The Wooksta!: Not a Spitfire Blog - comments thread.

[Lost Cosmonauts]

I'm wondering, having read your post about the flash, whether I need to reorient the print. The first ones were fine but used an Anycubic resins while yours is the equivalent from Elegoo which was supposedly the same but seemed a little more viscous. I wonder if it has resisted the detergent and solvent rinses more. I might need to angle the print where there are big wide sections to improve run off

Always lots to learn and thanks for the constructive and informative build thread

[NARSES2]

Quoting

Thoughts have turned from the SR.187 to what the RAF would use as lead in trainers for the type.  Some sort of two seat trainer would be necessary for the main OCU but other types would also be needed.  I have considered another AZ SR.53, and begrudgingly considered their two seater, but also the idea of RAF requesting a limited run of Fairey Delta II to train pilots in the use of the droop snoot.  One in Aluminium and red, similar to the Lightning T5 flown by the Empire Test Pilots School, would look very fetching.  And I have a genuine Frog one with no intended use that I got very cheap.

Like the idea of a Fairy Delta II Lee 

[kitbasher]

Quoting

Thoughts have turned from the SR.187 to what the RAF would use as lead in trainers for the type.  Some sort of two seat trainer would be necessary for the main OCU but other types would also be needed.  I have considered another AZ SR.53, and begrudgingly considered their two seater, but also the idea of RAF requesting a limited run of Fairey Delta II to train pilots in the use of the droop snoot.  One in Aluminium and red, similar to the Lightning T5 flown by the Empire Test Pilots School, would look very fetching.  And I have a genuine Frog one with no intended use that I got very cheap.

Like the idea of a Fairy Delta II Lee 

An SR.187 pilot trainer would be the logical way forward to me, rather than an additional - and short-run production - type in the RAF inventory (Canberra T4 was used for all Canberra pilot training). 

Weapons systems training could be problematic - maybe a Javelin T3 modification (including FAW8/9 reheated engines) as radar trainer, but that would be seriously inadequate in terms of coming close to the SR.187's flying characteristics, and couldn't tote a load of Red Deans and Blue Jays. 

That said, a pair of wingtip-mounted Red Deans on a Javelin T3/FAW9 mash-up could look good (even if it could never be a practical proposition)!

Looking again at the 187, I can't help but feel Saro successfully engineered in some design problems by being wedded to a side-by-side seating arrangement.  And maybe the far more elegant Fairey FD3 suffered from the same issue?  I don't think OR329 and F155T specified side-by-side seating, did they?   If not, could a tandem-seat 187 have dispensed with the droop nose, increase simplicity and reduce weight?  We'll never know.

[Lost Cosmonauts]

If not, could a tandem-seat 187 have dispensed with the droop nose, increase simplicity and reduce weight?  We'll never know.

They did offer a drawing in their brochure of a pilot in a raised hood offset to the left and radar operator in the coal hole a la Sea Vixen but they seemed to use this mainly as a counterexample with worse landing visibility and high speed drag than their proposed layout

[kitbasher]

If not, could a tandem-seat 187 have dispensed with the droop nose, increase simplicity and reduce weight?  We'll never know.

They did offer a drawing in their brochure of a pilot in a raised hood offset to the left and radar operator in the coal hole a la Sea Vixen but they seemed to use this mainly as a counterexample with worse landing visibility and high speed drag than their proposed layout

Yep, was looking at that as I wrote my post.  Couldn't help but feel they'd found a solution waiting for the right problem to emerge!

[Lost Cosmonauts]

If not, could a tandem-seat 187 have dispensed with the droop nose, increase simplicity and reduce weight?  We'll never know.

They did offer a drawing in their brochure of a pilot in a raised hood offset to the left and radar operator in the coal hole a la Sea Vixen but they seemed to use this mainly as a counterexample with worse landing visibility and high speed drag than their proposed layout

Yep, was looking at that as I wrote my post.  Couldn't help but feel they'd found a solution waiting for the right problem to emerge!

I might eventually (once I've cleared a lot of other things on my to-do list) rejig things to offer that seating layout as an alternative model option

[Lost Cosmonauts]

Sorry the P.187 flash is proving a pain - if bits get broken then just let me know and I'll dispatch replacements

[The Wooksta!]

It's all sanded back now, so nothing to worry about.

[NARSES2]

"so I can't manhandle it as easily as say an assembled but unfilled Lancaster (size comparison),"

Lee that's a snippet from your blog. Is the 187 really that big ? I'm still trying to grasp the size of the thing in my mind

[Nick]

"so I can't manhandle it as easily as say an assembled but unfilled Lancaster (size comparison),"

Lee that's a snippet from your blog. Is the 187 really that big ? I'm still trying to grasp the size of the thing in my mind

To put it into a rough perspective using WW2 aircraft:

Spitfire = SR.53
Mosquito = SR.177
Lancaster = P.187

The P.187 would have been just 12ft shorter than a Vulcan.

[Lost Cosmonauts]

That's a great way of putting the size into perspective Nick.

I think a lot of the joint issues that have come up are because of the sheer scale is at the limit of the printer. I've crammed everything tightly together into the print area and the resin isn't getting room to flow out between layers.

I'll get hold of a less viscous resin and see if I can improve flow without having to spread it over more print runs (with associated knock on to pricing)

[NARSES2]

"so I can't manhandle it as easily as say an assembled but unfilled Lancaster (size comparison),"

Lee that's a snippet from your blog. Is the 187 really that big ? I'm still trying to grasp the size of the thing in my mind

To put it into a rough perspective using WW2 aircraft:

Spitfire = SR.53
Mosquito = SR.177
Lancaster = P.187

The P.187 would have been just 12ft shorter than a Vulcan.

Cheers Nick. I honestly didn't think it was that big. I'm slightly gobsmacked 

[Mossie]

"so I can't manhandle it as easily as say an assembled but unfilled Lancaster (size comparison),"

Lee that's a snippet from your blog. Is the 187 really that big ? I'm still trying to grasp the size of the thing in my mind

To put it into a rough perspective using WW2 aircraft:

Spitfire = SR.53
Mosquito = SR.177
Lancaster = P.187

The P.187 would have been just 12ft shorter than a Vulcan.

Cheers Nick. I honestly didn't think it was that big. I'm slightly gobsmacked 

Bigger in fact, 83.3 ft, nearly 14ft longer than the Lanc and closer to the Stirling.

[kitbasher]

Yes I'd assumed The Beast wasn't much different from the Canberra in length, but how wrong was I?  Very!
Oddly, though, the 187 seems not to have been the heaviest of the F155T contenders - that was the CF-105.

[Lost Cosmonauts]

All that maple syrup has to go somewhere