Iain Posted December 27, 2018 Author Share Posted December 27, 2018 Twist - yes - mainspar no. Need to keep the area around gear bay clear for one. I'll be leaving the front part or the kits front/rear webs on place to support the front third of the wing - and leaving the root to tip webs in place. Just add some airfoil 'formers' and bend the wing skins with a bit of force should be most of the way there I reckon. But, yes, some trimming will be needed to the rear of the lower wing. Hold my beer... Iain dennismcc, jgrease, Shawn M and 3 others 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mgbooyv8 Posted December 27, 2018 Share Posted December 27, 2018 Hi Iain, Good thinking! Your solution to correct the wing airfoil is very promising. It will also address the remark in the other B-24 thread that the trailing edge of the wing sits too high on the fuselage. I will follow your thread, it surely will be as interesting as your Revell He-219 thread A 1/32 B-24 is too big for me, I will stick to the 1/72 Hasegawa one with Dutch markings. Cheers, Peter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shawn M Posted December 27, 2018 Share Posted December 27, 2018 excellent lain, you're the man for this type of correction and I appreciate the insider view on the kit as well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Posted December 27, 2018 Share Posted December 27, 2018 Ian I wonder if this issue could be helped by doing what others have done with the 1/144 757 from Minicraft. On the 757 kit the engines angle downward too much, so the solution was to hog out the wing mounting slot and rotate the back of the wing down ward...in the 757's case raising the face of the engines. Now on the 24, if one does that, it it would drop the rear wing but put the engines faces at an odd angle.... Hmmmmm. Ryan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iain Posted December 27, 2018 Author Share Posted December 27, 2018 Hi Ryan, Nope - won't work - you'd still have wrong wing cross section - and now have to 'correct' nacelle position. Problem is two-fold - cross sectional shape - and angle of incidence. I learned a long time ago - keep it simple! Have been thinking this through since I saw images of the built up model at a trade show a few months back - convinced the route I've planned is the easiest! Iain D.B. Andrus, Shawn M and Phartycr0c 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Posted December 27, 2018 Share Posted December 27, 2018 (edited) Yes of course you are right. In my example you would retain the kit's wing shape and be forced to correct engine angle and landing gear mounting points perhaps. Carry on sir, please excuse my diversion. Ryan Edited December 27, 2018 by Ryan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iain Posted December 27, 2018 Author Share Posted December 27, 2018 Probably helps if I show the direct overlay of the Davis B-24 profile overlaid on the kit wing root for reference - you'll see why adding a few degrees of incidence made all the difference and caused me to go my planned route: And with a few degrees of incidence added: You can see how this simplifies the 'correction' and covers the two areas of concern in one hit! The root angle of incidence on the B-24 wing is, I believe, 3° 26' (the kit is less - a quick measure with a protractor gives about 1° - dictated by the angle of the cut-out in the fuselage) - so that fits roughly with what I've found above. Just sometimes the Planets align - this *may* be one of those times - but jury's out until we make it happen! EDITED to correct angle of attack to incidence - an important difference! Iain patricksparks, PhilB, sandokan and 7 others 10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Posted December 27, 2018 Share Posted December 27, 2018 Thanks Ian, I now understand. Ryan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iain Posted December 27, 2018 Author Share Posted December 27, 2018 Thanks for chiming in Ryan - keep it coming - I make no guarantees on anything I come up with - extra thoughts and input are *always* appreciated!! Often, you think you've found a solution to a problem, then an extra pair of eyes will throw something into the mix that causes a re-think... Iain Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winnie Posted December 27, 2018 Share Posted December 27, 2018 50 minutes ago, Iain (32SIG) said: you'll see why adding a few degrees of angle of attack Being pedantic, it would be the angle of incidence, as the angle of attack is a function of velocity. as in relative wind etc. Iain 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iain Posted December 27, 2018 Author Share Posted December 27, 2018 Indeed it would - my bad - I blame the wine Have edited the above post in case anyone misses this! Iain Shawn M and Winnie 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fvdm Posted December 27, 2018 Share Posted December 27, 2018 This looks very promissing. I'm afraid I can't help you but I will follow closely. Good luck and have fun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dennismcc Posted December 27, 2018 Share Posted December 27, 2018 Looking like more master modelling, will follow with great interest, I'd love to build and RAF B-24 but even the He 219 maxed out my display space. Cheers Dennis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trak-Tor Posted December 27, 2018 Share Posted December 27, 2018 Great show, Iain. I'll follow this for sure, although I'm not planning to get this kit at the moment. Juraj Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
artoor_k Posted December 27, 2018 Share Posted December 27, 2018 I've seen this one today in hobbystore. I'll be following with great interest. There was a polish Liberator and I'd like to make it someday. Out2gtcha 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts