Jump to content
This site uses cookies! Learn More

This site uses cookies!

You can find a list of those cookies here: mysite.com/cookies

By continuing to use this site, you agree to allow us to store cookies on your computer. :)

John Aero

1:48 Hawker Furies

Recommended Posts

Recently I managed to get hold of a full set of the Westburg drawings for the Hawker Fury. These are without doubt the best Fury drawings around and originally drawn to 1:10th scale from Hawker originals. I did a comparison with the Pyro/Likelike Fury and the Airfix Fury with these drawings and surprisingly the Airfix one comes out as the most accurate (or the one with the fewest faults). I have done some correction surgery on both. Here is a photo of the two fuselages.

The nearest is the Airfix one. This required some building up and re contouring under the nose. The top of the nose cowl reshaping and the main cowl top lifting at the front by 1.5mm with a plasticard wedge. 2mm adding to the sternpost and the fuselage stringers, fabric sag reducing. The exhausts are too low and incorrectly spaced (these have yet to be re-drilled).

The Pyro one needed two fuselages chopping into four pieces and re-spacing. The nose top needed some work to reshape it as did the top deck forwards of the cockpit. Again the exhausts are wrongly spaced but they are at the right height .

I'll deal with the wings and things at some point.

John

Firstlookphotos054.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting work John, I've got the Airfix Fury to do.

Seem quite nice built up with a little TLC, typical Airfix though I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have an Airfix one in the stash, and despite always being told it was the least accurate of the 1/48 Furies, I've always liked the look of it. This should give me a lot of useful info.

John, is there any chance I could get a copy of these drawings please?

Obi-Jiff :fish:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very nice John, a possible opening in the market for an Aeroclub beauty? Luckily I've already done my Pyro one so I can't worry about its faults any more but I'll be keeping a close eye on these two!

David

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I compared the Pyro to some plans of the Nimrod, they came out very close. Maybe Pyro started from the Nimrod specs when they made the Fury.

Either way, it suits me fine, since I wanted a Nimrod for my FAA collection.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
denstore said:
When I compared the Pyro to some plans of the Nimrod, they came out very close. Maybe Pyro started from the Nimrod specs when they made the Fury.

Either way, it suits me fine, since I wanted a Nimrod for my FAA collection.

Remember that the Fury and Nimrod  fuselages are virtually identical a/c despite what is often written. Yes they differed in detail design and material specs but the basic structural shape is the same, they just followed differing development paths from the Hornet, Hoopoe via the Norn. The fact that they were so similar was Camm's insistence that the Navy requirement need not differ so much from the Air Force requirement. The Nimrod wings of course have a greater span and area, presumably to aid deck operation with greater all up weights, with and without floats. As far as drawings are concerned this is where it's easy to get it wrong (as per usual). The drawing most often used is that by George Cox (Aeromodeller Christmas 59) which I think was influenced by the H.J.Cooper one in Aeromodeller Sept 1944. A lot of the short fuselage problems can be laid at that door IMO. I haven't yet compared the Stair and Granger drawings but I have found some similarities with the Nimrod. The late Peter Westburg drawings (now held by NASM) have their roots in the factory drawings information supplied by Bob Coles who I believe was a Hawker Siddeley employee.

Coles by the way was also responsible for some rather nice Shark drawings.

The Aeromodeller drawings were not only published in the magazine but a fact that is not widely known is that Harborough started a series of British aircraft company plan books of which Miles, Westland and the rarer Bristol saw print but the ones for Hawker, de Havilland and Fairey were stillborn though a lot of the plans did get into circulation via the Aeromodeller Plan Packs (6d a sheet, double sided) in the 50's.

My Airfix fuselage is destined as a Nimrod. When this was originally written.

John

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's some very interesting and timely information John, thanks. I also am planning to build a Nimrod, hopefully in the not to distant future, and have two Airfix furies stashed ready, need two to extend the wingspan, how do the airfix wings compare to the plans?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Remember that the Fury and Nimrod are virtually identical a/c despite what is often written. Yes they differed in detail design and material specs but the basic structural shape is the same, they just followed differing development paths from the Hornet, Hoopoe via the Norn.The fact that they were so similar was Camm's insistance that the Navy requirement need not differ so much from the Air Force requirement. As far as drawings are concerned this is where it's easy to get it wrong (as per usual). The drawing most often used is that by George Cox (Aeromodeller Christmas 59) which I think was influenced by the H.J.Cooper one in Aeromodeller Sept 1944. A lot of the short fuselage problems can be laid at that door IMO. I haven't yet compared the Stair and Granger drawings but I have found some similarities with the Nimrod. The late Peter Westburg drawings (now held by NASM) have their roots in the factory drawings information supplied by Bob Coles who I believe was a Hawker Siddeley employee.

Coles by the way was also resonsible for some rather nice Shark drawings.

The Aeromodeller drawings were not only published in the magazine but a fact that is not widely known is that Harborough started a series of British aircraft company plan books of which Miles, Westland and the rarer Bristol saw print but the ones for Hawker, de Havilland and Fairey were stillborn though a lot of the plans did get into circulation via the Aeromodeller Plan Packs (6d a sheet, double sided) in the 50's.

My Airfix fuselage is destined as a Nimrod.

John

I'm sure you are right. I've only compared the Pyro kit to the drawings in the Mushroom Models Publications Hawker Fury & Nimrod book. I havn't got a clue where they got the drawings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's some very interesting and timely information John, thanks. I also am planning to build a Nimrod, hopefully in the not to distant future, and have two Airfix furies stashed ready, need two to extend the wingspan, how do the airfix wings compare to the plans?

The Airfix top wings are well shaped and the ailerons are portrayed better than the Pyro one but they have riblets on the top surface where it should have a smooth metal topside leading edge. The Pyro top wing is well shaped but the ailerons are poor and they do not have riblets on the under side leading edge. The Pyro fabric is nicer than the Airfix. The real aircraft's wing chords are top 60" and lower 58". The Airfix lower wing has 60" and the Pyro 58". The real lower wing span is 26' 01/4"

The Mushroom Fury plan top wing is a 2mm too long. It scales at 30' 4" (real 30')

John

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Airfix top wings are well shaped and the ailerons are portrayed better than the Pyro one but they have riblets on the top surface where it should have a smooth metal topside leading edge. The Pyro top wing is well shaped but the ailerons are poor and they do not have riblets on the under side leading edge. The Pyro fabric is nicer than the Airfix. The real aircraft's wing chords are top 60" and lower 58". The Airfix lower wing has 60" and the Pyro 58". The real lower wing span is 26' 01/4"

The Mushroom Fury plan top wing is a 2mm too long. It scales at 30' 4" (real 30')

John

Thanks for that John, am I correct in thinking that for a Nimrod, the wingspan needs extending to 33' 6 3/4" for the upper wing ,and 29' for the lower wing, with a chord of 63" on both ?.

Andrew

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for that John, am I correct in thinking that for a Nimrod, the wingspan needs extending to 33' 6 3/4" for the upper wing ,and 29' for the lower wing, with a chord of 63" on both ?.

Andrew

The Nimrod upper span is usually quoted as 33' 6,3/4" and I note that Paul Fontenoy's article in MMM quotes 29' for the lower wing. with chords of both wings at 63". The odd thing is that the wings of the Nimrod drawings in the really excellent Mushroom book are under scale in span but the fuselage o/length is right. The Nimrod also has a wider span tailplane.

Note . I forgot to point out that when modifying the Airfix nose with the plasticard wedges, the top of the nose has to be filed to a flatter, squarer, contour, so a curved piece of card needs gluing on the underside, as the cowl gets a bit thin. Be careful not to damage the cylinder head blisters.

John

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Recently I managed to get hold of a full set of the Westburg drawings for the Hawker Fury. These are without doubt the best Fury drawings around and originally drawn to 1:10th scale from Hawker originals. I did a comparison with the Pyro/Likelike Fury and the Airfix Fury with these drawings and suprisingly the Airfix one comes out as the most accurate (or the one with the fewest faults. I have done some correction surgrey on both. Here is a photo of the two fuselages.

The nearest is the Airfix one. This required some building up and re contouring under the nose. The top of the nose cowl reshaping and the main cowl top lifting at the front by 1.5mm with a plasticard wedge. 2mm adding to the sternpost and the fuselage stringers, fabric sag reducing. The exhausts are too low and incorrectly spaced (these have yet to be re-drilled).

The Pyro one needed two fuselages chopping into four pieces and respacing. The nose top needed some work to reshape it as did the top deck forwards of the cockpit. Again the exhausts are wrongly spaced but they are at the right height .

I'll deal with the wings and things at some point.

John

Firstlookphotos054.jpg

John,

It would be interesting to compare the 1/32nd Montex Fury to your plans.

I think the air intakes either side of the fuselage, just in front of the forward undercarriage strut should be of a squarer cross section than those of the Pyro kit. In fact the lower fuselage cross section at that point looks a little too rounded.

Regards,

Trubbie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
John,

It would be interesting to compare the 1/32nd Montex Fury to your plans.

I think the air intakes either side of the fuselage, just in front of the forward undercarriage strut should be of a squarer cross section than those of the Pyro kit. In fact the lower fuselage cross section at that point looks a little too rounded.

Regards,

Trubbie

Hi

I can't comment on the Montex Fury as I don't have one but the following photo might help. Yes' it's a Nimrod .I but as to my earlier comments the fuselage exterior is virtually the same. Note the carb intakes are very flat as are the fuselage sides and belly.

John

Flylegend2006023.jpg

Edited by John Aero

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi

I can't comment on the Montex Fury as I don't have one but the following photo might help. Yes' it's a Nimrod .I but as to my earlier comments the fuselage exterior is virtually the same. Note the carb intakes are very flat as are the fuselage sides and belly.

John

Flylegend2006023.jpg

A little more detail. On the Fury the Potts oil cooler was mounted in front of the radiator under the sloping grill and the little blisters that get missed off (because they would interfere with release from the mould) cover the lower engine mount joint.

John

Flylegend2006021.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Recently I managed to get hold of a full set of the Westburg drawings for the Hawker Fury. These are without doubt the best Fury drawings around and originally drawn to 1:10th scale from Hawker originals. I did a comparison with the Pyro/Likelike Fury and the Airfix Fury with these drawings and suprisingly the Airfix one comes out as the most accurate (or the one with the fewest faults. I have done some correction surgrey on both. Here is a photo of the two fuselages.

The nearest is the Airfix one. This required some building up and re contouring under the nose. The top of the nose cowl reshaping and the main cowl top lifting at the front by 1.5mm with a plasticard wedge. 2mm adding to the sternpost and the fuselage stringers, fabric sag reducing. The exhausts are too low and incorrectly spaced (these have yet to be re-drilled).

The Pyro one needed two fuselages chopping into four pieces and respacing. The nose top needed some work to reshape it as did the top deck forwards of the cockpit. Again the exhausts are wrongly spaced but they are at the right height .

I'll deal with the wings and things at some point.

John

Firstlookphotos054.jpg

John Aero, I realize that this is now some months since you first posted this. But I am going to make a 1/48th scale Hawker Nimrod using 2 or 3 Lindberg Hawker Fury models suitably modified, as a base. I have printed off this page in order to make measurements from it. I have also checked both the Aifix & i

Inpact fuselage pieces against the George Cox & the Mushroom Models book plans. What I am trying to figure out, is what, & how you modified the Impact/ Lindberg fuselage to correct the length for your model. In measuring the fuselage halves in the above picture, the upper one is 1/4 inch longer. I am using the other measurement given in other resposes to this thread for the wing span & chord. Also, did the Mark 1 Nimrod have the enlarged horizontal tailplanmes ? Thanking you in advance for any comments. Carl T :thumbsup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry Carl I've only just seen this. My Pyro modded fuselage is in fact made up from two fuselages that are "cut and shut". Not an easy job. I also found out that the exhausts on the Airfix kit are much too low and those on the Pyro kit are too bunched and wrongly spaced. I will try and take some more photos to show my exhaust modifications (I let in etched frets from my Demon project). The George Cox drawings have fuselage errors.

I will need to check on the Mk.1 tailplane sizes but I suspect that the Mk.2 wing was swept for C of G reasons and the larger tailplane was also as a result of this for better pitch control.

John

Edited by John Aero

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry Carl I've only just seen this. My Pyro modded fuselage is in fact made up from two fuselages that are "cut and shut". Not an easy job. I also found out that the exhausts on the Airfix kit are much too low and those on the Pyro kit are too bunched and wrongly spaced. I will try and take some more photos to show my exhaust modifications (I let in etched frets from my Demon project). The George Cox drawings have fuselage errors.

I will need to check on the Mk.1 tailplane sizes but I suspect that the Mk.2 wing was swept for C of G reasons and the larger tailplane was also as a result of this for better pitch control.

John

John, I am sorry to say that I do not know what you mean by cut & shut. I have been looking as close as I can at the Inpact fuselage picture & am trying to make out where you made your cuts to lengthen the fuselage. In comparing tha Airfix Fuselage to the Mushroom Models plan I see that the plan & the Airfix fuselage are very close in size, if not exactly so. ( I have checkedout both of the exhausts on both models & agree with you about the things that you comment on. ) It is a strong temptation to use the Airfix fuselage & the modified Inpact wings to make a Nimrod model. But I have 2 each of the Airfix & Impact Fury fuselages made up, with one more of the Impact ones still in its box. The 4 built up Fury models I want to keep as Furies. I have an order in for 2 more of the Lindberg/Impact Furies so that I can make up the Nimrod coversion.

Above here you say that converting the 2 kit fuselages is not an easy job, & that is why I want to be as clear in my mind how to go about it as I can. Is it possible that you could make lines on the above picture showing where you made your cuts?

Thanks very much for getting back to me so soon, & for your generous help. I appreciate it very much. Carl T :thumbsup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
p-26luvr said:
John, I am sorry to say that I do not know what you mean by cut & shut. I have been looking as close as I can at the Inpact fuselage picture & am trying to make out where you made your cuts to lengthen the fuselage. In comparing tha Airfix Fuselage to the Mushroom Models plan I see that the plan & the Airfix fuselage are very close in size, if not exactly so. ( I have checkedout both of the exhausts on both models & agree with you about the things that you comment on. ) It is a strong temptation to use the Airfix fuselage & the modified Inpact wings to make a Nimrod model. But I have 2 each of the Airfix & Impact Fury fuselages made up, with one more of the Impact ones still in its box. The 4 built up Fury models I want to keep as Furies. I have an order in for 2 more of the Lindberg/Impact Furies so that I can make up the Nimrod coversion.

Above here you say that converting the 2 kit fuselages is not an easy job, & that is why I want to be as clear in my mind how to go about it as I can. Is it possible that you could make lines on the above picture showing where you made your cuts?

Thanks very much for getting back to me so soon, & for your generous help. I appreciate it very much. Carl T :thumbsup:

The term "cut and shut" is a car modifying term for cutting out bits and adding new ones. I hope the attached photos explain the mods to the Pyro kit. You will notice that the tail end and centre portion have been cut from one kit and added to another fuselage to lengthen it in a couple of places. Also you can see on the Airfix kit where I have lifted the exhausts up by a couple of mm.

I am now of the opinion that the Nimrod 1  was normally fitted with the smaller tailplane.

JohnFuryfuse005.jpg

Furyfuse007.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

John, Thank you so much for your generous help & for taking the time to answer so quickly. I can now see clearly how you made the modifications to both models. And thank you also for your opinion about the Nimrod tailplane. I will see what I can do with both models. Carl T :thumbsup::speak_cool:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like what you have done with the Pyro Fury. What are you going to do with the wing and rear fuselage fabric detail? (pyro)

Maybe it is just me, I do not like the fine cross hatch fabric detail and would prefer a smooth finnish (on mine at least) how could I do this without destroying the fine detail of the structure below the fabric? I have heard of Merlon? or somthing, maybe I should get some of this to rub down the areas?

I need to get rid of injection marks all over the wings also..

Edited by phat trev

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just out of curiosity - what finish would the prop have on a Fury? I've never seen a good clear picture of one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just out of curiosity - what finish would the prop have on a Fury? I've never seen a good clear picture of one.

Warm Light Grey to Dark Grey or Black. Smooth semi glossy. Later with Black rear faces (mostly on Mk.11's). Certainly not Wood as the majority of the blade has a protective covering. The built up ply boss is usually painted( prop colour or Flight colour) but the last couple of inches either side of the hub may be in clear varnish over the natural mahogany wood colour on some a/c. Spinner polished natural metal

John

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't managed to finish a private model for 30 years so why should I start now? :0)

John

With more unfinished Moths that DeHavillands.

Share this post


Link to post
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...