forum.ww1aircraftmodels.com
WW1 Aircraft Modeling => Under Construction => Topic started by: Bluesfan on October 23, 2018, 05:59:24 AM
-
I'm currently working on these two models, for a beach scene diorama. Fraid this'll be a half-hearted build log; I hadn't considered doing one at all, but this October is the time of high tension on this project, and I guess I feel a need to share some of my pain (!)
I've been working at this for quite some while this year. Despite having made several 1:32 kits, these Roden Felixstowes have felt like the hardest kits I've ever attempted (oh the bliss of a poor memory). And I'm not criticizing the kits. I've made other Roden kits, and I wouldn't include these amongst the nightmare ones. It's simply that they're pretty challenging. I remember when Roden produced them, and being amazed and delighted that anyone had kitted what were then somewhat obscure types from WWI. I have a Wingnuts Felixstowe waiting; I don't expect it to be as hard!
Ultimate success is not a given: I have a late November deadline, since I want to present the diorama as a gift at that time. So as the next couple of weeks roll on, I'll add a few pics relating to the most 'entertaining' aspects of the kits.
-
Here's something which nearly stopped me in my tracks. And I have to say, being on this forum was probably crucial to my carrying on.
The thing is, Roden moulded the wings in three parts. Fair enough, given that moulding the very long wings of the Felixstowe in one piece was likely impractical, if only from the boxing point of view. However, one is expected to join them together with butt joints, and true to Roden practice, they're pretty much scale thickness. So, straight gluing them together seemed to be asking for trouble.
I've never thought of pinning pieces before attaching, before now, but seeing other examples on the forum here made me think it was worth trying. It wasn't easy, but here we are now with two 1:72 Felixstowes both with solid looking wings. Of course, they droop a bit and they shouldn't, but that's not because of the pinning...
-
Looks like a great start, wishing you success in this undertaking.
-
This site taught me to pin, too... but struts, not wings.
Good work!
Gaz
-
Very challenging project and one I'll follow with great interest. You've got a great start and I'm looking forward to further updates.
Cheers,
Lance
-
Thanks for looking :)
A couple of pics from last week's shananigans. The hoisting of the top wing on the first boat.
All modellers must have a streak of masochism, but makers of multiplane models go one step beyond. And the moment of peak stress is surely when after extensive preparation (and procrastination), one attempts to stick that top plane in place. I'm sort of used to it these days, but the Roden Felixstowes are something else. It's not just that there are a lot of struts, but that the parts and instructions don't do much to help you out. Worst of all is the nature of the plane's design, with its engines between the wings, casually supported on dodgy struts. Much trial and error is required to figure out how to put that structure together.
The engines themselves - RR Eagles in the F.2A, Liberty engines in the H.16, are beautiful little models in their own right; but they're very fragile and even with careful handling you may have to glue exhausts etc. back on again. I freely admit I made frequent use of the Wingnuts manual for the F.2A while building the Eagles.
I can't remember if this pic was taken before or after the first mounting attempt. Which failed. There are definitely times when you just have to take a deep breath and walk away, and rethink.
-
And... eventual success. Look, it's not perfect, but this'll do me.
So why didn't I use a jig? Can't give a good answer to that. Partly because I haven't tried it as a method. But also, experience with other Roden kits with lots of struts (though not as many as these); knowing that with all the various quirks I might just as well rely on steady hands and a reasonably good eye.
I relied on the nature of glue (Contacta cement) to help me out, the fact that there would be a fair bit of play for some while. And a different approach, whereby I first glued in the engine assemblies, then the struts, and kept them upright with the occasional nudge. I placed the top plane upside down, moved my lights into helpful positions, then brought the fuselage/lower wing/engine and struts down on to it, gently directing the front struts and then the rear ones into place.
It does help that despite the number of struts, the Felixstowes had a straightforward wing layout, with two even rows.
This pic must have been taken after starting on pulling the rigging taut (monofilament line). Using small bulldog clips like this has worked quite well in the past, but may have been a mistake here, because of the thinness of the wings, especially towards the wing tips, which took on a droop.
I'm approaching the moment of truth with the other boat (the H.16). You would think practice would make perfect, wouldn't you? ;)
-
Sorry to read that the wings are drooping as a result of the rigging. I too do not use jigs as you can see from my build logs, but I do find that simple supports are generally more than satisfactory. May I suggest that instead of using monofilament thread which is pulling the wings out of true you use EZ line instead? I do not have direct experience of it but others who have tell me that it helps to avoid this particular problem. Perhaps others on this forum may be able to offer advice.
Stephen.
-
Thanks Stephen, appreciated; I've wondered about EZline quite often but my preference is still for monofilament for the sake of having - when all goes well! - structural rigging. Instinct tells me that it'd be risky not to have the help of that with these kits.
The wingtips don't droop too much, it's just annoying to compare it with the splendid look of the real thing. It was my fault, not to allow for the thin moulding of the wings. Hopefully I can improve on that with the H.16. What I should have done is angled the line upwards while the glue was setting, rather than let the clips hang as you see in the picture.
While I'm at it, may I compliment you for the inspiring work you do in 1:72 - a shrinking but select little club these days! :)
-
Rigging and control wires...
Shots of where I'm attaching some control wires at the moment, using Wonderwire (there's an inquiry thread about this elsewhere)
For the main rigging I usually use monofilament, but the Felixstowes provide plenty of problem areas for that, notably the splendid array of constantly dividing control wires at the tail. See the first pic where I've made a start, hope it's clear. Trying to use monofilament would be tricky, and impractical for the longer lengths going into the fuselage. That joy is still to come; I know the Wonderwire will look the part and stay straight, but I'm less confident about getting the 3 sections on each line right. Of course, in 1:32 WNW provide those little etched brass pieces to handle the split into two lines. In 1:72 this will be a fiddly test for eyes and fingers.
Second picture shows where I've begun on the control lines on a top wing. Fraid I'm a bit blobby with the glue.
As you can see, the Wonderwire comes in a dark steely grey, and is maybe a little overscale for 1:72. Doing all these sections of wire is time consuming, but you get into a sort of rhythm. The essential tools are a pair of compasses for measuring off, a firm base for cutting on eg. a tile, and an old craft knife for precise snapping of the ceramic material.
-
Very cool, you don't see this kit built very often, and I have one to-do as well. I have the AIMS decals for the white/red curly scheme. I have a few Wingnut Wings kits, and I'd love to both be able to afford a Felixstowe, and have place to put the built up model!
Good luck with the H-16, too! :)
-
Awesome work in spite of your difficulties. Proves you are a MODELER! Excellent results so far!
RAGIII
-
Thanks for the encouragement, sincerely appreciated!
A note about compromises, while I park this machine for the moment; judgement calls made about both accuracy and detailing.
As you can see, I gave up on double rigging. While I've seen it done in 1:72, sorry, but I haven't figured out a convincing and practical way to do it, by me at any rate. More importantly for these kits, when I noticed that there is indeed rigging on the tail assembly (as opposed to control wires), I was a little too far along to feel like fitting it in. Unfortunately, tail rigging doesn't feature anywhere in the Roden illustrations. Also, I have omitted some wires from around the engine assemblies. Laziness, I guess.
As far as markings and colour schemes are concerned, I've made some deviating choices. As regards the H.16, it seems, from a couple of pictures I've seen, that this particular machine didn't actually have yellow wings, but aluminium dope. Rather lamely, I'm imagining that it might have had some yellow paint applied later on, because it's hard to resist the look. I'll argue that many of the H.16s in that period did have fully or partially yellow painted wings, so it's 'authentic' even if not accurate.
The Chilean machine poses a different problem, in that the red and blue of the decals are badly out of register. For the large ones on the wings, I trimmed a rectangle and then painted white rectangles on the wings to place them on. But this was more awkward for the smaller ones on the fuselage, and I cut a corner there, leaving out the white outline. By the way, 'Zanartu' was the name of a midshipman who died performing a rescue, and the plane, donated by the British after the war, was apparently the first flying boat seen in South America.
-
Still looking terrific in my opinion! I have not done this but was once told that in smaller scales one can run two lines through one hole for double rigging separated by a piece of cardboard or paper then glued in place.
RAGIII
-
If you find the 1/72nd scale Roden Felixstowe too small to work on and the 1/32nd Wingnut Felixstowe too large to display, there is the option of the 1/48th scale Lone Star Models Felixstowe F.2a kit. This comes with parts for both early and late versions plus a beaching trolley.
-
You may well look at the picture and stare doubtfully at the bits of wood balanced uncertainly on the spindly wings, also at the seething mass of loose rigging, itching to knot itself together. To paraphrase a line from that great work of cinema, Spinal Tap, "There's a fine line between clever and stupid..."
But don't ignore the big picture here - the top wing's on! It may well stay on! ;)
-
Is it okay putting this here? I know there's a separate section for books, but this little reading list is directly relevant to the project, and I've just finished reading The Spider Web, which I would heartily recommend to anyone modelling Felixstowes/America boats. It's about the activities of the War Flight at Felixstowe April 1917 - April 1918, which Hallam was in charge of. It's full of eye opening stories and one ends up in awe at the bravery of the men who went out on patrol over the North Sea, and also at the genius (I use the word avisedly) of those who developed these amazing machines. Amongst other things there are tales of survival and in-flight repairs which have all the tension of a Hollywood action film, and vivid descriptions of the harsh seas and weather they confronted.
A couple of small points. John Porte, the principal man of genius, barely features in the book, I suppose because Hallam's mission was to tell the stories of operations. But it's odd because by his own account he even flew the extraordinary Felixstowe Fury at least once, and so he must have had something to do with Porte. I'd have loved to hear more! But he does include two fascinating pictures of the 'Super Baby'. Another point to note is that Hallam moved on just at the point of the demise of the RNAS, and so the stories of the great aerial battles later on in 1918 remain untold.
I expect to enjoy the other memoir equally, To the Ends of the Air by Gerry Livock; although his time in Felixstowes only occupies one chapter. He was based at Yarmouth. He was the guy who first applied dazzle painting to the boats, which then became general practice. His boat is one of the schemes available with the WNW Felixstowe Early kit.
As for the other books, as well as the WNW manual, I've made a lot of reference to Colin Owers' Fighting America books. Many will be familiar with the Aeronaut publications, and maybe demur about value for money. I can only say that I'm very glad to have them, they're full of pictures and information I haven't seen elsewhere. But I'm hugely fascinated by these planes, and I love history anyway - I couldn't imagine making a model of anything and not wanting to know its story and its people. These two volumes helped me a lot with this current project, especially with details about the H.16.
-
Thanks RAGIII and Berman :)
The thing about double rigging in 1:72, for me anyway, is that you want the two wires to be right next to each other, to look right. As you say, one considers running them through one hole. Very fiddly, whatever wheeze you try! I felt that with the Felixstowes, there's so much rigging anyway that the visual effect isn't too lacking, if I leave out the double lines. But some time in the future I have a SPAD XIII to build in 1:72 and I know I will want to install double lines on that one. (I also want to build a SPAD XIII (and XII???) in 1:32 and I eagerly await the forthcoming WNW kit of that...)
It's brilliant that the Felixstowes are also available in 1:48. I suspect it's a tad less challenging than the 1:72 kits!
Mark
-
Very fine work all 'round, Mark! You may be on to something with those blocks.
Cheers,
Bud
-
Those blocks look perfectly OK to me. Just the kind of jig that I rig up on a regular basis. "Simple but effective" is my motto: it is amazing what can be accomplished with a little ingenuity and whatever is to hand....
Stephen.
-
"Is it okay putting this here? I know there's a separate section for books, but this little reading list is directly relevant to the project",
Mark,
I'd say yes, it looks like a fine selection of Reference material for this very neat Build you have going. Like you say so well, the history and the people are a huge part of our hobby and I, like you, enjoy the reading and research work as much as the Build.
Great Thread you have going here, keep up the excellent work! :)
Cheers,
Lance
-
Thanks for your comments gentlemen! :)
Here's where I am on a dark Friday evening in November. The H.16 finally has a tail, and now looks like an aeroplane.
Most of the rigging is done, with only one or two sagging lines. Pity about the lop sided radiators but one just has to try to unsee them(!). I'm not touching them now - those engine assemblies are trembling collections of tiny parts just waiting to explode in all directions, never to be found...
Only a few bits to add on both kits; then lots of fun to be had with control lines around the tail. Elsewhere, bits of wood have begun to be glued on the display base.
-
Hurra! Always a good moment when the top wing goes on, especially on something this complex!
-
Looks AWESOME!
RAGIII
-
Fantastic work on pretty complicated kits, at least my impression form peeking in the box :)
Am taking notes on your build(s), I plan to start mt 1/72 kit soon. Have the WnW Early waiting, and plan to buy the Lonestar 1/48 kits in the near future.
My interest in the Felixstowe came in a odd way, and was the only WWI aircraft I wanted to model for many, many years. I hope I don't overdose, now LOL
Looking forward to the rest of your build, and the diorama you have planned.
Jim F
-
Mark thanks for a great build log, and the insight into the issues faced with this kit. You have inspired me to get hold of this kit and give it a go.
While I dream of building the WnW kit, I have to be honest and wonder where I would put the finished kit. If I can build the Roden kit to the same standard as you I will be very happy, and maybe it will open the door for the WnW build.
Thanks also for the book reference. I was not aware of The Spider Web and will look out for it.
P
-
Thanks for the interest as ever! :)
In the spirit of offering a little more info about the kit, here are some comments about the interior. The pics show what you get, which isn't very much, but then you can't actually see very much inside when it's built. I painted a rough wood effect just in case, and a fabric colour in areas which would have been covered that way. I spent time blobbing some detail on the control panel, but you can barely see that now.
One suggestion, which I think you'd likely come up with on your own if you were building the kit: you could usefully add some extra support under the pilots' seats. Roden has them held up only by a single spigot at the front, which virtually begs for them to disappear inside the fuselage at some stage. The seats are pretty fanciful. I wonder if I'm the only person to open up the WNW manual for the 1/32 kit and scour it looking to see where the seats are. It took a while before it dawned on me that in the real thing, the pilots simply sat on cushions on a crude bench. When you consider that they typically spent 4-5 hours on the air on long patrols, how comfortable could that have been??
Is it worth adding more detail inside? Probably not, unless you open up the top hatch, which you could, since so many pictures of Felixstowes do show it open. The one thing lacking in my view is the ladder under the rear top gun position, though you do have that locker which just about fills the visible space. I've cheated, really, in including the gun support struts and the ammunition boxes in that area, just to fill it up a bit, because both the machines I'm building were unarmed.
By the way, the scene I have planned is only a basic one, and I probably shouldn't have used the word 'diorama'! It's going to be quite big enough without lots of landscaping. At any rate, I hope you do have a go at the kit sometime. Obviously it's a long build, but as it comes together it's very satisfying, and they are such pretty planes. :)
-
Those engine mountings look a bit fragile. The interior colours look very convincing, but as you write if much detail is not going to be visible then why bother to put it in?
2 Felixtowes on one base is going to be a large unit - I fully understand why you are hesitant to make it larger.
Stephen
-
Thanks again Stephen. Yes, assembling them and keeping them in place opened up new horizons of suffering for me. ;) Especially because the supports don't have well defined location points.
More usefully, I would tell other builders to watch out for the height on these - they seem to end up a tad higher than the rest of the standard struts. I clipped off the top in one case. Part of the reason why I didn't bother with the rigging underneath. Lazy, but...
I think I'm calling it a day with these two boats. A few pics to follow now, then another one or two when I put the scene together.
-
Here's the other boat. Despite the agony, and many, many mess ups, I'm pleased overall. There's nothing like a final spray over with matt or satin varnish to lift the whole effect (and obscure lots of the patchwork)!
Second pic - never mind the quality, feel the wires, eh? I may not have done a complete job on the rigging, but I was determined to do one of the Felixstowe's 'signature' features, that fanning out of the control wires on the tail. Took me ages, but Wonderwire lent itself perfectly to the job. As for those connectors (not sure of the right term), I simply used tiny plastic pieces and made a hole in each end. We'll see how well the wires and rigging stand up to handling and transport, but for now it looks nice.
The basic design is IMHO so charismatic, and here I've only dressed them in ordinary paint schemes, but even then they're good looking. I'm going to have a go at a dazzle scheme when I get round to the 1/32 kit.
-
While I think of it, some comments about the tail rigging (as opposed to the control wires on the tail).
You may be able to see that I did in the end do some of it; I assumed that the Roden documentation ignoring it was, well, accidental omission. But they probably made use of the Datafile, and when you look at the 3-view drawings there - no rigging on the tail.
Of course, WNW made no such mistake. Unless you count the fact that some of the boats had even more rigging; at least, I can just see drift wires going from the tailplane to the rear of the side fin in some pictures, including one of the Curtiss H-16 here ...which I've left off as it happens. Look, handling these models became more and more of a cat's cradle puzzle as more of the rigging was done! Which leads to another bit of advice - leave fitting the drift wires from the nose to the wings as late as you possibly can. Goodness knows how these ones are still in place!
Ah well. Glad to have taken the plunge with these planes in 1/72, and grateful that such kits were available. When all's said and done, 1/72 is a scale which gives you much more scope than bigger scales, about how much you're going to do, and what level of detail you're going for.
-
You have built two lovely models! Myself, as a happy owner of a pair of Roden's F.2a/H.16 I can only admire your work. You should be proud of what you did.
And yes, it is hard to keep the dihedral in these kits. I managed to achieve it in H.16 but at the cost of thick monofilament rigging lines. F.2a, which has a more to scale rigging from elastic thread has sadly drooping wings...
-
You have two very good models there: neither would have been easy to assemble, especially given thier size.
Drift wires are always left to the end on my models otherwise I know that they would come adrift! You are right about God's Own Scale too: by far the best IMHO because not only can the detail be fudged if necessary, but a larger collection of models can be crammed into a smaller space!
Stephen.
-
Many thanks, compliments from such masters as yourselves gratefully received 8)
I confess, I decided the dihedral was too subtle to attempt, and was merely trying to keep the wings straight! At which I failed with the F.2A; it's a quirk of making two similar models in parallel, that you often make little (or big) mistakes with one, and naturally you avoid the mistake with the other, which bizarrely means it can be quite hard to build the two kits to precisely the same standard. Thankfully the very different schemes, and the different wingtip designs, makes the differences here not so obvious.
Currently puzzled why the rigging on the previously neat H.16 has slackened, when it seems okay on the F.2A. I can live with it. Which brings up another modeller's lesson: once you've decided you've reached the finish line, don't keep staring at it like that, or you'll absolutely definitely see something which 'needs correcting'! :)
Another footnote, something possibly not obvious from the pictures, about rendering a wood effect. I've been used to using clear orange on brown, and hadn't tried this before, Tamiya Smoke over reddish brown ('NATO brown' in this case), as seen on the F.2A's side fins here, I thought the result was really nice.
-
You have two gorgeous Models added to your collection! Funny thing about the rigging that has slackened. There was a very good Modeler who built the Roden Felix years ago. He used Mono I believe, and swore that it loosened and tightened with changes in Humidity 8)
RAGIII
-
These 18th c. pirate ships with wings look really nice! ;)
Andreas
-
Very interesting models, with captivating liveries. In my opinion very well executed and it surely was a troublesome work, so congratulations for what you achieved.
Ciao
Giuseppe
-
Many thanks for the further comments gents :)
I've just got back from a thoroughly enjoyable holiday to the US visiting friends and family; before this noble forum thread becomes some sort of 'what I did on my holidays' ramble, I'd better say that my challenge of transporting biplane kits by air succeeded pretty well, though divine intervention and a smart Norwegian Airways stewardess were probably involved. (The stewardess intervened when she spotted me looking doubtfully at the overhead lockers; I hadn't anticipated that they would turn luggage upside down :) She took the box away somewhere where it could stay flat)
I should say that in my family there, a US cousin has married a lady of Chilean heritage, hence the setting of the scene I made.
Here's the bespoke box I constructed, with most of the pieces more or less firmly positioned.
The display base and acrylic cover went in my hold luggage.
I took glues and some repair tools but to my amazement, I only found one bit of wire needed putting back in place.
-
Here's a pic of the scene, before screwing on the acrylic obviously.
Not really a diorama, despite its size, not least because the two aircraft were never in the same place together. But they were around at the same time (1921-ish), and in the same hemisphere(!); and at least one had been around during WWI.
I guess it's meant to represent a warm climate US base - imagine Florida, where 845 did operate - with the Chilean plane passing through. Those are US vehicles, but the uniforms of the various figures are generic and just vaguely of the era. I did look around for some while but couldn't find anything better in this scale. The section of slipway is inspired by pics of the slipways at Felixstowe. It would have been longer and included some water, but I realised there would be height issues elsewhere what with the depth required.
I'll put up more photos of the scene later, in the completed models thread.
The dog was meant to be a certain animal, still with us today, but having just spent some time with Sammie, 190 pounds of Newfoundland and bigger than me, I can see I should have looked for a scale model bear ;)