Pellsons Perceivings

[Pellson]

On of my railway modelling mates is ex-RAF and he was ground crew on 74 Sqdn at Coltishall when they had the first Lightnings in the RAF.

Some of his tales would horrify you! He reckons they didn't have a single aircraft from the first dozen or so that was the same as any other, they had individual 'Amendment Schedules' for each aircraft to add to the work manuals! 

Owning two Land Rover Defenders, built only three months apart, there's no surprise whatsoever in your story, Kit. None at all.. 

Currently tidying up the combined work/hobby desk, I'm not entirely certain there will be anything useful done on any models today. The amount of things that should have been elsewhere..
Anyway - hopefully I'll manage to keep the desk somewhat less permanently crowded for a week or two, at least.. 

[Rick Lowe]

The amount of things that should have been elsewhere.

But if you put them back 'where they should be', how will you find them again? They're no longer 'on the bench, right to hand' anymore...

[Pellson]

Back to the J35A, while conducting some "aerodynamic studies" I've been trying out some more missiles under the Draken. I'm not entirely happy with the Skyflash missile, and having mulled a bit on possible alternatives, the below came to mind.

What if we rather had a look at the Falcon missile, and in particular its SARH versions. While the missile itself was deemed excessively draggy on the Lightning (yes, it was considered IRL), why not just transfer the seeker technology, or even the technology from the newer but at the time fielded Sparrows, to the existing Firestreak missile, and perhaps in the process fit an improved rocket engine, giving a bit more speed and/or range? That would allow for head-on attacks and could, at least in whif-world, be facilitated within a modified weapons pack.

Reading up a bit more on the Firestreak, the internals were rather complicated due to size limitations of the original vacuum tube technology. However, already in the mid 1960's, transistors had revolutionised technology allowing for significant miniaturisation which in turn could have allowed for a complete rearrangement of the functions, and also expansion of f.i engine/fuel, resulting in significantly better missile speed and range.
Obviously, the logical thing to do IRL would have been to continue with the much better Red Top missile, but as the small-finned Lightnings couldn't carry the Red Top for aerodynamic reasons, let's assume the RAF actually did consider reworking the original Fireflash/Blue Jay generally within its existing shape and dimensions. Given progress in propulsion technology, it wouldn't have been unreasonable to expect a 15 to 20 km range and at least Mach 3 performance, and with a good SARH head, exchangeable for an all aspect and very sensitive PbTe IR seeker heady, you would have a decently efficient missile also on the older Lightnings.

Enter the SAAB J35 Draken, for which the RSwAF was looking for a good true all weather missile. In reality, the Hughes Falcons were selected, but if DeHavilland would have succeeded in making the Firestreak go both faster and reach further than the Falcon, then why not chose that instead? And the Firestreak does actually look more "at home" under the Draken than the Skyflash does. Maybe.

Well, this does require some further thought. And aerodynamic studies. 
Maybe we'll get some results tomorrow.

[NARSES2]

Well, this does require some further thought. And aerodynamic studies. 
Maybe we'll get some results tomorrow.

Well I'm completely bamboozled it just makes me glad I tend to stick with "prop jobs" where the only decisions regarding air to air is whether to go wiith .303" : .5" : 20mm or 30mm 

[Pellson]

Still not properly done tidying, but it's boring. And that Lightning is teasing me. So I just took a little dig into its box, and we'll... Here we are.

It's good fun, though, and it'll be even more fun to see if this old dog of a kit can be turned into something that looks at least a bit Lightning-ish. 

[Charlie_c67]

I may have missed it, but with the miniaturisation available, why not a Firestreak with a SARH head? The body's probably big enough to not need extending much for the necessary gubbins, just a new nose, and it allows the smaller finned Lightnings to carry it without compromising aerodynamics.

[Pellson]

I may have missed it, but with the miniaturisation available, why not a Firestreak with a SARH head? The body's probably big enough to not need extending much for the necessary gubbins, just a new nose, and it allows the smaller finned Lightnings to carry it without compromising aerodynamics.

That's suggested above. 

*******

Having been busy in meetings today, I've nonetheless had some possibilities to fiddle with the old Lightning. And good fun it's been! Despite having modified the fin following a friendly tip from our own Wooksta, I've been able to complete the major build, including fuselage and all flying surfaces. Quick reward - that's mojo building if anything!

However, the work situation dictates a modelling pause for a couple of days now, so I'll just have to try to stay in the mood anyway.

[Pellson]

Heading into the weekend with a week off ahead. Nice - it's been a tad stressful lately, but it's not entirely over yet. My mid lass wants to attend one of the national sports colleges next year, and they have centralised test facilities. Hence, a full day is awaiting for Monday, driving to and fro Stockholm. The things you'll do.... 

Having performed some further aerodynamic studies on the early Lightning project, I discovered a few irregularities and gaps in the model that needed attention, so despite my earlier decision not to overcomplicate this rather lighthearted build, I've puttied for a bit and to be fair, it did make some difference. The downside is that this entire exercise mostly is procrastination of the need to mask the canopy as there's all but no traces of any cast frames. Annoying. I'm admittedly not the most steady handed painter you've seen, and one should probably mask any canopy, but I've always made do anyway. As long as there's some guidance, that is. And here, there's not.

Well, that canopy is on the other hand almost the last piece of hardware to go on the Lightning. Besides it, there's the long pitot, that refuelling probe and some missile rails, of which the number and fashion will be decided once I've seen the model complete with two Firestreaks only.

Those missiles also have some impact on the J35A Draken rebuild, currently sitting idle on my desk. If Firestreaks is the way to go there too, then I might want to remodel the missile rails for them. Or maybe I should stick to Falcon missiles after all? IRL, the RSwAF used them until they took the J35J out of service in 1998, the Finns and Swiss for two years more on Drakens and Mirage III's respectively. And with the Swedish developed proximity fuses, maybe one could assume they weren't that bad after all? Downside - I only have the smaller AIM-4G's rather than the larger AIM-26B's the Drakens really flew with. There is a certain difference in size, after all.

You cannot view this attachment.

Then again - the small Falcon missile looks good under the more nimble Draken, and a fictional developed AIM-4G+, taking advantage of better and smaller electronics as well as better rocket engine technology could, in whif-world at least, be both much faster and thereby slightly more long legged than IRL, and maybe also featuring a somewhat larger warhead, all in all making it a decently efficient missile.
All this mulling on missile options probably isn't making any sense from the spectator perspective, but I still find it a bit amusing. I like looking for things and modifications that would have been almost possible rather than totally off the chart. Sometimes, there's a fine line between the two.

And speaking of mulling - mulling on Drakens and Lightings, it's interesting to compare their shape and size. They were initially designed against the same threat, coming out very similar in role and performance, the Lightning admittedly somewhat more powerful but also slightly shorter on fuel. Yet they're very different, the Lightning being far bigger and more brutal in appearance. It's hard to conclude anything but that the SAAB aircraft actually came out a bit more efficient than the English Electric counterpart, given not only the cost of construction but even more so the cost of operation. Still, there's something very appealing about the big British twin engine monster.

Well, well. Masking canopy, he said.. 

[Gondor]

You can get the AIM-26B seperate from a kit if you want. Below is a link the a Scalemates search for them.

https://www.scalemates.com/search.php?fkSECTION%5B%5D=All&q=1%3A72+AIM-26B

Hope that helps.

Gondor

[Pellson]

You can get the AIM-26B seperate from a kit if you want. Below is a link the a Scalemates search for them.

https://www.scalemates.com/search.php?fkSECTION%5B%5D=All&q=1%3A72+AIM-26B

True, but as our dear Beermonster recently wrote - I'm not that enticed by procuring twice the worth of extras for cheap kit. Or at all, to be honest. Which maybe calls for either the SARH Firestreak or the Skyflash for the Draken after all.

[NARSES2]

Why not use painted transfer strips for the canopy framing ? I've also used painted strips of 0.75mm masking tape.

[Pellson]

Why not use painted transfer strips for the canopy framing ? I've also used painted strips of 0.75mm masking tape.

Because I'm a conservative old git?

Painted now, and it went reasonably well, actually. There's more to do, but it'll have to dry a bit first.

[NARSES2]

    

[Pellson]

Annual Halloween week visit to the Danish relatives. Godawful weather driving yesterday, but really nice to arrive.