CLICK HERE to see posts in last 24 hours
| Welcome to Mainly Military modelling. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Trumpeter 1:48 A3 Skywarrior; Notes on a theme. | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jul 20 2013, 11:39 AM (11,517 Views) | |
| Mark M | Sep 1 2013, 03:47 PM Post #31 |
|
Hawk T1
|
Cracking mate |
![]() |
|
| DLG Dave | Sep 2 2013, 08:42 AM Post #32 |
|
Lt Dave 'Wraith' Carter
|
Just a tiny number of touch-ups to achieve but essentially the model is now finished. However there's an awful lot of writing-up still to add on the final assembly individual areas and whatever. ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Watch this space, as they say.... |
![]() |
|
| Olde Farte | Sep 2 2013, 10:27 AM Post #33 |
|
Lt. Derek 'Smurfy' Reeve
|
This is stunning, a damn good build and write up, thanks for sharing this. |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Sep 2 2013, 01:11 PM Post #34 |
|
Deleted User
|
That is superb Many thanks for taking the time to do this
|
|
|
| Mark M | Sep 2 2013, 01:56 PM Post #35 |
|
Hawk T1
|
Wow and thanks mate |
![]() |
|
| DLG Dave | Sep 2 2013, 02:45 PM Post #36 |
|
Lt Dave 'Wraith' Carter
|
If you're building the model with airbrakes extended or closed, the hingeline is in error either way. The hinge tabs were in the direct linear plane of the frontal airbrake plate itself - not angled as per the Trumpeter part. To fix the airbrakes closed either fill the hinge tab recesses or cut them from the part and glue within the recesses. As previously, the fit of this part as you might use it is very tight again and you'll need to remove some material to glue open airbrakes in if you use the parts as supplied, without modifying them otherwise. Glueing the engine pods in place at this stage is of course a bit terrifying. There are three raised ridges across the top of the pod to help guide you but they're a wee bit wide. Remove around half a mil from each end of them and dry test fit until you're happy. ![]() There's a bit of an online discussion around the baffle area ahead of the bomb-bay doors. This baffle was added to the Bomber airframes to prevent the bomb fall being disturbed by air currents immediately outside the fuselage. The baffle frequently is in the down position when the airframe is at rest. The appearance of the baffle itself is pretty representative. Certainly of my airframe although in some cases the 'open' slot as can be seen is closed off by the rear edge continuing along the full run. However, the 'briquette appearance does actually feature on the associated face of the fuselage underside. To be fair it's not really as heavy as Trumpeter feature it, but it is there. The outermost two briquettes also feature the recesses for the retractable launch cable attachment hooks. The circular parts of this recessed fuselage area seem not to stick proud but are themselves recesses *possibly*, but my reference is not clear here and if it's really important to you, you'll need to seek further clarification. As is, if you build this area with the baffle in the extended position, the associated fuselage face is fairly well concealed from just about any angle other than looking directly up at it. As is, of course, the bomb bay, but I would suspect that any viewer wishing to look at the underside will have their eyes drawn inside the bomb-bay rather than to a fairly unimportant fuselage face. However. If you elect to build this part retracted, for a 'clean' airframe, you've probably got troubles. As you see the model I've built, the area the baffle will mate to seems swollen. That's my fault, not that of Trumpeter. ![]() ![]() Earlier I mentioned that the fuselage halves are something of a task to get together. All told, the final area to be glued for me was this baffle fence recess. To glue it successfully as was, I'd have had to force the two fuselage points here together and upwards - the way in which I'd built the kit compelled that. To negate the complication, I simply added a slip of plasticard against which both fuselage points could bond, which has artificially forced the part here outward and down - forming the 'bulge'. An inner fuselage tab assisting the join much earlier would have been helpful to keep the appearance more in keeping with Trumpeter's intentions. Even then, the baffle fence will not form a satisfactory look if the part itself is simply glued into place for a 'clean' airframe. As unsatisfactory as it may seem, you may be better off simply packing the area with milliput and sanding the area down to conform to proper shape, scribing in the relevant baffle plate outlines subsequently. Once again, that really was easy for me to type out... :rolleyes: ![]() The nose undercarriage door hangs from PE hooks added to the door itself. Each undercarriage door, main and nose, is moulded with a large number of moulding gates to retain the deep aspects of the cast without distortion. Care and attention will be needed to get them off the sprue and cleaned up properly. The two parts at the front of the door are a single lamp and a box which comprised landing and approach lights. They need to be angled at the line of flight and\or landing rather than to the forward orientation of the door itself, hence need to be angled downwards in comparison with what I've produced here. |
![]() |
|
| DLG Dave | Sep 3 2013, 07:56 AM Post #37 |
|
Lt Dave 'Wraith' Carter
|
Wing slats. Another point at which you'd be advised to build the kit with wings folded. This picture helps immensely. http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7220/6918874...4241988f5_z.jpg The earlier version Skywarrior (in the photo you have a later airframe) has no extending slat inboard of the engine pylons. Those later airframes which comprised the slats, the inboard slats extend with less stroke, and their resultant leading edge does not extend as far forward as those of the outboard slats. The airframe subject of the Trumpeter kit itself may not feature the inboard slats, as mentioned above, but because I didn't apply to any real diligence for that particular one, in the ol' Wiki phrase, you may bear in mind 'Citation needed'. However, the outboard slats as depicted in the instruction sheet feature an anomaly. I have no specific proof of this since I never put the wings together with the slats fitted in a wings-extended position. If you wish to build the model with wings extended, Trumpeter's instruction pictorial hints that the sections of slat immediately outboard of the engine pylon - but inboard of the wing fold, feature slats which do not match the deployed stroke extent of the slats fitted to the outboard wing. IF - **IF** - the kit builds thus, then that's wrong. The entire wing slat surface area outboard of the engines out to the wingtip extend in line as if they were a single unitary structure, without break in the leading edge they form. This is true of all versions and variants. Again, IF that's right, then building your model thus is of course made that bit trickier. The tight Trumpeter tolerances once again work against you and getting that exact straight line whilst managing to get each slat actuator to fit in the correct manner is something of a juggle. If you build with wings folded, your job is made just that wee bit easier. I'm not certain if a replacement resin single piece here will be the answer since such a thin and delicate piece would be likely to warp. Snap together. Funnily enough, we get to the stage where at last Trumpeter's very tight tolerances work in your favour. The horizontal tailplanes have never been glued in. They're a tight fit but if they fall out of their respective slots due to some force of nature, I wouldn't necessarily worry about it too much. If that force did that to your Skywarrior, it would have taken your house along with it. And that's the fantastic thing about the wing fold. The outer wing slots with protest into its respective recesses but it will fit at a press. It will sit at any angle you give it without drooping or changing three seconds after you turn your back. It means you can set it at exactly the right angle and then set the join with your glue of choice. It also means you won't necessarily need a wing fold support 'twixt adjaecent upper wing surfaces. Just going on what I see in reference, wing fold supports are fitted less often than more, and are more frequent on deck-deployed airframes. I didn't want to fit them on this occasion, and on this one the choice will be yours. ![]() The IFR probe, as has been noted earlier, is not relevant to the airframe as depicted for the Trumpeter kit. However, it's in the box and is there for use. It may have the previously noted possible incorrect height on the fuselage, and also features a curious bulb-shape immediately aft of the tip, which wasn't present on the real feature. It shouldn't prove too much of a task to replace this with a piece of tubing with the refuelling tip added in place cut from the kit part. Previously I'd always assumed that the IFR probe was a single straight line from tip to tail. It's not. It's difficult to garner from photos but the probe limb angles to port gently from the point at which it joins the fuselage. Trumpeter have got this angle just about right, and if you weren't expecting it, it looks terrible at first. It also means that if you don't take photos of the model at exactly side-on, an optical illusion takes place in which the forward length of the probe looks like it's pointing downwards slightly. Whilst the forward yoke support for the probe could do with some positive attachment points to bed it into the fuselage, I'm otherwise happy with this feature. The coaming, finally, is not a particularly good fit but it will slot in after a fashion. As previously stated, the kit I built needed no nose weight, even with that resincast ECM tail. The canopy seems to me to be a wee bit caricatured. Again on this occasion I'm not convinced I'm just suffering an optical illusion but it doesn't seem to be as low and sleek as it ought to be. To my eyes, it seems just a bit high at the forward centre, and the impression is that the transparencies are 'blown' in the same manner as the hood of a Spitfire. In my terms, I'm actually not too worried if that turns out to be true or false. If it's false, then the canopy is fine, and my eyes are off. If I'm right, I'm in no particular doubt there will be replacement transparencies coming from AM sources. There are several different framing configurations for the Whale according to the versions and variants you'll be building, and conversion kits will need to take that into account. If those AM concerns commit to those replacement canopies for the later versions, the likelihood is they'll produce a superior replacement for this earlier version, and hopefully with facility to open the top hatch. |
![]() |
|
| DLG Dave | Sep 3 2013, 08:51 AM Post #38 |
|
Lt Dave 'Wraith' Carter
|
![]() ![]() So. After a few thousand words of petulant and pedantic whining and moaning, here we are. When I first dry-fitted the fuselage without nose or tail, I thought the model looked all box and shoulders. Once assembly had evolved considerably with all tail and inner wings in place, the familiar Whale shape emerged from the separate parts. And everything in place now, what I see is indisputably a Skywarrior. Other than the areas I've indicated could be subject to optical illusion, from what I can see, there are three specific clear areas an experienced observer can point to immediately which would be seen to be inaccurate. Only two of those can be clearly seen if the kit wings are depicted in the folded state. One is the Wheel hubs - incorrect for the early versions. The next will be the slots for the RATO bottles. And often those slots were plated or taped over.The only other immediate inaccuracy the experienced observer would see would be the disparity in the slat leading edges *ONLY* if the instruction sheet accurately indicates their respective levels where noted to be anomalous. Other than that, if the builder has built the kit scheme with the IFR probe in place - but that's a fault in Trumpeter's understanding of the version, not in particular part inaccuracy. (The kit scheme also incorrectly details the anti-glare panel as 'black', which is incorrect for this airframe in this period - the kit's scheme anti-glare should be a mid-grey. Roughly the same tonal value as ocean grey or dark sea grey). Other faults and problems are not immediately visible, and certainly not to anyone other than someone going out of their way to seek them out. If you weren't aware of those features, and\or they don't matter to you, then you're left with a model which will satisfactorily represent the aircraft you want to depict. It's a shame in terms for Trumpeter they didn't impel themselves to turn this superb kit into a masterpiece - but that's academic. They've given us an exceptional model which can be turned into a Skywarrior, where previously you would have had to seek out a vac-form and some onerous scratchbuilding alongside in parallel, or resincasts of varying price and availability. For the price of this kit, you'd have to be particularly mean-spirited to find genuine approbrium. It took long enough for the companies to come up with a 1:72 injection moulded kit - far too long in fact. To have a Whale available in injection form in 1:48 is fantastic, and the kit will prove more than equal to the satisfaction of the modeller in more than ninety percent of cases. It's a modeller's model. Whilst as I've admitted from the start, I'm not hugely interested in aircraft modelling any longer, and this is my first completed Trumpeter airframe. I've not previously encountered a model where PE is a central constituent of assembly, so it's an interesting pointer to where the hobby might be going. To the careful builder, there's easily a year's worth of modelling here for superdetailing and improvements. There's plenty to bite the careless and the hurried. It's not a beginner's model, and completely unsuited as a Christmas present for a ten year old. Whatever work you're prepared to put in, it's got tremendous presence on your shelf, and you'd have to be daft to overlook this one simply on the basis of its known shortcomings. (Including those shortcomings I lacked the attention and competence to note). ************************************************* The airframe I chose is depicted in a fairly short frame of period whilst it was flying from Roosevelt Roads, Puerto Rico in 1963. Somewhere in the region of two decades later, I found myself on a Thursday evening on a Royal Navy warship which had put alongside at Roosevelt Roads for the night, whilst planned exercises with the Coral Sea were being discussed. Some US Navy senior officers came aboard and I was tasked with showing them round part of the Seaslug missile compartments. Early in the afternoon, some US Navy Phantoms lazily orbited overhead, too high up for a photo unfortunately. Later that afternoon came a message that some of the ships company had been invited to a barbeque on one part of the Rosie Roads base beach, guests of one of the other US Navy Destroyers alongside. Comer around six in the afternoon, there we found ourselves with some rather ludicrous sandals trading t-shirts, zippo lighters and dits with some of the boys from the other ship, whilst in the background the unmistakeable sound of turbine engines was winding up. From the low shrub background, took off a succession of US Navy fast jets. Two singleton Skyhawks. An A7. Two further pairs of OA-4M's. Two further A7's. Two fighter variant F-8 Crusaders. A further RF-8. (Yes, fighter versions, I'll just have to ask you to accept that I knew the difference - and no, they weren't French airframes on a visit...!...) They all spent the next hour manoeuvring and wheeling around. Touch and goes. Formation flying. One of the best air shows I ever saw. Another high pitched whine and a low rumble and unsticking far further on from the runway appeared a Skywarrior rising at a shallow angle towards the blue bay. It levelled off, turned gently starboard into the Caribbean setting sun and slowly climbed away. That's what I call a well-spent youth.
|
![]() |
|
| Olde Farte | Sep 3 2013, 11:27 AM Post #39 |
|
Lt. Derek 'Smurfy' Reeve
|
Truly superb and your patience is boundless. Many thanks for all your efforts and I am in the process of sorting it all out build wise and leaving out the fluffy bits from the rest of us before printing. |
![]() |
|
| DLG Dave | Sep 3 2013, 11:30 AM Post #40 |
|
Lt Dave 'Wraith' Carter
|
I've still got to back-edit a couple of bits which are more important in the correct sequence, where here I've mentioned some aspects too far in retrospect. I've still yet to add a list of references, credits and walkarounds, and I'll finally add a list of recommended aftermarket accessories and decals that would be welcome. So keep looking in, I'm not done yet. Thanks for the feedback, nonetheless. |
![]() |
|
| DLG Dave | Oct 26 2013, 09:54 AM Post #41 |
|
Lt Dave 'Wraith' Carter
|
Recommended accessories for After-Market concerns to ponder. To my knowledge, not available yet or in preparation elsewhere. These are general replacement\additional parts which will suit most Skywarrior needs - other than a fairly narrow - but important - case I've omitted suggestions for conversions to other specific variants. I've also tried to remain only on-track for what I personally would use. Hence I've not recommended replacement engine castings. I wouldn't need them, use them or display them. I've also omitted mention of replacement parts where I already know (at time of writing) they are already extant or in preparation. Decals :- Upper Fuselage Walkway. Outline and full strips. And\or Walkway mask. (albeit one version of these walkways has already been covered by Caracal) Recesses for RATO gear in decal form. Etch Brass and resin:- Windscreen wipers. Pitots and vanes various around fuselage. Replacement Bomb-bay baffle fence. Full replacement cockpit panels including a resincast replacement cockpit interior with corrected panel locations. (There are sub-panels which sit above the main panels at around elbow height for both the pilot and bomb-aimer). Naturally the internal cockpit differences between the Bomber airframes, and the versions airframes is different but that isn't insurmountable. Cockpit details, levers, buttons etc. Recommend any cockpit panel parts in etch form have pre-painted status to include the prominent white text. Etch template for scribing the RATO recesses into the fuselage. Additional Bomb-bay structure and equipment. (Partially provisional on this occasion. Trumpeter may have mistaken the internal structure for Tanker-unique fittings. When their Tanker version appears, it may have some of the missing bomb-bay structural details I've already covered) A nuclear bomb for the weapon bay. (Why not...?) An internal insert for the modeller who will be building with bomb doors closed which will strengthen the fuselage, improve the fit and support:- ...a keyed 'raft' which will carry not only the closed bomb-bay doors but provide a replacement area which will feature the baffle fence closed, or provide for an opened area to fit the replacement etch baffle plate. ...a keyed 'raft' which will be a replacement lower fuselage to provide for reconnaissance versions (which of course will need additional reconnaissance fittings and sensors, new canopy, use of the circular porthole mouldings Trumpeter feature in the kit, plus additional decals) Both lower 'raft' castings to carry the recesses and\or hooks for the catapult launch fittings. Stays, actuators, interlocks & additional internal equipment for the radome to be fixed in the open position. Vac-form transparencies:- Replacement transparency for the in-box version. (With the model finished for some weeks now, I can honestly say the cockpit canopy moulding just makes my finished model look wrong. It's not too much to ask for since there are several variants of the cockpit canopy across the Skywarrior versions and service so it would be just one of four or five transparency mouldings which would legitimately be needed anyway). Provision for hatch opening for any and all canopy variants. Provision for internal canopy framing, which is prominent. Some back-editing to do and still to add a list of credits and inspirations. This list of recommended improvements will probably expand too... |
![]() |
|
| Olde Farte | Oct 26 2013, 09:59 AM Post #42 |
|
Lt. Derek 'Smurfy' Reeve
|
Thanks for this update. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · Full Build Reviews · Next Topic » |



















7:26 PM Jul 11