forum.ww1aircraftmodels.com
WW1 Aircraft Modeling => Under Construction => Topic started by: ebergerud on May 02, 2020, 11:07:31 AM
-
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49839746557_64d663c672_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2iWaJg8)MoraneN (https://flic.kr/p/2iWaJg8) by Eric Bergerud (https://www.flickr.com/photos/156656645@N05/), on Flickr
I had great fun building my humble Academy Nieuport 17 - biplane #2 for me. So I decided to break out a kit from my stash - the Special Hobby 1/32 Morane Saulnier N. I bought this kit a few years back because the real plane had what we used to call "funk appeal." In real life, the model wasn't well suited for combat and only 50 were made. But it looks neat. And it also got into the original version of Sierra's famous Red Baron video game which I played avidly. There it was called the Morane "Bullet."
There was only one online build review - a piece from IPMS. The reviewer described an "excellent multi-media magical kit" including styrene, PE and resin. An open box pic shows that at least the multi-media description was accurate - alone with very neat box art:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49839746622_fbeea079a4_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2iWaJhf)kit (https://flic.kr/p/2iWaJhf) by Eric Bergerud (https://www.flickr.com/photos/156656645@N05/), on Flickr
However this kit turns out I certainly won't use the term "magical" about anything. The kit is a short run model produced by the Czech firm Special Hobby in 2006. I know a Polish modeler who said that during the Cold War modeling was very popular in the Eastern Bloc nations (including Russia) because it was cheap and required very little space. He also noted the kits were very spare and presumed great patience on the part of the modeler - none of the decadent Tamiya type engineering that was changing the hobby in the West. I've thought about those comments often in the last couple of weeks because this kit fights you every step of the way. So a model with about 50 parts is not going to be a quick build. Might add that the instructions are wretched. The parts are drawn suspended with arrows pointing in the direction of where they're to go - but no good diagrams of what things are supposed to look like when done. Fortunately (the same was the case for the Academy Nieuport) Eduard had released a 1/48 MS Model N several years back - that kit is out of print I could download the instructions, and they've helped a lot. So have a couple of photo builds from Large Planes and a terrific pic of a MS pilot and showing the cockpit in nice detail:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49838904273_2793df1af5_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2iW6pSZ)Morane-Saulnier_N_cockpit (https://flic.kr/p/2iW6pSZ) by Eric Bergerud (https://www.flickr.com/photos/156656645@N05/), on Flickr
I've needed the Special Hobby instructions for one thing - the parts are not numbered on the sprues, so you have to refer to the instructions to know where they are. And to think before turning to biplanes I had built four straight Tamiya kits - a new normal.
There are pegs and holes only for the vertical stabilizer and - luckily - they fit. That means everything else is guided by some slots and adjustments made by eyeball. One way I judge the quality of fit is to ask how often I could use Tamiya "Extra Thin" cement - the better the fit, the more extra thin works. On this model I'm using Tamiya's regular cement (a lot like testors or German Revell: many modelers buy it in an orange bottle ) which is thicker but stronger and allows you extra time to adjust pieces. I sure needed it while doing the cockpit. None of the pieces have solid attachment points so you've simply got to get them together and keep adjusting things until everything looks aligned. It isn't easy. (Eduard had a similar interior but gave it a floor - a place where you attach all of the bird cage pieces, rudder stick and seat. Maybe Eduard was making its own history but considering the fact that you don't see much of the cockpit, I'd take it. However credit Special Hobby for making the only PE seat belts I've used that were soft enough to install more or less correctly. Here it is:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49839746702_b490860de4_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2iWaJiC)cockpit (https://flic.kr/p/2iWaJiC) by Eric Bergerud (https://www.flickr.com/photos/156656645@N05/), on Flickr
The fuselage halves - no pegs mind you - required careful eyeballing, sanding and a proper dose of Tamiya's Light Curing putty. After my lacquer primer goes down I don't there will be any seams. (It covers a lot of errors - great stuff.) The horizontal stabilizer assembly was very weak and sure enough broke in short order. The wings are in single pieces which means they're very heavy. Because the wings meet the fuselage at the cockpit, there wasn't any way to make big slots. There were two pegs on the wings and two holes in the fuselage which were helpful for wing alignment but didn't even come close to a fit. I worried about the gap appearing between the wings and the fuselage and decided there should be one. (Wise heads on this board guided that decision.) But I need not have been concerned. There was no way that heavy wing was going to stay on with plastic glue alone - even the heavy duty Tamiya. That meant a dose of Zap a Gap CA (definitely my favorite brand although I wish it was never needed) across the wing join - and the gap is no longer there. But I'm hoping the wing will stay on. I also used some CA to stabilize the cockpit fit:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49838904238_2d4043ac69_k.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2iW6pSo)topfuslage (https://flic.kr/p/2iW6pSo) by Eric Bergerud (https://www.flickr.com/photos/156656645@N05/), on Flickr
The next step was putting assembling the front panel of the top of the fuselage. This task had only a few parts, but they had to go in right because it was needed to seat the machine gun and put on the post over the gun that will hold the upper rigging together. Not a single part fit without trimming something - and it didn't help that the gun required surgery on the slot holding the magazine. Actually the instructions gave no clue to where the gun was supposed to mount except for painting diagrams showing a side view of the whole plane clearly that the barrel was to extend well over the cowl. The cockpit pic shown above was of huge help in this phase. Following this was assembling the engine. Here again, the pieces were all somewhat out of alignment. If I was going to make an RAF MS-N I could leave off the big round spinner and the engine would stand out and I'd have to work harder. (In the real world the big spinner caused overheating - a bit like trouble Kurt Tank had with the original FW-190.) But then I wouldn't have a Bullet - unthinkable. As it stands only a small portion of the engine will be visible underneath. Anyway - here's the engine. (The brass portion part is simply daft - I'll spin it to make the lower part align correctly because that's the only thing we'll see.)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49839746667_1f1625a3b2_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2iWaJi2)engine2 (https://flic.kr/p/2iWaJi2) by Eric Bergerud (https://www.flickr.com/photos/156656645@N05/), on Flickr
More soon I hope. With some luck the undercarriage and rigging apparatus on the bottom will go on without debacle. I am, however, already trying to see how that very small area on top of the post over the gun is going to handle 10 individual rigging lines.
Should note a gent named Brian Dean has a 1/3 scale MS-N on YouTube. The model has working wing warping which I've never really seen before - very cool. Check "Morane Saulnier Type N"
Eric
-
This is of great interest o me, I have the Special Hobby Nieuport 11 and Bristol M1c in the stash. You've made a great start on it, must be difficult identifying small parts without numbers to help!
-
Excellent work on getting the wings mounted and aligned! Sounds like a challenging build but you seem to be getting it all sorted out!
RAGIII
-
Nice work with this one Eric. I built this kit several years ago and I recall that it was a bit of a challenge to get together, but makes a nice modelittle if you can survive to the finish. ;) Looks like you will make, based on progress to date. Well Done!
Best regards,
Bob
-
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49848291228_58d2e1b103_k.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2iWVwi3)Primed (https://flic.kr/p/2iWVwi3) by Eric Bergerud (https://www.flickr.com/photos/156656645@N05/), on Flickr
Some progress - if that's the word - on the Special Hobby Morane Saulnier N. Assembly is complete. The prop and spinner are only attached with white glue because I want to give the prop some proper TLC. All of the stuff underneath was much like the stuff on top - nothing fit right, and the eyeball got a real workout. But, I think, everything looks ok. Still wondering how all of the rigging is going to end up attached to very small areas, especially upstairs. Also I'm very glad this model is 1/32 because it's a very small plane. Cecil Lewis (author of the classic Sagittarius Rising) recalled that he didn't think a pilot over 5'6" could fit into the cockpit. Lewis did "love" the Morane LA "Parasol". He said it was a death trap, and made every plane he flew later easy. Odd view on love, but I've dealt with a lot of fighter jockeys and they're a breed apart - lack of oxygen maybe. BTW: Lewis gave a 40 minute interview to BBC in 1964 (BBC didn't have to hurry with Lewis - he lived another 33 years). The interview is on YouTube in its entirety, but the audio is accelerated. You can turn on the subtitles and turn off the volume. There are bits of the interview attached to some topics and it comes off brilliantly.
As you can see, the model is primed. My primer is a product I've grown very fond of. It is Duplicolor automotive lacquer primer that is both "sandable" and "fillable". (Duplicolor makes dozens of paints and primers and only a couple fit this description - the one used is #1698 Black Hot Rod.) I was guided to this product by one of the great modelers on YouTube - Paul Budzik. (Scale Model Workshop is the channel - if you've never seen Budzik's videos you should check them out, they're amazing. He was one of the pioneers at Finescale Modeler and other places in the 90's that created the kind of high level modeling we know today. His videos deal with tools and techniques with a couple of video builds.)
The neat things about this type of Duplicolor is that it serves as a primer the way it would be used at an autobody shop. It's a true lacquer and melds with the plastic - but does zero damage to detail. It's in a rattle can (with a "fan cap" - fancy) which works great. In my workspace, no enamel or lacquer products are allowed because of the pungency - hence I prime outside. (Duplicolor would work great decanted and then airbrushed - that's just verboten at my place.) Luckily, like lacquer paint, it dries very quickly. When originally sprayed on it is matte in finish and somewhat grainy. So by melding with the plastic it eliminates any left-over seams and obliterates the kind of shinny irregularities you'll get from lots of glue and especially CA. And this kit required a lot of both. If anything is still left you can sand the primer - and because the primer grasps the plastic - you also sand any problems remaining on the plastic. A light sanding - or even a proper rub with a coarse rag - removes the grainy texture and leaves you with a smooth satin finish in about 90 seconds. Also, because this is a product intended for people who make their living using it it's much cheaper than anything made for modelers - we pay a premium for everything. (Figure about $6 for 12 ounces - enough primer to do maybe six to eight kits depending on size.)
Also I'll be black basing this model to ready it for oils and pigments, and, as you might guess, black primer is essential. I think it's going to work pretty well on this model with it's mostly doped linen surface. I hope so anyway.
Eric
-
Good work Eric, it looks better than OK to me. From the photo everything seems to line up perfectly. You've done a great job selling the primer to me, think I'll try to get some once my Tamiya rattle can is finished. I have to go on YouTube now to look for that interview!
Richie
-
Excellent work. You are making a difficult kit look Fantastic!
RAGIII
-
Congrats on getting to this stage on a difficult challenge , looking forward on seeing her with the livery . :)
Terri
-
Holy cow that’s fast, looking forward to paint.
Ryan
-
(Joke) Nice nightfighter.... All kidding aside, looks great, cannot wait for your painting.
-
Dupli-Color also makes a primer sealer that does not contain any filler material such as talcum powder. Sprays on very smooth and will not hide the smallest detail. Available in grey color. You can purchase this product ( at least in the USA) from auto parts stores.
-
Eric, did you know about the Tom's Modelworks 1/32 PE Moraine-Saulnier logo for the cowling? They're a very nice touch.
-
Eric,
"I've dealt with a lot of fighter jockeys and they're a breed apart - lack of oxygen maybe. BTW: Lewis gave a 40 minute interview to BBC in 1964 (BBC didn't have to hurry with Lewis - he lived another 33 years). The interview is on YouTube in its entirety, but the audio is accelerated. You can turn on the subtitles and turn off the volume. There are bits of the interview attached to some topics and it comes off brilliantly. "
Ha! I've often wondered what was wrong with me, thanks for clearing that one up! :) :) :)
Thanks for the hint on the Cecil Lewis Interview, I've found it and book marked it for tonight's Isolation Movie, looks like great stuff. Like many of us I have a copy of his book and enjoyed it immensely, I didn't know of this video and am really looking forward to watching it.
Cheers,
Lance
-
Eric, your black bird looks great!
Do you want to use a technique like "black biasing"? I will be very interesting, how you will convert this black into linen color.
This invites me to finish another shelf queen (the Type I) soon, lets see ...
Cheers,
Frank
-
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49848291228_58d2e1b103_k.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2iWVwi3)Primed (https://flic.kr/p/2iWVwi3) by Eric Bergerud (https://www.flickr.com/photos/156656645@N05/), on Flickr
Time for some black basing. If you haven't heard the term, check YouTube under Doog's Models and watch his first video – about 8 minutes, called "Black Basing" for an introduction. (Doog in my opinion is one of the best modelers on YT - and doesn't mess around with patreon etc. All of his stuff is crackerjack.) The idea is to dispense with preshading and instead amplify tonal variations randomly. This technique is very popular among WWII and jet aircraft modelers because any service plane (or vehicle for that matter) shows a high degree of tonal variation on its surface due to paint degradation due to fading & elements and a buildup of a kind of patina from fluids combining with dirt and stains left by pilots and ground crew crawling around. The question is, does the same calculation work with fabric planes of a different era. I think it would - and would be most pronounced on doped linen surfaces. As I understand it, a rotary burnt about 1 gallon of castor oil per hour. There's a very short old film of a Morane Saulnier N starting up on YTube - the exhaust is pouring out and the prop is kicking up a cloud of dust. For some of the same effect, you can check a video on the warbird channel run by Kermit Weeks. He was starting up a full size Sopwith Snipe replica that hadn't been started for five years, flew the plane for just a few minutes - and when landed he chatted with his ground crew while standing in huge streak of castor oil that had built up in, literally, almost no time.
I can see why many people are keen on WWI aircraft modeling. We have a lot of data on the planes, and numerous artifacts from the old planes. (There's a very neat article from Vintage Aircraft about the kind of linen you'd choose for a SE-5 and how it would be sewn. It includes pieces of original fabric.) But despite the existence of thousands of pics we don't have anything like the photographic record present for WWII - which includes some in genuine color. Admiring replicas is great fun - I was at Guntersville Alabama when it still hosted dozens of mostly full sized replicas - but I don't think these planes give you much of an idea of what a real WWI service plane would have looked.
One could claim that aircraft were used hard and replaced quickly - and it's certainly true that every plane is new once. But I'd argue that few aircraft were retired from service altogether and in the early war probably very few. There was much to do, there were few enemy scouts, and not enough airplanes. Cecil Lewis flew a Morane Parasol for 300 hours (almost all in one plane) in very dangerous low level observation missions over the Somme in 1916. And check the staggering air combat scenes in Hells Angels - the allied linen covered planes look very worn indeed. But as it certainly appears to me that a WWI modeler has a lot of "creative license" to use because we simply don't know what these things would have looked like. So this Morane (barring catastrophe) is in for a full cycle of weathering: oil filters, washes, fading and soiling with pigments and a very interesting paint ideal for grim made by Iwata Com.Art.
Back to black basing. In a sense this technique turns painting the aircraft into the first stage of weathering. The black primer (which as Doog points out, makes you model look "badass" like it belongs to Darth Vader) is essential. The stage of the process is the creation of the "Mottle" coat. You mottle by creating very thing lines, dots, squiggles over every area that will be weathered. The key here is to get your airbrush in very close and "paint small." Ideally black basing should be done with acrylic/lacquer paints like Tamiya, Gunze and the very good MRP heavily thinned with lacquer thinner. (Because you don't want to cover the surface fully you use a remarkably small amount of paint.) Painting small means spraying at about 12-15 PSI as close as you can get your brush safely. I've also tried out a PE stencil made by USCHI and it works pretty well. I use a Creos Procon (made for Gunze by Iwata in Japan) with a .2 needle.
In my word, solvent paints are out. So my paints are always Golden High Flow acrylics - unless I need metallic, and then I'd use Vallejo Metal Color. For my money High Flow is the best water based acrylic out there - it has very heavy pigment load and because it's made for artists and not modelers, it costs less - about $5 for 1 ounce. Golden pioneered artist acrylics in the 1950s are make the best acrylics in the business. The only problem with High Flow is that there are no military colors, so you have to make your own. This is great fun, especially as Golden has special "mixing colors" that have remarkable effects when you mix them - see phthalo blue (green shade) or Quinacridone Red. For the base color here, the mix was simple - Titanium Buff plus a bit of Yellow Oxide. Golden uses a near 100% liquid polymer for its agent – think of it as a kind of liquid plastic. For thinning you can use water – but only in very small quantities. Too much water and the polymer begins to break apart – poor finish and bad airbrushing invariably results. Instead you use Airbrush Extender - it's a thin and white polymer. It doesn't change the color of the paint but it changes it's opacity - something essential for black basing.
Here is a Mottle Coat on the whole model and a detail. (I should note that the front end will be satin black, and hence is ignored for the present.) I should also note that I applied 1/32" (.8 mm) chart tape over the ribs and spars.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49865158072_7470d505b7_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2iYpYdG)Mottle (https://flic.kr/p/2iYpYdG) by Eric Bergerud (https://www.flickr.com/photos/156656645@N05/), on Flickr
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49864848761_3542849eb7_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2iYoogK)MottleDet (https://flic.kr/p/2iYoogK) by Eric Bergerud (https://www.flickr.com/photos/156656645@N05/), on Flickr
Next is the application of the base coat. This requires a more distant and broader coverage, so I switch to my trusty Iwata HPC Eclipse. Note, this base coat is 3-1 extender/thinner to paint. You want low opacity to make it harder to cover over the mottle coat. If you've ever demolished preshading with too much base, you know the problem. The problem is more difficult here because I want to apply enough base coat to cover some of the surface, but want to stop to remove the tape. This is trial and error here as I'm not used to the biplane idiom. The first pic is when I stopped - the second shows the plane with the tape removed.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49864310448_c481d9bad7_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2iYkCfu)BaseEarly (https://flic.kr/p/2iYkCfu) by Eric Bergerud (https://www.flickr.com/photos/156656645@N05/), on Flickr
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49864848746_0bc240805b_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2iYoogu)tapeOff (https://flic.kr/p/2iYoogu) by Eric Bergerud (https://www.flickr.com/photos/156656645@N05/), on Flickr
Now, more base coat. I have found that it's a very good idea to stop spraying base before you eye tells you to. For one thing you want it to dry to see what it really looks like. And you do not want an even coat - that defeats the entire purpose. Black basing is very forgiving - if you don't have enough on, you can spray some more. If you decide that the experiment looks like a failure, spray on more and create an evenly covered surface. In this case, I'm pretty happy with where I stopped. Again, you want the surface color to modulate and to be irregular. So here's the base coat as it stands now and a detail - I think the irregular coloring is easy enough to see.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49864310523_88e49ad19f_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2iYkCgM)Base (https://flic.kr/p/2iYkCgM) by Eric Bergerud (https://www.flickr.com/photos/156656645@N05/), on Flickr
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49865158157_b7923ed929_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2iYpYfa)baseDet (https://flic.kr/p/2iYpYfa) by Eric Bergerud (https://www.flickr.com/photos/156656645@N05/), on Flickr
This is looking okay to me. I may tone down the dark lines on the fuselage and tail. There's a very nice Morane N replica on YouTube and you can see the thick tape over the ribs on the wings - it isn't black but it does stand out. High Flow has a satin surface and extender is gloss which is fine because decals come next. As it was I sprayed some Liquitex spray gloss varnish after the last pic. (Heaven help me if the decal for the tail fails - it would be very hard to paint it.)
Upcoming are the decals, masking the front end for a satin black (High Flow carbon black will be perfect) with some salt chipping up front. After that, serious weathering. And I suppose rigging. Wish me luck.
Eric
-
Eric, thanks for that detailed description of how you handle black basing. Very helpful and informative. I will have to try it sometime. Also, the reference to the Golden High Flow acrylics is much appreciated.
The Moraine really looks good at this stage. The black basing was well-executed and created a realistic finish for this aircraft. Looking forward to what's next. Very well done.
Best regards,
Bob
-
Thanks for the tutorial. Your Morane is looking terific!
RAGIII
-
I'd say it was rather dark, personally - and it could be the lighting in the image. The linen let's quite a bit of light through so the insides of the wings are not completely black
That's just my opinion, and it's your model to build as you wish
Richard
-
Enjoying your build, thanks for showing your technique.
-
About the surface being too dark - we'll have to see. There is a lot more weathering to come and that will include fading. However, I really don't have a clue on how to properly emulate the effect of sunlight passing through doped fabric and showing the ribs. Here are 3 pics - two of the same replica and one original:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49865157962_17ec1c0782_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2iYpYbN)wingribs (https://flic.kr/p/2iYpYbN) by Eric Bergerud (https://www.flickr.com/photos/156656645@N05/), on Flickr
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49868428797_09a2b2f4d9_m.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2iYGJuv)MS-g (https://flic.kr/p/2iYGJuv) by Eric Bergerud (https://www.flickr.com/photos/156656645@N05/), on Flickr
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49867590953_15b523a85c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2iYCrqV)1916-morane-saulnier (https://flic.kr/p/2iYCrqV) by Eric Bergerud (https://www.flickr.com/photos/156656645@N05/), on Flickr
I don't see how one is going to make an opaque object like a plastic wing look translucent. (Tamiya has done at least two kits - one was their Swordfish I - in clear plastic to show the full interior. I wonder what you could do with that? But I doubt we'll be seeing clear styrene wings anytime soon.) Ultimately you have to evoke the look - but no modeling technique I know will reproduce the effect. (If wiser heads see things I'm missing, please comment.) The third picture above shows an opaque wing with dark ribs. That's only appearance of course - it looks that way because the light is going through the fabric. You can also see from the last photo how prominent the tape or wooden slats on top of the wing are. It's passed my mind that I should have trimmed the chart tape more carefully and left it on the wings. As far as the mottled wing - which causes the irregular light/dark patterns - it's not done to evoke sunlight going through the wing - hopefully it will be step one to creating that patina of castor oil + dust + mud + other fluids + wear from ground crew that I think would have appeared on a well flown service aircraft. We'll see.
Eric
-
One trick is to note is that the spar does not touch the fabric. so what you paint the spar has to be lighter than what you paint the ribs. Look at it as pre shading narrow lines with hard edges. If you can raise the mask for the spars a few thou and get a slightly softer edge to go with the lighter color, then you are a master masker. I have done it before, white primer darker spars, even darker ribs, then mist on the CDL until you get the translucent, 3d effect you want.
sp
-
I'm far from convinced that paint effects widely used on metal skinned aeroplanes transfer to wood and fabric ones. Likewise, dirty aeroplanes don't convince me either
If you read autobiographies from the time, it's noticeable how little flying pilots did due to weather conditions. On top of that, there were a lot of ground crew tasked with maintaining the planes, including cleaning them down immediately after a flight
Oil soaking into canvas is pretty obvious in pictures, and really inevitable due to the constant loss lubrication in some engines. Paint that has got rubbed off by aggressive cleaning is also often found and not unexpected. Paint applied at unit level was unlikely to have been done to a high standard, and put onto a slightly glossy dope. And the inevitable rash from handling is easy to find
But dirty 'planes caked with mud, with oil leaking from every panel - you don't see many pictures like that. For a start, they would be heavy - and weight was precious on low powered aeroplanes. Some SPAD pilots regretted the all over paint schemes they applied due to the penalty it created
We're back to the basics of modelling here - look at lots of contemporary pictures of aeroplanes then decide what you want to do.
Richard
-
Richard - I don't think we see with the same eyes. I teach and write military history for a living (doesn't help modeling skills of course) and I have looked at a boatload of military photographs from several different wars. I do agree that you probably didn't find "mud-caked" planes so weighted down with filth that it hurt performance. (I think you could count on the fact that any plane in service for even a few weeks was not putting out the performance of a new aircraft - I'm sure the engines were rebuilt by ground crew when needed - or when possible.) As far as weather goes, WWII aircraft were grounded if the weather was really bad and they had radios. So of course that would have been true in WWI. However, the last time I was in Europe it rained a lot - often several times a day. That's why the area is home to so many rivers and streams. And I doubt the air war was stopped when the first snow or sleet fell. I think the pilots were regularly up in dicey weather: how many of them simply "vanished?" And all engines were beastly inefficient when compared to, say, a Pratt Whitney 2800 or a Merlin. That's why engineers at the time did well to get 200 hp: - the industrial technique simply didn't allow for a great leap in power. (I bet that the radial would have been very difficult to cool with Great War technology.) And rotaries did burn a gallon of castor oil in an hour. Lastly, if you landed a plane that was coated with a film of castor oil, landed in a dirty or muddy field - how would you have cleaned that off? Perhaps aircraft were far more tidy than I imagine - some of course were. But I think that fluid-dirt-dust patina would have been there. I could produce hundreds of pics like the ones below: two are of a Morane N, (the cockpit is a good close up: how do you account for the tonal variations evident on the wings?) one of an Eindecker and one of Lanoe Hawker's Bristol Scout: I see planes that would have shown a kind of film - unevenly distributed - across the aircraft. On the rare photos that show the underside - the oil stains would have been very large - that's something you can see in modern films.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49869019113_07a3a06831_k.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2iYKKYn)MSBigcockcockpit (https://flic.kr/p/2iYKKYn) by Eric Bergerud (https://www.flickr.com/photos/156656645@N05/), on Flickr
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49869858587_53f53bd8e6_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2iYQ4w4)wholeftr (https://flic.kr/p/2iYQ4w4) by Eric Bergerud (https://www.flickr.com/photos/156656645@N05/), on Flickr
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49869551416_030cd85ebb_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2iYNud1)Eindecker (https://flic.kr/p/2iYNud1) by Eric Bergerud (https://www.flickr.com/photos/156656645@N05/), on Flickr
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49869551396_8d71fcc444_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2iYNucE)Lanoe_Hawker'sBristolScout (https://flic.kr/p/2iYNucE) by Eric Bergerud (https://www.flickr.com/photos/156656645@N05/), on Flickr
I have no second sight and certain admit to be possibly in error. Obviously we can't see these planes as they actually existed but I think the photo record certainly allows for some aircraft to fit my image of a vanished reality.
Eric
-
You (or your erks) cleaned castor oil off after every flight with rags soaked in petrol, which also had a habit of removing the markings applied at unit level. You can find examples of this kind of damage in pictures
I would like you to have a go at explaining what you can see in the pictures you linked. I can see spillage marks and the results of handling (two patches on the rear of the fuselage of the Bristol monoplane) . There is quite a bit of paint damage including the results of cleaning on the underside of the Bristol monoplane. On the wings of the Bristol mono I can see the ribs highlighted by the reflective dope finish. The nose of the Morane is quite clean and has quite a bit of distortion on the top emphasised by the shininess of the dope. I'm not sure if the chipping is real as there are white dots on the prop
I'm not going to make judgements of the Bristol biplane, it's a poor reproduction of a picture from a book - notice the stripes in the sky
On the shininess of dope, this is an extreme example as N500 is brand new. Even so, notice the reflections in the side of the fuselage:
(http://www.wingnutwings.com/ww/v46A6C38E/www/products/model_kitsets/32008/archive_photos/Sopwith%20Triplane%20N500%20Prototype%20(0655-025).jpg)
As an aside - thank you for engaging in this discussion. I'll admit I have a bit if a bee in my bonnet about aeroplane painting, there does seem to be a trend to paint models to emulate other models and exaggerate 'techniques' producing parodies of reality. On the other hand, I'm not an expert on painting and I'm sure these techniques have a place when properly used. So I'm willing to learn
As to weather - yes the air war stopped when it rained, was foggy, snowed and sleeted. Pilots couldn't do observations so what would be the point flying?
Richard
-
I notice I am being rather argumentative in this thread, and I want to apologise. This isn't an excuse, just an explanation - I have anxiety, and on low days it can make me unnecessarily combative
I do have an interest in this subject, I would like to understand more, I'm genuinely not convinced many paint techniques represent real world aeroplanes - and this isn't the time for me to be discussing this
You are clearly a skilled and thoughtful modeller Eric, I'm looking forward to seeing how your Morane comes out
Richard
-
I really like the effect you've achieved with your black basing technique. I have tried this on WW2 builds before but never got a very convincing finish like you have here. From your tutorial I realise I applied either too much or too little base colour. Thanks for sharing, it looks superb.
-
Very interesting approach! It'll be fun to follow your build to the finish and see what really comes out in the end. One "problem" with model building is the fact that so many things change over time with each new layer of paint or just new details or the addition of a top wing... Quite often I end being surprised by the end result... I envy those that know exactly what they are doing!
/F
-
Richard
If I came off too strong, you have to remember that I have a background in academics. Henry Kissinger once said that academic arguments were so fierce because the issues were so small - that's true. It is surely true that in our world how to approach weathering a WWI aircraft has to rate pretty low in importance - although it's interesting. And I'm really kind of at sea on this - I have no idea how this is going to turn out. But I'm finding biplanes great fun - and they look very neat on the shelf - even my wife likes them. So straight ahead and see what happens.
Eric
-
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49907221041_f277fc4557_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2j38y5i)pr-rt-r (https://flic.kr/p/2j38y5i) by Eric Bergerud (https://www.flickr.com/photos/156656645@N05/), on Flickr
The weathering is complete for the Special Hobby Morane Saulnier N. As I tried to explain in the last build note, the use of black basing is intended to create a base coat with a high degree of tonal variation and some of the original effect is still visible. But I've done a lot fiddling since.
Fist I gave the kit a gloss coat for decals. Some modelers think that's unnecessary, but I was concerned that 14 year old decals accompanying a problem child kit could be dicey especially for the tail. As things stood the decals did go on - the two for the tail were much too large but trimmed nicely. The roundels seemed okay, but proved very fragile. Fortunately there was an alternate tricolor marking for the fuselage which I didn't use that supplied materials for patches. (One bit came off under some masking tape after dried 48 hours and covered with a matte coat - that shouldn't happen.) In retrospect I should have not assembled the tail but black based it separately and then airbrushed on national markings across the board. But once the tail was on, there was no turning back.
Next came a matte clear coat. This was needed for the oils. (I find oils much better than enamel products - if nothing else, they don't interact with acrylics.) The first step were two filters. Almost all of my oils are Gamblin "Fast Matte" which are designed to dry very quickly and dry matte. Gamblin also accompanies a proprietary mineral spirit called Gamsol. Gamsol is remarkably benign - it has zero odor and no tide marks: ideal for models. The filters are very heavily thinned - figure 10% paint. Unless put on a matte surface the filters wouldn't work at all. But if done right you can "fine tune" the base coat and give it some depth. I used two filters: one of Yellow Oxide and one of Burnt Sienna. Because Gamblin dries so quickly, a 30 minute pause did fine. After that came a wash of black and burnt umber. Figure maybe 25% paint for a wash. Because I use filters the wash is applied carefully - mostly along the ribs on wing and body. Ideally I don't want excess wash, but a separate brush is ready Gamsol to remove some. With the filters and wash down, I pretty much know what I'm dealing with. Next comes adding tonality - mostly with fading. I do not use dot filters. I think fading is much better done with straight up oils with the brush only moistened with Gamsol. Where I wanted to fade I'd use either simple titanium white - applied literally with a toothpick - and rubbed into still mostly matte surface. In some places I mixed some burnt sienna or even umber with a buff and put down a darker patch. None of these faded areas are bigger than a dime. The idea is to mix things up - add depth - prevent a uniform finish.
Here's what the kit looked like before anything described above was done:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49864310523_88e49ad19f_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2iYkCgM)Base (https://flic.kr/p/2iYkCgM) by Eric Bergerud (https://www.flickr.com/photos/156656645@N05/), on Flickr
Here it is after the decals and oils:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49907522557_1098d187ae_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2j3a6GR)filt-oils (https://flic.kr/p/2j3a6GR) by Eric Bergerud (https://www.flickr.com/photos/156656645@N05/), on Flickr
Next I masked the front end and painted the front end black with Golden High Flow Carbon Black - a very good paint with a powerful pigment. There's not much to do to vary tonality with a black as dark as Stalin's soul, but I had noticed that many MS N that carried the big spinner (again, needed to make a bullet and fulfill Red Baron memories) had a proper case of chipping. For a light and irregular chipping I am very partial to the use of salt - in this case simple table salt. First I hand painted the front end with Vallejo Metal Color aluminium. Next I misted distilled water all over the front end (I did the spinner separately) and shook on some salt and pushed it around a little. After drying, I airbrushed on the High Flow which, as usual, goes down perfecto.
I'd like to make a note about the paint - and feel free to disagree. High Flow is satin/gloss when dry. It's also a water based paint and creates a kind of film - which is what I want. As good as acrylic lacquer paints (Tamiya, Gunze, MRP) are I'm not sure that most weapons painted for service use looked as though the paint had changed the color of the surface - like what you'd want in a new car. Rather I think they looked like painted objects. Water based acrylics look like paint has been applied over something else. The difference is subtle after weathering but it's still there, especially if you see a kit in person.
Anyway, after the paint dried, I brushed off the salt and ended with a nicely chipped front end. This is a forgiving technique - I found some of the chips too much, so I used a very fine brush and did some editing. The result is about what I wanted:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49907522352_159d8c7774_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2j3a6Dj)chipping (https://flic.kr/p/2j3a6Dj) by Eric Bergerud (https://www.flickr.com/photos/156656645@N05/), on Flickr
Lastly I wanted to soil the plane without making it goth. (I found a couple of pics of a MSN in Soviet service - it looks a complete mess. Some of the best modelers out there specialize in very severe weathering - knocked out tanks, abandoned aircraft, rusty cars etc - it's a genuine skill. But that wasn't what I wanted.) For inspiration I watched a 60 second video on YT of a MSN being moved out, mounted by the pilot and taking off. The little thing was kicking up dust galore and exhaust poured out of bottom of the engine. (The angle of attack on take off is impressive - the N model MS was originally a race plane.) The pilot also did some acrobatics to get into the cockpit - I'd guess Lewis was right about this plane being made for a pilot about 5'6" - and that would leave some proper scuffing over the weeks. I also kept staring at buckets of photos of linen covered early war planes. The DH2 below is typical of what I was thinking about:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49907522582_51f57e52af_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2j3a6Hh)dh2soiled (https://flic.kr/p/2j3a6Hh) by Eric Bergerud (https://www.flickr.com/photos/156656645@N05/), on Flickr
To get where I wanted to be I turned to Iwata Com.Art paints. Com.Art is a very popular brand for professional airbrushes who "paint" on paper. The stuff is marketed by the best airbrush maker on the planet, so it does have a place. But the texture isn't ideal for plastic. I use transparent colors - usually transparent smoke - so the opacity is very low and it has a grainy texture. It feels almost grimy. So I airbrushed the stuff all over the plane in a kind of mist - this is a common enough technique for any acrylic but Com.Art is made for it if you want to emulate a general grime. After that I took a small "streaking" brush and applied an irregular coat mostly along the fuselage and the wings close to the fuselage. Underneath I used Com.Art "old oil" mixed with a little Klear and gave a proper oil streak from the engine and back. I also used some pigments just to soil the underside. And this is what we get:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49907221061_d60879d44e_k.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2j38y5D)pr-rt-ft (https://flic.kr/p/2j38y5D) by Eric Bergerud (https://www.flickr.com/photos/156656645@N05/), on Flickr
Here's a detail pic:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49907221126_7892a3d3ca_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2j38y6L)PR-det (https://flic.kr/p/2j38y6L) by Eric Bergerud (https://www.flickr.com/photos/156656645@N05/), on Flickr
Next up - rigging.
Eric
-
That looks really good, Eric! I like the effects you've achieved! I did try black basing several years ago, but I never got the results I wanted and nothing close to this. Maybe I just gave up too soon?!
/Fredrik
-
The weathering and painting look Fantastic! I am looking forward to seeing this one rigged!
RAGIII
-
Moving right along man, looking suitable grubby.
Ryan
-
Eric, I really like the look you have achieved here. It looks just right to me. Thank you for sharing your tools, products and techniques. Very well done!
Best regards,
Bob
-
Beautiful!!
-
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49929334436_524013f47b_k.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2j55TBJ)lft-ft (https://flic.kr/p/2j55TBJ) by Eric Bergerud (https://www.flickr.com/photos/156656645@N05/), on Flickr
My rendition of the Morane Saulnier N is rigged and finis.
Anyway I could have done this the rigging would have lacked realism. Special Hobby calls for .5mm wire. I guess that's right judging from the photos. But I haven't a clue how I would have attached those C Type turnbuckles - and they're on every photo. (One modeler online did use wire and I thought it looked awful - I'm sure the plane was rigged with thick cable as opposed to rigid tubes.) The kit came with PE turnbuckles but I haven't the foggiest how they expected anyone to use them with wire. I checked one out and I would have had to use ship rigging line to get it through their very little eye. So heck with it.
The rigging was very challenging and I doubt there are many models where it's so visible. I used 2lb P-line mono. The anchor points are Gaspatch white metal. I also used Gaspatch resin Type C turnbuckles. The idiom of rigging is still new to me and I know I made several errors. Most are underneath - it did that first figuring it was a good place to hide mistakes. I'll have to work on setting the anchors in more precisely. It did take a while to figure out how to attach the Type C. The resin type C did look the part, but they are very fragile. It proved pretty easy to crack off and eyelet and four had to be replaced. I probably should have made my own. I replaced a few lines completely, but did leave some errors alone. For now, I can't let the search for very good to get in the way of "okay." I'm new at biplanes and look at every kit as, hopefully, leading to something better.
I'll put up some more kits in the "Completed Builds" forum. Here's what I've got now.
Eric
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49928814988_5c97f1e4fc_k.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2j53ecJ)rigdet (https://flic.kr/p/2j53ecJ) by Eric Bergerud (https://www.flickr.com/photos/156656645@N05/), on Flickr
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49928815088_72ca196bb0_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2j53ees)front (https://flic.kr/p/2j53ees) by Eric Bergerud (https://www.flickr.com/photos/156656645@N05/), on Flickr
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49928814963_e6886f3d35_k.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2j53eci)rt-r (https://flic.kr/p/2j53eci) by Eric Bergerud (https://www.flickr.com/photos/156656645@N05/), on Flickr
-
She looks wonderful Eric! Just the way i picture a Morane Bullet. ;D You can be justly proud of this one. Very well done!
The rigging is quite challenging on this one. How did you get all of the lines to anchor on the apex struts with pulleys?!
Outstanding work!
Best regards,
Bob
-
Excellent Eric, looks like a well used warplane. The weathering techniques worked out beautifully.
-
Looks great! A well used Morane for sure!
RAGIII
-
Hi Eric
That's a fantastic result. To me it looks as flimsy as the real plane would have been - you have perfectly captured the fabric - in all senses - of these death traps.
For rigging I take a less is more approach. Eyelets at both ends of a line then a .3mm brass tube threaded on the line to indicate a turnbuckle at one end only or central to the line. The trick I reckon is that the rigging should become a secondary detail to the primary detail which is the rendition of the plane itself. If the rigging becomes the focus by being overly detailed then the main object - the plane itself - is lost. Many of the exemplar models on the WNW website demonstrate this with no eyelets and no turnbuckles at all - just a line. Taking that approach also really simplifies the challenge of rigging in general. I use the eyelets more for the ease they provide for rigging rather than realism. At 1/32 an eyelet would be near invisible and a turnbuckle a mere thickening of the line. This has been debated here in the past and it comes down to personal taste.
But all said your rendition is great and when I get to this model - which I have - I will reference your approach.
Cheers
Alistair
-
Alistair
I do not quibble with your views on rigging. I think the techniques argued for by Des are sound - and if done correctly I don't think they'd be an addition to almost any model. This one .... if I had been more experienced in biplanes I might very well have done things differently. Had I made my own turnbuckles they would have been smaller and would have installed cleaner but those big C type buckles are simply very prominent in all the photos and I simply didn't have the confidence to ignore them. I've done several ships and it's common to use white glue and paint to emulate all kinds of fittings and that would have been an option here.I know WNW takes the minimalist approach to rigging, but I'm not sure if it's because they are right or want to sell more model biplanes. I'll post that question and see if some people here would chime in - the bar is very high on this board - it reminds me a lot of Model Warship. For what it's worth, I've bought a couple of Eduard 1/48s. (Not that I had much choice - WNW doesn't seem to exist at this moment.) On those I'll use EZ line and glue/paint to emulate sleeves. Am curious there to see how easy it will be to stick EZ line into a hole containing CA - could be a well hidden eyelet would still help. We'll see. Thanks for your opinion.
-
What a great looking build! Nicely done!