Jump to content

Hawker Kestrel FGA1


Recommended Posts

Thanks for that Tim.

 

Interesting details to be scavenged from it, such as the 'Harrier hump' over the engine bay being on XS688 at Farnborough in Sept '64 while XS695 definitely had it while with the TES until at least '66. Yet while at Culdrose in the photo from Feb. '87 in the faux FAA scheme, it had been retro-fitted with the P1127 flat spine. The hump has been restored now '695's on display at Cosford.

 

I'm sure there's even more to be extracted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not at all sure why I'm doing this. I've already got a perfectly good and exciting challenge to hand with Alan Wilson's Icelandic big 1/32nd Bucc resin masterpiece, never mind the shelf of procrastination if not quite doom and the aftermath of a recent house move to be getting on with.

 

But whatever the reason, Revell's 1/32 Harrier hit the doorstep today (it's chunky enough to withstand the impact) and I couldn't resist a look. Mainly because of nostalgia - I first took a crack at it in 1975 - but also because of reports that it most closely resembled a P1127(RAF) and therefore is potential Kestrel source material. 

 

Does it and is it? Well, yes and no. The first disappointment is with the forward nozzle fairings which resemble nothing Harrier or predecessor like at all. I wondered if Revell had attempted some mould revision, but no. Vintage builds show the same flawed concept and execution. The red line indicates the kit contour line, with the correctly shaped fairing overlaid in black. Those corrected intake fairings will also be a lot more rectangular in cross section.

49672478822_8a5f613865_b.jpg

 

Built kit photos also demonstrate that perennial Revell problem of the squashed canopy. But in this case, a replacement mould can probably be made by jacking up just  the windscreen arch by a couple of mm., gluing on the hood then filling it and crash moulding or vac forming a better replacement. I'll work out the dimensions and details later because its a basic requirement that every model has the right 'face'. If you don't know what I mean by face, the squashed canopy probably doesn't bother you.

 

The intake fan is also terrible for the scale and needs some kind of enhancement. The tailplanes are of the extended tip type with the leading edge crank - correct for all but the very earliest Kestrels but easily cut to size if required, and the fin is the short version which just needs the root intake removed, the leading edge re-instated and a pitot probe added. I've read that the brass Hawk T1 probe from Master is Harrier-suitable, but from photos it looks like their L-39 Albatross type is closer to the Kestrel fin mounted one.

 

The wing will need both leading edge saw tooths (teeth?) and fences removed (although at least XV689 definitely had the outer saw tooth introduced at some stage) and also the tip beyond the outrigger fairings. Which also need to be reshaped. The vortex generators can be removed completely, the innermost one and outer six left in place or the full set left as is, depending on the evolution of your subject.

 

The undercarriage is a bit simplified as too are the cannon pods, but luckily the Kestrel doesn't need the latter, only the under fuselage strakes which are supplied and seem to fit reasonably well.

 

On balance then it's better that there is one than if there wasn't. But in 2020, an updated one would surely have been worth the effort for what is still the most efficient and innovative VTOL aircraft seen so far.

Edited by Chek
spelling
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for that Charles. It seems like I have deflected you off your Bucc path!! Apologies for that. I have a P.1127 (RAF) in build for the last 3 or 4 years. I am scratch building a cockpit and ground to a halt whilst realising I'd got the angle of the HUD unit relative to the instrument panel wrong and also running out of steam making straps for the seat! Fortunately I can carry on in due course, hopefully before someone produces an accurate tin wing Harrier and then I have another 3 to produce a GR3, T2 and FRS1. Not ambitious at all! With the P.1127(RAF) you have to be very precise about which airframe because, for one thing, the number of vortex generators changed! I will now follow your trials and tribulations with interest because I definitely need to know how to do it! Keep going!!

Simon

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No worries Simon! You can't be held responsible for my weakness of character in the face of new plastic.

 

But it's proving an interesting journey, with the decal project progressing to include some panel outlines with their associated stencils where required. As the Revell raised lines have to be sanded off anyway, it seemed the sensible way to do it.

 

They'll likely require most of the colour elements to be printed on white sheet, with the stencils printed on clear, although the coloured ones such as the yellow lettered ones around the canopy and the red fire access ones around the intake fairing opening will need at least doubling up due to home printer transparency issues..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any idea who Thierry?

Scalemates don't mention that accessory.

 

Alternatively maybe some kind soul might make a milliput impression of their Trumpeter AV-8B fan, he wondered aloud, hopefully.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Chek said:

Any idea who Thierry?

Scalemates don't mention that accessory.

 

Alternatively maybe some kind soul might make a milliput impression of their Trumpeter AV-8B fan, he wondered aloud, hopefully.

Charles, 

I'll see what I can do about copying the Trumpeter fan. I'm thinking of making a mould and the casting the fan in resin. I can justify it for my own purposes so its just matter of getting on with it! 

Cheers

Simon

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey thanks Simon.

 

In harder times, I've actually used leftover bathroom silicone sealer to make moulds for small items like wheels.

It takes two or three days to cure for a blob about a half inch thick and an inch across, but what's the hurry?

The benefit of using silcone is that you can flex the part out of the mould, which you can't with milliput.

Plus you'll get more copies from the same mould

Edited by Chek
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Chek said:

Any idea who Thierry?

Scalemates don't mention that accessory.

 

Alternatively maybe some kind soul might make a milliput impression of their Trumpeter AV-8B fan, he wondered aloud, hopefully.

 

 

  To save Thierry rummaging around, it was a company called LMG (Laser Model Graver)

Compressor engine Rolls-Royce Pegasus

    The example is 1/48, but there was a 1/32 version (for a short time).

 

I'm looking forward to a new fan replacement. Using the Trumpeter would also remedy the fact the Revell blades are backward for the Pegasus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for that, and well spotted about the rotation direction. I just skimmed right past it when I noticed the ring was missing. 

While the fan blades are just about doable with a knife at home and some sheet, it's the reinforcing ring that makes it both more authentic and viable.

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...