The De Havilland DH.101 Mosquito Hawk

kitnut617 · January 06, 2011, 04:59:36 PM

The Sea Fury wheels arrived today, I don't think I'll be using them even though they look quite good. I got the True Details set, and they don't measure out at 48" in 1/72 scale and they're only 12" wide. I need something that's a minimum of 48" x 18" and so far the Catalina wheels are the only thing that's close.

rickshaw · January 06, 2011, 06:09:20 PM

Quote from: kitnut617 on January 06, 2011, 04:59:36 PM
The Sea Fury wheels arrived today, I don't think I'll be using them even though they look quite good. I got the True Details set, and they don't measure out at 48" in 1/72 scale and they're only 12" wide. I need something that's a minimum of 48" x 18" and so far the Catalina wheels are the only thing that's close.

The diameter I can understand being a worry but the width, is it really that important? At 1/72 it works out at .5mm...

The Wooksta! · January 07, 2011, 01:25:45 AM

It does. The wheels in the Academy 190D are pretty thin. Put it next to a Revell or Hasegawa one, about .5mm thicker, and they look like buttons.

Mossie · January 07, 2011, 02:42:12 AM

Quote from: kitnut617 on December 22, 2010, 01:27:42 PM
So maybe a better canopy for pressurization might be called for.

How about one from a Vampire trainer or Sea Venom? Similar basic shape & size to the Mossie, not sure how different it would be to cause any issues. Alternatively, you could polish out some of the framing to give the impression of a blown canopy?

The Wooksta! · January 07, 2011, 04:46:36 AM

Aeroclub do both canopies. But they bothe have the flat bulletproof screen similar to the Mosquito fighter, whereas the bombers have a 'V' screen.

Mossie · January 07, 2011, 05:02:56 AM

Roberts profile does seem to show a V windscreen, but I guess it doesn't matter too much for a later variant since your changing the design of the canopy anyway.

rickshaw · January 07, 2011, 07:11:27 AM

Following on from the Mosquito, if it was a bomber it would have had the "V" windscreen, if a fighter, then the flat one. Which raises the question, would we have seen a fighter version of this larger Mosquito?

kitnut617 · January 07, 2011, 07:24:23 AM

There's no indication of it being considered as a fighter, the Sharp/Bowyer book saying it's a High Altitude Un-armed Fast Bomber. All the arguments put forward by De Havilland was for the advantage of an aircraft of this type.

Both Avro and Handley Page considered the same format.

The DH.101 was 1.2 times bigger, which doesn't sound a lot but just compare a 1/72 kit to a 1/48 kit of a Mosquito, 1/48 being only 1.5 times bigger than 1/72

kitnut617 · January 07, 2011, 07:25:45 AM

Quote from: Mossie on January 07, 2011, 05:02:56 AM
Roberts profile does seem to show a V windscreen,

The plan view I have of it shows it even better, but until Tony gives me the OK to post pictures, I can't show you ---sorry--

kitnut617 · January 07, 2011, 07:36:28 AM

Quote from: rickshaw on January 06, 2011, 06:09:20 PM
The diameter I can understand being a worry but the width, is it really that important? At 1/72 it works out at .5mm...

These Sea Fury wheels measure out at 5/8" in diameter, times that by 48 and you get 30", times it by 72 you get 45" which I could live with. It's actually the width that's the problem, as Lee says, they look like a button. The front view I have of the wheels make them almost the same shape as a B-25 wheel, which could work but the appearance of the wheel hub is not what I was after, even though they are a single u/c leg type wheel. But thinking about it, the RAF had a number of Mitchels on hand at the time so spare wheels wouldn't have been a problem, so maybe that was the plan ----- hmm!!!

There are another companies Sea Fury wheels I can get though, the description stating that the wheels were 32" in diameter. Maybe I'll get a set of those too, and some B-25 wheels just so I can pick and choose.

kitnut617 · January 13, 2011, 05:25:03 AM

The u/c legs I ordered have arrived, very nice set too. I needed to see what I was getting but now I think I'll order another set for the second DH.101.

R simmie · January 20, 2011, 10:26:34 PM

Hello Kitnut,
Would it be possible to cut down a 1/48th Mosquito to the size needed?

John Howling Mouse · January 21, 2011, 04:17:45 PM

You are such a tease, what with the engineering perfection and all!

I fully expect each of your creations likely go through rigorous wind tunnel then taxi testing before you ever show them to us, too!

kitnut617 · January 23, 2011, 02:41:12 PM

Quote from: John Howling Mouse on January 21, 2011, 04:17:45 PM
You are such a tease, what with the engineering perfection and all!

I fully expect each of your creations likely go through rigorous wind tunnel then taxi testing before you ever show them to us, too!

Quote from: R simmie on January 20, 2011, 10:26:34 PM
Hello Kitnut,
Would it be possible to cut down a 1/48th Mosquito to the size needed?

I don't think it's quite that simple, the section of a Mosquito anywhere along it's fuselage is a really weird 'egg-shape'. but it is a thought.

I've already found out that an He.111 fuselage doesn't work as it has an almost perfect oval section

sequoiaranger · January 23, 2011, 03:02:42 PM

>I've already found out that an He.111 fuselage doesn't work as it has an almost perfect oval section<

I have had some success with top-and-bottom splicing in my whif-works. Could it be that the taper of a Mossie and Heinkel are such that you could use the BOTTOM of the Heinkel fuselage with the TOP of a Mossie (moved up or down the taper to get it close) and get an enlarged egg-oval section you could use?? You might have to adjust the taper with either filing or filling the joint, but....!?