Jump to content
ARC Discussion Forums

Sign in to follow this  
ProfessorOfDeath

Mosquito Rivet Pattern?

Recommended Posts

Big Daddy, we were all in amazement when your fuse came off the mould. I got to have a good look all over it many times before she left our shores. How are you guys getting along?? What bits are you still looking for?

Cheers guys

Anthony

Hi Anthony,

The project is moving along well. The main wing is almost finished and has passed inspection. Work on the tail plane is progressing well. We hope to mate the wing and fuselage in the next few months. One thing we are lacking is good drawings of the vertical fin. Ours are old and almost illegible. Thanks for your interest!

Cheers,

Don

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Scoob

Kevin that is one interesting looking Mossie, I just struggle to get my head around what they have done and how they did what they did. I think it looks odd, and would love to see her in more detail around the nose to see how they did the nose conversion. The 2 stage Merlins reminds me of an Aussie one. But hey, at least she is safe and where she looks well cared for.

Cheers guys

Anthony

I hate to say it, I was a member of that museums restoration department when the Mossie was butchered. The nose was chopped off and a new nose was grafted on. I likely have photographs of the process.

Many of us voiced our concers at the time. I understand why it was done, it was due to our lineage with 418 Squadron (I am a former member too). Squadron Leader Russ Bannock liked it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kevin that is one interesting looking Mossie, I just struggle to get my head around what they have done and how they did what they did. I think it looks odd, and would love to see her in more detail around the nose to see how they did the nose conversion. The 2 stage Merlins reminds me of an Aussie one. But hey, at least she is safe and where she looks well cared for.

That particular Mosquito is a B.35 dressed up and, as Scooby said, re-tailored to mimic an FB.VI.

I was very surprised to see it as a soild, gun nosed variant when it was presented post restoration. I left the museum just after the un-restored fuselage was brought in, so expected to see a bomber nose restoration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the info on how that B35 ended up looking like that. Ouch! I didn't realise they actually cut the nose right off! Oh dear. Where did the nose section end up? I hope they saved it.

Big Daddy, I had a look through my drawings, I have fin and rib drawings but they are poor also, I suspect we have the same ones. I do however know where there is a fin in need of repair. I am unsure if the chap will part with it, but I will ask in about 2-3 weeks if that is ok? Do you have any spares yourselves?

I am heading away for a few days to go to Classic Fighters Airshow. But we can chat more when I get back if you like?

Cheers

Anthony

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the info on how that B35 ended up looking like that. Ouch! I didn't realise they actually cut the nose right off! Oh dear. Where did the nose section end up? I hope they saved it.

Big Daddy, I had a look through my drawings, I have fin and rib drawings but they are poor also, I suspect we have the same ones. I do however know where there is a fin in need of repair. I am unsure if the chap will part with it, but I will ask in about 2-3 weeks if that is ok? Do you have any spares yourselves?

I am heading away for a few days to go to Classic Fighters Airshow. But we can chat more when I get back if you like?

Cheers

Anthony

Thanks! Yes, we do have quite a collection of Lanc and Mossie parts and some are duplicates. We are always willing to trade parts as well as expertise. Thanks. Have a great time at the CFA!

Don

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And as long as we're talking about Mosquitos and how they're made, for the record, and contrary to what one 'expert' opined when I first posted the fact that the Tamiya 1/48 rudder hinge post is a scale 3 1/2" too tall, Mossies ARE built to very exacting tolerances just like every other airplane. I'm 100% certain that the tolerance for the height of the vertical fin is a lot less than 3 1/2" :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:D, Not exactly on the Moquito topic here but has to do with Merlin engines. Early in WW2 there was a conference sponsored by the Ministry of Aircraft Production. they were looking to increase Merlin engine production by any means possible. A number of engineer reps from car companies were invited to attend. The Ford UK rep reckoned that the car builders would have problems with the tolerances specified. One Rolls Royce engineer apparently got a bit puffed up and said something along the lines of "What, our tolerances too fine for you chappies in the car game?" To which the Ford man replied "No, too wide actually. We have to be able to take any piton off the shelf and shove it into any bore in any block. You fellows can measure the bore and then go off to the shelf with a micrometer and find the piston you want for that bore. Unfortunately we don't have the time for that so every piston must fit every bore in every block within tolerances of course." Apparently the Rolls engineer was flabbergasted as well as a bit ego deflated.

:cheers:,

Ross.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd heard that story before as well... :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is that why Packard ended up building the Merlins? (Packard is mty all time favorite make, followed by Bugatti and Ford).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And as long as we're talking about Mosquitos and how they're made, for the record, and contrary to what one 'expert' opined when I first posted the fact that the Tamiya 1/48 rudder hinge post is a scale 3 1/2" too tall, Mossies ARE built to very exacting tolerances just like every other airplane. I'm 100% certain that the tolerance for the height of the vertical fin is a lot less than 3 1/2" :)/>

Thanks for that tidbit of info Jennings. I had read somewhere else too that there were issues with the rudder hinge I could not find out exactly what was wrong. Are there some reliable drawings around? I would not mind correcting my Tamiya kit on the next one I build.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, I misspoke - it's 4 1/2" too tall. This was from a measurement taken against the rudder post of the B.35 (masquerading as a PR.XVI) at the NMUSAF in Dayton many years ago.

Mossie_Tail.jpg

Edited by Jennings

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is that why Packard ended up building the Merlins? (Packard is mty all time favorite make, followed by Bugatti and Ford).

Packard built them in the US..Ford built some in England.

Sean

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The "right" part is exactly how Aston Martin engines were built. My father had the engine of his DB-4 rebuilt in the late 70s. Each bearing had to be measured so the proper individual replacement could be ordered.

That straight 6-cylinder engine was a beast of a power plant!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:D, Hi Hal, Packard were brought into the mix to increase the production rate, not so much the quality. The quality was always there but I once saw an American documentary about Packard production. There were a number of problems with early Packard Merlins, mainly to do with annealed parts and when the source of the problems was found according to the doco it was down to coca-cola. That might seem strange but apparently the semi-skilled workers would walk back to work after their tea breaks past the annealing tanks and pour the leftover coke in their bottles or cans into the annealing tanks and after a while this had an effect on the finished product. From memory the main problems were with magneto drive shafts and also some bearings. There were a number of Mk.8 and Mk.9 Spitfire crashes and maybe even some late Mk.5s due to these problems. Of course when the cause was found Packard had to provide drums cut in half for the workers to tip their last bit of coke into before they went anywhere near the annealing tanks.

:cheers:,

Ross.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a few lines of rivets and fasteners on the engine nacelles but that's about it.

DSCF7848.jpg

DSCF7847.jpg

Funny looking Mossie with the two stage engine nacelles and the FB MkVI nose and windscreen which it never had. Totally ruins the forward lines. The engines stick out too far beyond the nose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There were a number of Mk.8 and Mk.9 Spitfire crashes and maybe even some late Mk.5s due to these problems.

I suspect someone has misheard, or been the victim of an "old wives tale." Apart from the Mk.XVI, in 1944/5, no Spitfire was ever fitted with a Packard engine. Even the renamed Merlin 266 started life as the Merlin 69, designed for Canadian-built Mosquitoes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry if this seems rude but the though that a Mosquito deserves rivets and nails inserted where layers of plywood is merely held together by a bond of glue strikes me as idiotic .

If you want this sort of thing to be the main impression of your build it would make more since to pick an airframe that was hammered together .

Just my thoughts . Regards, Christian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry if this seems rude but the though that a Mosquito deserves rivets and nails inserted where layers of plywood is merely held together by a bond of glue strikes me as idiotic .

If you want this sort of thing to be the main impression of your build it would make more since to pick an airframe that was hammered together .

Just my thoughts . Regards, Christian

I am sometimes surprised at how some modelers choose to add completely inaccurate detailing to their models, and others chime in with comments about how cool those details are. I've even seen comments about those completely inaccurate details saying things like "you nailed it!" or "you've shown us the definitive way to model this aircraft" while I am cringing at how completely wrong it looks to me, having spent five years working on one real plane that's often modeled inaccurately plus another dozen years working on other aircraft types.

But it is just a hobby, and if someone chooses to be completely inaccurate with their model because they like it, that's their right. If it pleases that modeler, it doesn't matter if you and I are shaking our heads and thinking thoughts about how awful it looks to us.

My only concern is that someone who wants to build an accurate model but doesn't know that much about the real airplane will see one of those "artistic liberty" models and think that the details are accurate. I am often conflicted about commenting on the inaccuracies I see. In the past I would point them out to benefit those following the build who would prefer more accuracy in the model they might make in the future. My comments were sometimes less tactful than they should have been, and I've tried to do better with that. Lately I've pretty much just decided to let things be, as the guy who wants accuracy can ask about details he isn't sure of, and the other guy who wants all kinds of rivets or other inaccurate details seems to just want it to look cool in his eyes and doesn't really want to hear comments about the inaccuracy. To each, his own...

Edited by Scott R Wilson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While slightly OT to the aircraft, about 10-15y ago, FSM had a squib showing a "junker" Aston Martin DB4, with a fine job done on rusting the body and wheels, including protruding wheel lug bolts. Getting back on-topic--and adding insult to injury--while the model showed a well-executed finish, it was inappropriate to the aluminum-bodied Aston Martin with its wire spoke wheels and knock-off wheel nuts.

Closing the doors, bonnet, and boot of the BD4 required a gentle touch. You closed the doors by setting them in motion and letting go before they engaged the door lock. If you held onto the handle and pushed the door into the lock, you likely deformed pushed the handle into the door, deforming it. With the bonnet and boot, you let go about 6 inches above the closed position and let gravity finish the job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry if this seems rude but the thought that a Mosquito deserves rivets and nails inserted where layers of plywood is merely held together by a bond of glue strikes me as idiotic .

If you want this sort of thing to be the main impression of your build it would make more sense to pick an airframe that was hammered together .

Just my thoughts . Regards, Christian

If you recognise the need to apologise for what you're about to write, why follow through with the writing?

There's nothing in this thread that warrants calling someone an idiot.

I

Edited by worldslaziestbusker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am sometimes surprised at how some modelers choose to add completely inaccurate detailing to their models, and others chime in with comments about how cool those details are. I've even seen comments about those completely inaccurate details saying things like "you nailed it!" or "you've shown us the definitive way to model this aircraft" while I am cringing at how completely wrong it looks to me, having spent five years working on one real plane that's often modeled inaccurately plus another dozen years working on other aircraft types.

But it is just a hobby, and if someone chooses to be completely inaccurate with their model because they like it, that's their right. If it pleases that modeler, it doesn't matter if you and I are shaking our heads and thinking thoughts about how awful it looks to us.

My only concern is that someone who wants to build an accurate model but doesn't know that much about the real airplane will see one of those "artistic liberty" models and think that the details are accurate. I am often conflicted about commenting on the inaccuracies I see. In the past I would point them out to benefit those following the build who would prefer more accuracy in the model they might make in the future. My comments were sometimes less tactful than they should have been, and I've tried to do better with that. Lately I've pretty much just decided to let things be, as the guy who wants accuracy can ask about details he isn't sure of, and the other guy who wants all kinds of rivets or other inaccurate details seems to just want it to look cool in his eyes and doesn't really want to hear comments about the inaccuracy. To each, his own...

:D, I guess it all comes back to reference photos of that particular aircraft at a particular time during its service life, whether miltiary, airline or GA types. Like you I worked on 2 military types and components from numerous other types during my military career and have assisted in minor ways, working on GA types since getting out of the RAAF. The reference photo is the best idea of what it looked like at that time. But yes Scott, I think you're dead right with your thoughts there, there will always be those who wnat to ask for the sake of being accurate and those who don't really worry too much about accuracy. I have a model of one of Adolf Gallands Bf 109Es when he was in France. I know it's painted in totally wrong colours, dark green 71/black green 70 over blue 65 with a light spray of 02 RLM grey over the 65 on the fuselage sides. However I have never changed the colouring to what I now know is correct because I fear goofing it up toally if I try. I got the scheme from a profile in a book over 30 years ago which was incorrect. It was the only reference I had at the time apart from one indistinct photo and a lack of knowledge of Luftwaffe schemes then.

:cheers:,

Ross.

Share this post


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.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...