avatar_TheChronicOne

(DONE, pics pg 16/17) NATO Reporting name "Bull." Cuban Tu-4 Heavy Bomber

Started by TheChronicOne, February 16, 2017, 03:05:20 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

TheChronicOne

Wings upon fuselage havles. . . .. .






This part went well. Next up, gluing in the interior stuff.   :mellow: :lol:
-Sprues McDuck-

TheChronicOne

Quote from: Gondor on April 13, 2017, 04:24:33 PM
Apparently the Tu-4 was in service with China for some time with several converted to "Turbo Bull" configuration in the 1970's using the local version of the AJ-20K engines. One aircraft was modified to carry Chinese copies of the Ryan BQM-34A Firebee while another was converted into an AWACS aircraft. LINK

There has been a conversion set of the latter aircraft made by Cutting Edge in both 1/48 and 1/72 but they are rather rare and command quite a price.

Gondor

Ooooh yeah!  I forgot about the AWACS one!  I might like that one even better than the drone ship.
-Sprues McDuck-

McColm

You could use parts from the Hasegawa Grumman E-2 Hawkeye to make the rotodome but the stand will need extra rigging. Not too sure where you would get the engines from, you might kitbash them or use the An-12 Cub.  There are other lumps and bumps to add.

Gondor

Quote from: McColm on April 13, 2017, 06:56:28 PM

You could use parts from the Hasegawa Grumman E-2 Hawkeye to make the rotodome but the stand will need extra rigging. Not too sure where you would get the engines from, you might kitbash them or use the An-12 Cub.  There are other lumps and bumps to add.


The E-2 rotodome is the wrong shape as the Chinese one is much thicker. The engines are different from their soviet counterparts having a slimmer and longer cowling to the engines.

Gondor
My Ability to Imagine is only exceeded by my Imagined Abilities

Gondor's Modelling Rule Number Three: Everything will fit perfectly untill you apply glue...

I know it's in a book I have around here somewhere....

PR19_Kit

The Chinese rotodome is more like the one on the 'Moss', but even that wouldn't really be thick enough.
Kit's Rule 1 ) Any aircraft can be improved by fitting longer wings, and/or a longer fuselage
Kit's Rule 2) The backstory can always be changed to suit the model

...and I'm not a closeted 'Take That' fan, I'm a REAL fan! :)

Regards
Kit

TheChronicOne

#155
Oh man, oh man.... I made a critical error whilst gluing the wings on. One went on fine but the other....

I didn't trim some flash from the insert tabs that go into the fuselage. I didn't think it would matter. I was paying more attention to the join and the angle and overall look and completely missed that the entire wing is sitting too far aft.  It's bad. It's because of that flash.. I should have ground it off.

Lesson learned for next time, though; I'm still learning and this is a damn good learning experience.  I usually file that stuff away anyway to ensure a good fit but didn't think it was necessary on these.. boy was I wrong!! Next time, I'll pay more attention. And, yes, I even did multiple test fits and dry runs before glue. I simply screwed up, nothing else to it. Not sure how I missed it but I did!

Now what to do??? Somehow saw the wing back off??  I tried something similar on the tail planes and we saw what happened there....  I glued it pretty well but I'm going to try to somehow dislodge it (didn't work) . Barring that, I'll have to file down the wing root area on the fuselage in order to have it match up with the wing (this should work) . Overall, it will look fine, but... damn, it's a lot more work to do! (actually, not too much I think after seeing the other side)


So disappointing. It's been days since I've been able to work on anything and I decided to sit down and start gluing the innards in and saw this... now, I'm back to a dead stop...

Here's the thing, though, it's not ALL me... the difference at the leading edge of the wing (pictured) is greater than the difference at the trailing edge and now looking at the other wing that I got right... I split the difference perfectly and there's STILL a difference on each end. SO, with a bit of "whittling" I can get them matched up pretty well.   :lol: The wings aren't as wide as the wing roots on the fuselage halves.


Bad angle (with the angle and the shadow, it looks deceiving, but trust me, there's an equal amount of space left over at the front and also the back of the wing where it joins) , but see what I mean? Even if I were to line the other wing up "better," it would still not be as wide as the wing roots. So.. I feel better about my mistake and it's easier to fix.  :mellow:

-Sprues McDuck-

McColm

There's a similar problem with the 1/72 Academy model. One wing assembles perfectly whilst on the other there's a big gap. Fortunately with the Academy kits there are two spars that slide into two slits on the fuselage, this giving more wing support.
This is not uncommon in the older kits especially on the Revell Dassault Breguet Br1150 Atlantic.

TheChronicOne

Thanks for that, man. Having slept on it and now knowing this I think I'll not fuss over the problem too much. It really doesn't look too bad until you start taking a magnifying glass to the thing. When I go to putty the seams I'll just build up in that area and taper it and have it all blended it.  :lol:

-Sprues McDuck-

Captain Canada

Doesn't look that bad to me  :thumbsup: I love big models !

:wub:
CANADA KICKS arse !!!!

Long Live the Commonwealth !!!
Vive les Canadiens !
Where's my beer ?

zenrat

Put it down to the conversion from US units and standards sizes to Soviet units and standard sizes when they back engineered the B29s.
Maybe the comrades working on the fuselage rounded up while those on the wings rounded down?

Or maybe its what happens if you fit B29 wings onto a Tu4?

Fred

- Can't be bothered to do the proper research and get it right.

Another ill conceived, lazily thought out, crudely executed and badly painted piece of half arsed what-if modelling muppetry from zenrat industries.

zenrat industries:  We're everywhere...for your convenience..

TheChronicOne

Quote from: Captain Canada on April 23, 2017, 07:05:00 AM
Doesn't look that bad to me  :thumbsup: I love big models !

:wub:

Thanks buddy!!  Stay tuned, I'm due to have it glued together at some point this week and we'll have a legit airframe going!
-Sprues McDuck-

TheChronicOne

Quote from: zenrat on April 24, 2017, 04:49:33 AM
Put it down to the conversion from US units and standards sizes to Soviet units and standard sizes when they back engineered the B29s.
Maybe the comrades working on the fuselage rounded up while those on the wings rounded down?

Or maybe its what happens if you fit B29 wings onto a Tu4?



Brilliant! I'm rolling with this. A couple of "comrades" probably got turned into goulash over the incident but it is what it is and still is airworthy. Maybe this is why Kruschev gave it away...  lol
-Sprues McDuck-

TheChronicOne

Need some guidance.

Do I need to fill in this gap at the trailing edge of the wings?


-Sprues McDuck-

Gondor

Have a look here as it looks as if you don;t have the undercarriage fairings in place yet, the ends of which may fill the gap if I remember correctly.

Saying that its been years and years since I looked an the ancient Airfix kit so I may be miss-identifying the parts breakdown a little.

Gondor

My Ability to Imagine is only exceeded by my Imagined Abilities

Gondor's Modelling Rule Number Three: Everything will fit perfectly untill you apply glue...

I know it's in a book I have around here somewhere....

TheChronicOne

Nice!  I don't have to:




Thanks, Alastair! Saved me quite a bit of work there.  (not the least of which was looking it up myself...  :rolleyes: :angel:  )   ;D

So all I have to do is fix up the wing roots and I'm back on track.
-Sprues McDuck-