Andrew Posted January 13 Posted January 13 I like the old (1974) kit by Matchbox of Hawker's fine fighter (perhaps their finest?), primarily because it offers the opportunity to build two under-represented versions of this impressive aircraft. I've tried to finish the kit numerous times in the past, but never succeeded in doing so; sadly as time has gone on I've become less inclined to actually build it, deterred by the kit's trench-like panel lines and the overall lack of finesse. My hesitancy was reassessed last year when I happily discovered @TeeELL's build, in which Tony has added a plethora of self-produced resin bits to make very substantial improvements. I've procured a couple of his sets as the necessary impetus to get this kit built. Or kits, to be more accurate. Mmmmm..... Centauri.... I've started work with the nose, replacing a blunt nose ring with a new forward cowling, which also includes the opportunity to add an engine - thanks very much Tony! Other work has taken place in the cockpit (to locate the seat and its armoured headrest) and the wings (to incorporate panels with opened shell ejection chutes and to prepare for new undercarriage and undercarriage bays). Cockpit Wings (pre- and post-installation of shell ejection chute panels) Original gear position holes being filled with plastic stock, in readiness for new holes - Positions being drilled using Tony's clever jigs - New positions drilled, and depressions for rocket rails filled with plastic rod - Here I've added plastic stock to the maingear bays to add depth (I don't like the join seam that runs around the Matchbox maingear bay, so I'll remove the roof of the bay and create my own) - In order to get the new gear bays to fit into the fuselage halves, I've had to remove plastic; these shots should give a sense of how much is entailed: And finally (to bring you to where the project is at time of writing), fuselages with seat and rear frame tubing in place, and kit at the rear fresh from some radical plastic removal - 15
tempestfan Posted January 13 Posted January 13 While it is somewhat hamfisted in execution, I'd stick my neck out that it is one of MB's best non-biplanes, if not THE best. The designer obviously took advantage of Arthur Bentley's drawings, as the kit follows it very closely, in shape and even with the trenches. 2 1
TeeELL Posted January 13 Posted January 13 Andrew, I’ve just found this thread. Delighted to see the various components coming together and my ‘aftermarket’ enhancements being put to good use. 1
TeeELL Posted January 13 Posted January 13 I had thought about creating an improved U/C bay (and for the tail wheel) but decided that, as I don’t display my models upside-down or on a mirror, it was unnecessary extra work and with the various U/C operating components much of ‘that joint seam’ would be obscured.
Andrew Posted January 13 Author Posted January 13 9 hours ago, tempestfan said: While it is somewhat hamfisted in execution, I'd stick my neck out that it is one of MB's best non-biplanes, if not THE best. The designer obviously took advantage of Arthur Bentley's drawings, as the kit follows it very closely, in shape and even with the trenches. The kit's accurate shape and outline are key endearments, with the exception of the canopy shape and way the cockpit opening is rendered. More work, then... 3 hours ago, TeeELL said: I had thought about creating an improved U/C bay (and for the tail wheel) but decided that, as I don’t display my models upside-down or on a mirror, it was unnecessary extra work and with the various U/C operating components much of ‘that joint seam’ would be obscured. Indeed Tony, and it's one aspect of my build that I've agonised over (probably for waaay too long...), but I imagined a future self being frustrated that I hadn't made the effort to improve the appearance of this part of the kit, so I took the decision to just proceed with the work. Time will tell, I guess!
Andrew Posted January 15 Author Posted January 15 Here are a few pictures of recent work on the maingear bays, which involved trimming the plastic stock I applied a couple of days ago back to the bay outline (slow and tedious work, and handy to identify where insufficient glue was applied just as I was building some momentum...) and removal of the kit's gearbay ceiling as moulded on the underside of the upper wings. I was assisted in this task by an appropriately aggressive tool in my Dremel - phew! As will be obvious, the underside of the upper wing halves is messy as a result of the attention of Herr Dremel, but none of it will be visible (save the mounts for the gear legs) so I've done little to clean the area up; it will soon be covered by the new gearbay ceiling anyway. And finally, just to allay any concerns and verify that there was sufficient clearance for that new bay ceilings (even though it will be very thin plastic sheet), I've tested the fit of the upper and lower wing halves: I think that will do! 12
Andrew Posted January 20 Author Posted January 20 I mentioned earlier in this build that there's one area of the Matchbox's kit that I don't like (outline-wise). To my eye the canopy is too bulbous and rounded, and the way that Matchbox moulded the fuselage (obviously to accommodate a closed canopy) is nothing like the real thing. While I could simply replace the canopy with a vacform canopy or one from another kit (such as the Heller offering), or ignore the issue (never going to happen), I've been perplexed as to how to rectify the issue of the cockpit opening, but having seen how Airfix (and Eduard in 1/48) deal with this part of the fuselage, it got me to thinking... If I was using a Heller canopy on this kit anyway, why not also use the matching part of the Heller fuselage to replace the dodgy Matchbox area? Shouldn't be too hard to do, surely? How we laughed. Anyway, while this has been my plan for a while now, and seeing no other way to complete the conversion work other than with the fuselages together, I've painted as much as I dare of the cockpit interior without actually closing the fuselage. As you can see below, with some seriously sticky sticky tape holding the fuselage halves together, I've converted my Matchbox Tempest into a convertible and removed the corresponding area from the donor kit. From memory, that Heller kit was destined for Mk. II greatness itself, but clearly that conversion didn't proceed beyond hacking the nose off the Heller kit off... In the background you'll notice that the two Centaurus nose sections couldn't help but join the party - I suppose that they're glad to have finally been painted and glued together! Once the mating surfaces were cleaned up/trimmed to size, a trial fit showed that the Heller plastic matches the Matchbox shape quite well - phew! Having done it once and proven that the idea wasn't the worst I've had this year, I've dug another Heller kit out of the Big Box of Unfinished Kits in preparation for its sacrifice to a very noble cause. Fingers crossed that I can repeat the cutting/chopping feat. And then get the cockpit innards into place. And after that, get the fuselage halves together. And finally glue the new (old) fuselage deck in place, not forgetting to blend said deck and Matchbox fuselage together so that it looks like a bought one. And then rescribe the result so that it looks like a beautiful bought one and do all of that twice... by which point I guess I'll be ready to resume work on the undercarriage bays. Oh yeah, the undercarriage bays! 14 1
Andrew Posted January 20 Author Posted January 20 4 hours ago, TheyJammedKenny! said: Wow--serious surgery involved here! Yes, of the reluctant and risky kind! Something I've discovered as I fiddle with the resulting bits and pieces is that the position of the Matchbox aft frame (which is where the seat is attached) isn't exactly congruent with the opening in the Heller fuselage deck - the Matchbox position is a few mm ahead of the Heller opening, so an obvious gap will be left if I don't attend to the seat position. Cue more laughing/crying... Perhaps I should just wait until Airfix releases a Mk. II, along with their Mk. VI...? 1
Andrew Posted January 20 Author Posted January 20 1 hour ago, Andrew said: Perhaps I should just wait until Airfix releases a Mk. II, along with their Mk. VI...? ...which would of course be followed in quick succession by a new Sea Fury in 1/72. Or Eduard / Special Hobby can downsize their Tempest kits. I'm a patient chap, so mid-year release is fine. 1 1
TeeELL Posted January 21 Posted January 21 Hmmmmm! Do I need to acquire a Heller kit in order to design a 3D replacement upper fuselage section? How closely do the 2 parts match? 1
Andrew Posted January 21 Author Posted January 21 38 minutes ago, TeeELL said: How closely do the 2 parts match? At the point I've made the 'slice' (the relative depth of the new fuselage deck), the two kits match very well; the Matchbox fuselage is slightly wider towards the front of the deck but otherwise I'm pleasantly surprised at how closely they align. Ignore the mismatch visible in the photo above - the two parts are not yet glued and the top piece had moved off centre when I was arranging the bits for the photo. If you can grab a Heller/Smer kit cheaply then by all means have a squiz at what I've done - I wish that I was situated closer so I can hand over a spare kit for your experimentifications. I'm not entirely convinced that it's the best way to improve this area of the Matchbox kit; it's just the solution that occurred to me while pondering... perhaps Airfix's drop-in canopy deck (part A4) would serve a better basis?
TeeELL Posted January 22 Posted January 22 I happen to have both a SMER and Airfix kit! I’ll have a look see. Question is….. can I find another Matchbox kit to experiment on?
TeeELL Posted January 22 Posted January 22 I can answer my own question - yes I have sourced a Matchbox Tempest. I was offered one that had turned up at Jet Age Museum a couple of months ago, I chose not to buy it but it is still around so I have been able to secure it thanks to @theplasticsurgeon who bought it last weekend and I can buy it from him. 2
Andrew Posted January 22 Author Posted January 22 1 hour ago, TeeELL said: I can answer my own question - yes I have sourced a Matchbox Tempest. That's great, Tony! The kit seems to have become a very desirable/collectible item, at least here in Australia. I was mildly concerned when I ordered two sets from you late last year that I didn't actually own two kits. I knew I'd purchased one recentlyish (for a substantial sum and what history will hopefully not record as the origin of the current Cost of Living crisis) but wasn't confident that I could lay hands on a second kit in the stash. Cue relief when digging in the right box yielded the other kit (plus trace elements of the first Matchbox kit I owned!)...
Andrew Posted January 23 Author Posted January 23 I've been making a bit of progress with the Matchbox cockpits (of the 'one step forward, three steps back' kind) and can happily report that I'm now where I was a week ago (more or less)... All the bits in that photo will end up in the cockpit somehow. And yes, that's yet more contribution to the project from Messrs Heller and Smer; their cockpit bases will be very useful for keeping other bits in place when I finally assemble the two fuselage halves. And just because there's always more tedious stuff to do on Andrew's workbench, I've been making slow headway in my quest to render the maingear bays a bit more like the real thing. Here's a shot of some recent progress in that arena: 12
TeeELL Posted January 23 Posted January 23 Andrew, something to consider - the dimensions of the ailerons on the upper wing vs lower. I confess that I realised the significant difference too late to correct.
Andrew Posted January 23 Author Posted January 23 12 hours ago, TeeELL said: the dimensions of the ailerons on the upper wing vs lower. I confess that I realised the significant difference too late to correct There's a difference? In chord? Span? Better check that out when I'm next at the bench. Thanks very much for the heads-up.
Andrew Posted January 27 Author Posted January 27 Hi all, There's some good news in this protracted tale of two Tempests - the fuselages are together! and I've glued the wings together... 10
Andrew Posted January 30 Author Posted January 30 Included in Tony's lovely set of enhancements is a new tailwheel, which is a big improvement over the Matchbox offering. While I could have just substituted Tony's tailwheel for the Matchbox part, I wanted to incorporate a more representative mount and (slightly) improve the tailwheel bay; my inspiration in this respect being the KP kit (which traps a tailwheel leg between the fuselage halves and adds a 'roof' to the bay). Anyway, you can probably see where I'm going here with this, and if you've imagined yet more contribution by the noble Heller/Smer kits, then you'd be right!!! Yes, more filling is in my future, but I'm pleased (again) at how well the two kits can be combined. Having now more-or-less completed the fuselages, I will set about rescribing both kits. 10
Andrew Posted January 31 Author Posted January 31 Hello and thanks for looking in at my little Tempest project. I've begun the process of smoothing out any gaps on the fuselages with some painted-on putty slurry (I won't be saying that quickly any time soon): I've also moved ahead with an aspect of the project that I've been both looking forward to and dreading - removing the panel lines on the wings, in preparation for rescribing same. Dreading because I know how tedious the step would be (a very real threat to sustaining interest in this project) and looking forward to it because I'm reasonably confident that a very nice result can be achieved, justifying the investment of time and effort. As at time of writing, I'm part-way there; I've at least removed almost all traces of the Matchbox panel lines and have arrived at a more-or-less blank slate. Here are some pics of the work, hopefully showing the transition from Matchbox panel line vagueness to a canvas for scribing... This tool (from DSPIAE) is a very handy bit of kit - at slowish speed in the Dremel it can be applied relatively gently (!) to the wing surface... I haven't shown the various sanding sticks that I've used to erase the evidence of the scratching/grinding etc, but they've been essential to getting to this state: 10
Andrew Posted February 1 Author Posted February 1 Prior to embarking on the rescribing, I thought it best to create the wingtip lamp covers out of scrap clear plastic. This has gone surprisingly well; not only have I been able to file/sand/polish the chunks of plastic into shape, but all without the need to re-glue the clear bits (minor miracle in my experience). Another pleasant surprise was that my alignment of the clear plastic (as determined by the 'bulbs' I'd drilled into the clear plastic) with the scant plastic of the wing was accurate! Work on reshaping the four wingtip lights was well underway when I took this pic (the two port lights had been reshaped [one of those polished], and the two starboard lights yet to be worked on): Work about to begin on one of the starboard lights (with the 'meaty' half of the sanding stick collection) - Shaping of all four lights complete, with the other half of the sanding/polishing arsenal - and a dodgy close-up (that isn't) of the finished set of wingtip lights - Not captured in the above set of photos is another part of the scribing preparation - filling the oversize join lines built into the Matchbox wings (it reminds of the much younger Airfix Phantom kit in this respect) with strips of thin plastic. No pictures could convey the frustration of trying to finesse ultra thin plastic strip into the underside joins... although most of the joins occur on hinge lines (flaps or ailerons), they would have been too prominent if I'd not addressed them - cue an hour or so of cutting, trimming, shimming and gluing. This work will necessitate more filling and re-definition of the lines, but at least it's' done. Now let the scribing begin. 12
Mals Way Posted February 1 Posted February 1 (edited) Allrigtht. Hardcore building and some old school building that still are effective theese days....and you showing it...effective, great result...looking forward to see more. Nothing wrong with AM...but love when choosing what to improve on a model kit.... love it 🥰 Edited February 1 by Mals Way 1 1
Andrew Posted February 2 Author Posted February 2 Thanks very much, @Mals Way, I appreciate your encouragement!
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now