**** DONE: GB-45 1/48 Gloster Gladiator - BoB/Foreign Service
- Thread starter Crimea_River
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
- Thread starter
- #142
Crimea_River
Marshal
OK, seems there's little more to go on than the fuzzy pictures so I bit the bullet and carved up another bulge for the starboard side. The gun heating theory is questionable to me as there is no heat source right by the guns to heat the air but there does seem to be some purpose to having an intake there. The port side just seems to have a hole in the fuselage at the 10 o'clock position of the bulge. Anyway, whatever the purpose, I stuck it in and will move on.
Looking very good Andy. But IMHO you was mislead by the light trick seen in the pic of the damaged 429. To be honest my first thought was exactly like your. But the MG blister didn't have the pipe protruding from it forward. Terry also pointed that but the pipe wasn't part of the bulge. If you have a close up look at the enlarged shots had posted on the previous page you may notice that the pipe protruded from the fuselage. It can be noticed in the shot with the two small bulges there.
The enlarged part of the shot with the damaged 429 reveals that the pipe there also was protruding from the fuselage and was in front of the blister. What is more if looking close up at the pipe it can be noticed that there was a round hole in the fuselage skin for the pipe. The main reason for misleading is its shadow seen on the front edge of the blister. Also there could be some of the dirt and MG fume stains what amplify the effect.
So it should be something like that ..
The enlarged part of the shot with the damaged 429 reveals that the pipe there also was protruding from the fuselage and was in front of the blister. What is more if looking close up at the pipe it can be noticed that there was a round hole in the fuselage skin for the pipe. The main reason for misleading is its shadow seen on the front edge of the blister. Also there could be some of the dirt and MG fume stains what amplify the effect.
So it should be something like that ..
- Thread starter
- #144
Crimea_River
Marshal
Thanks my friend. Very interesting and that would also explain the same feature on the port side. However, I'm confused by this red line and that's what led me to the interpretation:
I see. Pal. But the line ( shape of the top edge of the bulge) is the effect of taking of the pic from , let's say . the bottom. Also because of the bank of the plane due to the damaged port leg. In other words it's the effect of foreshortening.
Last edited:
le_steph40
Chief Master Sergeant
Impressive job Andy, as usual 
- Thread starter
- #147
Crimea_River
Marshal
Thanks Steph. Wojtek, I'm not sure I understand what you're getting at but I've decided to fix it and make it like the port side anyway, simply because it makes more sense in my engineering mind to do it like that. Stay tuned.
Good work so far Andy!
- Thread starter
- #150
Crimea_River
Marshal
Work has continued in spurts as I juggle my other two builds along with this one. The below progress was actually made over the course of a week so this post catches us up.
I discovered an annoying defect in the clear parts (below). At first I thought that I had somehow sprayed droplets of black paint onto the parts but close inspection reveals that these are bits of dirt embedded inside the plastic of the parts. As these are subsurface, there's nothing I can do about them.
The kit's gun sight also needs work.
I reshaped the blob that's supposed to represent the reflector glass leaving just enough to represent the supports for the glass. I then cut and added an acetate part, painted everything, and then glued on the windscreen.
The starboard gun blister was modified as suggested by Wojtek and the port side pipe detail was also added. I have no idea what these pipes are and probably never will but it's time to move on.
I finished the shoulder belts using some extra PE parts from the Tamiya Spitfire combine with masking tape. The wires to the release were also added and these are stretched sprue. As you can see, I've also been working on the fit of the windscreen to the fuselage, which wasn't very good.
Once the cockpit is protected, I want to give everything a shot of primer to check on the surfaces before spraying on the silver. Thanks for looking in and for the continued interest and feedback.
I discovered an annoying defect in the clear parts (below). At first I thought that I had somehow sprayed droplets of black paint onto the parts but close inspection reveals that these are bits of dirt embedded inside the plastic of the parts. As these are subsurface, there's nothing I can do about them.
The kit's gun sight also needs work.
I reshaped the blob that's supposed to represent the reflector glass leaving just enough to represent the supports for the glass. I then cut and added an acetate part, painted everything, and then glued on the windscreen.
The starboard gun blister was modified as suggested by Wojtek and the port side pipe detail was also added. I have no idea what these pipes are and probably never will but it's time to move on.
I finished the shoulder belts using some extra PE parts from the Tamiya Spitfire combine with masking tape. The wires to the release were also added and these are stretched sprue. As you can see, I've also been working on the fit of the windscreen to the fuselage, which wasn't very good.
Once the cockpit is protected, I want to give everything a shot of primer to check on the surfaces before spraying on the silver. Thanks for looking in and for the continued interest and feedback.
Airframes
Benevolens Magister
Nice work Andy. You could always explain those marks in the windscreen as squashed flies !
Something I noticed in some of the detail pics i took, was a stencil for a hand hold, on top of the 'flat' section arrowed in your pic below, the stenci itself being on the side.
I haven't been able to establish what this looks like, but suspect it might be a shallow trough.
Something I noticed in some of the detail pics i took, was a stencil for a hand hold, on top of the 'flat' section arrowed in your pic below, the stenci itself being on the side.
I haven't been able to establish what this looks like, but suspect it might be a shallow trough.
- Thread starter
- #153
Crimea_River
Marshal
Good observation Terry and it caused me to go back to my references. I suspect that the grip is within a sprung flap as the surface appears to be flat in overhead shots. Picture is a capture from Gloster Gladiator
Airframes
Benevolens Magister
Yes, I couldn't see any depression in those ground to air 'top side' shots I've taken. However, in the pic you've posted, it appears that there might be a very small ridge around the outside edge of the 'flat' area, just enough to prevent fingers slipping off, although this might be the effects of enlargement of the image. Either way, it's too small an area to replicate, so I'd ignore it.
- Thread starter
- #155
Crimea_River
Marshal
Ignored it will be!
Airframes
Benevolens Magister
Roger Over.
- Thread starter
- #157
Crimea_River
Marshal
Soooooo, one of the empediments to progress here is that I need to be able to properly secure the interplane and cabane struts to the lower wing and fuselage, respectively. The issue is that all of these are just individual pieces that don't allow the builder to be sure that all of the right angles between the upper and lower wings are achieved. Without some kind of jig, this whole assembly process would be guesswork and would more than likely result in a mess. So today, I bit the bullet and built a jig.
The first thing I had to do was to find a drawing showing the right geometry relating the upper and lower wings. I enlarged a file that I had (thanks Geo) and printed it. I then highlighted in red the lines that I would need to observe, paying attention to the fact that the interplane struts were parallel (thank God!) and also to the fact that there is a difference between the wing angle of incidence and the fuselage axis.
My adjustable bevel was then held against the marked up drawing to record the critical angle.
That bevel was then used to create two supports for the lower wings of the model with the proper angle of stagger. With the model held in place so that the lower wings rested on the supports, I then located and glued a support for the aft end of the fuselage to finish the jig.
This is how the model will sit in the jig to secure the upper wing and the struts.
I'll need to add one more item to ensure that the upper wing is located dead center over the fuselage before I secure the struts but I now have a basic frame to work with.
The first thing I had to do was to find a drawing showing the right geometry relating the upper and lower wings. I enlarged a file that I had (thanks Geo) and printed it. I then highlighted in red the lines that I would need to observe, paying attention to the fact that the interplane struts were parallel (thank God!) and also to the fact that there is a difference between the wing angle of incidence and the fuselage axis.
My adjustable bevel was then held against the marked up drawing to record the critical angle.
That bevel was then used to create two supports for the lower wings of the model with the proper angle of stagger. With the model held in place so that the lower wings rested on the supports, I then located and glued a support for the aft end of the fuselage to finish the jig.
This is how the model will sit in the jig to secure the upper wing and the struts.
I'll need to add one more item to ensure that the upper wing is located dead center over the fuselage before I secure the struts but I now have a basic frame to work with.
Bustedwing
Tech Sergeant
Brilliant ! Ran into the same problem with my Dornier 24 build.
Airframes
Benevolens Magister
Great - and another reason I shy away from biplanes !!
