Hubert Boillot Posted June 16, 2009 Share Posted June 16, 2009 Even though I am plowing along with my scratchbuilt Hansa, I have decided to start another rather esoteric subject. The reason for that is (partly -at least that seems a reasonable excuse ) practical: I own a business located 110 Kms from my home, in the French "Plastics Valley", which means that I have 1 1/2 hours driving pre-mountain roads to get to work...Let's say that daily comuting to and from work is not always an appealing proposition, especially in winter. I have thus a small flat near my work, where I spend two nights per week. Over the time, I have accumulated a small "workbench subsidiary" in this flat, not as well furnished as at home, but enough to do some more basic modelling (or paper modelling which does not require the same paraphernalia of tools as plastic modelling). To be fair, some evenings, I have just enough willpower to sit in front of the TV getting stupid and sipping beer ...but I all I needed was a lilltle more motivation. Thanks to LSP, I found it ! And I will continue on the Hansa when at home, i.e. during week-ends really... So back to the topic : The "Cypress' was a licence-built version of the Bücker 131 Jungmann, for primary training of both Japanese Army and Navy pilots. 1037 were built for the Army as Kokusai Ki-86, and 337 as Kyushu K9W1 for the Navy, between 1943 and 1945. Even though the numbers are huge compared to other japanese subjects, their unglamorous role, and possibly the time frame of their existence, makes for very sparse documentation ...At least, I sould not start a rivet-counter row about some details ... I stumbled in my net-search (a by-product of the search on the Hansa, as both were german types licence-built in Japan) upon the following photo, and color profile from the Czech manufacturer CMK, which arose my interest : I could swear the white "thing" behind the pilot on the photo is a white scarf ! This is Russ's Oscar pilot ! Now a quick question for you Japanese experten. I know the usage of the mauve colour is debated, so what do you think I should go for: mauve as in the profile, or brown as seems logical (but far less interesting) ? I was actullay thinking of using the brown color used for props...or sticking with "historically debatable mauve", which is better.-looking... Next step was to get a kit. There is nice, albeit not too detailed, resin rendition of the Jungmann in 1/32 by Planet Models. I got mine from Hannants a few weeks ago: The other trigger for this build was the great site which was indicated by Loïc in his Ki-100 Build (by the way, long time no see mate, where are you ?). it is devoted to japanese flight instruments and weapons. In this site, there is a page on the Ki-86 instruments panel, right here So I started by drawing the new instruments (the funatsu site has detailed shots for each one of them) on a simple vectorial drawing software. Because of the issue of lines thickness, I went to a 1/8 scale drawing, and had to cheat on the fonts and lines (making them bigger than real life) to achieve something legible when reduced to 1/32 scale. This is my drawing of the dashboards, with plenty of "spare" instruments: When finished, I exported the drawing in .pdf format and used my company's equipments to produce a 1/4 scale film of this drawing. I now have a prefectly defined, scale IP ! I could now get really started on the Cypress. The Planet Model kit is nice, reasonably accurate (I have a few issues about wing-sweep angle but that will do as is) but lacking in detail and finess. I started thining down the internal sides of the cockpit with a a small burr, and did some preliminary adjustment check, including some cutting to get the lower wing to fit reasonably in its slot in the under-fuselage... With its open cockpits, the Cypress will draw attention on internal details. The most prominent feature of the Jungmann is its steel tubes structure. The kit's representation was a bit too simplistic to my liking, especially as it was lacking completely in the structure to attach the seats (which in real life are bolted to transversal tube frames). So I went for an all-new tubular structure using rods in 0.40 "", 0.353 and 0.25" diameters. This is the result of one evening's work yesterday, next to the kit's original parts. Only the parts of the structure that will be visible through the cockpit's opening have been done. The rear part is not perfectly adjusted, but will be barely visible (if any at all) behind the pilot's seat... To be contined next week, notably with new seats.... Hubert. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruzlkampf Posted June 17, 2009 Share Posted June 17, 2009 That is BEAUTIFUL Hubert!!! I used to build a lot of 1/700 ships when I was away when traveling for any length of time. Should have guessed that you are a 'paper builder'! I can tell by the exactness of your work. One side or the other of a pencil line in paper modeling is VERY noticeable. I sure like the paper stuff, but it requires 'Zen-like' concentration and precision. I'm much too sloppy! Great to see you're still staying active posting,...even when you're away. I really like checking out your work. Good stuff! Russ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hubert Boillot Posted June 17, 2009 Author Share Posted June 17, 2009 I can tell by the exactness of your work. ... Good stuff! Russ Hey Russ, thanks again, but I have to prove you wrong on this one .... I had a nagging feeling that something was not quite right with my tubular structure. So I just rechecked my reference photos, and ....ARRRGH ! I worked on replicating and improving the kit's side and bottom pieces, and they are basically wrong ! My structure is not wide enough (by about 1,5 to 2 mm) but above all, far too shallow, by at least 7 to 8 mm ! Oh alright, I have to start all over again. 'nother evening of quiet lonesome work... Hubert. PS : I also do some ships, but not in 1/700 scale : far too small for my liking and eyesight. I have a (currently -but not permanently - stalled, thanks to LSP) building thread on Modelwarships.com, Right Here. Another one without guns ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hubert Boillot Posted June 19, 2009 Author Share Posted June 19, 2009 OK, so my first attempt was all wrong... This has taught me a lesson...There was a man in the French 18th Century, Mr de la Palice, who has left his name to posterity for having un uncanny habit to state the obvious...Thus "une lapalissade" in French language means "to state the obvious, the rephrase an evident statement"... So here is my "Lapalissade" as a learning : when trying to correct a wrong kit part, do not base your work on the kit's part .... Ok, here is the new tubular frame, after another evening of work. and soime preliminary household job of redrawing the frame according to reference photos (to be found on www.bucker.info). I feel much happier now , altough I will have to significantly thin down the kit's sides in front and behind the cockpit, to make it fit... I thinks the photos speak for themselves, the new frame being the largest of the two... To be continued... Hubert. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ssculptor Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 I would not get too worried by the use of mauve. Mauve was first aniline dye – specifically, mauveine, sometimes called aniline purple. There are various shades of the color. Consider also that aniline consists of a benzene ring substituting on an ammonia molecule. To make the dyes, the manufacturers take aniline and stick it with compounds with alternating double and single bonds. The idea is that these compounds extract the colors from white light to appear red, blue, etc. When these compounds are exposed to intense UV light, it breaks apart the double bonds, causing the color to dissipate. Is it possible that with enough exposure to the hot, bright sun the mauve lost some of its color and ended up looking kind of brownish. So, my advice is paint it a shade of mauve that you like and let the nit pickers go pick their nits. Stephen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LSP_Kevin Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 I would not get too worried by the use of mauve. Mauve was first aniline dye – specifically, mauveine, sometimes called aniline purple. There are various shades of the color. Consider also that aniline consists of a benzene ring substituting on an ammonia molecule. To make the dyes, the manufacturers take aniline and stick it with compounds with alternating double and single bonds. The idea is that these compounds extract the colors from white light to appear red, blue, etc. When these compounds are exposed to intense UV light, it breaks apart the double bonds, causing the color to dissipate. Is it possible that with enough exposure to the hot, bright sun the mauve lost some of its color and ended up looking kind of brownish. So, my advice is paint it a shade of mauve that you like and let the nit pickers go pick their nits. Stephen Kev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ssculptor Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 Kev Its OK, Kev. I do not understand all that what I wrote, either. But the analine dies are rather prone to self destructiveness under UV light, so maybe the Japanese did paint a number of their planes in mauve and the colors soon decayed into a browish tint. Sounds plausable, anyway. Now I gotta go paint a bunch of my Japanese airplanes poiple. Stephen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hubert Boillot Posted June 20, 2009 Author Share Posted June 20, 2009 Thanks Stephen, for this very enlightening technical input...one can feel the artist's touch here Mauve it will be then, as I think it is nicer...Anyoone disagreing please provide me with color photos of this plane, both sides Hubert. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azgaron Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 Looking very good so far Hubert! Cheers, Azgaron Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KOTR Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 I think the information was on a Linden Hill decal sheet covering a some-very-odd-ex-soviet-country's Mongol trainer where the formerly brown paint of the camo faded into some pinkish hue, if that is of any help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hubert Boillot Posted June 30, 2009 Author Share Posted June 30, 2009 Thanks Azgaron and KOTR for your comments...Much appreciated... I guess I will have to do some subtle colour mixing then to achieve a credible result. No much apparent progress in this update. I did not like the kit's seats very much, finding them a bit long, and above all I did not like the cushion and molded-on straps. The straps were actually fine looking, but the cushion is atypical of the Jnugmann. I had an attempt at making out of beer can aluminium...Ended sort of Ok I guess, but I had gone for too wide a seat... Then I found new references photos that showed that the back was definitely rounded, and that therefore the kit basis was more appropriate, and that I would probably struggle to achieve the now-complex compund curves of the seat out of ber can alu, especially if I wanted two identical seats... I have thus gone into a tedious and dust-full process of removing the cushion and straps with my Dremel and a small burr, and correcting the front of the seats to have an open tube structure that wraps around the tube frames... Here are, from left to right, auminium 1st attempt, reworked resin seat, and the kit's original part ...apologies for the not too great photo. I need to work on my photo skills... I had also an issue in that the rear seat did not fit the structure I had built. The stance was not right, any way I tried it...I then found a new set of plans in this site which has plenty of 3-views plans, and it was a lot better than anything I had previously...including a tube framework profile layout. I was happy to see that I had most dimensions correctly interpreted from photos, but for the rearmost tube of the cockpit-tub opening, much more slanted than what I had done... :angry: ...But I had drawn my plans to fit the kit's fuselage...more on that below... Anyway, I cut and changed the rear part of my tube structuren and it is now Ok, and both seats fit right, as can be seen from the photos below (seats are not glued yet)... from the side... and from the rear ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hubert Boillot Posted June 30, 2009 Author Share Posted June 30, 2009 While I was operating the resin dust production factory at full speed I went for thinning down the insides of the kit, in order to accomodate my close-to-scale tube structure. The Jungmann was a very nimble aeroplane, built around its engine and pilots, witout much space around them, not enough certainly to accomodate a wall thickness of 3mm (10 cm at 1:1 scale), all the more so as the fuselage was fabric covered.... Anyway, the Dremel was again put to good use sanding down the innards of the Jungmann (even a bit too well, as I have gone though the bottom of one kit part :angry: ... I said in the post above that the new set of plans were the best I had found so far...They are, and I rechecked them against profile photos of the real plane...And then all my troubles with the rear seat became clear : Planet Models have misplaced the cockpit openings, them being too far forward by close to 5 mm ! In a compact design such as the Jungmann, where shape follows the function (here to accomodate properly two pilots), this is cascading into other problems, like the rear compartment in the kit being too tight (I did check using a 1/32 pilot : there is no way a "normal" man could enter the rear cockpit position as rendered by Planet Models ... :angry: :angry: :angry: Oh well ! some more surgery needed ! Anyway I had broken the coaming between the two pits when thinning down one fuselage half :P This project which started off as an "easy-going , low-tech" build, is becoming more and more involving as I progress. So now, If I start thinking about accurizing the Planet Models' kit, what about the wings : span is too short (by about 30 scale centimeters) and the wing sweep not pronounced enough, by a few degrees ? More to come... Hubert. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ssculptor Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 You do realize that the reason that "...the plane's wings are swept back is to cause less disturbance when the aircraft breaks the sound barrier." * Those crafty Chermans were planning ahead about ten years. Stephen * Directly quoted from a research paper by Herr Doktor Professor Heinrich Schtinkfinger read in The Berlin Academy of Aeronautics July 23, 1933. The Herr Professor left Chermany shortly afterward (covered in tar and feathers - a way the populace showed great respect to certain individuals) and settled in the country of Vulgaria, where he was instrumental in developing many aircraft unique to that country's mountainous terrain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hubert Boillot Posted July 1, 2009 Author Share Posted July 1, 2009 You do realize that the reason that "...the plane's wings are swept back is to cause less disturbance when the aircraft breaks the sound barrier." * Those crafty Chermans were planning ahead about ten years.Stephen * Directly quoted from a research paper by Herr Doktor Professor Heinrich Schtinkfinger read in The Berlin Academy of Aeronautics July 23, 1933. The Herr Professor left Chermany shortly afterward (covered in tar and feathers - a way the populace showed great respect to certain individuals) and settled in the country of Vulgaria, where he was instrumental in developing many aircraft unique to that country's mountainous terrain. Hi Stephen, Given your extreme knowledge of chemistry behind colour fading, and even more of the Vulgarian aircraft industry, do you happen to have the color profile of the Jung-supermann the Vulgarians developped, with variable sweep wings and turbojet, developped from the Bü 131 ? Given where I am with surgery and color guessing, I might just as well try this one :lol: Hubert. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hubert Boillot Posted July 9, 2009 Author Share Posted July 9, 2009 Well, The Vulgarian supersonic "Übermann" plans seem hard to come by...No surprise given the very secret nature of Vulgarian operations Carrying on with the not-so-secret-but-close project of the "Cypress" then... When you do modelling as I do with the Optivisor permanently bolted to your forehead, you get a much better vision, but can get carried away on the details. Anyway, I had a lot of fun continuing the detailing work of the cockpits, even though those small parts can be unnerving sometimes. I am struggling to admit the size of my fingers in the Optivisor. Could not someone invent something where the fingers remain the same size in the magnifying glass vision area, whereas the parts get enlarged ? Well, come to think of it, I think it's been invented already, it is called Large Scale Modelling Anyway, 'nuff with detailing (actually not as I have forgotten one knob and I still need to add the belts), time for painting. This is a japanese plane, I chose it for the interesting colors and its fairly peaceful nature, I have no information on the true colors of the "Cypress", so I decided to go for an aotake frame. Now, as I explained in my firts post, this is supposed to be a "low-tech" build, without all the equipments of my more permanent home available. So my initial idea of airbrushing the frame silver, then adding a mix of Tamiya clear blue and clear green was simply not applicable, for the lack of an airbrush... The scantly furnished local DIY store had an automotive metallic blue-green color (the name of the rattle can says "Bora-Bora") that I felt could do the work...I need to pick a brush for weathering, highlighting contrast, adding dots of color here and there, painting some details, and I am even thinking that a trip of the assembly back to the permanent home for a quick airbrushed veil of sum'thin to tone down the lot is necessary in the end...all the blal-blah to say a lot more work is still needed...including scrapping those #@!§## :angry: paint-dripping marks on the frame that the photos reveal ...But anyway, I will assume what I have done, and expose my WIP so far : Comments and criticisms welcome. I somehow feel the paint job need some of them... Hubert. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts