc Mk.I blueprints needed

[boom.boom]

I continued work on the Special Hobby 1/48 Blackburn Roc Mk.i and realized that the wing paneling was completely incorrect?
I would greatly appreciate it if someone could send me accurate and detailed technical drawings of the Blackburn Roc Mk.I! I know that Mushroom Model Publication printed the Skua/Roc publication and that they provided quality blueprints there even with riveting schemes... If anyone owns it and is willing to take pictures of the plans for me I would greatly appreciate it. Also any other accurate, relevant plans are fine with me...

[Ray_W]

Can I make some recommendations?

 

The MMP site does show samples of their Blackburn Roc plans that you could use:

 

http://www.mmpbooks.biz/assets/books_pdf/103.pdf

 

The following site is also very good indeed. In fact, I would say "wow!" in terms of the information available. Careful though, once you dive into all the information presented you might want to do more to your Roc:

 

https://dingeraviation.net/skuaroc/blackburn_roc.htm

 

And this link from the same page will give you a lot of what you're after.

 

https://www.dingeraviation.net/skuaroc/modelling_plans_for_skua_and_roc.pdf

 

Ray

Edited September 23, 2022 by Ray_W
Correct link added

[tempestfan]

7 hours ago, Ray_W said:

 

And this link from the same page will give you a lot of what you're after.

 

https://www.dingeraviation.net/skuaroc/modelling_plans_for_skua_and_roc.pdf

 

Ray

Now that's a great one! Many thanks & saved! If I may add a snippet - AvNews had Skua/Roc drawings sometimes in the mid 80s (by Chris Bowley?), and Ian Huntley noticed something was not quite right - I think the wing chord -, and redrew the wings in his Column in SAM. Man/men, I am getting old 😞 seems like I read that piece yesterday... 

[boom.boom]

On 9/23/2022 at 2:01 PM, Ray_W said:

Can I make some recommendations?

 

The MMP site does show samples of their Blackburn Roc plans that you could use:

 

http://www.mmpbooks.biz/assets/books_pdf/103.pdf

 

The following site is also very good indeed. In fact, I would say "wow!" in terms of the information available. Careful though, once you dive into all the information presented you might want to do more to your Roc:

 

https://dingeraviation.net/skuaroc/blackburn_roc.htm

 

And this link from the same page will give you a lot of what you're after.

 

https://www.dingeraviation.net/skuaroc/modelling_plans_for_skua_and_roc.pdf

 

Ray

Thank You Rey!!! I was not aware that MMP provides these reviews from their publications. It helps a lot!

Dingeraviation sit is just great!!! 

What is not clear to me is if there is a difference between the panels on the wings of Skua and Roc?

[Ray_W]

 

On 9/26/2022 at 12:38 AM, boom.boom said:

What is not clear to me is if there is a difference between the panels on the wings of Skua and Roc?

 

I think you are with the majority. A close reading of the link https://www.dingeraviation.net/skuaroc/modelling_plans_for_skua_and_roc.pdf  does help. They provide a great summary of changes to the Skua. For example:

 

12. The Roc did not have machine-guns in the wing and therefore would not have had the access panels required by the Skua. We can speculate that, other than that, the access panels and panel-layout on the wings of the Roc would have been much the same as the Skua. 

 

I do appreciate their honesty in what is not clear or speculation. You can take their position or do some more research to determine what commonalities in the wing construction with the Skua. Noting the obvious difference of introduced dihedral and elimination of MG's. Best is to then to check any photo evidence and decide. There is a great image here:

 

https://www.worldwarphotos.info/gallery/uk/raf/roc/blackburn-roc-l3090/

 

I am usually wary of published plans as they do tend to repeat the same errors. 

 

Ray