Been past that museum a couple of times but never had the chance to go in 

Gondor

Quote from: PR19_Kit on December 23, 2023, 11:09:59 AMGreen with envy mode full on!

I've been in a C-5 at RIAT once, but that special one, and went in an An-124 the same afternoon, which was a real laugh, but that's another story. 

Fly from Hawaii to Thailand in the passenger compartment behind the wing. That got old pretty quick!

Having figured out how to use the B model rear doors on the A model tail, I've sawn and filed the tail of my kit to become a B model now. Actually, as they'll be add-ons to the end of the production runs I may call mine a C model. And if I can get an old Airfix Vanguard I might re-engine it with Tynes too.

This is the plan for the eventual colour scheme, also showing the C Model rear doors as well.



If I could afford it I'd have one of those 3D printed Blue Streaks being loaded aboard it too, but my budget won't stretch that far. I might scratch one though.................

Quote from: PR19_Kit on December 23, 2023, 10:05:23 AM

Quote from: scooter on December 23, 2023, 08:51:25 AMHmm...drop testing air-launched Thors. 

And why not? Launched from half way across the North Sea (....or Germany....) the Thor would have got much further into its intended target.

I still wonder how they did that with the C-5/Minuteman combination. There must have been some FRANTIC elevator trimming going on immediately after the drop! 

Thor was liquid fuelled with RP-1 (kerosene) and LOX (liquid oxygen) immediately before launch, taking about 15 minutes to do so. I'm not sure how long it could be held fuelled and ready for launch, but the boil-off rate of the LOX, only liquid at -180 deg. C, would have been the limiting factor.

You'd either have to:

1. Carry the LOX in an insulated/chilled tank inside the aircraft (if there was room) and fuel the missile just before launch,
2. Carry the missile fuelled and chill the missile,
3. Carry the missile fuelled and launch within the hold time.

You'd also have to deal with LOX venting while the missile was inside the aircraft.

None of this is undoable with enough money and resources thrown at it, but it's very unappealing, especially from a safety point of view, and ESPECIALLY especially if you want a continuously airborne nuclear deterrent (poffling).

Minuteman and Polaris (also proposed for air-launch) were solid fuelled, so all these problems go away with them.

Quote from: PR19_Kit on February 02, 2024, 03:51:18 PMHaving figured out how to use the B model rear doors on the A model tail, I've sawn and filed the tail of my kit to become a B model now.

This is the plan for the eventual colour scheme, also showing the C Model rear doors as well.

Glad you found the B doors on your sprue!  I found the hydraulic struts holding the rear ramp to be very fussy. Definitely time for tweezers, and I recall them getting stuck to my fingers and tweezers more often than the model. 

Great scheme.  I applaud you for brush painting white!  bold plan.  I hate white

Quote from: sandiego89 on February 03, 2024, 05:00:40 AMGreat scheme.  I applaud you for brush painting white!  bold plan.  I hate white

NO chance I'll be doing that, it'll be Halfords Appliance White spray can! The airliner modeller's staple colour. I expect the underside grey will be Halfords Ford Grey too, or just maybe a silver if I decide to go NMF.

Mucho fiddling with Tynes and T-34 engine nacelles of late, now I have a Vanguard kit to meddle with (thanks David  ) BOTH nacelles are very odd shapes, the T-34s are flat on the top and the Tynes have 'sabrinas' on the underside, like Hunters. 

The Tynes will take some careful sawing to free them from the Vanguard wings and I can see a fair amount of PSR in my future.

The Plan B to put the T-34s on a US market Vanguard may not work as planned a) because the T-34 nacelles have the prop centre line well below the wing and b) the 3 blade props are HUGE, so much so that they'll hit the ground with the stock Vanguard landing gear. I do have a magic airline scheme to go on it though.   

I'll either clip the blades of the T-34 props or return the props to their original airframes, but I'm reluctant to do that as a Tyne SHOULD have 4-bladers.

Hmmm, it seems the Tyne's 'sabrinas' are only on the outboard nacelles as the inboard ones have much deeper rear ends to accommodate the landing gear, and so they don't need that extra room. I may have to generate some 'sabrinas' for the inboard engines once they're glued in place on the C-133's wings.

I've got the first outboard Tyne in place now and it doesn't look as puny as I thought it might, but it'll need a LOT of filling and PSR work to fair it in nicely.

I've done the structural work for changing the T34s for Tynes on the Cargomaster, well on one wing anyway. It needed a fair amount of styrene packing and filing to get the angles right but it looks as I expected, almost a bit Belfast-ish. But that's hardly a surprise as the Belfast had the same engines. Lots of PSR to do on it as well of course.



And the underside too. I may not add the 'sabrinas' to the inboard engines after all as they're a little wider than the outboards because they originally housed the main landing gear of course. The T34 nacelles are quite a bit wider anyway and both needed to be filed down to match the Tyne nacelles, the outboards more than the inboards.



Comparing the 'before and after' wings/nacelles you can clearly see how much larger the T34 nacelles are, much wider, deeper and longer, but the engine was arranged quite differently to a Tyne, having a spur type reduction gear housing rather than the epicyclic set on the Tyne, and that made it a much taller engine overall.



Now I've only got to do the other wing of course.................

You could always flip the T-34 engines upside down on the Vanguard wing like the engines on the P-3 compared to the C-130.
This looks very interesting!

Quote from: kerick on February 24, 2024, 06:07:43 AMYou could always flip the T-34 engines upside down on the Vanguard wing like the engines on the P-3 compared to the C-130.
This looks very interesting!

That's a good idea, thanks. 

I hadn't thought of that, and it'd put that strange flat top of the nacelle underneath too. 

Quote from: PR19_Kit on February 24, 2024, 06:27:42 AM

Quote from: kerick on February 24, 2024, 06:07:43 AMYou could always flip the T-34 engines upside down on the Vanguard wing like the engines on the P-3 compared to the C-130.
This looks very interesting!

That's a good idea, thanks. 

I hadn't thought of that, and it'd put that strange flat top of the nacelle underneath too. 

Sounds cool. Glad to help.

That looks good Kit 

Gondor

Started on the quite complex main landing gear for the C-133C, lots of little bits all of which are handed and 'forwaded' in that they only fit in one position. Having assembled them onto the fuselage to ensure that I don't lose track of which leg is which, I test fitted the massive outer fairings to see how it worked

It didn't.............. 

The legs and stuff HAVE to go on first as they're larger than the hole in the underside of the faring so there's no way you can feed them through the hole afterwards, and the two bulkheads (red arrows in the pic) are wider than the inside space of the fairing.



When they're firmly set I'll try and file them down so the fairings will fit, but I'm not optimistic that they'll stay attached. I've left the wheels off till both they and the legs are painted etc.

I've got the cockpit glued up and painted, as well as it could be, but 1/144 cockpits are MINUTE!

This one has separate arm rests for the Captain's and First Officer's seats, but I couldn't even get my tweezers to hold them, let alone glue them in place! 

The rather odd colour scheme come from the one that's preserved at Dover, which looks weird but if it's good enough for them.....     In any case very little of it will be visible through the windscreen anyway.