EE Lightning

[Librarian]

The pictures from Trumpeter but any kit'll do. I have a maaad idea (in the voice of Father Ted ). Thanks for looking.

[The Wooksta!]

DO NOT under ANY cirumstances use a Trumpeter Lightning to measure accuracy!  It's a total abortion, barely fit for the bin!

[Rhodri]

Could someone with a 1/72 kit please supply me with a mm measurement:



Running vertically down the fuselage is a panel line at the rear of the upper airbrake and just behind the fuel tank. I need to know the measurement from top to bottom if a ruler is placed flat on the fuselage half. If it's posssible could an approximate measurement be made of the widest point of the fuselage at that panel line. If yes, many thanks in advance.

I make it 28mm on the Airfix F3 kit ... That's from the bottom of the spine (where the base of the vertical stabilizer rests) to the outside edge of the plastic at the aft-most part of the fuel tank.

Hope that helps ...

[PR19_Kit]

I almost concur, the Sword T4 measures 28.5 mm there, but is missing the actual panel line! 

The fuselage maximum half width at that station is 6.5 mm, and it's pretty constant all the way to where the nose taper starts.

[Librarian]

Many thanks for that. I may go with the Sword kit as that little extra might help .

[rickshaw]

A variable-sweep Lightning of the Luftwaffe from here.

[rickshaw]

BAC P.6 Thunder from English Electric from here.

[PR19_Kit]

That's Stargazer's work, who used to be on here.

And very modelable it is too. 

[eatthis]

BAC P.6 Thunder from English Electric from here.

what did he use for the nose?

[PR19_Kit]

what did he use for the nose?

He drew it, or PhotoShopped it.

Stargazer is an excellent graphic artist, and it's worthwhile doing a search for his earlier work on here.

[RAFF-35]

Does anyone know why the lightning didn't have a retractable IFR probe? Or for that matter, why the f.6 had such a long probe running all the way underneath it's wing?

Also, I'm mid way through a delta wing build and I'm wondering whether the reccy role or ground attack would suit it better 

[Dizzyfugu]

Not certain, but I'd assume that there was simply no (extra) space for a retractable probe. Such an installation takes up a lot space - the probe hasto be stowed somewhere, you need a rigid structure to mount it, hydraulics, and the plumbing to the fuel system. I'd guess that you have to make this an intergral part of hull design, retrofitting would certainly be a tough job. And I cannot recall any aircraft with such an equipment?

The Lightning's wing probe is just result of these problems. You need a good installation point, the probe tip  should be directly visible from the cockpit and not impair the field of view. The wings are a good place, with tough spars and a direct connection to the fuel lines.

[rickshaw]

Not certain, but I'd assume that there was simply no (extra) space for a retractable probe. Such an installation takes up a lot space - the probe hasto be stowed somewhere, you need a rigid structure to mount it, hydraulics, and the plumbing to the fuel system. I'd guess that you have to make this an intergral part of hull design, retrofitting would certainly be a tough job. And I cannot recall any aircraft with such an equipment?

The Lightning's wing probe is just result of these problems. You need a good installation point, the probe tip  should be directly visible from the cockpit and not impair the field of view. The wings are a good place, with tough spars and a direct connection to the fuel lines.

You also need the fuel to enter the tanks near the C-of-G.  Otherwise you have problems with balance when the fuel comes into the aircraft.

[Captain Canada]

Love that Luftwaffe example !

[RAFF-35]

Ahh poop, thanks for the input guys, don't think I'll bother installing the IFR probe then  any thoughts on its role though?