Rick Griewski Posted June 8, 2018 Share Posted June 8, 2018 I am working on bashing a HC P-51A to a P-51B right now using the Revell kit's fuselage as the donor (radiator section and engine "egg"). That is why John got the P-51D wing. I am using the Rutman P-51B as a guide and I am loaded with references so that helps. I have discovered so far that: The engine interface is darn close all around but the belly connection to the wing will need attention The measured widths of the fuselages in the area of the cut/incision lines to swap the radiator sections match up +\- 015 inch over all! (I have cutting tools poised) The cut at the trailing edge of the HC kit wing at the fuselage needs to be preserved. The HC wing needs mods to slide under the new radiator. I want to drop the flaps so more work. There is no resin wheel well so the Aries B version that is really an A version has to be modified. The faring on the fuselage at the wing root of the HC kit has to be changed to the D type. There are few HC kit sins. Various scribing updates; not many. Time will tell however. Comments welcome indeed. Rick <measure 10 times, cut once> Griewski David66 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CANicoll Posted June 8, 2018 Share Posted June 8, 2018 The question is how accurate do you want this conversion to be? Nuts and bolt accurate - then lots of the comments above apply. I think you would be much better off starting with a B kit and using a lot of Aftermarket to improve it to where you want it to be. Again, how accurate do you want it to be? Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radub Posted June 8, 2018 Share Posted June 8, 2018 (edited) The extra 6 inches are above the wing, not below. Because of this, the Merlin Mustangs had to have a cockpit floor instead of using the upper wing surface as on the Allison Mustangs. Stein M When using the Hobbycraft P-51A, only the spine is needed. In other words, cut the spine along a horizontal line at the bottom of the windscreen, from the front on the windscreen to the tail, on both kits. Discard the spine from the "D" and graft the spine from the "A" in its place. That is all that is needed. Wherever the difference happens below that line is highly irrelevant. Maybe our luck will change and Revell will issue a B. What they have in the new kit has all the makings of one. No, the Revell "D" does not have the "makings of" a "B". This whole theory is based on Brett Green's comment that the separate bottom leading edge may "hint" at a "B". But the whole rest of the wing is completely unusable on a "B". Let us imagine for a second that a new bottom leading edge is made for the "B". The top of the leading edge is not separate, so that will not work. Then how about the three holes for the machine gun spent ammunition? You need two such holes for the B. These are set, cannot be changed. How about the ammunition door? The door is shorter on the B. That is set, cannot be changed. Think of it logically! It is simply not possible to make a "B" wing from the Revell Mustang "D" wing. All of those choices about how the leading edge parts on the "D" were designed had all to do with tooling. The intention was to give you machine guns muzzles without a stupid joint line across the middle. And because that part was separate, the bottom leading edge had nothing to attach to, so it HAD to be separate too. That is the only reason for the separate wing leading edge parts. No "hints" at another model. Just logic. Radu Edited June 8, 2018 by Radub R Palimaka and David66 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce_Crosby Posted June 8, 2018 Share Posted June 8, 2018 Hi Guys, I'm building Trumpeter's take on the P-51B over in WIP and wishing I hadn't wasted my hard earned cash. It looks like a B, more or less, on a good day with the wind in your favour and a huge amount of poor eyesight. Everything fits nicely but it sure as hell isn't a Mustang. It will look OK when I finish it but "OK" isn't good, its just OK. Now I've got lots of D's, one Revell built, one in the box, two Tamiya and a Z-M also all in the box. A B/C to the standard of ANY of these would be acceptable. Radu has an "in" with Revell, maybe we should all bully him into talking to them? And quickly as I'm 68 this year and I can't wait around forever. Never seen the Hobbycraft A but it seems that may have been a good starting point for now? regards, Bruce Crosby Out2gtcha 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Out2gtcha Posted June 8, 2018 Share Posted June 8, 2018 Yes Radu, the Revell D seems such a success regardless of any minor issues, please do help them to create a new tool Revell B model! A ROG new tool P-51B, in the same ilk as their new tool D, price point and fit wise, would be your basic licence to print money. That thing would sell out everywhere it got released I would imagine! David66 and Alburymodeler 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Griewski Posted June 8, 2018 Share Posted June 8, 2018 Radu, Thanks for your suggestion about the spine graft from the HC P-51A to the Revell D. I will look into it. I have not cut plastic yet. Rick David66 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radub Posted June 8, 2018 Share Posted June 8, 2018 Radu, Thanks for your suggestion about the spine graft from the HC P-51A to the Revell D. I will look into it. I have not cut plastic yet. Rick That is how I would do it. Below that line, the "B" and the "D" fuselages coincide, more-or-less. The place where there is a difference is the area of the leading edge of the wing-root-to-fuselage joint. Yes, threre is a slight difference in the height of the firewall, but it is minuscule and hard to see, so I would not lose sleep over it. I would also use the "D" wing and graft the Hobbycraft wing root leading edge, then fill and rescribe the gun panels and spent ammo chutes. I would not worry much about the wheel wells, just build it with the inner doors closed. Radu Alburymodeler and David66 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeMaben Posted June 8, 2018 Share Posted June 8, 2018 How hard could it be from B to D Hey Noob , welcome Found this somewhere ... David66 and Kais 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeMaben Posted June 9, 2018 Share Posted June 9, 2018 Radu has an "in" with Revell, maybe we should all bully him into talking to them? Watch it Bub ... You're askin' fer trouble. Lothar 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radub Posted June 9, 2018 Share Posted June 9, 2018 In as far as I understand, Revell received a lot of messages requesting a "B". â˜ºï¸ So, they know. As for my "influence"... That is above my pay grade. â˜ºï¸ Radu David66 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fab Posted June 9, 2018 Share Posted June 9, 2018 A B to D or D to B? B to D... Why? D to B is hard. Although they may seem similar, they are different planes, just like a Bf 109 E is different from a Bf 109 G. But if you wish to do it, the easiest way to do it would be to combine the Hobbycraft P-51A with the Revell P-51D. - Graft the spine, including base of the tail fin, from the A To the D - Graft the wing root leading edge fron the A to the D - Graft the "wing end" of the lower engine cowl from the A to the D to account for the different wing leading edge and wheel well - You will need to rescribe the ammunition doors on the wings (shorter on the B. Change all position/navigation/landing lights. - there are many changes all around the wings and fuselage, rescribing, etc. You will need good references. In my opinion, there is no single "good" book on the Mustang that covers all differences. That explains why there is so much confusion about how hard it really is to make a B from a D or (a classic!) why just adding a tail fin fillet will not turn your D-5 a "something else I wanted". Radu Alaaaaaaaarmmmmmmm....Radub is currently working on the next Revell surprise ;-)) Amities Fab Kais 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hacker Posted June 9, 2018 Share Posted June 9, 2018 Don't you just love these conversations In a few sentences one can make or break a project Having said kit in hand l been looking at it. Radu is half right l think . The top wing is a separate molding and l could be wrong but wouldn't be the first time they made a new top wing or even a bottom one ( The Mk IX spitfire vs the Mk II comes to mind here ) Plus with all this new ways of making molds and the ability to add or change stuff is great which adds to the flavour of the stew here. The bottom wing has the three injection ports for the D. Placement of two of the guns should be the same on both B and D which is dictated by the internal structure of the wing so what would stop revell from just taking one piece out of the mold and replacing it with another to eliminate that third port? A lot of "ifs" here but my money is on a later D model with the other tail before a B and we may not see a B from them. Same as the old Hobbycraft early Mustangs which we may not see again unless like the rest of the Hobbycraft line was picked up by Academy and they are just sitting on it. Who knows My thinking about Revell kit is based solely on my own observation and until now did not realize Mr Green had the same thoughts. As for the gun bay doors yes they are different yet the same. Question here is has anyone really measured the kit one vs the actual one? If you did not know the difference would it matter? Doesn't matter really to me as l may be a bit fussy on getting it right but if the door is slightly bigger l won't lose sleep over it . Sometimes we worry too much about the finesse of things and not about if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and sounds like a duck then it will pass muster. That is just me and isn't part of the game here is also illusion ? Only time will tell what Revell true plans are. Hacker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce_Crosby Posted June 9, 2018 Share Posted June 9, 2018 Hi Guys, Revell will do a late D, that's built into the kit architecture with the separate tail end, all on its own sprue. Like they will do a single seater 262. The latter one is a given as the early sprue shots had the single canopy. So they are a done deal, we just have to wait a bit. But a B/C? Nowhere near as easy as it looks to actually manufacture one as a kit derived from the D. Granted, the prototype real D was built from a converted B (s/n 43-12102) but kit wise it would mean pretty huge molds for the fuselage, wings AND tail unit (lead-in angle at the top is different due to the high back). Not really insurmountable problems though! I've been pleasantly surprised by the newer Revell kits having built the D and the 262. Also in the stash there's the 111 and 88 and a half built Arado. Wouldn't it be nice to have a P-51B/C as well? Regards, Bruce Crosby Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radub Posted June 9, 2018 Share Posted June 9, 2018 Radu is half right l think . I am 100% right. A "B" would need a whole new mould. If you can "see" something in this kit that "hints" at a "B", you are looking in the wrong place. Radu David66 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeMaben Posted June 9, 2018 Share Posted June 9, 2018 Sure a whole new mold would be necessary but molds are made from cad/cam drawings from which a B mold could be made with relatively few adjustments. The later D should be close to being ready to market. Decals maybe David66 and Bruce_Crosby 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now