Avro Lancaster B III Gunship Operation Firedog

[63cpe]

Yep, the projects continue to pop-up.....so, started the next one for the RAF centennial GB: How about an Avro Lancaster converted to a make-shift gunship during operation Firedog?

This is how it started. It's the 1:72 Airfix Lancaster B3 in the Dambuster boxing. I planned to build it OOB. But I changed my mind. I figured a ww2 surplus Lancaster converted to gunship would be plausible and could have been very effective during this operation. So bought myself two 1/72 40mm Bofors AA guns from Zvezda and a 1/72 Italeri 25-pounder (QF).
To accommodate the guns, ammunition and crew the bomb bay is deepend by glueing in a strip styrene of 1cm over the full length of the bomb bay. This deeper bomb bay requires also a deeper nose for better streamline and a more streamlined tail cone as no turrets for defence was needed during this operation.

Work started with the cockpit, as usual, and an Eduard set for better cockpitdetail was added (one can see everyting as the canopy is very thin and transparent). Later a gunsight from an Meteor will be added to the left wall between pilot and canopy.

This afternoon I completed the installation of the guns and glued the fuselage. This is how it looks like all taped together. The guns are in front:

IMG_20180919_211958982 by Buddy Holly, on Flickr
IMG_20180919_212014834 by Buddy Holly, on Flickr
IMG_20180919_212029025 by Buddy Holly, on Flickr

After some taping together sessions the exact placement of the guns was decided and squares were milled out. Some pavla weighed wheels were added:

IMG_20180919_212046131 by Buddy Holly, on Flickr
IMG_20180919_212059910 by Buddy Holly, on Flickr

With guns installed. I superglued mountings to the inner sidewall off the Lancaster. They're all movable and travel of the barrel is very realistic!:
IMG_20180920_134938699 by Buddy Holly, on Flickr
IMG_20180920_134944671 by Buddy Holly, on Flickr
IMG_20180920_142345336 by Buddy Holly, on Flickr
IMG_20180920_142418707 by Buddy Holly, on Flickr

Then the guns got painted. Now usually I don't put pilots or whatsoever in planes, but made an exception for this one: Found a kneeling figure in the spares box and put this in the bomb bay- now belly pan-. Made it a ginger with his sleeves up working on one of the bofors in the heat.
Well, you ain't going to see any of it ones the bombbay annex belly is installed.

IMG_20180920_163018520 by Buddy Holly, on Flickr
IMG_20180920_163026969 by Buddy Holly, on Flickr

When all this was done the fuselage halves were glued and got cured. Then the bombbay was installed  as were the nose- and tail cones. The joints on the nose- and tail cones were puttied over and is curing now. (that's why i can update you..)

Meanwhile the wings and engines were installed and puttied. I guess sanding and installing them will be easy. So, I focus on the fuselage...

Hope you like it!
Enjoy your modelling!

David aka 63cpe

[PR19_Kit]

A 25 pdr? 

I hope the pilot has strong legs and ankles, he's going to need to heave on the rudders when that fires for sure!

[Old Wombat]

Bonus with the 25 pdr is you could vary the charge & from a plane a light charge might be preferable to a full charge, especially as you're not fighting gravity to lob the projectile over something, you're already at the top of the ballistic arc.

[The Rat]

Uh... WOW!

[AS.12]

For air-to-ground with a large shell a breech-loading mortar might be a mangeable solution.

I know that Brandt made such in 60mm and 81mm, including the latter in a dual-barrel configuration.

[Rheged]

This may be less of a Whiff than you think.

Reading about the Radfan campaign in Aden in the 1960's , it seems that Shackletons were used as gunships to attack rebel held mudbrick compounds when rocket armed Hunters were unavailable. The forward 20mm cannon had quite an effect, a did a couple of  250 lb bombs .

It is reported that in one instance the army requested assistance in breaching the gate of a fortified compound.  After a Shackleton pass,  the gate remained standing but the walls around it were flattened.  "Not quite what we had in mind, but it will do nicely" was the Forward Air Controller's verdict.

Consideration WAS given to mounting heavier armament on Middle Eastern Shackletons, but the idea was not pursued

[Snowtrooper]

Makes one wonder why gunships were not more common between WW2 and the introduction of MANPADS. Even if WW3 was thought to be all-nuclear, there were colonial conflicts and brushfire wars all through the 1950's which were fought with decidedly conventional armament, and there still were repairable warbirds in the "boneyards" by the thousands.

The model looks superb already now, by the way. The nose and tail cones make it look even more "British" than the baseline Lanc.

[zenrat]

Twin engine?
It does after all have a lot less weight to lug about.

[63cpe]

Thanks Gentlemen,

@ Zenrat: no it ain't going to be an twin..A proper 4-engined Bomber it'll be!

Today i made the tailplanes, sanded the joints of the engines to the wings(all 4 of them and as a bonus didn't molest one off the props... ) and did the first sanding off the joints of the nose- and tail cone to fuselage. Puttied the joints again....

IMG_20180921_203714359 by Buddy Holly, on Flickr
IMG_20180921_203826617 by Buddy Holly, on Flickr
IMG_20180921_203930592 by Buddy Holly, on Flickr
IMG_20180921_203952793 by Buddy Holly, on Flickr
IMG_20180921_204016093 by Buddy Holly, on Flickr

Now the only question is: is the opening behind the bomb bay to faired over or not.....I reckon it could have been very hot and full of smoke if the 25 pounder in fired. Therefore it could be plausible to leave the gap open. Might also come in handy to discard the empty shells. But leaving it open is also a risk for the crew members to falling out....It's also not very handy when drag is considered..

Thanks!
David aka 63CPE

[dumaniac]

great concept - nice build

[AS.12]

Makes one wonder why gunships were not more common between WW2 and the introduction of MANPADS.

The French had some adventures with side-firing 20mm MG 151s in Algeria but I think the hidrance on 'going bigger' was the performance / capacity of transport aircraft at the time, and the lack of ability to target at night ( which in turn was necessitated by the vulnerable pylon-turn attack profile ).  Daylight ops against opponents with HMGs seemed to be too dangerous.

It was only when the likes of the C-130* became available that heavier ordnance could be fitted that stayed out of range of HMGs and made the gunship more survivable. 

A Firedog-era real-World gunship would probably be restricted to 20mm Oerlikons due to weight, ammunition and recoil which might make ops a bit dodgy.

* Wasn't there an FC-124 proposal at some point?

[63cpe]

the lack of ability to target at night ( which in turn was necessitated by the vulnerable pylon-turn attack profile ).

Now, during WW2 the night vision devices were first used but were still experimental. After WW2 NVD's evolved rapidly and got more capable. These Generation 0 devices used a large infrared light source to illuminate targets. So I plan to put in two circular Illumination devices in the nose (one "spare") and a smaller search/finder device.
To further extend the low IR signature of the Gunship there will be flamedamping exhausts installed over the wings to hide flames.

Note: in WW2 the Germans used the FG 1250 "Sperber"device on Panther tanks and as far as I can check online these had an effective range of 600-700 meters. I suppose a further development could easily double this range, if not triple it... The Germans used earlier IR devices in nightfighters. A known example of these devices is the "Spanner-gerat" used in Do-217's.

Now recoil could be an issue.....especially for the 25 pounder eventhough it has a recoil damper, just like the bofors.
I think more elaborate recoil dampers could help to overcome this issue.

David als 63cpe

[63cpe]

So, trying to finish before ending of this GB I found myself is an technical/chemical problem. The black enamel I sprayed on about 12 hours ago still is'nt curing at the places where I've puttied. I've sanded these area's smooth with grid 600 and later 800. But won't cure...I've thinned the enamel with terpentine.
So, i've got two choices: let enamel cure for over a week and finish model later which means no time for entry in the GB anymore.
Or try to cure with hairdryer....probably won't work in time. Or try anger management  and destroy it (that's how the Malvern ended).So please advice..

IMG_20181014_110850726 by Buddy Holly, on Flickr
IMG_20181014_110838961 by Buddy Holly, on Flickr
IMG_20181014_110828508 by Buddy Holly, on Flickr

[PR19_Kit]

Didn't you primer it first?

Sounds like hairdryer would be best bet in the circumstances.

[zenrat]

It's too good to risk wrecking it.
You've got two or three other excellent entries for the GB.
Give it time so you can do it justice.  You'll only regret rushing it.