Chipmunk References

[cmatthewbacon]

Pilots notes, parts manuals etc, downloadable in PDF format:

http://www.sierralima.co.uk/aircraft.htm

and nice cutaway here:

http://www.chipmunkflyer.co.uk/images/cutaway_large.jpg

All you could ever need to super-detail your Chippy...

bestest,

M.

[Dave Fleming]

Thanks Matthew

[Jazzy Jase]

Sweet. I used to love flying Chippies as an Air Cadet.

Edited February 20, 2009 by Jazzy Jase

[AnonymousFO98]

i love you Matthew and want to have your babies

many thanks for posting the info very helpful

[lunarhighway]

I found this thread looking for info on the Chipmunk, but sadly the first link seems to be dead. I figured i'd post my question here rather than start another toppic

I'm planning to build airfix's 1/72 scale Chipmunk wich was tooled in 1969... and to help with the creation of the interior i'm putting together some (simplified) diagrams of the side pannels and the floor, etc.

These will be semi scale, by wich i mean i'll take into account the actual dimentions of the model so that everything based on these drawings will actually fit inside the fuselage rather than be exact scale. (as I imagine most kit and aftermarket interiors do)

Once done and if deemed appropirate i'd be more than happy to share these here. But to that end i'm looking for any good references on the interior of the Chipmunk. Especially 3 views of the interior so that i can exprapolate the dimentions and relation of all components.

Any free on line resources would be ideal, but recommendations towards printed or digital publications containing such diagrams would also be appreciated.

I'm especially intersted in the early 1A variant, as i'm planning to build one of these (possibly both)

http://www.belgian-wings.be/Webpages/Navigator/Photos/MilltaryPics/post_ww2/De%20Havilland%20Canada%20DHC-1%20Chipmunck/De%20Havilland%20Canada%20DHC-1%20Chipmunk%20Frontpage.htm

I've seen a few build reports on the chipmunk, and i figure these might also be helpfull in this context.

[stringbag]

Any free on line resources would be ideal, but recommendations towards printed or digital publications containing such diagrams would also be appreciated.

http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/234932824-airfix-chipmunk-t10-172/?hl=chipmunk

Can't get much betterthan this build by Fritag.

Chris.

[Rod Blievers]

Matthew:

The definitive Chipmunk reference would have to be DHC-1 Chipmunk - the poor man's Spitfire (ISBN 978-0-9812544-0-1). New copies are still available from Rod Brown at [email protected]. While I wrote a small part of this, I should stress I have no financial interest here - nor did I choose the title!

What a lovely drawing, though- I love the quaint way batteries were called "accumulators" then!

A word of caution here, this depicts a VERY early Chipmunk T.10:

1. Two piece spinner, with panel line at mid-chord.

2. Kinked exhaust pipe

3. Blind flying screens in front cockpit.

All of these items had disappeared by around 1952.

4. Narrow chord rudder (replacement started in 1953).

5. No strakes (fitted quite rapidly in 1958).

Lastly, there's something not quite right in the way the undercarriage is depicted - while the "scissors" are fully open the legs should hang down further than shown. On the ground there should be 7-8 inches of "oleo" showing, rather more in flight:

While this is a typical late configuration Chippie (broad-chord rudder, strakes, "Canadian" heat/exhaust), there are "fatal flaws" here too -the colour scheme pre-dates the heater/exhaust system by at least 5 years, while the underwing VHF antenna is a modern variant and nothing like the RAF's whip aerial. Further the combination of this and the fuselage mounted UHF antennae was rarely, if ever, fitted.

Lunarhighway:

Bear in mind please that the Canadian-built DHC-1A-1 (as shown in your photo) is a very different beast to the UK-built Chipmunk T.10. You may or may not wish to incorporate these into a 72nd model, but off the top of my head, some of the differences are:

1. The two-piece spinner is fitted.

2. A vertical "slot" intake directly below the spinner, while the circular cupped intake on the lower LHS is missing.

3. No prominent airscoop on the top of the cowl.

5. No ground power plug (immediately aft of firewall, LHS).

6. Canopy is very different, has a much narrower cross-section ("pointier" at the top), narrower frames, handles on the top centre-line (i.e. not biased to the LHS) and no bulged rear side panels, while the windscreen joins the fuselage in a straight horizontal line (curved in the T.10).

7. Instrument panel is simplified (no blind-flying instruments).

8. Cockpit coaming doesn't overlap the panel, and is straight - it appears much narrower because of this).

9. No battery access panels on the top rear fuselage.

10. The hole for the lifting rod is now aft of the vertical fuselage frame, while the prominent oval access panel adjacent to this is missing.

11. No rectangular access panel on the tail cone under the tailpane (LHS).

12. Because it lacks a tail light and its associated fairing, the tailcone is distinctly blunter in appearance (the fuselage is in fact fractionally shorter).

12. Elevator balance horns are slightly smaller, i.e. the total tailplane span is 2 inches less. (this is very subtle indeed).

13. Mainwheel tyres contact the ground 3 inches further aft than the T.10 (some sources say 4"), achieved by mounting the legs 1.5 inches further aft than the T.10. and having them more vertical. It doesn't sound like much but the differences is obvious when you see both types together.

14. No landing light.

15. Pitot/static mast has an "L" shape).

16. No wingtip navigation lights.

I hope this helps...

Cheers,

Rod.

[lunarhighway]

Rod:

Thank you very much for such a detailed answer! It's much appreciated.

With so many Chipmunks still flying it's hard to know which variation you're looking at and what has been retrofitted or changed. Your list gives me some great pointers to look for .

If you're familiar with the airfix kit, you'll know that it's very rough kit... but this has the advantage that most details will have to be scratch build anyway (i was condiddering replacing the canopy with a vac formed one, so now it seems that will need to be done). And as you remarked, i will have to decide what details i'll represent in this scale. And in the end, given my model skills i hope to represent something that captures the look of 'a' chipmunk.

That book also looks very nice, i'll definately look into that.