Airfix 1:24 Ju87B - Airscale Saves the Day-A Great Kit is Waiting

[CraigH]

So, straight away, when I looked back on the rudder pedal assembly, I wasn't happy. Luckily, I've got 2 sets of most things on this kit so I used the new kit parts to redesign them and I'm much happier

 

I've painted up the Airscale oxygen regulator assemblies which aren't in the kit and stuck a couple of tiny decals on for the regulator gauges. Still a bit of cleanup needed from the sand coloured paint I've poked into the holes to represent the canvas bag which sat inside the metal housing.

 

 

Lastly, I looked at the Revi gunsight Peter added to the Pro Range kit and just painted and dry brushed it, added a decal or 2 and a bit of lead wire to represent the power lead.
Finally, a sliver of clear plastic for the glass sight and it looks a bit better than the kit part already I hope. I'll be removing the hair I can see on the enlarged photo LOL!

 

 

I've had an idea to repurpose the kit Revi sight to be the Stuvi bombsight which never seems to appear in kits but sits high up on the left of the cockpit glass. I'll have a play and see how it turns out.

 

 

As ever, thanks for looking.

[airscale]

just brilliant watching you work on this Craig - superb job

 

great to see the set come to life like this

 

Peter

[CraigH]

3 hours ago, airscale said:

just brilliant watching you work on this Craig - superb job

 

great to see the set come to life like this

 

Peter

Thanks Peter. High praise indeed

[CraigH]

I started the engine today but painted it before I could photograph it so the primed pic will have to wait. However, my theory about the plastic used in the new kit has been proven to be true. I clipped it well back from the joint and it still brke in the wrong place. Luckily I have the original parts in 1970s plastic, which is much nicer to work and less prone to snapping so I'll be repurposing wherever possible (plus the fact I hate removing flash and the other parts were cleaned by me eons ago. The new kit part is on the left BTW

 

I've been working on the Airscale instrument panel. Some of the knobs I've nicked from the kit panel and some of the levers are PE strip with tiny 1mm ballpoint pen ball bearings stuck to the end and painted the relevant colour. I've got some 0.5mm balls on order to make switches for the bomb selection panel to the right. They'll stick onto thin wire, I hope!, to make switches instead of levers. I've put a pic of the kit panel in for comparison.

 

 

Also done some work on the magazine racks (no, not the ones for keeping copies of International Scale Modeller and the like). They're beautifully detailed and are just an exercise o
in masking and painting. Again, I've put the kit offering alongside for comparison.

 

I'm hoping to get some pictures of at least a rough put together of the cockpit before we go to London for a few days. I've talked her into a visit to the IWM so looking forward to it.

Thanks for looking

[CraigH]

I decided to get the instrument panel finished now that my 0.5mm ball bearings have arrrived (finally) from China.

That means I can make up the switches for the bomb selector panel on the lower right of the IP

by taking short lengths of No. 6 guitar string and gluing a ball bearing to the tip. Then a dob of red paint and away we go!

Shorten them to around 2mm and fit three and the last one flies away Aargh!

Ho hum, make another one then all finished, just the gunsight to add when everything's in the cockpit

Speaking of which, I've done a rough fit of some of the components of the left cockpit side. Some chipping done. Still lots to do like a dirtying up job with red/black mix, extra wiring to add but I'm pretty happy with this rough mock up.

 

Hopefully get the seats fitted tomorrow. The closeup is going to be a nightmare I can tell. So many bits to align and seat properly. HELP!

[thierry laurent]

You did a great detailing work! If you still need tiny balls of various diameters, simply use a Brita water filter. It has tons of them and they are easy to glue and paint.

BTE, this is strange as in my memory the Airfix large Stuka was the only Ju87 LSP kit where the pilot area floor was level with the rear one.

 You pictures seems to show it has the same fantasy step than all other kits!?!

[CraigH]

nothing new to report build wise but Thierry's comment on the "fantasy step" got me thinking. I'm not sure where this originated to be honest. In all my research, I've seen nothing suggesting that the pilot's floor area was ever level with the rear gunner's i.e. the same floor running the length of the cockpit.

In fact, all I can find is evidence to the contrary. I don't think anyone will doubt that the pilot sat higher than the rear gunner, even allowing for the fact that the aircraft is sitting on the tailwheel in this photo.

If the only explanation for this height discrepancy is the plinth the pilots seat sits upon, then it must be a heck of a plinth and need a small stepladder inside to get the pilot up to seat height.

And lastly is the evidence from the JU 87 B1 maintenance manual from 1939 which has this lovely diagram in it, showing the pilot's seat plinth is, indeed, not very high because the floor it sits upon is higher than the floor of the gunners station.

Of course, this would not constitute any sort of "step" in the actual aircraft as the hydraulic actuator unit and the radios and other assorted equipment form a "wall" between the pilot and gunner. It's just the case that the pilot's floor and the gunner's floor sit at different levels within the fuselage.

I await my execution 

 

[Hans]

I have been working on Trumpeters' Ju 87A that has an elevated floor for the pilot as well. I looked into the "floor problem" before and found no evidence of the pilot's and gunner's floors being at the same level. Perhaps Thierry can back his claim with photos or drawings? 

 

Crag, in case you being shot, can I inherit your kit?

[CraigH]

38 minutes ago, Hans said:

I have been working on Trumpeters' Ju 87A that has an elevated floor for the pilot as well. I looked into the "floor problem" before and found no evidence of the pilot's and gunner's floors being at the same level. Perhaps Thierry can back his claim with photos or drawings? 

 

Crag, in case you being shot, can I inherit your kit?

Ha ha. I'll leave it to you in my will Hans 

[thierry laurent]

Hi guys. Actually the TM view is misleading. The "floor" you see is actually the seat support structure. One good hint is the oxygen bottles. When there is a step, the front bottle is typically shortened in models and photoetched sets whereas both had obviously the same size. I need to go back to my kit and my books but I know I have pictures somewhere as I used them to correct my kit. 

[thierry laurent]

And there is another clue: the internal end of the funnel for the diving window present on the initial types would not be anymore in the pilot line of sight with a higher floor.

[Hans]

Thank you Thierry! I am curious about further info you might have. 

 

 

[thierry laurent]

Hi again,

 

I do not have access to my Stuka books right now but found more than enough evidences on my laptop.

 

Look here and you will see a cutaway showing both sections:

 

Then look now where the funnel end is:

Now consider where this would arrive with the high floor.

And now a basic view of the seat support structure:

And finally one cockpit side along the seat support:

 

Look at the oxygen bottle.

 

I have other manual views somewhere but I think this is more than enough to show how the structure was actually built. I also have pictures of the correction I made but cannot find them right now. I know they were posted on LSP years ago. For whatever reason all kits are wrong in that aspect.

 

Hth

 

Thierry

 

P.S. Sorry for the pics size but for whatever reason the were redimensioned by Imgur?!?

[CraigH]

8 hours ago, thierry laurent said:

Hi guys. Actually the TM view is misleading. The "floor" you see is actually the seat support structure. One good hint is the oxygen bottles. When there is a step, the front bottle is typically shortened in models and photoetched sets whereas both had obviously the same size. I need to go back to my kit and my books but I know I have pictures somewhere as I used them to correct my kit. 

Hi all, sorry but it isn't misleading at all . The seat support structure has the seat on it. The "floor" goes the full width of the cockpit as can clearly be seen by the outline of the frame all around. The floor observation window is, frankly, irrelevant. We're not discussing the height of the pilot, that is what it is and there's enough photographic evidence to make that irrefutable. 

It's whether there are two levels of floor or one continuous. Everything I see (in the real world not models) points to two distinct floor levels both from necessity and actuality. 

I also have to question, purely from a pragmatic point of view, how every major model manufacturer can have got it so wrong for so long. 

 

[thierry laurent]

21 minutes ago, CraigH said:

Hi all, sorry but it isn't misleading at all . The seat support structure has the seat on it. The "floor" goes the full width of the cockpit as can clearly be seen by the outline of the frame all around. The floor observation window is, frankly, irrelevant. We're not discussing the height of the pilot, that is what it is and there's enough photographic evidence to make that irrefutable. 

It's whether there are two levels of floor or one continuous. Everything I see (in the real world not models) points to two distinct floor levels both from necessity and actuality. 

I also have to question, purely from a pragmatic point of view, how every major model manufacturer can have got it so wrong for so long. 

 

Look at my last picture in the prior post and you will see there is no floor right under the seat but a beam structure to support the seat mechanism. You cannot add it to a kit without putting the floor where it should be. With regard to the height of the pilot linesight, I do not see how you can see it irrelevant as this is a problem of geometry: If the floor was higher, the internal end of the funnel would need to be higher as well and as it is not parallel to the floor its end would be located closer to the pilot! It would not be anymore between the pedals or its angle with the floor would be different. There is a TM view showing clearly that angle (I can post it if you want). And with regard to the last comment related to why all companies made the same error, this case is far from being an exception! One example jumping  immediately out of my mind: There are dozens of F-4 Phantom kits and aftermarket cockpit tub sets. All of them have a angled rear bulkhead whereas it was close to vertical on the full scale plane... The Ju87 is a badly documented plane regarding its evolution and more particularly the cockpit features (e.g. when the seat types changed between marks?). So, to me this error is not really surprising.