Jump to content

453rd BG Museum Build - USAAF Boulton Paul Defiant TT Mk I (from the Airfix 1/48 Mk I) - FINISHED


Fritag

Recommended Posts

Well... perfection at the first hurdle we see.  You do realize that you have set the bar for yourself for the rest of this build not?

1 hour ago, Fritag said:

but I'm really interested in its time with Martin Baker.

 

Seeing as you have more than a nodding acquaintance with Messrs Martin and Baker, wouldn't it be worth a punt to contact them directly and see if they have something tucked away in their dusty archives somewhere?  

 

Found this if it's of any use

 

DmE9JswXcAAl9mP?format=jpg&name=900x900

 

And this...

 

52582336518_c1b6cd879d_h.jpg

Though they appear to be of AA292

  • Like 14
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

8 hours ago, hendie said:

Though they appear to be of AA292

 

Yes, that’s my understanding too.

 

Nice piccies, but testing the R. Malcolm, rather than the Martin Baker, seat.

 

I confess I know nowt about R. Malcolm seats.  And lots of other stuff too, to be fair :D

 

P’raps I should do as you say and ‘reach out’ (I bloomin hate that phrase - makes me cringe) to MB.  They’ve prob. got better things to do with their time tho’. :D

 

 

 

Edited by Fritag
Further comment
  • Like 2
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

R. Malcolm?

 

The famous canopy adapters?

 

Must admit that is a part of aeronautic history which has passed me by.

 

That test of a Malcolm seat was two years and a day before I was offloaded into this confusing world.

 

Confused? I do be...

 

Loving the lovely plug Steve, wow time already.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I started my work on the Defiant book, one of the first things I did was contact MB to see if they held anything in their archive. Sadly, they didn't hold any real material. The file held at the National Archives, Kew which has the images and data relating to AA292 only holds four A4 pages. The RAF Museum holds a report on ejection seat design 1944 -1945 and that was published in 1949. DR944 gets a mention, briefly. 

DR944 doesn't have as detailed history as some Defiants, but it was originally delivered to 46 MU in August 1942, before going to 11 CCRC on the 1st of September, It was on strength with them until July 1944, then to 10 MU before finding it's way to Denham. Nobody has yet found which codes DR944 carried.

AA292 was built as a Mk I, delivered in 1941, and after a stint at 7 AGS it was converted to a TT III in February 1944. Later joined 667 Squadron and went to R. Malcolm at White Waltham in April 1945. It was eventually scrapped in March 1947.

7E8MDjR.jpg

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/21/2023 at 11:24 AM, Terry1954 said:

Crisps and mug of tea in hand (Saturday morning elevensis) 

 

T.


For the avoidance of doubt (since we are dealing with a lawyer here), I can exclusively reveal that there are no apostrophes missing from Terry’s post.  No-one handles Crisp’s anythings at elevenses, even on a Saturday morning.

 

The Martin Baker bang seat Meteor was flown by the father of one of my EFTS course mates, and he brought it to Linton while we were there and even allowed us to crawl over the aircraft.  At the time we were amazed that such an old aircraft was still being put to such modern use - from memory they were testing Tornado bang seats at the time.  I had no idea that MB had ever used a Defiant; fabulous - at least the beast did something useful.

 

Always a pleasing-looking aircraft, the Defiant; a slightly more pointy Hurricane to my eyes, and that can’t be bad.  Shame that the whole “turret fighter” concept was so deeply flawed, thus consigning it (and the even more useless Roc) to the backwaters of history.

 

You officially have my attention, M’Lud

  • Like 4
  • Haha 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You stated "Looking for a relaxing build, so probably not going to do too much else."  Obviously your version of a "relaxing" build and the rest of us mere mortals have two very diverse meanings.  Us good old boys think "relaxing build" is a snap together kit and maybe filling the joint gaps and improving the paint job.  Your version of "easy" is whacking off the nose, designing a new one, using 3D technology, and then will make even more major modifications to the frame.  Am I just a bit confused about easy.  I know I'm a colonial, but I thought I had some mastery of basic English terms.  Obviously not.

 

So, feeling like a dinosaur, as I have no clue about 3D technology and how to do it, I hope to learn a thing or two by rereading just the first two pages of this thread as I got lost when you casually referred to "Fusion" as something everybody is familiar with.  My familiarity with fusion usually refers to an Asian restaurant I go to and their style of food.

 

I look forward to your updates which will be almost as confusing as some of the references given on this website to obscure English history and pop culture that have no meaning to a Texas farm hand.  Now a discussion on the issues of colic, causes and cures, I'm all over that technology.

  • Haha 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/22/2023 at 8:18 PM, Fritag said:

Possibly borrowing a friend's cottage in Devon for a week - we'd both like to visit the FAA museum at Yeovil amongst other things.

 

Brilliant museum IMHO. Since moving down here (Dorset) permanently about 6 years ago, I've been there quite a few times, as its just "down the road", being a mere hour and 15 minutes on very slow Dorset roads. Can't get enough of the place. Depending on your route to Devon, you may also be interested in the BDAC museum (ex Boscombe Down) at Old Sarum. Numerous exhibits there including Jaguar XX734 which I think is being refurbished from the original base airframe with other bits and pieces. Looks almost convincing! A good picture of it here...

 

https://www.thunder-and-lightnings.co.uk/jaguar/survivor.php?id=1004

 

Nice work on the Defiant nose section.

 

On 1/22/2023 at 8:18 PM, Fritag said:

Only if you want to learn from a muppet, Terry :winkgrin:

 

Doesn't look like the work of a muppet!

 

8 hours ago, Ex-FAAWAFU said:

For the avoidance of doubt (since we are dealing with a lawyer here), I can exclusively reveal that there are no apostrophes missing from Terry’s post.  No-one handles Crisp’s anythings at elevenses, even on a Saturday morning.

 

All I can say is it's a good job I went to a decent grammar school ...........😓

 

T.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So.

 

On 1/23/2023 at 8:55 AM, perdu said:

I persoom the effalump's foot effect is not a characteristic of a supported workpiece?

 

Yes Bill.  Or to put it another way, the 'elephant's foot' is a characteristic of the first several (bottom) layers of the print on the build plate.  The bottom layers of a print have longer UV exposure times than the main print layers in order to ensure adhesion to the build plate and this causes the layers to be a little larger in cross section (don't know exactly why - but it does).  So if you print the part directly onto the base plate then the 'elephant's foot' effect can mar the print.  If you print with supports from a base or 'raft' then any elephant's foot effect will be on the base/raft and not the print proper. 

 

On 1/22/2023 at 11:21 PM, Serkan Sen said:

I am also proud of being in the second page. Last time I was in 100...

Serkan

 

Yes, but then 100 pages turned out to be just the amuse-bouche :blush: :whistle:

 

On 1/23/2023 at 8:32 AM, giemme said:

feeling :snail:

 

Ha.  Momentarily only.

 

23 hours ago, Ex-FAAWAFU said:

No-one handles Crisp’s anythings at elevenses, even on a Saturday morning.

 

Now that is good to hear old chap.  At least it's good to hear  if that's how you want it.  I wish I'd never started this comment...

 

23 hours ago, Ex-FAAWAFU said:

The Martin Baker bang seat Meteor was flown by the father of one of my EFTS course mates, and he brought it to Linton while we were there and even allowed us to crawl over the aircraft.  At the time we were amazed that such an old aircraft was still being put to such modern use - from memory they were testing Tornado bang seats at the time.

 

Excellent memory to have.

 

18 hours ago, georgeusa said:

Obviously your version of a "relaxing" build and the rest of us mere mortals have two very diverse meanings. 

 

Ha.  Once the trauma (to the late middle age brain) of getting acquainted with Fusion has passed it's quite relaxing to do virtual model making.  At least you're not subject to the stress of the 'one slip of the knife/saw/scriber/brush etc. and all that work will be ruined' syndrome :D

 

14 hours ago, Terry1954 said:

Depending on your route to Devon, you may also be interested in the BDAC museum (ex Boscombe Down) at Old Sarum. Numerous exhibits there including Jaguar XX734 which I think is being refurbished from the original base airframe with other bits and pieces. Looks almost convincing! A good picture of it here...

 

Interesting.  Painted in 6 squadron colours.

 

On 1/23/2023 at 9:36 AM, AndyL said:

When I started my work on the Defiant book, one of the first things I did was contact MB to see if they held anything in their archive. Sadly, they didn't hold any real material. The file held at the National Archives, Kew which has the images and data relating to AA292 only holds four A4 pages. The RAF Museum holds a report on ejection seat design 1944 -1945 and that was published in 1949. DR944 gets a mention, briefly. 

 

On 1/23/2023 at 9:36 AM, AndyL said:

DR944 doesn't have as detailed history as some Defiants, but it was originally delivered to 46 MU in August 1942, before going to 11 CCRC on the 1st of September, It was on strength with them until July 1944, then to 10 MU before finding it's way to Denham. Nobody has yet found which codes DR944 carried.

 

Thanks for your scholarship Andy.  I guess I won't bother to contact MB then.  It's a shame that DR944's codes are unknown and probably explains why it hasn't fund its way on to any decal sheets (AFAIK) as I guess the shark's mouth would be an obvious attraction to decal manufacturers.

 

I'm still attracted to the idea of doing DR944 as opposed to DR945, but I may think again and take the easy way out.  I suppose if known one knows DR944's codes I can't be definitively wrong if I make a stab at guessing them.

 

The best photo I've seen of of DR944 is from a similar angle to one of DR945.  Viz:

 

DR945

 

y4mxq45P7fE9LtTaLqJNVmqM3ucTKZHZIK5zcBeT

 

DR944

 

y4mpq5BnGLlSj5ahbXZdLQzKgahNDsZHAFK2xYE5

 

Which seem to me to be consistent (or at least not definitively inconsistent) with same or similar overall paint scheme and, as ringed, you can just see on DR944 what iI interpret as being one of the points of the fuselage star and the bottom of the code letter, in the same position as on DR945.

 

My superficial understanding is that the USAAF 326th BG (which operated the 11th CCRC which used the 2 Defiants) used the codes JW (according to Google) so it seems a reasonable assumption to me that DR944 would also carry the squadron codes JW.

 

The photo of DR944 suggests that the lowest part of the individual aircraft code is an inverted triangle which to me suggests a 'V'.  Hence I'm minded to infer that DR944 was JW-V when with the USAAF.

 

That's a lot of assumption and inference and not a lot of evidence; so I'm obvs. willing to be corrected and I'm not yet sure it's sound enough reasoning to proceed with.

 

Anyways.

 

Having satisfied myself that the new nose interface would be a decent fit to the kit it was time time to rough out the interface for the rear fuselage insert.

 

Comparing the F Mk I and TT Mk I plans etc. suggest that the rear fuselages are the same profile for some distance forward of the tail and so by reference to panel lines on the kit and plans I cut down the fuselage thus:

 

y4mmtRv15fAm0H_9nAF1mIHIYwX1puBYBwptIY2v

 

y4m0-vXA8tmNcSIlurlIxtKKhTviAwD_fuSGuucz

 

And using a mixture of scans from the cut down fuselage and plans as canvases I sketched the side profile of the insert:

 

y4mYIv6DqNP_WrREv3gOPZRJxTnjyFeF09ooJ8HI

 

I then printed out a crude block of the side profile to check the sizing with the cut down fuselage:

 

y4mWlwQ-Ezx36OByuTJcI0RUYlicyH0ld5L6FARs

 

And with what I found to be a pleasing interface between the digital and analogue I scribed the base, front and rear cross sections onto the printed block:

 

y4mbPsnvtYwn2IQ39SBu1JXQUy7eneY8oz3PvGYx

 

And then scanned each of the sides of the block to use as canvases to sketch the insert cross sections thus:

 

y4mddJbYTNR_O9pD5UMCl5F3mKh3VBJL99Jhy2i0

 

And so produced (yet) another test print to see how well it will fit to the kit:

 

y4mMtla9yMVN2bAhKsWTh161vF4UbTFBW9BR8gI8

 

And that is printing away in the Mars 3 as I type.  Result later.

 

I'm taking a bit of time over these initial steps because I want to make sure the printed replacements/additions will be a good fit to the kit before spending any time on the detail of the new sections.  It's obviously easier to make corrections to the fit at this stage.

 

And I'm frankly more concerned to make the new part fit the kits existing profile/cross section nicely than conform perfectly with the plans and not fit the kit! Although the differences between the kit and ther plans are pleasing small in the areas I'm working on anyway. 

 

 

Edited by Fritag
typo
  • Like 25
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice work so far, Steve, and I'm onboard in under a week from the start. Chair, table, sleeping bag, and tent all pulled up ready for however long this build takes, with a regular supply order put through to avoid the risk of starvation

 

James

  • Haha 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok So.  Insert outline test print, well, printed :D

 

Calling it not bad.

 

General fit pretty neat and tidy.  Probably needs to be another 0.1mm wider from the mid point rearwards.  It's the correct width nearer the front, despite what the photo below seems to suggest, indeed if anything perhaps 0.1mm too wide - but I think I'll keep it at that to give a bit for shrinkage and/or smoothing down after gluing.

 

y4mWwS7Olpg_Tmoeg2xzCOhxoPzXlwCYMBv9g77P

 

Rear cross section would benefit from a slight reshape to make the curve a little wider/flatter at the top.

 

y4mTJWsVrgIEf94YY6qPhsVpHuGzlltoysx2YOIW

 

Front cross section needs to be a little lower and c. 0.2mm narrower at the top and and that will bring the curve in with it.

 

y4moag7u5oqraXJC7RbEid6AjbcQq6NyDc_KevJa

 

Like I said; not a bad first effort from an analogue (scribed) input :winkgrin:

 

Edited by Fritag
  • Like 29
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Design tweaked following the test fit and Version 2 now printed.

 

y4m6RnfnZhWTVe92Z4MNec-q5oqhQw3R5A0i5kdt

 

y4mrDmmJ0x97qaowl8e2TnSvvT8Zd4khMItaOf90

 

I can't reasonably expect to get the fit between the kit and new TT rear cockpit/upper fuselage insert any better than that, and so I'll call that done.

 

Remember (like the bit of the new nose I printed and test fitted) this test piece is just a blank to get the fit to the kit sorted and to set the dimensions. Now I've got to start on the new TT rear cockpit/upper fuselage design itself.

 

Edited by Fritag
  • Like 28
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Fritag said:

Remember (like the bit of the new nose I printed and test fitted) this test piece is just a blank to get the fit to the kit sorted and to set the dimensions

We do. It is still brilliant, though. :clap:

 

Ciao 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks as if I am almost the only one that knew the Americans operated the Defiant duering WWII. This comes from likeing reference material such as the Warpaint series as well as other books and also browseing the Web for alternative or different colour schemes for my aircraft builds.

 

Enjoying what has been done so far and looking forward to the next instalment.

 

Gondor

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd say the deck is stacked in your favor.

 

Now if only you'd done a bit of vac-forming too I could have said you're off to a blistering start.

I'll just save that one for another day then.

 

Anyone seen my coat?

 

  • Haha 10
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...