1/24 F6F-5 Hellcat--In Flight

[easixpedro]

Have spent the last few days trying desperately to get the panels on the cowling all situated.  Have some lessons learnt for anyone else willing to try the kit. (hint, dry fit, dry fit, dry fit!)

First up, if you're buttoning everything up, you don't need to add all the wonderful detail Airfix provides you. There's a lot of pieces and they all keep adding up to the point that sooner or later 1 little thing will be out of alignment and then everything else that gets added after will be outta whack.  There's even a caution in the instructions that a piece can cause mis-alignment.  Look at step 200 here--it did this exact thing to me.  I ripped it all out as it wasn't visible and things fit much better. If you have the panels off, you'll need that detail, but not on this build...

 

The engineering on this kit is good--everything fits as it should, so take your time. Otherwise, you'll end up taking wood clamps from the workshop to ensure the cowl ring fits and the panels fit snuggly. 

 

When all was said and done, I beat it into submission. If I'd been more careful and scraped paint/sanded and dry fit, it would have gone smoother!  As it is, I'm happy to show you that Hellcat Smile! (it makes me smile...have been waiting for this moment!)

 

Will need to wipe some putty through the more glaring panel lines. Plus side is that if you look at wartime photos, they were pretty beat up. I'd imagine so, as they were constantly removed to do any maintenance on the engine. Also...total pet peeve of mine: I used the closed cowl flaps--it's inflight and cowl flaps are used primarily on deck to aid with cooling air flow over the cylinders. I know manufacturers usually provide them open, but it just looks odd to me to see an a/c modeled in-flight with open cowl flaps.

 

Lastly, here's some teaser pics of it on the stand. Photographing something this large isn't easy--I don't have anything big enough to provide a clean background (I usually use a sheet of white foamboard). Kind of digging the nose down attitude it rests at.  Looks like our intrepid aviator is pulling up after diving down on the Zero...!

 

 

Next post, should be a bit about the markings.  Have several from VF-12 on USS Randolph in mind. Also a bit of historical discussion that I wasn't aware of till last week as I was doing a bit of research. Till then!

-Peter

[easixpedro]

OK, so here's a bit about markings. As I mentioned, I'm going for a VF-12 bird from USS Randolph during Feb-May~ish 1945. That's when CVG-12 was embarked. They were replaced by CVG-16 in June. Here's something I didn't realize about the Geometric Markings (even after all these years). They stayed with the carrier, no matter the CVG that was assigned. It changed after the war and became the system I think we're all familiar with (where the markings denote the air wing).  Case in point...was doing some research on July 1945 strikes on Yokosuka naval base. Read reports and stories about Yorktown and Randolph leading these strikes, but when I'd find photos, it was what I thought was CVG-12 with the fancy blue/white stripes. Adding to the confusion, about a week later the markings where changed to letter designations. Randolph's white stripes became the letter "L."

 

The light finally came on for me with these 2 photos. This one shows VB-16 (Part of CVG-16) striking a harbor near Fukushima in mid-July 1945. After checking Randolph's cruise book, I realized the dates and that it was indeed VB-16, not VB-12 as I had often thought! 

 

Now look at the closest Helldiver in this photo. You can make out the blue and white stripes underneath a fresh coat of paint and the new L. (Beer's on me at the Omaha Nats if anyone pulls this off w/ the new HPH kit BTW!)

 

So back to the Hellcat. I'm going for the dates mentioned above, as those where the times when the Kamikaze threat was its worst. As the fleet moved up to support Iwo Jima and Okinawa, they'd do sweeps through the mainland to try and destroy as many aircraft as possible before they became an issue during the invasions. There were several big strikes, including one on Kure near Hiroshima. In what's known as the Inland Sea, it was a gigantic fleet anchorage, and there was a pretty big air battle.  Gives plausibility to my scene.

 

So which markings?

Current fav and tied for first is this #0. The air wing commander's bird. Before it became the norm for CAG birds to be 00 in the squadron markings, they were either 0 or 99. I kind of dig the look of this one. 

 

Also tied for first is # 28 here. I don't know why, but I love the wonky markings. The fact that it was painted like this means they were in a hurry. Gives a decidedly personal flavor to the markings. Also look at the high gloss and very little exhaust staining. This late in the war, there was a pretty steady stream of replacement a/c being ferried out to Guam and then flown forward, so this is likely a replacement bird that was rushed down into the hangar and painted shortly after arrival!

 

A distant second is 56, for the same reasons as above. The paint shop on Randolph must have had some issues...!

 

Here's a different # 56...wonder which one is the replacement? Also check out # 32--same thing. But I don't really want to use the kit markings. Want this to be a bit different, so between the Airfix kit and that Flying Heritage Collection's F6F is painted like this, I've had my fill of # 32. 

 

Lastly, I could do Ham McWhorter's #9 as shown here on the Eduard instructions. Who's he you ask?  He was the first Hellcat Ace and first double Ace in the Hellcat! That happened with VF-9 earlier in the war, and then he became a senior flight lead in VF-12 as they formed up and headed to war in 44-45.

 

Anyway, what jumps out at you? Thoughts?  I'm leaning towards #28 as I've never seen a photo of it before, plus all the above reasons. Am wrapping up the final bits, and then she's off to the paint barn.

Stay tuned!

-Peter

[Out2gtcha]

Haha, my OCD would NOT allow me to build 28, nor likely the latter 56. Same reason I cant build asymmetrical load outs!

 

I love the look of good ol #Zed/0! 

[easixpedro]

59 minutes ago, Out2gtcha said:

Haha, my OCD would NOT allow me to build 28, nor likely the latter 56. Same reason I cant build asymmetrical load outs!

 

I love the look of good ol #Zed/0! 

HaHa! Totally true, but why I love ‘em! Also why I’m torn...plain Jane 0 or wonky numbers...?!

[MikeMaben]

 

I like wonky too, oversized as well 

I thot it was just me

[jeroen_R90S]

#28 is neat, I'd pick that one!

 

Having just read through the whole thread, this is exactly the kind of setup with forced perspective I had in my mind for a long time. So nice to see this being excuted, and being executed well, too!

 

[easixpedro]

5 hours ago, MikeMaben said:

 

I like wonky too, oversized as well 

I thot it was just me

Heh... nope, I’m right there with you. I just imagine some young sailor pressed for time and slapping a mask down and painting while a chief yells to get it done.

22 minutes ago, jeroen_R90S said:

#28 is neat, I'd pick that one!

 

Having just read through the whole thread, this is exactly the kind of setup with forced perspective I had in my mind for a long time. So nice to see this being excuted, and being executed well, too!

 

Thanks! That’s what I love about this forum...we all share techniques and ideas and learn from each other. Hopefully I give someone an idea and they’ll take it farther than my ham fisted building techniques!

[JeepsGunsTanks]

I like the Wonky numbers, but without a photo next to it, you'll end up having to explain it's not a mistake. 

[Joe Hegedus]

On 12/18/2020 at 3:51 PM, easixpedro said:

A distant second is 56, for the same reasons as above. The paint shop on Randolph must have had some issues...!

 

I can't say for certain, but since many of the 2-digit numbers seem to have the forward digit higher and/or at an angle WRT the aft digit, I'd say the reason isn't because the paint shop was in a rush or had "issues"; I'd make a guess that, since the side numbers appear to be larger than those used in other air groups, the stencils used to paint them were too large to be properly placed over the wing in the forward location and the skewed orientation is due to what the shop had to do to make the stencil fit.  But I wasn't there, so that's just a guess.

[easixpedro]

2 hours ago, Joe Hegedus said:

I can't say for certain, but since many of the 2-digit numbers seem to have the forward digit higher and/or at an angle WRT the aft digit, I'd say the reason isn't because the paint shop was in a rush or had "issues"; I'd make a guess that, since the side numbers appear to be larger than those used in other air groups, the stencils used to paint them were too large to be properly placed over the wing in the forward location and the skewed orientation is due to what the shop had to do to make the stencil fit.  But I wasn't there, so that's just a guess.

I agree with that synopsis! One of the reasons I love Randolph's markings is those unique numbers. Not quite art deco, but definitely unique to that era. And as I said above, I can only imagine a chief or LPO giving instructions and walking away. Then Seaman Timmy on nights painted 'em up. All in a rush to get them 'up before flight ops began the next day. 

 

That's my story anyway!

Peter

[justplanecrazy]

love the discussion about the markings for the Randolph's aircraft. My dad flew with VF-16. He joined the VF at Ulithi just before they deployed to the Randolph. I have a picture in my collection of VF-16 Hellcats on deck immediately after arriving on the Randolph that dad took at Leyte. The Hellcats don't have any ID codes or numbers yet, just the stars and bars. I suppose it's possible that some of the aircraft received the old geometric carrier ID markings, but I'm sure not very many,  or for very long. My brother and I watched a YouTube video of VT-16 Avengers, of which several were still in the old camo scheme, while some were Dark Sea Blue. they all carried the "L"  and no hint of any stripes. Dad always associated the stripes with VF-12 and the L with VF-16, even though as has been stated, these were carrier ID marks and not Air Group ID's. I'll try to work on uploading some of the photos I have, but my technical skills are sadly lacking.....

[justplanecrazy]

In regards to the first photo you posted easixpedro, I have a copy of the Randolph's combat action report that Those Helldiver pictures originally appeared in. With those planes having white alierons, I suppose it is possible that some of the VB-16 Helldivers might have received the striped tail markings and were then painted over, however, I don't see the L's on either aircraft. Definitely a curiosity.

[easixpedro]

1 hour ago, justplanecrazy said:

love the discussion about the markings for the Randolph's aircraft. My dad flew with VF-16. He joined the VF at Ulithi just before they deployed to the Randolph. I have a picture in my collection of VF-16 Hellcats on deck immediately after arriving on the Randolph that dad took at Leyte. The Hellcats don't have any ID codes or numbers yet, just the stars and bars. I suppose it's possible that some of the aircraft received the old geometric carrier ID markings, but I'm sure not very many,  or for very long. My brother and I watched a YouTube video of VT-16 Avengers, of which several were still in the old camo scheme, while some were Dark Sea Blue. they all carried the "L"  and no hint of any stripes. Dad always associated the stripes with VF-12 and the L with VF-16, even though as has been stated, these were carrier ID marks and not Air Group ID's. I'll try to work on uploading some of the photos I have, but my technical skills are sadly lacking.....

 

33 minutes ago, justplanecrazy said:

In regards to the first photo you posted easixpedro, I have a copy of the Randolph's combat action report that Those Helldiver pictures originally appeared in. With those planes having white alierons, I suppose it is possible that some of the VB-16 Helldivers might have received the striped tail markings and were then painted over, however, I don't see the L's on either aircraft. Definitely a curiosity.

Wow, would love to see them, whenever you get a chance! Have done history as a side hustle for years, but am actually doing for reals now. Have been tempted to dive in on these late war actions for a future subject. There’s not much written about it.

 

This website might be useful for you. Here’s the Randolph’s 44-45 cruise book. Covers both CVG-12 and CVG-16. There’s a great map under “activities and events” that shows what missions your father likely flew.  Also shows the dates for the strike in that first photo...I have the rest in the series somewhere, just have to find them! https://www.navysite.de/cruisebooks/cv15-45/index.html 

 

As for the markings, Adm McCain issued the order to switch them on 27 July 45. So they used the white stripes and ailerons tilll then and then became L. Of course not every ship did it immediately, meaning lots of confusion for not only historians, but modelers since! Making matters worse the markings were there for about 2 weeks before the bombs were dropped and the war ended. Lots of the records just weren’t kept in the rush to put everything behind ‘em. Just think of that massive demobilization that occurred...pretty amazing when you think about it.

 

Next up in my stash is a 1/48th Helldiver that I want to do in VB-16 markings from when they attacked the Nagato in Yokosuka in July 45. A bit of personal history for me as I was stationed there and 2 different ships I was on berthed at those very piers! 
 

Thanks for sharing!

-Peter

[John Stambaugh]

Am getting inspired. Not to do a diorama as this is way out of my league but I do have this kit in the stash... Great work BTW.

[easixpedro]

Quick update.

 

Spent the night doing some old-fashioned modelling. Meaning I cut my own masks out of tape. Have nothing against masks you can buy or make w/ a computer/cutter, this was just super easy. Spent about 2 mins each on the stars-n-bars. The numbers took maybe 5 to trace and cut. Took longer to position them in the crazy angles than it did to draw and cut. 

 

Here's what I did: set a piece of glass on top of the kit decals and just traced over each marking I wanted. Easy as pie. Cut with a straight-edge and a sharp blade, and you're off to the races! (It's also pretty hard to take a photo of a piece of glass...just saying!  Also, don't mind my homemade photo etch saw.)

 

You can see the markings starting to take shape. I'm always trying* to think ahead, and I really don't like it when paint lifts off w/ the masking.  I'm using Tamiya XF-17 for this, and I have a bad track record w/ their acrylics lifting at inopportune times. That and painting white after the blue would've been a nightmare.  Instead I just shot it with Tamiya rattlecan white primer.  It dries rock hard and is about as impervious as the AS-12 Aluminum.  You can also see my fancy tape I used on the tail. That's "Washi Tape." After living in Japan, I came to the conclusion that Tamiya's excellent masking tape is just plain ol' Washi tape.  It's everywhere in Japan. I've seen it in craft stores here in the states, and even in Target. My wife has an entire glass canister full of rolls of it, so when I'm in a pinch I just grab some.  It's also a heck of a lot cheaper than Tamiya tape...

 

 

And here's the side number. Took me forever to position it. After the trials and tribulations of doing so, I agree w/ Joe's post above! No way the sailors could get a gigantic mask in those positions. I also noted that the position of the numbers doesn't coincide w/ the instructions (or the FHC restoration). They're further aft than the wonky numbers in these pictures. Regardless, I'm doing a fictional snapshot in time so I'm not too concerned.  

 

For the numbers elsewhere on the cowling/tail/gear doors, I'll use the kit decals, and just use a strip of white or blue from the sheet to turn the 3 into an 8.  

 

That's it for now. Hoping to get her painted tomorrow before we all settle down to celebrate the holidays. After that, it might get put on hold as I need to get crunching on the kitchen reno...

 

Thanks for following along,

-Peter