Jump to content

HK B-17...C 11/2 progress resumes!


brahman104

Recommended Posts

Craig,

 

PRETTY HAPPY with the results?

How about being being absolutely ecstatic!

I thought your original replacement nose/cabin work was pretty stunning.

Your "new and improved" work is all the more stunning as it is, let alone what it's going to look like once it's totally finished.

 

It's a good idea to go with what you now have. I have to agree that it's pretty much as close as you are going to get ---- and that's pretty damn close. You have indeed captured the elusive "look" of the Fortress "face". Congratulations!

You put a lot of work into this area and It's quite an accomplishment --- not that your bomb bay, radio compartment etc wern't a lot of work!

Once you get a little further along, it's going to be interesting to see some comparision photos with the OOB HK nose/cabin area and see just just how far you took the corrections.

 

JB Weld --- love the stuff!

Rough up the surface a bit and you have "industrial strength" a bond for life. Not the easiest to file/sand, but blends nicely.

 

Terry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're right : well worth the efforts and hassle. :goodjob:

 

Hubert

 

Thanks Hubert! Well you did issue me a physical challenge, so how could I not accept ;)

 

LOVE it! 

 

Thanks very much Brian! Really appreciate you looking in :) Don't think I've forgotten your tri-jet thingy.... when I've got a spare moment I may have just the thing for it. I shall keep you posted :)

 

Fantastic work, Peter! Oops, I mean Craig!

 

Kev

 

Lol Kev! Although we all know that this is no-where near the league of a certain member's skills..... ;)

 

Craig,

 

PRETTY HAPPY with the results?

How about being being absolutely ecstatic!

I thought your original replacement nose/cabin work was pretty stunning.

Your "new and improved" work is all the more stunning as it is, let alone what it's going to look like once it's totally finished.

 

It's a good idea to go with what you now have. I have to agree that it's pretty much as close as you are going to get ---- and that's pretty damn close. You have indeed captured the elusive "look" of the Fortress "face". Congratulations!

You put a lot of work into this area and It's quite an accomplishment --- not that your bomb bay, radio compartment etc wern't a lot of work!

Once you get a little further along, it's going to be interesting to see some comparision photos with the OOB HK nose/cabin area and see just just how far you took the corrections.

 

JB Weld --- love the stuff!

Rough up the surface a bit and you have "industrial strength" a bond for life. Not the easiest to file/sand, but blends nicely.

 

Terry

 

Thanks Terry! I think if it's passed your very observant eye than I'm definitely on the right track :) It's proving very hard to photograph at the same angle as that front quarter pic of the swoose in the restoration hangar, but the JB weld certainly makes this a permanent fixture now so there's no going back. 

 

Agreed, it will be very interesting to see a comparative photo of the two once both sides are together; I might just have to get another one just to see how it looks, although hopefully that E/F isn't too far away.

 

Right now I thought I'd have a crack at creating the nose cone shape. My plan is to 3D print this in one piece, reducing the overall dimensions by the thickness of some brass sheet. I will then use this as a form to shape the frames over. It's going to be a very complex part, and I feel that this, like the cockpit, may need several attempts to get the right look to it...... As I'm learning, almost nothing on the fort is straight forward, but that's half the fun :)

 

More to follow soon hopefully!

 

Cheers, Craig

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My thoughts...? Absolutely amazing, both in the execution and result.

 

I'm sure this has been discussed before, but do you have a final scheme in mind? Could twist your arm to do an RAF bird with the azure blue undersides?

 

I know you've mentioned skinning the beast so maybe a NMF scheme is in mind, but RAF would look so good in this scale.

 

I have the Koster 1/48 conversion for the Monogram G kit, and that's as close as I'm going to get to a largish shark tailed Fort as my skills are nowhere near good enough to attempt to replicate what you're doing here.

 

It's nice to build it with you in 'virtual reality' though!

 

Keep up the great work - this thread is a real crowd-pleaser!

 

Tom

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Craig,

 

Ahhhh ---- the nose cone! Another part that getting it just right is easier said then done

The obvious main curves along with more subtle curves all blending into a perfectly flat front surface. Throw in the "5 & 7 jowls" on the rear edge ---- and then it has to fit perfectly to Bulkhead #1!!!

 

On the bright side, I have complete faith in you to pull it off!

 

 

Terry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Craig,

 

Tom (#431 post) is lobbying for a RAF Bomber Command Fortress I.

You haven't decided on a C or D yet, but you're partial to a natural metal finish.

Solution --- go with a NM B-17D with this one and then build another as a RAF Fortress I (B-17C), then you have both the C and D covered.

 

Oh, maybe take a break from shark fins when this one is done and re-work and whip us up a HK B-17E.

Then come back and crank out a Fortress I and then on to a B-17F!

Then there's always the Coastal Command Fortress I, Fortress IIA and Fortress II you can cover, as well as some 92nd BG B-17Es!

 

What do you mean you have other projects you'd like to get into!

 

Calm down everyone! 

I'm just kidding you, Craig

 

 

On the subject of RAF aircraft names/designations, I've read conflicting versions, none of which are official documents.

One states that the "A" after the mark number (Fortress IIA), identified it as an direct purchase aircraft, bought and paid for from the manufacturer.

The other source states the opposite, that the "A" identified the aircraft as one on loan to the RAF via a transfer from USAAF inventory.

 

Going by the above statements, the B-17F was obtained in the opposite manner that the B-17E was, correct?

Being the devil's advocate, let's say the F was obtained in the same manner as the E. Theoretically, we now have two different B-17 varients with the same RAF  Fortress IIA designation, 

 

Then to add to the confusion, the B-17E  was labeled Fortress IIA, so why wasn't the B-17F (Fortress II) designated as Fortress III and the G as Fortress IV?

 

This just the usual government bureaucracy (bungling) at work?

 

Just curious if anyone knows the answers to any of my the questions.

 

 

Terry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My thoughts...? Absolutely amazing, both in the execution and result.

 

I'm sure this has been discussed before, but do you have a final scheme in mind? Could twist your arm to do an RAF bird with the azure blue undersides?

 

I know you've mentioned skinning the beast so maybe a NMF scheme is in mind, but RAF would look so good in this scale.

 

I have the Koster 1/48 conversion for the Monogram G kit, and that's as close as I'm going to get to a largish shark tailed Fort as my skills are nowhere near good enough to attempt to replicate what you're doing here.

 

It's nice to build it with you in 'virtual reality' though!

 

Keep up the great work - this thread is a real crowd-pleaser!

 

Tom

 

Hahaha, thanks Tom! I know your affinity for the coastal command birds and as much as I would agree with you, this one will be natural metal.... unless I do a really bad job, then I will be using as much paint as possible to hide it :) I definitely would like to do one though.... the scheme is growing on me, so maybe that Koster conversion might be the ticket.....

 

Craig

Simply brilliant work

Keep 'em coming

Peter

 

Thank you kindly Peter! I certainly intend to "keep 'em coming" :)

 

Craig,

 

Ahhhh ---- the nose cone! Another part that getting it just right is easier said then done

The obvious main curves along with more subtle curves all blending into a perfectly flat front surface. Throw in the "5 & 7 jowls" on the rear edge ---- and then it has to fit perfectly to Bulkhead #1!!!

 

On the bright side, I have complete faith in you to pull it off!

 

 

Terry

 

Yep, she's been tricky..... see below for the fun I've had with this one!

 

Mighty impressive!

 

Thanks mate :)

 

Fantastic !!

 

Cheers Loic!

 

Craig,

 

Tom (#431 post) is lobbying for a RAF Bomber Command Fortress I.

You haven't decided on a C or D yet, but you're partial to a natural metal finish.

Solution --- go with a NM B-17D with this one and then build another as a RAF Fortress I (B-17C), then you have both the C and D covered.

 

Oh, maybe take a break from shark fins when this one is done and re-work and whip us up a HK B-17E.

Then come back and crank out a Fortress I and then on to a B-17F!

Then there's always the Coastal Command Fortress I, Fortress IIA and Fortress II you can cover, as well as some 92nd BG B-17Es!

 

What do you mean you have other projects you'd like to get into!

 

Calm down everyone! 

I'm just kidding you, Craig

 

 

On the subject of RAF aircraft names/designations, I've read conflicting versions, none of which are official documents.

One states that the "A" after the mark number (Fortress IIA), identified it as an direct purchase aircraft, bought and paid for from the manufacturer.

The other source states the opposite, that the "A" identified the aircraft as one on loan to the RAF via a transfer from USAAF inventory.

 

Going by the above statements, the B-17F was obtained in the opposite manner that the B-17E was, correct?

Being the devil's advocate, let's say the F was obtained in the same manner as the E. Theoretically, we now have two different B-17 varients with the same RAF  Fortress IIA designation, 

 

Then to add to the confusion, the B-17E  was labeled Fortress IIA, so why wasn't the B-17F (Fortress II) designated as Fortress III and the G as Fortress IV?

 

This just the usual government bureaucracy (bungling) at work?

 

Just curious if anyone knows the answers to any of my the questions.

 

 

Terry

 

Hahaha, yep! No worries Terry, I'll get right onto it! ;) 

 

Now that I'm starting to wrangle in this forward fuselage business, I'm really keen to see what HK comes to the party with.... Now I know what I would have to do if faced with a similar problem, I say bring it on! :)

 

Then I woke up.......

 

Yeah, the Brits always did have a way of making aircraft designations rather confusing, although it seems in this case it wasn't all their fault. I don't know the answer to your questions, but I don know the problem still exists.... have a look at their designations for different models of CH-47!!!!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyway.... the show must go on!

 

So as I alluded to in my last update, I've decided to have a crack at the nose cone. For something that appears on the surface to be pretty straight forward, I can assure you it is anything but.

 

So my concept here, is to make a solid master on the printer, then use the exterior dimensions and shapes to form brass over for the frame work. Then, I plan on making a cast of the master in something than can handle heat like a clay, then possibly heat/vac form the individual pieces to fit back into the frame. 

 

Cool, so let's see how that's working out for me...

 

IMG_1456_zpsa7nmtgof.jpg

 

This was my first attempt at it. A bit hard to see in the photo but I ended up with something rather horrid and overly flat, which would just not do. Still, couldn't resist a photo opportunity :)

 

IMG_1450_zpsa6bdeawc.jpg

 

IMG_1452_zps10syt0ut.jpg

 

I did however, find a front on (from the inside) photo which showed the frame layout quite nicely, so I used this to get my frame dimensions. Here it is next the the HK effort. I know they can't actually be compared, but amusingly it would appear that HK had the profile of bulkhead #1 almost exactly the same as mine, which means we are either both wrong or maybe close to being right!

 

IMG_1459_zpsgshgmew1.jpg

 

IMG_1460_zpsccpnfaam.jpg

 

Pondering how to proceed, I went back to the old three view that Tim sent me a while back. Even though I had not relied on this for the forward fuselage due to questionable dimensions, the now cone shape looked to be much better than my efforts. With my new found skills of importing and scaling a jpg image to use in the background, this is what I did.....

 

Screen%20Shot%202016-02-21%20at%2011.16.

 

Screen%20Shot%202016-02-21%20at%202.55.3

 

This is an incredibly useful trick.... thanks youtube tutorials!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Screen%20Shot%202016-02-21%20at%203.37.2

 

Is this cheating? Probably, but I don't care ;)

 

And so with a much better series of profiles to work from, this is what I now have...

 

IMG_1464_zpsqapcqtob.jpg

 

Now, this is where the pure coolness of 3D design comes in.....

 

So I want to take the above and split it into all these little segments to get the individual frame shapes. That would very painful to do well with a saw or dremel and I'm flat out cutting straight at the best of times. So let's slice it up in Rhino and reprint....

 

Screen%20Shot%202016-02-22%20at%208.33.3

 

Oooh! Look at that! It's printing right now, but what I am seeing so far is looking pretty good.... Hopefully sometime soon I will have some innocent brass being mauled for your viewing pleasure :)

 

Stay tuned, 

 

Craig

Edited by brahman104
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Craig,

 

The comparison pic of the HK nosecone and yours; I think your rear edge shape is much closer to the real thing.

The HK looks to "pinched" towards the bottom, giving it a stretched look.

Your's has just the right amount of "meat" in this area, retaining the circular look, rather then a elongated look..

 

I didn't see this one coming!

Originally, I assumed you were going to vac a clear nosecone and place your brass framework over that.

Individual clear segments fitting into the framework? I'd think I misread something, if I didn't know you're a glutton for punishment, which repeatedly morphs into beautiful pieces of work!

 

Loving challenges as you do  begs the questions:

  • Are you going to hinge the small vent/cleaning hatch on the lower right side of the nose, making it postionable and adding some extra character to the nose?
  • Have you figure out how to make the gun ball sockets movable?

I'm being a bit tongue-in-cheek, but you wouldn't surprise me if you did!

 

 

Terry

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...