Jump to content

Progress on my Revell P-51D


109ace

Recommended Posts

I made an adapter to allow my using a 2006 release,dust covered Dragon P-51D, filleted version clear parts to build. I also am using a one piece engine cover that just seems to have a bit more umph to it. I like details that stick out and accept an oil wash after painting. I'll be making an adapter to accomdate the kit canopy for when I get my next kit in.

 

27973669_1584540694962393_76953084845650

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just trying to figure out how I'm going to mate it to a Revell kit

The way I did it Granger is I glued some Evergreen sheet stock over the end of the fuselage.hole of the kit. I then trimmed it and sanded it flush to the it surface. I was then able to put some super glue onto the blanking plate and place the tail on and adjust for best fit. Make sure not to center the fillet to the spine centerline. I wanted to remove the tail from my test mule and couldn't break it free for my life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So is that cowl fro m the dragon kit as well? The panel lines for the access panels look kinda big.

 

I have been trying to figure out how best to utilize my resin. Am I right in my conclusion that the tail and horizontal stabilizers/elevators are direct Dragon copies? My rudder looks to be a direct clone.

They are not direct copies of the Dragon tail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which canopy Kevin ?  I'm not clear on what you mean by adapter. :shrug:

as stated in another thread, that one can not just add a filleted tail to an early D and have it accurate. It needs a different canopy. So I took a known late D model canopy from a Dragon 2006 release of their P-51D and made this adapter to allow the modeler to repurpose a kit that sits in their stash, never  to be built.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not sure I understand, but are you using the Dragon engine cowling instead of the Revell engine cowling?
The Mustang has a similar "wide top" behind the spinner as a Spitfire, in order to clear the Merlin engine. The Dragon nose clearly lacks that (it is too pointy), whereas the Revell nose has the correct shape. Get close to a real Mustang and you will see what I mean right away.
See the photo in the link below. See that "bump" in the curvature at the top of the top of the cowl? That is missing on the Dragon nose.
Also, be careful with the Dragon canopy. I have no idea what type it is meant to be, but it definitely is not a type suitable for "late" Mustangs.
Hth
Radu

 

mustang%20nose.JPG
http://www.olarmyjoel.com/images/randolph%20air%20show/mustang%20nose.JPG

Edited by Radub
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not sure I understand, but are you using the Dragon engine cowling instead of the Revell engine cowling?

The Mustang has a similar "wide top" behind the spinner as a Spitfire, in order to clear the Merlin engine. The Dragon nose clearly lacks that (it is too pointy), whereas the Revell nose has the correct shape. Get close to a real Mustang and you will see what I mean right away.

See the photo in the link below. See that "bump" in the curvature at the top of the top of the cowl? That is missing on the Dragon nose.

Also, be careful with the Dragon canopy. I have no idea what type it is meant to be, but it definitely is not a type suitable for "late" Mustangs.

Hth

Radu

 

mustang%20nose.JPG

http://www.olarmyjoel.com/images/randolph%20air%20show/mustang%20nose.JPG

Thanks Radu. I'll be honest with you since you were with me, I get what you are saying about the bump in the front.  That' a very interesting nuance I have never noticed before. My problem with the Revell engine cover is not anything you have done, but kinda typical of Revell where the details get soft or blurred the closer to the seam lines of the two halves. I could barely make out the three service panels hardly at all. Really wish Revell had used some Tamiya engineering to make a seamless, one piece engine cover. Thanks for your help. As a general rule in modeling, I'm Leary of using restored warbirds as bible for what was used in the war. I hate seeing two seat P-51's Hellcats, and on.  It's their planes. to each his own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 As a general rule in modeling, I'm Leary of using restored warbirds as bible for what was used in the war. I hate seeing two seat P-51's Hellcats, and on.  It's their planes. to each his own.

 

Kind of like the Kitty Hawk T-28 B/D?  Decals are from a restored plane.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...