Nigelr32 Posted July 19, 2020 Share Posted July 19, 2020 58 minutes ago, serendip said: Hi Nigel, I'm wondering though if you also compared the kits in your video to actual line drawings or only compared them to each other. Thanks, Marc. Hi Marc, To answer your question.. in a word..No. I don't have reliable line drawings, and I don't trust drawings unless I KNOW they're good. I think we can sum this one up with what "looks" right, to my eye the Revellogram kit is spot on, the others are, well, wrong. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ElectroSoldier Posted July 20, 2020 Share Posted July 20, 2020 On 7/18/2020 at 7:20 AM, serendip said: Thanks for that. I'm not crazy about Vallejo, but with paint that's often a touch personal. I might go for a home brew on the basis of Gunze or Tamiya. Yeah having tried several paints I keep going back to the old faithfulls like Tamiya and Gunze for aircraft too but the colours Vallejo put out are compelling. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Nigelr32 Posted July 20, 2020 Share Posted July 20, 2020 (edited) Just to keep you interested.. I thought I'd pop up a pic of the Master in progress for the Italeri/AMT H with EW gear. Upper ECM has been mastered with its mounting flange and is currently being moulded. If you compare this to the kit parts you'll see a big difference.. especially the profile underneath.. The resin parts will include the radome including underbelly and cooling vents forward of side ECM's , ECM (Either as one with nose or separate)? I think I will also make separate FLIR blisters as the AMT ones are so bad.. in fact the MC ones are poor as well... I'm also working on the MC nose, which is very labour intensive!! I've had to replace pretty much the whole fuselage under and forward of the glazing. Once the later (Phase VI) radomes are done I'll get stuck into the early nose.Is that phase IV? Please let me know what you think.. good or bad. Edited July 20, 2020 by Nigelr32 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
serendip Posted July 20, 2020 Share Posted July 20, 2020 On 7/19/2020 at 10:31 AM, Nigelr32 said: Hi Marc, To answer your question.. in a word..No. I don't have reliable line drawings, and I don't trust drawings unless I KNOW they're good. I think we can sum this one up with what "looks" right, to my eye the Revellogram kit is spot on, the others are, well, wrong. Thanks Nigel, Makes sense to me. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
serendip Posted July 20, 2020 Share Posted July 20, 2020 Yeah, Phase IV (4) consisted among other things of: AN/ALR 20 countermeasures AN/APR 25 RHAW AN/ALR 18 receivers AN/ANT 6B or 22 CW jammers AN/ALT 13 jammers AN/ALT 15H jammers AN/ALt 15L jammers AN/ALT 16 (you guessed it) jammers AN/ALE 20 flare dispensers AN/ALE 24 chaff dispensers AN/ALE 25 chaff dispensers HTH. Marc. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
habu2 Posted July 20, 2020 Share Posted July 20, 2020 On 7/19/2020 at 4:31 AM, Nigelr32 said: I don't have reliable line drawings, and I don't trust drawings unless I KNOW they're good. How do you determine drawings are "good" (accurate) ? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Nigelr32 Posted July 20, 2020 Share Posted July 20, 2020 2 minutes ago, serendip said: Yeah, Phase IV (4) consisted among other things of: AN/ALR 20 countermeasures AN/APR 25 RHAW AN/ALR 18 receivers AN/ANT 6B or 22 CW jammers AN/ALT 13 jammers AN/ALT 15H jammers AN/ALt 15L jammers AN/ALT 16 (you guessed it) jammers AN/ALE 20 flare dispensers AN/ALE 24 chaff dispensers AN/ALE 25 chaff dispensers HTH. Marc. Sorry Marc, you may as well write that in double dutch.. it all means nothing to me!! Can you describe the phases by visual changes to the radome please. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Nigelr32 Posted July 20, 2020 Share Posted July 20, 2020 (edited) 33 minutes ago, habu2 said: How do you determine drawings are "good" (accurate) ? Opinion among those in the know or blueprints. otherwise I just use them to look at. For example.. I consider any drawing other than blueprint to be an artists representation at best, unless a renowned expert on the subject says otherwise. Also, as with the Squadron signal B-52 in action book.. there are 3 view drawings and artists colour drawings.. they all have errors which could cause the modeller to make shape errors. Just look at the shape of the wing tanks in that book if you have it. Edited July 20, 2020 by Nigelr32 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Nigelr32 Posted July 25, 2020 Share Posted July 25, 2020 I have posted this in the "H" thread, but wanted to put it here as well to ensure all interested parties see it. Here's a pic of where I am now. Ignore the Flir on the belly, I haven't made the non flir belly yet.. just look at the MC stock nose in the background!! Edit: looking at this picture I am wondering if there was another radome, or if the profile of the early nose above on the station diagrams is incorrect? The nose I have roughly carved to shape here looks a little too sloped to me, but it perfectly matches the profile above.?? So.. could it be we have the long "EVS" nose, two interim G/H short noses and the shorty D nose? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
SteveV22FE Posted July 25, 2020 Share Posted July 25, 2020 Post here for the sake of duplication.... This may help...or not... (posted under "Fair Use" for educational purposes) It looks to me that the Later nose has more of a up sweep and it approaches the end of the radome. The early seems to me more gradual. The later nose doe have a more "pointy" appearance. The early nose is "pointy" but not at the same angle as the later nose. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Corey Posted July 25, 2020 Share Posted July 25, 2020 (edited) The nose you just carved looks to me closer to an A through F model nose rather than an early G/H nose. Just my opinion and derived purely from looking at your photo. Edited July 25, 2020 by Corey Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Hooker169 Posted July 26, 2020 Share Posted July 26, 2020 Nice work Nige! I’m watching from afar but I’m super impressed with your tenacity and skill! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
serendip Posted July 26, 2020 Share Posted July 26, 2020 I think it's established there are (at least) three nose types: pre G model pre phase IV - just kidding VI from phase VI From phase VI top and bottom profile are markedly different. I would say the change below starts from the pressure bulkhead at station 345.50. Marc. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Nigelr32 Posted July 26, 2020 Share Posted July 26, 2020 Where can i find information on how to identify the phases of B-52 upgrades? I keep reading about Phase IV or phase VI but don't really know what it refers to? I have all the better known books.. so a reference to them would be cool. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
serendip Posted July 26, 2020 Share Posted July 26, 2020 Hi Nigel, No problem. I'll try to get back to that later today. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
serendip Posted July 26, 2020 Share Posted July 26, 2020 Hi Nigel, Very helpful for me is the Aerofax Datagragh book by Dennis Jenkins and Brian Rogers. The pictures Steve posted are also from that book. Further, Steve, Dutch and Teeradj were very useful in determining whether indeed there was a different nose contour or not which a month or so ago was still pretty much in the air. Let me know if you're in a rush, then I can send you relevant pages via mail. I also have the HPH kit which I think is stunning (unlike their customer service which is very underwhelming). I'm half planing to backdate the kit to a Chrome Dome era H but I'm not sure if I've got the bottle for that. Steve's station diagrams were very helpful in that respect but I really need some cross sectionals also. Let me know if I can help further, happy to share the book with you - internet prices for this book are somewhat silly. Marc. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Nigelr32 Posted July 26, 2020 Share Posted July 26, 2020 (edited) 6 hours ago, serendip said: From phase VI top and bottom profile are markedly different. I would say the change below starts from the pressure bulkhead at station 345.50. Marc. I disagree Marc.. The change is from 175.6, the back end of the composite belly. A change from 345.5 would have entailed a complete re-design-remake of the lower ejection doors and all surrounding structural members. I firmly believe the changes made to all fuselage variants from A-H are limited to removable parts such as the radome or tail gun housing. I appreciate there was a structure added below the cockpit to replace the rear end of the "belly" on later aircraft, but that was an addition, not a change to existing structures, Someone once told me they believed the AMT skinny fuselage was correct, because when they took the Man out of the tail it didn't need to be so wide... Are there people who actually believe the engineers would have copped up a complete rear fuselage and make it skinnier just because there's no Man in the back now??? Edited July 26, 2020 by Nigelr32 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Nigelr32 Posted July 26, 2020 Share Posted July 26, 2020 (edited) 3 minutes ago, serendip said: Hi Nigel, Very helpful for me is the Aerofax Datagragh book by Dennis Jenkins and Brian Rogers. Marc. I have that book Marc, so references to where to look for the info will be great...Thanks Edited July 26, 2020 by Nigelr32 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
SteveV22FE Posted July 26, 2020 Share Posted July 26, 2020 Look on pages 28 and 32 of the Aerofax data graph book for an explanation of the different Panasonic EW upgrades. I’m not buying the 3 different nose radome theory. Talking to former BUFF guys, guys that were around from the 60s to the 80s don’t recall 3. Different noses, only two: pre and post EVS. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
serendip Posted July 26, 2020 Share Posted July 26, 2020 9 minutes ago, SteveV22FE said: Look on pages 28 and 32 of the Aerofax data graph book for an explanation of the different Panasonic EW upgrades. I’m not buying the 3 different nose radome theory. Talking to former BUFF guys, guys that were around from the 60s to the 80s don’t recall 3. Different noses, only two: pre and post EVS. Hi Steve, The three noses include the original nose as worn very nicely by the D version amongst others. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
serendip Posted July 26, 2020 Share Posted July 26, 2020 My attempt here is to backdate my very nice HPH 1/48 BUFF into a SAC bird. Slowly but surely reliable information seems to be surfacing. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Nigelr32 Posted July 26, 2020 Share Posted July 26, 2020 2 hours ago, serendip said: Hi Steve, The three noses include the original nose as worn very nicely by the D version amongst others. Steve is correct in his statement. I was pondering the idea of three noses, basically because the station diagram above shows an early configuration and is a little too sloped, more like a cross between a D and a G. So, yes there were three styles/shapes, but i was suggesting there may be four in total. I am incorrect in my assumption. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Nigelr32 Posted July 26, 2020 Share Posted July 26, 2020 2 hours ago, serendip said: My attempt here is to backdate my very nice HPH 1/48 BUFF into a SAC bird. Slowly but surely reliable information seems to be surfacing. I'm considering making a mould of the 1/48 nose then making a resin copy to cut up and cast an early nose for that one too. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
serendip Posted July 27, 2020 Share Posted July 27, 2020 22 hours ago, Nigelr32 said: I'm considering making a mould of the 1/48 nose then making a resin copy to cut up and cast an early nose for that one too. I would welcome that Nige! Marc. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Nigelr32 Posted August 2, 2020 Share Posted August 2, 2020 We're getting there guys!! This early nose is so beautiful!! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.