1/32nd scale ID Models Boeing B-29 - FINISHED

[Hubert Boillot]

Tremendous work as usual ! Instructive, ingenious, masterful, etc...etc...

 

 

Hubert

[tomprobert]

I've now made and added the bomb doors to complete the bomb-bay area.

 

Step 1: Using the doors cut from the fuselage in the early stages, these had their linings made from plastic card and Evergreen strip, with some additional detail added in the form of Archer's rivets:

 

 

Step 2: Scratch-building the hydraulic door actuators was the next step. This was done by using cotton buds and some small nails...

 

 

With the cotton wool area of the bud removed and the plastic shaft cut to size, it was then a case of adding some additional detail using tamiya tape, and the nail heads were then removed and inserted into the shaft of the cotton bud:

 

 

Step 3: After some exterior detail was scribed on to the bay doors, all the components were painted. I also scratch-built and painted the mounting points for the actuators for the rear bay doors at this time:

 

 

Step 4: The doors there then attached to their mounts, and the actuators secured in place too:

 

 

 

 

 

The addition of the bay doors has certainly made her look less 'spindly' and a lot more business-like:

 

 

 

The main landing gear doors will now get the same treatment...

 

Tom

Edited May 23, 2013 by tomprobert

[Thomas Lund]

Brilliant work

 

Your paint looks smooth as silk - what do you use for the black ?

[tomprobert]

Your paint looks smooth as silk - what do you use for the black ?

 

It's automotive acrylic paint straight from the rattle can. I spray it over grey primer, polished with micromesh. It's also had a coat of satin varnish, too.

[dodgem37]

Check you out! You are BAD! Love that.

 

Sincerely,

Mark

[wunwinglow]

Halfords? I love their plastic primer, but not tried any of the colour cans. The filler primer is excellent too.....

 

Tim

[Sparzanza]

Simply stunning scratchbuilding there.

[Guest Peterpools]

Simply stellar work, Just wonderfully done

Keep 'em coming

:popcorn:

[Learstang]

One runs out of superlatives to describe you work, Tom! Absolutely brilliant! Sadly I don't feel the same warm and fuzzy feelings towards the lot that tried the idiotic stunt of trying to restore a huge and complicated aeroplane, then flying it out of the arse end of nowhere. Sheer idiocy in my opinion. Nothing less than incompetence, and let's not forget that it cost the life of the head engineer. I'm afraid that's all it was in the end, a stunt, which ended up in an unnecessary death and the destruction of an irreplaceable aeroplane. To leave the aircraft over the winter in Greenland, then come back the next year and expect to get if flying with a jury-rigged APU unit - I mean what could go wrong? The only lucky thing about this whole sad misadventure is that the fire didn't happen in mid-flight, then all the crew would have died. I shall no doubt get some strongly-worded replies, but so be it, this is my opinion on the whole "Kee Bird" operation and I've been dying to say it. I think someone should. There is nothing heroic or admirable about incompetence and ill-considered stunts.

 

Regards,

 

Jason

[Slartibartfast]

I'll disagree with your word "stunt". This was a real attempt to retrieve a historical object. The fact it ended in a bad way doesn't earn it the sobriquet "stunt". The project might have been ill-advised or poorly executed but it wasn't a stunt.

 

From dictionary.com

stunt:"any remarkable feat performed chiefly to attract attention"

 

And Tom's result is awesome. I am in awe.

Edited May 26, 2013 by Slartibartfast

[tomprobert]

The demise of the real Kee Bird is certainly a heart-breaking story.

 

There is a superb book called 'Hunting Warbirds' which is an excellent read - it covers the Kee Bird recovery in great detail. It seemed that the crew and plane were good to go, and were taxiing to the take-off point. At this time the crew ladder was still in place below the flight-deck and of course the APU was still running to provide additional power. I don't think they had planned to take off at that point - they were simply doing a fast taxi before committing to the take off run. (The book tells the story slightly differently to the documentary that was aired on TV.)

 

Nevertheless, the APU was still running and really shouldn't have been. The fuel pipe came loose and sprayed fuel all over the APU itself and the rear section of the fuselage... and the rest, as they say... is sadly now history.

 

I do often wonder if the recovery could have been done differently. Could the airframe have been disassembled and shipped out somehow? Could a C-130 or the like have landed? Heavy-lifting helicopters perhaps? I suppose it all comes down to money. It was clearly cheaper to 'fix her up' and fly her out rather than taking her to pieces and shipping her out in bits. There is frequent mentioning of a tight budget in the both the book and TV documentary.

 

I also think that despite the efforts put in to return her to airworthy status, I would not have fancied flying an aircraft that had been sitting in water and ice for the last 40 years without a complete restoration. I know it was only a short hop to Thule AFB, but even so this aircraft could have had all manner of things ready to fail after being exposed to the elements for so long. Yes she was running beautifully on the ground, but being in the air is a quite different thing. Did they replace the fuel system for example? Hydraulic lines? I don't know for sure but I'd be surprised if they did considering the limited equipment and the working environment. Just imagine if she had taken off only to crash with the loss of all on board. The loss of a rare B-29 was bad enough, and even worse was one of the team, but five or more deaths would have been horrific.

 

The Kee Birds sits on the ice now with her entire centre section intact, as well as four brand new engines and propellers. The tail is complete, apart from the section that burned out where the waist blisters were. I do wonder if the rest of her will ever get salvaged? There are some very valuable parts up there and they could be used to help with other restorations. I am sure with the remains of Kee Bird as well as other various sections of B-29 airframe stored worldwide another airworthy B-29 could be built. But I suppose once again it all comes down to money.

 

Tom

[Learstang]

I'll disagree with your word "stunt". This was a real attempt to retrieve a historical object. The fact it ended in a bad way doesn't earn it the sobriquet "stunt". The project might have been ill-advised or poorly executed but it wasn't a stunt.

 

From dictionary.com

stunt:"any remarkable feat performed chiefly to attract attention"

 

And Tom's result is awesome. I am in awe.

 

Perhaps the word stunt and a few other words I used are a bit harsh. But I still feel angry about the whole affair - I remember feeling that anger when I saw the documentary. I realise of course the people were trying their hardest; obviously things did not go the way they had wished. However, I do think we are all in amazement at what Tom has done.

 

Regards,

 

Jason

[Learstang]

The demise of the real Kee Bird is certainly a heart-breaking story.

 

There is a superb book called 'Hunting Warbirds' which is an excellent read - it covers the Kee Bird recovery in great detail. It seemed that the crew and plane were good to go, and were taxiing to the take-off point. At this time the crew ladder was still in place below the flight-deck and of course the APU was still running to provide additional power. I don't think they had planned to take off at that point - they were simply doing a fast taxi before committing to the take off run. (The book tells the story slightly differently to the documentary that was aired on TV.)

 

Nevertheless, the APU was still running and really shouldn't have been. The fuel pipe came loose and sprayed fuel all over the APU itself and the rear section of the fuselage... and the rest, as they say... is sadly now history.

 

I do often wonder if the recovery could have been done differently. Could the airframe have been disassembled and shipped out somehow? Could a C-130 or the like have landed? Heavy-lifting helicopters perhaps? I suppose it all comes down to money. It was clearly cheaper to 'fix her up' and fly her out rather than taking her to pieces and shipping her out in bits. There is frequent mentioning of a tight budget in the both the book and TV documentary.

 

I also think that despite the efforts put in to return her to airworthy status, I would not have fancied flying an aircraft that had been sitting in water and ice for the last 40 years without a complete restoration. I know it was only a short hop to Thule AFB, but even so this aircraft could have had all manner of things ready to fail after being exposed to the elements for so long. Yes she was running beautifully on the ground, but being in the air is a quite different thing. Did they replace the fuel system for example? Hydraulic lines? I don't know for sure but I'd be surprised if they did considering the limited equipment and the working environment. Just imagine if she had taken off only to crash with the loss of all on board. The loss of a rare B-29 was bad enough, and even worse was one of the team, but five or more deaths would have been horrific.

 

The Kee Birds sits on the ice now with her entire centre section intact, as well as four brand new engines and propellers. The tail is complete, apart from the section that burned out where the waist blisters were. I do wonder if the rest of her will ever get salvaged? There are some very valuable parts up there and they could be used to help with other restorations. I am sure with the remains of Kee Bird as well as other various sections of B-29 airframe stored worldwide another airworthy B-29 could be built. But I suppose once again it all comes down to money.

 

Tom

 

 

Well said, Tom, and I apologise if my remarks seemed a bit incendiary. I don't want to hijack this great build thread of yours, and I think your model is a fine tribute to the aeroplane itself, if not to the ill-starred recovery effort. However, even from the beginning of the recovery effort, it seemed like a bad idea to me. The B-29 is simply too big and complex to think you can adequately restore it in the middle of nowhere and fly it out of there, even for a short hop. In short, this was a big accident waiting to happen. You make a good point about the money; if they didn't have the proper finances to do the job correctly (they clearly didn't), they should have waited until they had the proper financing or just leave the B-29 alone. They were lucky that only one person died in this operation (although I'm certain that poor chap wouldn't think he were so lucky). I do think that the effort they used in trying to make the aeroplane flyable would have been better spent disassembling it and taking it out by C-130, as you suggest. The Il-2, of which I know a little, is a much simpler aircraft than the B-29, but I would be appalled if someone took the one that was recently pulled out of a lake near Murmansk and tried to restore it in situ then fly it out.

 

I did think when I saw the documentary that there was still a significant amount of the aeroplane left, including the new engines and propellers. I do hope someday someone retrieves all those intact parts and can use them with other parts to make a full B-29, flyable or not.

 

Best Regards,

 

Jason

Edited May 26, 2013 by Learstang

[tomprobert]

Well said, Tom, and I apologise if my remarks seemed a bit incendiary. I don't want to hijack this great build thread of yours, and I think your model is a fine tribute to the aeroplane itself, if not to the ill-starred recovery effort.

Best Regards,

 

Jason

 

There's no need to apologise Jason; it's great to add another 'real' dimension to this thread.

 

After all, the reason I chose the Kee Bird was due to the history behind it.

 

There's no better place to discuss it than here as far as I'm concerned.

 

Tom

[Learstang]

There's no need to apologise Jason; it's great to add another 'real' dimension to this thread.

 

After all, the reason I chose the Kee Bird was due to the history behind it.

 

There's no better place to discuss it than here as far as I'm concerned.

 

Tom

 

Thank you, Tom - I appreciate that. Re-reading my post, it seems that it was a bit harsh, but I still stand by my sentiment. However, it might have been better to have characterised it as a tragically ill-advised operation, than an "idiotic stunt". You were correct about my misusing the word "stunt", Bruce (from one Houston man to another - I worked there for over 20 years).

 

Best Regards,

 

Jason