Jump to content

1/32 Trumpeter P-38L Lightning- "Kicked Up A Notch"


Recommended Posts

Can you tell me what sort of glue GOOP is? Is it water based?

Thanks Andrew. Nice A-10 you made there!

GOOP is definitely not water based- and it's not silicone either. There is a warning about fumes and getting it near flames, etc., but to be honest, I don't worry about the fumes at all, because it dries fairly fast and there is not much smell in the first place. It dries to a silicone level of hardness within an hour or so, but after 72 hours it is quite hard- sort of like toffee that is hard but still slightly flexible. I have used it to glue plastic feet onto wrought iron chairs many times, so if it will stick to iron, it will stick to anything.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Andrew. Nice A-10 you made there!

GOOP is definitely not water based- and it's not silicone either. There is a warning about fumes and getting it near flames, etc., but to be honest, I don't worry about the fumes at all, because it dries fairly fast and there is not much smell in the first place. It dries to a silicone level of hardness within an hour or so, but after 72 hours it is quite hard- sort of like toffee that is hard but still slightly flexible. I have used it to glue plastic feet onto wrought iron chairs many times, so if it will stick to iron, it will stick to anything.

Back in my former life as an avionics tech, I regularly used silicone sealant that had flammable solvents. When it cured it did not smell of vinegar (acetic acid). I was told it was much more expensive than the silicone sealant that does smell of vinegar, but using that type was necessary to prevent corrosion on aluminum aircraft that might be caused by the acetic acid in the cheaper stuff. It was gray, not clear like Goop. I had presumed Goop was similar, but you may be correct, Goop may not be silicone at all. Whatever it is, it works. Looking at the manufacturer's website I found that they make it in many formulations:

http://eclecticproducts.com/products/amazing-goop.html

Edited by Scott R Wilson
Link to post
Share on other sites

July 15/15

Thanks Guys! I really appreciate the words of encouragement.

Another small update. Maybe boring, but I want to document every important step- and this one is VERY important, as you will soon see!

Before you glue the lower wings and bottom fuselage to the top wing, you need to install the 4 flaps and the ailerons to the upper wing. I made up the flaps and ailerons months ago and I applied some black lacquer primer to the inside edges, which will be very hard if not impossible to paint later after assembly. When you glue the little hinges into the slots in the upper wing, made sure the flap or aileron is flush to the top of the upper wing before you commit to CA glue. Once the hinge slots are filled with CA glue, there’s no turning back. So far so good.

After the flaps and ailerons were installed, I dry fit the lower wings. The fit wasn’t too bad, but then again, this is a Trumpeter kit.

I then dry fit the lower fuselage over the inner flaps and things did not fit well at all. The flaps would not move hardly at all, so I started to sand down the tight fit, when it occurred to me: “Are the flaps installed in the right location?” Checking the wonderful Trumpeter instructions, they were no help, because there is no detail or other hints to give you some guidance as to which flap fit where. You’re just supposed to know, even though I made them up months ago. Looking at things a bit closer, the light bulb turned on: “The flaps are all glued in left to right and vice versa!!! AGGGGHHHHH!!!”

Upon further inspection, there is a slight angle to the side of the flaps, allowing the flap to fit tightly with the wing parts while still being able to move with the dihedral of the wing. With the flaps flipped left to right (all 4), they were now binding with the wing. Briefly, but only briefly, I actually considered leaving them as is. With some sanding and tweaking, I could make them work, but the gaps and fit would always be poor- and wrong. Time to suck it up and correct the problem. This problem occurred very easily, so I highly suspect I’m not the first one to encounter it, because the error is not glaring. What threw me is that the upper surface of the aileron has a lot of rivet detail, while the bottom of it is fairly plain, so I did the same with the flaps, keeping the extra rivet detail up top. I now know that it should be on the bottom, opposite of the ailerons. BTW, the ailerons are correct, because during assembly the hinges are glued into place, unlike the flaps. Had the flap hinges been glued during assembly, this problem would never have happened, because the hinges have a hook that can only face in one direction- the correct direction.

I tried a number of methods to get the flaps off the hinges without breaking fragile plastic parts and what finally worked was to use a small thin flat screwdriver to pry the side of the hinge off the pin on one side of each flap. Surprisingly, it worked very well and nothing broke or was scratched and the hinge did not bend out of shape. WHEEEEEW!!!

So here is a pic of how things should look attached to the upper wing. As mentioned already, a coat of gloss black lacquer was sprayed to the inner edges of the flaps and ailerons to making painting these areas a lot easier later.

Flapsinstall1.jpg

With the lower wings and fuselage dry fitted, the flaps and ailerons now move freely.

Flapsinstall2.jpg

And fit nice and flush with the wing and fuselage braces when retracted in the up position.

Flapsinstall3.jpg

Before I glue everything together, there’s an area on the wing that still needs a lot of work. The landing/taxiing light lens at the front of the left wing is fairly crude and it fits into a chunky fitting at the front of the wing.

Landinglight1.jpg

As with many parts of the wing halves, panel lines do not match very well, so I have a lot of filling and re-scribing to do. The raised shroud around this light was sanded down earlier top and bottom, because it was way too high for scale. The landing light lens doesn’t look too bad at the bottom when installed. With a little work, I can get it to fit flush and correct the panel line flaws…..

Landinglight2.jpg

But the top, which you can see all the time, shows that big tab at the top of the lens.

Landinglight3.jpg

A closer look. Pretty sad- and where the heck is the LIGHT!? Trumpeter does not supply one- just the crappy lens.

Landinglight4.jpg

So I have quite a bit more work to do before I glue the wings together. I’m going to trim the inner wing and remove the upper lens tab, then clean up the lens and add a nice light behind it. This could take a while!

Thanks for checking in.

Chuck

Link to post
Share on other sites

Briefly, but only briefly, I actually considered leaving them as is. With some sanding and tweaking, I could make them work, but the gaps and fit would always be poor- and wrong. Time to suck it up and correct the problem."

This sums up your greatest strength, Chuck- your will to get it right. Salute!

That other, purposefully-misspelled chuk

Link to post
Share on other sites

chuck,

Another outstanding, well described, update that is easy to follow and understand. It's comforting to know that I'm not the only one who glues parts in backwards, or once upside down. Glad to see that it was easy enough to fix.

Joel

Link to post
Share on other sites

Great work as always Chuck!!!

Thanks John. Always great to have you aboard!

Briefly, but only briefly, I actually considered leaving them as is. With some sanding and tweaking, I could make them work, but the gaps and fit would always be poor- and wrong. Time to suck it up and correct the problem."

This sums up your greatest strength, Chuck- your will to get it right. Salute!

That other, purposefully-misspelled chuk

Thanks chuk. I know for a fact that you are also a very picky guy, which is why your models are always so well made and interesting. It takes a Chuck to know a Chuck!

chuck,

Another outstanding, well described, update that is easy to follow and understand. It's comforting to know that I'm not the only one who glues parts in backwards, or once upside down. Glad to see that it was easy enough to fix.

Joel

Thanks Joel. What really bugs me is that I foresaw the potential error, so I checked the angles and fit of the flaps several times to make sure they were in their correct position before I glued them in. Thankfully the repairs were not too dramatic, although there were moments I thought I was screwed!

I bet there's a bunch of you guys out there who have built this kit before and are just dying to see how I deal with the horrible boom fit, which can result in serious gaps and landing gear alignment issues. Trust me, I am very, very scared. :pray:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Chuck,

I really like the way you have managed to deal with the warped wings and their straightening. I have a similar issue with ESCI's S-3 and I will definitely follow your solution.

Keep up the good work!!!

Sernak

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

July 28/15

Assembly of the wing halves continues. As shown earlier, the frame around the taxiing/landing light on the left wing is raised quite high, but in reality it isn’t raised at all. Note also how the plastic finish is a bit rough and the rivet detail is inconsistent.

Landinglight1_1.jpg

After sanding the frame down on the wing, top and bottom, it looks a bit better, but the lens of the light is very thick, rough and has a big tab at the top of it that shows.

Landinglight4.jpg

The lower tab on the clear lens doesn’t show and can still be a good anchor, so I cut off the top tab.

Landinglight2_1.jpg

It looks much better now inserted into the wing.

Landinglight3_1.jpg

But the front-on view of the frame is still offset by quite a bit.

Landinglight4_1.jpg

The first step to fix this problem is to fully assemble the wing halves first- and I offer another build tip.

After using conventional Tamiya thin cement and letting it dry for 2 days, I sanded down the front join, which results in a nice, clean and ALMOST flaw free join. No matter how much glue you use and how careful you are, there will ALWAYS be a slight gap here and there, some of which you can’t see until the first coat of paint. Having experienced this common modeling phenomenon many times, I now routinely apply a coat of thin CA glue to any join that I want to disappear, let it dry for 10 minutes, then sand it down. For those of you who aren’t familiar with CA glue properties, this cement can easily be sanded in the first hour or so, but it becomes harder than the plastic after a day of drying, so you must sand it down early to avoid any problems later. Further, using CA glue accelerator can make the glue bubble, leaving air pockets and flaws underneath, so you’re better off letting the glue dry on its own for 10 minutes, hit it with accelerator to make sure everything is dry, then sand away. Using this method, I now rarely have any join blemishes after a coat of paint that need to be repaired.

Landinglight5A.jpg

Since the light frame will never join cleanly and is still too high anyway, I sanded it off, but I also sanded the lens which will now be too high without the raised frame.

Landinglight6.jpg

The lens frame was re-scribed, then I painted the inside of the wing black to avoid any unwanted reflections from within.

Landinglight7.jpg

Getting a landing light behind the lens is tricky, because the lens is so thick it doesn’t allow for much clearance and I want the light/lens assembly to be easily inserted into the wing at the end of the build after painting. The light on a real P-38 is forward facing and quite large, which would interfere with the lens, so I went with a hybrid “good enough” solution, by placing a spare light almost flush against the lower lens surface. The rear of the clear light was first painted chrome silver, followed by gloss lacquer black. After the lens was cleaned up with Tamiya polishing compounds, I dipped it in Future and stuck the lens to the back of the lens, using the Future as a clear adhesive.

Landinglight8.jpg

Here is the front before drying, showing the chrome paint. Those little contact ridges of Future at the bottom of the pic (top of the lens) shrunk and disappeared after drying.

Landinglight9.jpg

Edited by chuck540z3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Dry fitted into the wing it almost looks the part. This fit is so snug I won’t need any glue later, but I’ll lay in a little Future to fill any small gaps and seal it in.

Landinglight10.jpg

Especially towards the bottom where you can see the light better. With the aircraft tilted backwards while parked, this light won’t be pointing down as much and will look more natural.

Landinglight11.jpg

With the light now complete, I made sure that the rest of the wing was smooth and gap free, adding rivet detail across the front surface where it is obvious in pics.

Landinglight12.jpg

Next came the bottom fuselage assembly, which requires a lot of dry fitting and tweaking to get it to fit properly. One area of concern was the boarding ladder on the bottom half and the handle on the top wing, which don’t fit into the grooves of their respective parts. These grooves need to be widened in order for the parts to fit flush and allow the ladder to swing freely, which is really hard to do cleanly with a #11 knife. Fortunately I have a set of dental-like burrs and other attachments for my Dremel tool that did the trick.

Lowerfuselage1.jpg

The boarding ladder and upper handle were primed with gloss black lacquer, for ease of painting later.

Lowerfuselage2.jpg

Which leads to another tip. Buy a set of these Dremel attachments for future projects! They have tiny bits of diamond attached to the bits as an abrasive, but they were cheap- only about $30 for the entire set. I bought mine at my local hobby store (PM Hobbycraft), but they are readily available on the ‘net.

Lowerfuselage3.jpg

With the bottom fuselage glued to the upper wing, things are really coming together now. Although the gaps shown below should be eliminated using Tamiya cement and CA glue, the seam on the collar that goes around the front of the wing is real, so you need to somehow retain it. This is very hard to do with soft plastic after using Tamiya cement, so I recommend that you let it dry a week before re-scribing the thin line. I again applied a black wash to make any flaws pop out, like cracks and roughly sanded plastic.

Lowerfuselage4.jpg

The upper wing half does not fit the lower half very well at the top, creating a bulge. To fix this problem, I sanded the upper wing flush with the lower half, fixed the gap with CA glue, then also applied a nice glob of CA glue to the inside to make sure this join is strong and won’t crack in the future.

Lowerfuselage5.jpg

Here’s another tip. When you are fumbling with seam lines and glue, the rest of the wing assembly takes a beating as you flip it over and over. Sensitive areas are the wing tips, which have a very fine lip discussed earlier in this thread, so I covered them with cardboard, while the superchargers were covered with tape. The boarding ladder and upper handle were also masked off to prevent them from popping out.

The cockpit area won't be masked off until I get the canopy and windscreen installed, so I made a crude box over the top of it to help prevent breakage. Meanwhile, I need to keep the front landing gear exposed to help with wheel alignment when I attach the booms, so for that area I just need to be careful

Lowerfuselage6.jpg

The wing flaps were always dropping down and getting in the way, so I taped them shut, which brings up a major decision point. For all the work I’ve done so far to make the flaps work, do I really need them to work at all? I don’t see showing this model with the flaps down ever, partly because I don’t think they would look accurate anyway. I don’t believe the flaps can just drop as I have them installed and would only be accurate if I used the hinge extensions, dropping the flaps behind the wings, rather than just under the wings. Is this true?? In any case, it would sure make painting this bird easier if I just glued the flaps shut. Good move, or will I regret it later? Thanks for any input you can provide.

Cheers,

Chuck

Edited by chuck540z3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Chuck!

I've been out of the loop, apparently! I saw that you finished the A-10 (a masterpiece for sure) and now I see that you've found another Trumpeter kit with which to punish yourself haha!

Great work so far! Subscribed :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Chuck,

Just an outstanding fix and detailing of the wing landing light. Once again you've made a very difficult process look easy. That's a sign of a highly skilled modeler. As for which way to go with the flaps, they were lowered and raised via extension hinges, so I would think that gluing them up would be the right course of action.

Joel

DSC_0359_zps64175f4a.jpg

Edited by Joel_W
Link to post
Share on other sites

Chuck,

Just an outstanding fix and detailing of the wing landing light. Once again you've made a very difficult process look easy. That's a sign of a highly skilled modeler. As for which way to go with the flaps, they were lowered and raised via extension hinges, so I would think that gluing them up would be the right course of action.

Joel

Thanks a lot Joel for that feedback, which I have also received over at LSP. As I mentioned over there, gluing the flaps in the upright position will save me a ton of painting work and since letting them drop is just plain wrong, it's an easy decision. I just wish I hadn't spent so many hours getting the detail under the flaps just right! :bandhead2:

Edited by chuck540z3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks a lot Joel for that feedback, which I have also received over at LSP. As I mentioned over there, gluing the flaps in the upright position will save me a ton of painting work and since letting them drop is just plain wrong, it's an easy decision. I just wish I hadn't spent so many hours getting the detail under the flaps just right! :bandhead2:/>

Chuck,

At least you know that those details are correct. Of course since no one will ever see any of it, it could have been time better spent on other details. If it's any consolation, I've done that more times then I care to admit.

Joel

Link to post
Share on other sites

Chuck, knowing your obvious passion for accuracy, I would like to point out that the P38 had a seam on the leading edge of the wing where the upper and lower skins met. I noticed this when walking around a real example. Perhaps there are pictures online of this. It is like the seam on the upper fuselage of the Me 109 in that is faint. It may have had filler in it during WW2, but I do not know for sure. By the way, the Spitfire had a seam in the same place on the wing.

I hope this helps. I really enjoy your work.

Don Schmidt

Link to post
Share on other sites

Chuck, knowing your obvious passion for accuracy, I would like to point out that the P38 had a seam on the leading edge of the wing where the upper and lower skins met. I noticed this when walking around a real example. Perhaps there are pictures online of this. It is like the seam on the upper fuselage of the Me 109 in that is faint. It may have had filler in it during WW2, but I do not know for sure. By the way, the Spitfire had a seam in the same place on the wing.

I hope this helps. I really enjoy your work.

Don Schmidt

Don,

I just checked some of my reference pictures, and there is indeed what looks more like a crease then a seam, which may have resulted in how they formed the leading edge skin. Here's ref picture from a restoration P-38

p-38_lightning_02_of_29.jpg

Joel

Edited by Joel_W
Link to post
Share on other sites

Chuck, knowing your obvious passion for accuracy, I would like to point out that the P38 had a seam on the leading edge of the wing where the upper and lower skins met. I noticed this when walking around a real example. Perhaps there are pictures online of this. It is like the seam on the upper fuselage of the Me 109 in that is faint. It may have had filler in it during WW2, but I do not know for sure. By the way, the Spitfire had a seam in the same place on the wing.

I hope this helps. I really enjoy your work.

Don Schmidt

Thanks Don. My honest answer is, "I know". :P By coincidence, we discussed this very thing in Janissary's post "Random thoughts from 2015 Nats" in the General Forum on Monday. Here is one of my responses, which should explain why I didn't leave a panel line on the wing.

Thank you sir. Very detailed an enlightening observations!

Your example of the F-15 landing gear hits home. There are a number of modifications I make to my builds- and other ones I don't make- because I just KNOW that some model contest judge will view it as a flaw, even if it's real. For example, the AOA vane on the A-10 is off center within a circular base plate that's behind it. I was afraid it would look like an error if I installed it off-center, so I installed it dead center to avoid any controversy. On my current P-38L build, there is a horizontal seam line on the front of the wings which is subtle, but real if you get up close. If I left the seam line here, it would look like the classic modeling error of not filling the seams on the wing, so I filled it in, again to avoid any contest hassles in the future. Caving in to model contest judges over accuracy? You bet! A few builds ago I puttied in the rivet and panel line detail on the wings of my P-51D as was done at the factory, but after reviewing some war time pictures, I decided to "partially" putty them in to reveal some subtle detail from behind as the putty was compressed with boot marks and wear and tear. BIG mistake! I should have left the rivet and panel line detail alone or filled it all in completely, because I've been explaining my "inconsistent panel lines and rivet detail" ever since. Lesson learned. Keep it simple stupid!

To expand on this topic, I usually try to only include detail that I can see at scale. The seam on the wing collar I can still see from ~ 12 feet away at 1/1 scale, which is 4 1/2 inches at 1/32 scale, which is pretty darn close. I can't see the wing seam at 12 feet, but I can at maybe 3-4 feet, which is just over 1 inch at 1/32. Not even a contest judge looks at my model from 1 1/2" away, so I don't include it. The real reason is explained above. If I left a seam line at the front of the wing, there is an 80% chance it would be considered a flaw at a model contest!

Cheers,

Chuck

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Beautiful job taking care of all of the rough little odds and ends that make Trumpeter kits take so long to put together. The light looks really nice, and that in spite of the magnification under which you show the pics here.

:thumbsup:

Marcel

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...