The De Havilland DH.101 Mosquito Hawk

[kitnut617]

If you look at these two drawings of sections, you can see what I mean.

[sequoiaranger]

With those drawings, it almost looks like the Heinkel could be used "beneath the horizontal line" and a Mossie, maybe even a 1/4 scale Mossie, on top of the line (near the tail, and near the front, respectively). I wouldn't give up on it.

I have TWO 1/64 Lindberg He-111's for a future conversion for my four-motor He-211 (I am going to lengthen my 1/72 fuselage by using the 1/64th middle to expand it) and *MAY* have an extra fuselage when I'm done---THAT and a 1/4 scale Mossie might do it!  

[kitnut617]

I think I'll just go the way I have planned, making a bunch of bulkheads and skin it from scratch.

Anyway, yesterday in the mail, Tempest Mk.I fuselage, times four ---  these I do know match the DH.101 nacelles

[The Wooksta!]

Are you planning on chopping them up?  I've a mould for the lower half of the engine cowling, plus moulds for the l/e intakes, plus a load of spare Matchbox Tempest Sabre engines.  Just tell me how many you need.

[kitnut617]

Got everything I need in that department Lee, thanks all the same.  And yes, I'm going to chop them up --- it was all old stock anyway 

I wasn't expecting all the radiators though,  which will all go towards something that's stirring in the 'little grey cells'

[kitnut617]

Well this was mentioned on the De Havilland thread,  Hampden wings.

They fit quite well so I'll have to give this some thought.

[R simmie]

Hello Kitnut,

I guess you will have to cut and set the Hampden wing to get rid of the kink outboard of the engines.
I have Buttler's "British Secret Projects:Fighters and Bombers 1935-1950" that has a drawing of the D.H 102
and the plan view has a decided rearward sweep on the outer forward wing leading edge. Does the DH 101 have this or does it retain the straight leading edge as per the D.H 98 Mosquito?

I have been following this link as I was interested in the 4-engine Mosquito idea a while back. I have printed out your side view of the DH 101 with 14 foot props and a 1/60th of a D.H 98. Also looking up Hannants for parts you recommend for the build. I guess getting some cheap Tempest kits will supply my Sabres if I cut off the radiators.
I have the Valom Hampden and 1/72 and 1/48 Tamiya Mosquitos.

[kitnut617]

Hello Kitnut,

I guess you will have to cut and set the Hampden wing to get rid of the kink outboard of the engines.
I have Buttler's "British Secret Projects:Fighters and Bombers 1935-1950" that has a drawing of the D.H 102
and the plan view has a decided rearward sweep on the outer forward wing leading edge. Does the DH 101 have this or does it retain the straight leading edge as per the D.H 98 Mosquito?

Hi and welcome to the forum ---

I had a look at the BSP drawing and I see what you mean.  It's prompted an email to Tony Buttler to find out where that drawing came from.  Looking at the publish date of the book (2004) it's a year earlier than the article that appears in the Air-Britain Aeromilitaria (2005) so I would imagine something here is a bit of guesswork, but I'll find out for sure.  The Air-Britain article says that the DH.102 was a smaller version of the DH.101 and powered by Merlin 61's and I can tell you the plan view I have of the DH.101 is almost identical to the DH.98, only bigger. Incidently, the outer wing panel leading edge of the DH.98 is slightly swept back.

[kitnut617]

With those drawings, it almost looks like the Heinkel could be used "beneath the horizontal line" and a Mossie, maybe even a 1/4 scale Mossie, on top of the line (near the tail, and near the front, respectively). I wouldn't give up on it.

I've got a He.111 fuselage to do some testing, and it isn't the right shape for top or bottom.  It could be just the kit though.  Also, using a DH.98 fuselage doesn't quite do it either and here's the reason why.  In the side view of the DH.98, the top line of the fuselage is not straight, there's a very subtle curve to it which is more pronounced a couple of feet before the fin and rudder begin.  And in the plan view it's the same.  But I've found that the DH.101 doesn't have this curve to the top line which is why there's a sudden drop to it just aft of the rudder.  In the plan view the subtle curve is there but not like the DH.98.  I'm going to have to make a number of bulkheads which are not represented by the section views in the DH.98 drawing.  I know it sounds like I'm getting picky, but to get the 'look' right. it's the way I'm going to procede.

[kitnut617]

I've received a reply from Tony this morning, he has told me that the DH.102 drawing in the BSP book is an original De Havilland drawing and is accurate.  It's been published for quite a while too.

He has also told me he is revamping his article he wrote in Aeromilitaria which will include changing his comment that the DH.102 was similar to the DH.101 (among others that have come to light). It is quite obvious now that the two designs weren't related at all although I do see the tail arrangement is the same.

Comparing the two drawings has been very enlightening

[kitnut617]

Tony Buttler has just sent me a re-scan of the side view, it has more details than the one that was put together for the Air-Britain article.  It shows where the main wheels go and how they would have fitted between the wing spars (these are shown at the nacelle point too).  The wing spars are right where the 1/60th scale drawing has them.  The side view also confirms that the wheels are 48" diameter.

Craig (sequoiaranger) has very kindly said he would try to put together some wheels using 1/72 B-25 tyres (these are the closest in shape to the drawing) and add some 1/48 Spitfire five spoke hubs to them  (which I think would be most appropriate).  It will be very interesting to see how these turn out.

[sequoiaranger]

When I was speculating what the wheels might look like, I had fished out three B-25 wheel halves from an Airfix kit, put the correct two together, and measured. Then I wrote you about the possibilities. Just now I went back to my parts stash and got out the B-25 wheels again, and, to my utter dismay, the three wheel halves that I chanced upon are the ONLY wheel halves I have! I looked again and again to make sure I wasn't missing the fourth somewhere. Da*n!! It's like, there is NO REASON (other than the ubiquitous "Murphy's Law") that one wheel half should be missing, but there you go!!  

PS--the Matchbox B-25 wheels (of which I have all four halves) are a decidely smaller diameter.  

Sorry.  

[kitnut617]

Hey no problem Craig, but I'll give your idea a try myself I think.  I got hold of an Airfix B-25 only a couple of weeks ago just so I could check the wheel size.  But I might buy some True Detail B-25 wheels and see what they measure out to.  If they don't work out I've got a bunch of B-25's in the stash I can use them on.

But I've just had a thought, I've got an Eduard 1/48 Spitfire Mk.22 (Airfix origin) which has resin wheels to replace the stock ones, I'll have a look at those I think.

[kitnut617]

OK, I've made a start, I'm going to work on the nacelles first and looking over the Tempest Mk.I fuselages it looks like I can use quite a bit more of them than what I first thought.  The gap in the bottom of the fuselages where the Tempest host kit's wing is attached, can also serve as a wheel bay and I can use the fuselage sides as nacelle sides.  This means I've got to trim and sand off all the wing root fairings but before I can do that I have to fill in the insides where the leading edge root moulding is, as I'll get a large hole there when I sand it off. Mixing a bit of Milliput will help there.

[rickshaw]

Which kit are the Tempest I fuselages from?