Jump to content
ARC Discussion Forums

don f

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About don f

  • Rank
    Step away from the computer!

Recent Profile Visitors

5,413 profile views
  1. Take care. The J version waist gun windows were not the same as the B-25D2 or B-25G-12. These were symmetrical top and bottom. Here's a 41BG aircraft that shows the waist gun windows with the HAD modification. The wind deflector is clearly visible at the front of the window fairing. Lots of interesting detail in this image, i.e., the smooth contour MLG tire, rescue markings at the corners of the aft photographer's windows, starboard package gun. etc. Other images show that a port side package gun was not installed and cockpit external armor plate on port side only. The poor co-pilot. Hopefully he had a full seat with the armor plate behind him. Don
  2. Hi Jon, If you don't already have the information below, this posting to HS may be of assistance to you in building your model. Don ******************************** Mitchells in Central and South Pacific- ' 43-44 December 8 2007 at 9:56 AM Phil Marchese (Login philmarchese) HyperScale Forums from IP address I recently completed a model of a 1945 version of the B-25G as used by the 41st BG in the final two months of the Air Offensive, Japan campaign. That plane was a NA96 that had gone thru at least four major modification programs. Pictures of the build were posted in the Monogram Bomber Build forum. I've repeated two here from phase 9 of the build (right/left). My model is shown after the HAD refurbishment done for the 41 BG in early 1945. It has the J2* nose (8-gun), rocket racks and increased tail ammunition capacity (two cans). Some also had an armored waist window insert. My model also shows the forked ILS antenna above the cockpit and single wing tip lings. Both these feature appeared on later blocks of the B-25G and B-25D (NA100). Earlier blocks did not have the system and had wing tip lights in pairs, above and below each wing tip. The configuration has its origin in the NAA Kansas City 2081 change. NAA KC was under contract for 2080 B-25D and by the 2nd Quarter of 1943 was well into the B-25J design and production conversion planning. However the projected delivery was December, 1943. The AAF wanted an interim armament upgrade prior to the 2081 change. So circa May/June 1943 directed NAA to modify existing and future B-25D (NA87) and B-25G to the interim configuration. The bombardier version became the B-25D2 series (not block, i.e. no dash) while the interim G pulled from any NA96 C-20 to G-10 block became the G-12. The key differences in the interim configuration were: • the unique tail gunners canopy with a single 50 cal. MG in the lower position; • unstaggered, enclosed waist windows similar to the 2081 change design but with symmetrical fairings; • and side package guns with 2 x 50 cal. MG each side. During the NA100 contract for the last of the 2080 B-25D, the D2 configuration was produced on the assembly line rather than at the adjacent Fairfax modification Center. Martin Omaha’s modification center probably participated in the G-12 modification program, many B-25G IARCs histories indication passage thru the Center. The G-12 carried the package guns only starboard (none port side outboard the cannon breech). The package blister was hinged and did not have to be removed to service the weapons. This was an improvement over the less aerodynamic shell-type developed in the SWPA and used by the FEAF**. Many G-12 had been in the Central Pacific with the 75mm cannon nose since October 1943. HAD removed the plexiglas waist enclosures from those planes and added wind deflectors. The Central Pacific soon moved to an open tail position as it had done on its Liberators and removed the final section of the tail gunner's canopy which enclosed the rear face. In the process the MG was raised onto a pole mount and an ammunition can was mounted in the canopy fairing. The waist and tail changes were also done for the VII BC B-25D2 and many USMC PBJ1-D. Many of the 75mm nosed B-25G-12 had the disruptive shade 42 blotching on the rear spine and leading and trailing edges of the flight surfaces. The South Pacific B-25D2 and G-12 tended to keep the tail canopy complete but double the lower armament to 2 x 50 cal MG's. Waist windows were sometimes open but tended to remain enclosed also. Later USMC 612 BOMBRON upgraded its PBJ1-D similar to 1945 HAD upgrade. The Squadron's D2 had left the States with the interim armament and nose mounted radar. HAD/EWA modified the open waist and tail. Now the top turret was removed from the mid-dorsal position and rocket capability added. The finish was changed from the two tone USN scheme to the Gloss Sea blue. The prescribed 20" night fighter national insignia was applied to the conversions. When building the D2, omit the pilot exterior armor plate. It was not standard on the D2 configuration. Note that G and H carried only pilot side plates. In summary, the four phase modifications shown on my model can be replicated in different combinations to build many Central Pacific and South Pacific B-25D2, B-25G-12 and PBJ1-D planes from the AAF 41 and 42 BGs or from USMC VMB 612***. Footnotes: 1. * series (again, not block) for any B-25J with the nose modification applied) 2. Many surviving 42 BG B-25G-12 were converted to commerce strafers added to MG's to the nose, removing the 75 mm cannon and adding a SWPA gun package to the pilot side. 3. *** Some VMB night intruders also carried the J2 nose kit, but I have not confirmed a D2 conversion with the J2 nose in either AAF or USMC units. This message has been edited by philmarchese from IP address on Dec 8, 2007 10:15 AM This message has been edited by philmarchese from IP address on Dec 8, 2007 10:14 AM This message has been edited by philmarchese from IP address on Dec 8, 2007 10:09 AM This message has been edited by philmarchese from IP address on Dec 8, 2007 10:08 AM This message has been edited by philmarchese from IP address on Dec 8, 2007 10:08 AM This message has been edited by philmarchese from IP address on Dec 8, 2007 10:04 AM
  3. In 1/72, no aftermarket handheld twin .50s, M-6 Stinger or the light weight A-6B tail turret. Same for A-6 turret with modifications for use as a nose turret. By "light weight A-6B tail turret", I think you are referring to the SAC-7 rear turret. See "Consolidated Mess" by Alan Griffith. You could probably modify the Hasegawa B-24D/J rear turret for this. If you want the A-6B with the covers for the guns removed, the Cobra Company PB4Y-2 set has a great rear turret. This is the best 1/72 B-24 turret made. The bad news. Cobra Company has folded up shop. But, this does show that a good aftermarket turret can be made. In 1/48, the clear canopy for handheld twin .50s can be found in the Koster PB4Y-1 "Nose Job" + B-24H, J & L Liberator, No. 14 conversion set. For the other turrets, you're on your own. Don
  4. This the set you recall? I purchased these at a show in Texas some years back and don't remember the price for the cowling set. The wheel well set as marked. Nice casting. No idea if Fox 3 is still in business. Don
  5. don f

    Sword 1/72 P-47N

    Drifting a bit off topic, since we are talking about P-47N's, what about the 1/72 High Planes P-47N? Better than the Sword kit? Don
  6. Larry, That is a great article. The only summation, that I know of, for US aircraft ordnance from a model builder's viewpoint. This drawing has some dimensions that will be helpful in making the photoflash bombs: Here's a family of bombs that can be made from the 100# bombs in the various 1/48 AM kits. I had intended to finish these and cast duplicates. Never got around to the finishing and casting. The procedure was too reshape the nose, cut the nose and tail sections of the appropriate length and glue back together. Two kit 100# bombs are required for each Don
  7. I did not record where this critque was posted. Here's a start: ********************************* Hi! I'm Grant Matsuoka currently living in Tokyo. If you prefer building a kit as is and getting the most out of it, perhaps this will be disappointing. If you are a worrywart who likes it perfect, perhaps this is for you. If you might be interested in what might be necessary to make a kit more accurate, even if it is not important, this might be an interesting read. Among other things, I'm a C-130 nut who came back to C-130s after a long time due to the issue of the Minicraft kit. This is for the Coast Guard kit. Well here it goes. On first inspection, the kit looks good. Scribing is a bit heavy for 1/144, but acceptable. If slapped together, it will be a satisfying build. It provides many items that modelers would want, flight deck, cargo bay flooring and opening cargo doors. The join for the wings to the fuselage insures that the alignment of the wings is at the proper angle. Minicraft has put out a much needed kit. If you are interested, in improvements to the kit, read on. This is my opinion and I am not infallible. Part of this derived from comparing the kit with the excellent but by no means perfect drawings in the old Koku-fan Famous Aircraft of the World #79, C-130 Hercules, from Nov. 76, but more importantly from detail pictures that I have accumulated over the years. The fillet that covers the forward wing join to the fuselage is too large and extends too far forward. In other words the curvy part that covers where the wing attaches to the fuselage is too large ahead of the wing. The main landing gear door is about 2mm too long and cuts into the APU area. The wheels are too large in diameter. The fuselage around the cockpit is too angular. The lower forward windows should be slightly curved rather than have an angle in the middle. Looking at the rear fuselage towards the tail, the fuselage width should start curving in at the about the point where the two ramp cargo doors meet. On the kit it starts bulging out very slightly. The shape of the fuselage width under tail should be a more gentle curve rather than a sharp break. This is from before the horizontal tail surfaces to the beaver tail, looking at the kit from the bottom up. In the same area, lengthwise, the under fuselage is too deep. It should not be a raised area like on the kit, but follow the fuselage contours with the lowest part on the centerline. The raised area should be thinner in outline. Look at the Italeri or AMT kits. According to the plans, the fuselage is too short, perhaps around the paratroop doors and the tail is too narrow and too short. The fuselage under the paratroop doors should be flat and not curve upwards as in the kit. The props are too wide. The stubs that attach the props to the prop cone are too long and in this scale the back edge should almost be flush with the cone. The engines are too wide. The rear of the engine is too short and too flat at the end. The flat area should be narrower. They extend a bit too far back. Engine intakes are too square and too flat at the bottom. It should look like a deeper smiling mouth. The intake should pinch in where it joins the prop cone. From the front it should have a figure 8 shape. The prop cone diameter appears too wide. The small rear intake is too far forward. The exhaust cans at the rear have ends that are too slanted. The ends should be much closer to vertical. The under wing tanks are too short and the nose is too blunt. The pylons are too short and a bit too thin and missing the cutout for the flaps. The refueling pods should be more tear drop shaped. Perhaps they could be a bit larger in diameter. The forward part can be more rounded and the rear sanded down to present a longer tail cone. The fuselage and cargo door bumpers are missing. These support (?) the fuselage and door when they come in contact with the ground during loading or unloading. The air vent grill is missing from behind the right cockpit windows. Does not provide the more common 60s thru 80s straight edged beaver tail. The kit is of an E model whereas USCG 1703 should be a super H model. I think they now call it an H-7. Sorry. The landing gear housing should extend past the prop line and on the left side it should have a ball hump for the APU while the right side should have a small air intake (air conditioning?) in front. There should also be another bump behind and below the right cockpit. The orange on my decal was too red and slightly splotchy. It would have been nice to see the USCG emblem as a separate item. Sorry that this is a lot. I love the C-130. I am sorry that it will take a lot of effort to make it acceptable in my eyes. I may be wrong in my comments and would appreciate any comments to help me. Finally, thank you very much to Minicraft for releasing the kit. Making an accurate C-130A If you want to make an accurate A model (AC/DC/JC/RC/WC, C-130D, and RC-130S) you would have to correct three major things: Set the engines further back into the wing. Scribe the forward cargo door and add extra windows. Reshape slightly the join of the nose radome and fuselage. The A model engines were set further back into the wings. There is a vertical panel line on the engines about where the wing meets the engines. On the A model, the wing extends forward of that line. The rear engine fairings extend further back. On the inner engine, the rear ends at the front of the flap. On the outer engine, it extends onto the flap itself. The rear portion of the engine fairing is attached to the flap and there is a break line at about the 60% part of the flap, starting from the front of the flap. As the flap extends backwards and downwards on rails rather than downwards on hinges, there is no need for a cutout on the fairing. To get a better idea of the differences in engine length ahead of the wing, compare the red prop warning line on A models with B and later models. The prop line for the A model touches the front of the landing gear housing. On the B and later models, the prop line is about a foot ahead of the landing gear housing. For the later super H models, from about 72-XXXX tail numbers and later, the landing gear housing was extended forward so that the prop line is now flush with the front of the right housing, and is about half a foot behind the front of the left housing. As three blade props must do more work than four blade props, they are longer and have square corners and straight tips. They get wider towards the tips. The four blade props curve inwards slightly as they approach the blade tips and have rounded tips. I've always felt that the A model blades were fatter than the four blade props, but cannot confirm this at this time. The A models, (and their derivative Ds and Ss) B and E models up to and including the 61-XXXX tail numbers had a forward cargo door on the left fuselage side. These had an unfortunate habit of opening in flight with at least one tragic result and so were ordered locked shut and later deleted from later models. The outline is clear, even if perhaps less so, on camouflaged planes. The A models also had an extra window ahead of the landing gear housing, one on each side. B models and later deleted this window. Little remarked on, early A models (up to and including 55-XXXX tail numbers) had at least 4 windows on the upper fuselage, two on each side ahead of the wings. Look for 50s era photos to see this. Later A models had the windows plated over. You could still see this from the inside. B models and later deleted the openings entirely. From the early 60s the windows were painted over. The navigator also had a proper window rather than a sextant porthole. I have a picture showing this. I don't know when it was changed. I think it was probably at the same time as the upper windows. The very early A models had the Roman nose to house the smaller AN/APS-42 radar. Later C-130s had the larger beak nose radome to house the APN-59 radar. The A models radome attachment did not seem to consider its effect on airflow around the cockpit windows. (time, money?) The side profile shows a clear angular join where the upper part of the radome attaches to the cockpit. B model and later radomes had a scab attached to the fuselage and a slightly rounded upper radome to present a curved outline from the side. Look at photos of the side nose profile to see this. Be aware that most published fuselage lengths are for the original short tail stub. If they give the same lengths for A models thru H models, it is forC-130s with the shorter tail. From about the late 60s or early 70s a longer beaver tail was added to the fuselage after the vertical and horizontal tail surfaces. This was to hold a CPI. (crash position indicator) I believe that it was thought that this area would better survive a crash or a fire. In the early 80s the CPPI antenna was replaced with a short white whip antenna (?) and the super H production line reverted to the original short tail. The beaver tails installed on A to H models were not removed, although I believe that the CPI was progressively removed and changed to the later ones. Some aircraft never had the beaver tail mod, such as the JC-130Bs at Hickam AFB. (not Hickham) For A models, in the cockpit, the navigator's black boxes were installed on exposed racks. There was no soundproofing paneling as on the B and later models. The steps from the main floor to the cockpit were different in the A model. It is wider at the bottom, angled and slightly twists towards the rear and the slope of the ladder is lower so that the bottom steps are closer to the front door. From B models on, the steps are vertical and the ladder is rectangular in shape. If you are doing the Minicraft C-130; for the 450 gal wing fuel tanks, the old Otaki/Arii F-105D wing tanks are a close match. I haven't compared the kit tanks with drawings so I'm not sure how accurate they would be. The kit wheels are too small. The A Model C-123 main wheels are a good match in diameter. The C-123 kit rims have spokes and are wrong for a C-130, but gives you a good idea of the size. For engines, the old LS/Arii P-3 kit's engine intake part is nice. The P-3 kit intake has an upper lip that needs to be removed. The middle should pinch in a little more. The P-3 kit props are also very nice but are too rounded at the tips. Like the Minicraft C-130, the P-3 engines are too wide. Compare them with the Hasegawa P-3 kit engines to see this. I wrote this from memory, pre 90s publications and photos so there are probably errors. I apologize for any future misinformation being disseminated from this post. If anyone can confirm what I have said or elaborate on it, I would be grateful. I would even appreciate being contradicted. Thanks beforehand. I paid 7980 yen for this kit in Tokyo. I WILL still buy more.
  8. Hi Larry, Here's a discussion that you should read, if you've not already done so. Lots of very good info: Hyperscale discussion of RB-26C There is no kit or aftermarket source for the M46 Photoflash Bomb. The photoflash bomb was similar to the M47 chemical bomb, but dimensionally not exactly the same. You'll have to make your own M46. Not difficult to do. Here's the M46: I made an M46 from the 100# GP bombs found in the AM B-25C kit. If you're interested, I'll dig it up and post pics here. Don
  9. Blackburn Aircraft operated a modification facility at Roosevelt Field on Long Island New York. There, US aircraft such as Hellcats and Corsairs were modified to British requirements. Factory delivered aircraft for the USAAF and USN were also sent to US mod centers to make the aircraft meet the requirements of the theater of operation and projects that they were destined for. The critical role of these mod centers is an untold story of US WWII aircraft production. Don
  10. Hi John, In case you are looking for more Corsair III: "Sturtivant's "Fleet Air Arm Aircraft 1939-45" show two contracts for Corsair IIIs built by Brewster. The first, covers JS469-JS888 (BuAer #04689-04774, 08550-08797, and 11067-11152). A second batch was quite small, JT963-JT972 (BuAer 11153-11162) While these were all designated F3A-1 by Brewster, they were similar to Vought F4U-1a." Don't know the site or person that posted this info. It was copied from my files. "430 Corsair III serialed JS469-JS888 and JT963-972. USN BuNos indicate that the first 335 aircraft were F3A-1’s and the final 95 F3A-1D’s, all with the framed canopy. All these aircraft used the larger propeller." Posted by Paul Fontenoy at the long gone FAASIG website.
  11. Les, Happy to help. The tank mounted behind the rear cockpit bulkhead was for the ADI fluid. This was not installed in early F6F-3 aircraft. To quote William Reece, "This tank was not fitted until BuNo 40634 with the advent of the R-2800-10W engine." Don
  12. Here's a start. A link to a series of articles by Scott Murhpy that provides many details of the interior of the Hellcat that may be of help to you. Scott Murphy 1/32 F6F project Almost all R-2800 engines in kits and resin ones do not supply the cooling baffles for the cylinders. Here's a drawing that shows the baffles and how they interlocked to ensure adequate cooling air flow around and over each cylinder. The inter-ear deflectors linked together to form the "ring" between the cylinder banks. Below the schematic for the F6F induction system. Unlike the F4U-1, the F6F had a downdraft carb. From Scott's article: This may be of use: Finally here's a link at ARC: Sergey Chegodaev scratchbuilt 1/32 F6F Sorry I can't provide cuts from manuals. I'm far from home without access to my reference material. Don
  13. Hi Kent, The bullet resistant glass was integrated into the windscreen assembly. As I recall, the bullet resistant glass was 1 1/2" thick. Here's an image from navypilot overseas website that shows how the glass was built into the windscreen. The side shatter proof glass panels are broken out. Here's the link to more images of the same aircraft Click for more F4U-5N Don
  14. This good enough? Google or search Hyperscale for more.
  15. don f

    B-25D waist guns

    Even before the conversion to strafers, .30 cal. MG's were added to fire out of the photographer's compartment windows in the aft fuselage with simple pintle type mounts. These windows were hinged to open upwards so the installation was relatively simple. This practice continued with the conversion to the B-25D-1 strafer. For example, the narrative report for the aircraft named "Todelayo" lists the expenditure of 1,500 rounds of .30 caliber ammunition aboard Tondelayo after the famous October 18, 1943 mission to Rabaul. Later mission narratives also list expenditures of .30 caliber ammo. Hickey's book "Warpath Across the Pacific" has many photos showing the addition of .30 cal. MG's to the aft fuselage. The B-25D2, featuring enclosed fuselage side gun positions with .50 cal MG's, were operated in the PTO. Don
  • Create New...