Ridgewell's Flying Fortresses

[vppelt68]

The  thread name hints at a great book by Mr. Ron Mackay. It was the first book I bought about the 381st BG and Station 167, named Ridgewell Airfield by the RAF. It has a very, very lively following at the fb group of the RAFCA - Ridgewell Airfield Commemorative Association - that runs the museum at the airfield's old hospital barracks. I've been a member of the association since the previous STGB!

 

I have promised to build a pair of Revell 1:72 G:s, which I intend to keep, but there's also something out of the ordinary.

 

In the D-Day 75th GB managed to start an Academy G kit and as I tried to "improve" the kit wings, I ruined them... the fuselage was once nearly complete, but in a moment of frustration I disassembled it nearly completely. It was this " close to ending up in trash can! Did I learn anything? NO!  In the Bomber/Strike/Ground attack GB I tried to "improve" a Hasegawa G kit fuselage, and... ruined it too 😒. Has the trash can been close? You bet it has!

But, and there's ALWAYS the "but": They say an Academy fuselage is happy to accept a pair of Hasegawa wings

 

Let's see what happens... V-P

[franky boy]

Sounds interesting VP. I’ll follow along. 
 

I went to school a couple of miles up the road from Ridgewell airfield. In the summer term now and then we were allowed to cycle up to the airfield and have a ride around the peri track and run way. And there’s the village pub, can’t remember the name, which back in the early 90’s was covered floor to ceiling of old period photos of the airfield and aircraft and their crews.  Enough reminiscing. 
 

Looking forward to the build. 
 

James

[81-er]

This sounds like an interesting project, VP. Good luck!

 

James

[marvinneko]

Given the restorations, conversions and scratchbuilding on BM it's hard to believe anything can ever be truly ruined  

[SleeperService]

On 7/20/2023 at 3:04 PM, franky boy said:

Sounds interesting VP. I’ll follow along. 
 

I went to school a couple of miles up the road from Ridgewell airfield. In the summer term now and then we were allowed to cycle up to the airfield and have a ride around the peri track and run way. And there’s the village pub, can’t remember the name, which back in the early 90’s was covered floor to ceiling of old period photos of the airfield and aircraft and their crews.  Enough reminiscing. 
 

Looking forward to the build. 
 

James

Ashen had the Red Cow but are you thinking of the King's Head in Ridgewell by the green? Now a private house. Or the White Horse still a pub/restaurant.

[franky boy]

On 7/21/2023 at 3:44 PM, SleeperService said:

Ashen had the Red Cow but are you thinking of the King's Head in Ridgewell by the green? Now a private house. Or the White Horse still a pub/restaurant.

Yes I was thinking of the Kings Head. Shame to see another pub gone. 

[SleeperService]

1 hour ago, franky boy said:

Yes I was thinking of the Kings Head. Shame to see another pub gone. 

Doubly so as the Kings Head was the better of the two by some margin.

[vppelt68]

I'll sum up my thoughts about my builds. They are not yet build plans, as I have not yet decided which planes to build!

 

- I like G models, because I like the looks of the chin turrets. F:s just look boring.

- I like (described in Boeing blocks) the planes from G-35 to G-55 the most

- and the Vega built Pathfinders

- my preferred period of operations is May-June -44, the buildup to invasion and with long range escort fighters executing Doolittle doctrine

- thus, both OD/NG and NMF are possible but before the CBW tactical markings

- I have planned to use the two Revell kits, one has the original unstaggered and the other has the waist converted to staggered layout

- both could have the Stinger or the Cheyenne tail position

- I have decals for three 381st BG G-models:

-  42-97265 hell's angel (no capitals!), a G-45-BO with Cheyenne and unarmoured windscreen

-  42-102664 HAPPY BOTTOM (all capitals!), a G-55-BO with Cheyenne tail

-  43-37657 The Fox, a G-65-BO that I have only a pic of the nose

[vppelt68]

One week! I'll be back home by wednesday and it looks like I can start building Saturday when the group build begins.

 

Right now I feel like I won't be using those decal options I listed above. The Revell kit with all its shortcomings is still the easiest way to get a decent, wedge tail B-17 in 1:72 scale. I have two of those in my stash that I want to get rid of by building them. Airfix kits are easier to convert to unstaggered, Cheyenne- tail planes than staggered, wedge tail- ones, if needed.

 

I have been browsing suitable prototypes from the files I have gathered of the Boeing blocks G-35, -45 and -55. One of three G-40-BO:s  (42-97059 Marsha Sue) would also be good for the unstaggered build and the sole 381st BG G-50-BO (42-102423 My Devotion) for the staggered one... but there are several interesting other aircraft histories I'd like to represent too.

 

Luckily, I can build and paint the models ready and then decide how to decorate them . V-P

 

Edit: I just remembered that I have used to give precise titles to my B-17 build threads, like "B-17G-35-BO 42-32025 VP*P “DREAMBABY”", so I suppose I'll retitle this one too when I just know how

[reini]

So you're gonna go Dr. Frankenstein with your B-17's? Cool, looking forwards to it! 

[vppelt68]

Well it's already the second day into the group build and it's about time I get on with this. Like with the Ju 88:s last year, I won't let me touch fresh kits until a long time shelf of shame resident has been dealt with.

Voilà my 1:72 scale Hasegawa and Academy G kits + all the spares from several other B-17 kits. I'd be happy to come out of this with an Academy fuselage fitted with Hasegawa wings, and various detail parts from Revell. It'll become an G-35...45-BO or equivalent DL or VE, but the Cheyenne tail limits those options considerably. Time will tell! V-P

[SleeperService]

On 8/6/2023 at 11:36 AM, vppelt68 said:

Well it's already the second day into the group build and it's about time I get on with this. Like with the Ju 88:s last year, I won't let me touch fresh kits until a long time shelf of shame resident has been dealt with.

Voilà my 1:72 scale Hasegawa and Academy G kits + all the spares from several other B-17 kits. I'd be happy to come out of this with an Academy fuselage fitted with Hasegawa wings, and various detail parts from Revell. It'll become an G-35...45-BO or equivalent DL or VE, but the Cheyenne tail limits those options considerably. Time will tell! V-P

 

Seems that recycling long term projects may be a feature of this GB. Interested to see how well the wings fit. In 1/48 Monogram and Revell are pretty identical coincidentally

[vppelt68]

Ok. Let's start by disregarding all I've written earlier in this thread

 

I had to get my hands on the two Revell G-kits I have. Here they are, in a very appropriate box, where their escorts have had to make room for the Heavies. The P-51B is actually in my model cabinet, the P-47 is waiting for its turn in the STGB later this year.

Lots of silver grey plastic. The starboard fuselage on the right is converted to staggered layout. Otherwise, they are untouched. Or were.

Clear parts, two sets of Eduard Masks, two sets of instructions and a small bag of decals. It's my birthday so I treated myself with these!

A few hours worth of job done. Very little of an 1:72 Fortress will ever be visible. Especially, if you leave bomb bay closed, so I assembled those parts unpainted and left the bomb racks off. I thought the integrity of the finished kit might suffer if I don't add all the other parts, so the roof, center sill and side lattices are all there. I'm not going silly even painting the interiors, just basic colours. I'll add the bronze green, anti slip blacks and all the bare metal next. As can be seen, the Stinger tail pieces are added to fuselage halves. It's easier to deal with the (possible) seam in the middle. All the fuselage clear parts are also already in place.

 

But bugger, I'm not yet even sure which planes I'll letter these into. So many good subjects... V-P

[CliffB]

Nice to see these underway V-P and Happy Birthday 🥳.

[81-er]

That's a good start, VP. Happy birthday as well

 

James

[vppelt68]

I think I may have set my sights on the prototype for the staggered waist model. This old friend here, a Douglas-built B-17G-35-DL 42-106994 LiTTLE "GUY" from the 532nd BS.

 

 

Fantastic photograph! The plane has all the early -44 Douglas production features, like Stinger tail, staggered waist, DL wing walklines. It has a replaced port outer wing in camouflage paint, and starboard aileron to boot too. If only I had a good pic of the nose and how the name was written. Oh, but I do!

 

 

I think I can handle writing that name on the nose. These pics don't leave much guesswork left about the Guy, don't they? Sadly, LiTTLE "GUY" went MIA 26.11.44. Three of the crew were KIA and six became POW:s. V-P

[LorenSharp]

This is a veritable plethora of B-17 V-P. Should be an epic build. Oh before I forget. Happy 26th Anniversary of your 29th Birthday. Belated of course.

[vppelt68]

I had a nice, productive but not very pictoresque weekend with my Fortresses. There was a lot of small area and parts painting in the interior, and I also attached lots of parts in wing halves - there are eight of them. I left only the oil tanks and the carburetor air ducts off as they'd be in the way of painting the landing gear bays. I'm saving my precious, free online photo account... V-P

[Snafu35]

7 hours ago, vppelt68 said:

I had a nice, productive but not very pictoresque weekend with my Fortresses. 

 

ah, I know the same thing!
The preparation of the parts will be finished soon, so we'll be able to see a whole host of flying fortresses taking shape! 

😀

 

Regards,

Eric-Snafu35

[vppelt68]

Eric @Snafu35 Eric, thanks for this picture in your thread, that I seem to have missed . The Fortress nearest to the camera was 42-106994 "LiTTLE GUY" that I plan to decorate one of my builds as. I knew it had olive drab UPPER port wing panel, but I assumed the lower panel was neutral grey. Now, that doesn't look like NG, does it? Also, are they just tricks of light with the port flap and aileron trim that look very dark, and starboard aileron? It looks like faded olive drab on upper surface too (see 3 posts up). How about the port elevator, then? Not just a regular NMF job anyway - very glad I picked this one as my subject . @Ol' Scrapiron I'd appreciate your opinion here too 🙂. V-P

 

[Snafu35]

Hello vp,

 

Interpreting colours is always quite a subtle exercise, however a colour photo is more affordable than a black and white shot.
Little guy seems to have an aftermarket at the port wing panel, so Olive drab and Neutral Grey. The flap seems to be darker than aluminium, compare with the lower right flap. I'd see it in Neutral grey too.
The starboard flap is an aluminium colour in my opinion. It looks darker because the brightness must change with an angle set by the pilot, perhaps.

Note also that the tab on the port aileron has also been changed.

Also note that the outer panel of the starboard wing has a different aluminium colour to the panel supporting the engines. This makes it possible to create a patchwork with different shades of aluminium.

( I don't think the dark line on the leading edge is a  de-icer boot. Why would there be one on the right wing and not on the left?)

Finally, the stabilisers ailerons also appear to be made of aluminium. This one must be dull, it doesn't shine. The low angle view also changes the lighting. VP°S gives the impression of having a dark port stabilizer, again it's the angle of the shot that picks up a certain amount of light.

Interpreting the colours in this way, I'm still convinced that Sleepy Time Gal's port wing aileron is a replacement part painted in Olive drab and Neutral Grey.

 

You're going to have a lot of fun representing the exhaust and oil marks on the underside of Little Guy. They are particularly pronounced. 

 

But maybe I've got it all wrong...😏

 

Regards,

Eric-Snafu35

Edited September 5, 2023 by Snafu35

[vppelt68]

@Snafu35 Thanks, I agree with you 100%! I was asking for support for my own views and I got them. But d**n, doesn't that neutral grey look dark! V-P

[Snafu35]

5 minutes ago, vppelt68 said:

 But d**n, doesn't that neutral grey look dark! 

 

The neutral grey should be neutral grey, and in the photo the colour is in shadow.

 

Eric-Snafu35

[Ol' Scrapiron]

12 hours ago, vppelt68 said:

@Ol' Scrapiron I'd appreciate your opinion here too 🙂. V-P

 

hmmmmm.... there's a lot in that photo that makes me uneasy to trust it. I assume it isn't just a colorized photo, but there are sections all over that look 'edited" to me. I would say that the bottom area looks extra dark because there was some burning done when the negatives were printed. The whole underside just looks dark because someone did some dodging/burning to bring out the depth of the image, which was probably overexposed in that area from shooting essentially a mirror in the sunlight. If it were codes and markings missing I would say the Army censor was at work. There are several other wing panels on the planes that seem "too smooth" to be natural. and the second plane from left has black tips rather than red. Even the far wing on LiTTLE "Guy" makes me cringe when I inspect the stars/bars.

 

Sooooo.... ignoring all that making me want to not trust the photo, I would say you can feel comfortable using OD over Gray. That's what it has to be. 

 

 

PS- I do have one other "out of the box" thought, but I would need to check on something with an expert before I even hinted at that option.

[vppelt68]

Hohum, I spent many hours at the weekend painting and assembling these Revell kit interior... and painting and assembling them! It's been nearly five years since I built one the latest/first time, with two Airfix and a Matchbox in between and I didn't remember how labour intensive these kits are. Although experts say the Airfix kit is a better representation than this, I can't help liking the "feel" of the Revell kit parts more. Both kits are sadly lacking in certain, rather visible details. Then some of the detail that is there is incorrect... but I'll get back to reading these negative thoughts when I try to build the classic Frog and Airfix Fortresses next year

 

Makes me already miss the next P-51 STGB. Shake the box and finish one in a week . V-P