More Modeling Notes on the 1/72nd Airfix A-4B Kit

The Douglas Skyhawk is one of my favorite airplanes. I even wrote a book about it, Scooter!. When Airfix released a new 1/72nd scale kit of it two year ago, I devoted several posts to it. See http://tailspintopics.blogspot.com/2012/07/new-airfix-172-4b4p-modeling-notes.html

For an excellent built article of it by "Speedman" on Britmodeler, click HERE. This is a picture from that build:

Airfix had used the A4D-2 displayed on Intrepid as a basis for the kit, including the decals. Speedman decided to replicate that display, even to the point of adding red aileron-control-surface locks.

Neil Lowe posted a question about the Airfix kit on my post on A4D-1 vortex generators (HERE). He noted that there was a detail on the top of the fuselage between the canopy and the red anticollision beacon that is suggestive of the vent that is only present on the J52-powered A4D. I hadn't noticed it before. He also asked about the access panels in this area.

As far as I know, there is no vent in this area on the J65-powered A4Ds (I haven't seen any pictures of the top of the Intrepid A4D but I doubt that it has the vent). This is a picture of an early A4D-1 that depicts this area and the two access panels.

So for J65-powered A4Ds in general, this detail should be removed from Airfix kit. Whether or not you add the access panels is up to you.

27 Charlie

Hancock Deploying, 2 August 1969:

William T. Larkins

Steve Govus was on the flight deck of Hancock during its 1969/1970 deployment to the waters off Vietnam. Not only that, but he took pictures. For his first-hand description of the experience,  I recommend that you take a look at http://twentyseven-charlie.blogspot.com/.

A Brief History of the Rescue Arrow

David Collier asked when the red rescue arrow was introduced. The short answer is I don't know for sure, but it would appear to be circa 1957 (Elliott, on whom I normally rely, wrote in one of his Monogram Color Guides that he had been unable to find a directive for its initial use).

The rescue arrow was undoubtedly introduced to guide an uninformed rescuer in opening the canopy of a crashed Navy airplane. Up until at least the mid 1950s, the instructions to do so, if present at all, were marked on the fuselage in fine print. What was worse, the canopy control might very well not be near the entry to the cockpit and jet canopies were increasing made of tougher stuff than heretofore, making breaking one for entry a difficult proposition.

The earliest prominent rescue marking I could find in a brief search (and the only one on a blue airplane) was on a F9F-8 Cougar. I don't know the date of the photo but it was possibly taken during a cruise between November 1955 and August 1956 aboard Ticonderoga.

Note that the canopy release is on the very back of the canopy, not the most obvious place to look. The arrow guides the rescuer from the canopy sill back to it. However, this appears to be a very nonstandard marking. This was the eventual marking on gray/white Cougars.

The rescue arrow clearly wasn't introduced with the change to gray/white markings. None of the Navy jets I looked at that were the first with the new color scheme had it. In a review of dated photos of various airplane types, I saw no rescue arrows in any picture taken in 1956 but usually in pictures taken in 1957. There is a possibility that Douglas led the way. This is an early A4D-1 on the initial at-sea trials.

The red(ish) circle in the lower right side of the national insignia is the location of the canopy release handle. Just to the upper right side of the circle enclosing the star is what may be a small red arrow pointing to it.

 

The above is a different flight-test A4D-1 with a similar marking that is clearly an arrow.

However, on initial-production A4D-1s, which were among the first Navy airplanes to be delivered in the gray/white scheme, the identification of the canopy release was considerably more subtle.

At some early point in A4D production, it was decided that a canopy-jettison capability should be added and its location made a little more obvious but not as obvious as the arrow was to become.

The standard red rescue arrow was present on this A4D-1 aboard Randolph in early 1957 to direct attention to the canopy release handle since it did not yet have the canopy jettison capability.

(The addition of canopy jettison, as opposed to release, is why there are occasionally two rescue arrows on the left side of an A4D.)

The F4D followed the same evolution. No rescue marking on the early production airplanes, a small red arrow as shown here on a very early deployed Skyray, and then the standard large one.

 

In September 1962, a directive was issued to change the color of the rescue arrow from red to yellow.
The F4H-1 Phantoms, however, had yellow rescue arrows from its first flight in May 1958.

(The F8U-3, which flew a week or so later in early June, had a red rescue arrow.)

My guess is that the rescue arrow was changed red to yellow to avoid the connotation of danger, which would be off putting to the nonprofessional rescuer, while still attracting attention.

Rick Morgan noted:  The yellow/black canopy jettison markings seem to align with use of the colors for all controls that make things leave the aircraft.  EA-6s (and others I suspect) actually de-activated those handles in the about 1990 because while they’d never been used for a real emergency we had several cases where untrained ground crew pulled the handles thinking that was the way to open the canopy on deck.   

More background and non-standard examples would be very welcome...

Trumpeter 1/48 A3D Skywarrior Yet Again

As the previous post states, I haven't seen the kit first hand. I have read comments about the engine nacelle not looking "right". However, it wasn't until I saw the pictures in this detailed and well illustrated build thread that a possible problem became apparent: http://s15.zetaboards.com/Mainly_Military/topic/767183/1/

It's hard to tell from a photo of a model, but it looks like the slight bulge downward of the engine inlet and nacelle have not been properly represented. The J57 engines had their accessories mounted on the bottom of the engine, requiring the cowling to not be symmetrical around the centerline of the engine.

The inlet lip itself is not quite circular, being deeper than the width and a bit more round (bigger diameter) at the top than at the bottom:

Another frequently mentioned observation about the recently issued Trumpeter KA-3B kit is that the refueling drogue is far too big for 1/48 scale. Here is a picture of a Skywarrior with a partially streamed drogue for reference.

The actual drogue is variously reported as being 24" and 30" in diameter when streamed.

Trumpeter 1/48 A-3 Skywarrior One More Time

The A3D/A-3 Skywarrior is one of the airplanes that I've accumulated quite a bit of material on over the years. Although it isn't my scale so I haven't seen it first hand, I did post some observations on errors in the kit (see http://tailhooktopics.blogspot.com/2013/05/trumpeter-148-a3d-2-skywarrior.html for example). However, I was recently a little chagrined to be informed that yet another error with the kit is one I would not have noticed if I'd been given the opportunity to comment on it in the design process.

It turns out (see http://www.network54.com/Forum/624633/thread/1395310050/Trumpeter+Skywarrior+findings) that the aft bomb bay door actuators are located at the very front of the main-landing-gear wheel well. That's a minor detail since it wouldn't be easy to model that area in a meaningful way even in 1/48th scale. However, it does mean that the bomb bay doors actually extend aft of the bulkhead between the aft end of the bomb bay and the main-landing-gear wheel well, contrary to what I would have assumed, and doesn't end there as Trumpeter would have it.

I would also have assumed that the bomb-bay door actuation at the back end of bomb bay would be the same as the front end, an actuator driving a linkage:

At the moment, I don't know if there's a similar linkage on the aft side of the aft bomb-bay bulkhead or the actuator acted on a torque tube in the axis of the bomb-bay door hinge line.

In Trumpeter and my defense, the location of the aft edge of the bomb bay doors is generally obscured by the main landing gear. However, if you look very closely from the right angle...

Anhedral/Dihedral and Wing Sweep

The question of how much anhedral the F3H Demon wing has came up on a modeling website recently. (Anhedral is the opposite of dihedral; instead of the wings angling up relative to the fuselage when viewed from the front, they angle down.)

The answer is, strictly speaking, none. However, it looks like it does have some and appears to depicted with anhedral in a front view. The reason is that the F3H wing is swept and also mounted to the fuselage at a non-zero angle of incidence relative to the fuselage reference line.

This also makes the wing look thicker than it actually is when viewed from the front.

The effect is even more pronounced in the front view of the A3D Skywarrior because its wing is not only mounted at an angle of incidence, it has a higher aspect ratio.

As a result, in a side view the leading edge of the wing tip is lower than the leading edge of the wing root and therefore has to be drawn that way in the front view. Nevertheless, the wing itself has no dihedral; in other words, a line drawn from tip to tip on a front view of the wing that is at zero angle of incidence would lie right down the middle of the leading edge.

Taper in airfoil thickness between the wing root and tip can also create an illusion of anhedral/dihedral or mask it. An example is the A4D Skyhawk. It looks like it has no dihedral. In fact it is almost three degrees. (Note that aerodynamicists do not measure dihedral with respect to either the upper or the lower surface of the wing. It is generally defined with respect to the chord line; in the case of the A4D, it is measured at the trailing edge of the wing.)

A line drawn from tip to tip with the A4D wing at a zero angle of incidence lies along the upper surface of the wing, because it is basically flat. The taper of the thickness of the wing from root to tip is all in the lower surface, which results in the wing having a little dihedral from an aerodynamicist's view point.

Some airplanes do have anhedral in the wing, of course. The F8U Crusader is one, although the actual angle might be exaggerated by the sit of the airplane relative to the camera and the raising of the wing for takeoff and landing. (You'll also note that the horizontal tail appears to have no dihedral.)

In this case, a front-view drawing can be relied on since the wing is mounted a zero angle of incidence.

Aerodynamicists also define wing-sweep angle in a very specific and even more non-intuitive way. It is not measured at the leading edge as you might think, but generally at the quarter chord, or 25% of the local chord back from the leading edge of the wing. In accordance with this convention, the A4D has a wing sweep of about 33 degrees, somewhat less than the sweep angle of the leading edge.

F4U-4 Modeler's Notes

29 March 2023: Added some more detail on the differences between the -4 and -4B outer wing panels

8 December 2022: Added statement and illustration of engine installation

It's no surprise to me that model kit manufacturers get things "wrong". Between the bum information in publications and on the interweb, the reliance on warbirds and museum articles, and the number of configuration modifications that occur during production and afterwards, it's a wonder that they get as much right as they do.

An example is the F4U-4 Corsair, which at a glance doesn't look all that much different from the -1 series. And in fact it was the same as a late production F4U-1D from the firewall aft, except for the cockpit. And the F4U-1D was pretty much the same as the later F4U-1s referred to as F4U-1As. (The 1C was cannon armed, but that was its only notable characteristic.) However, the -4 was essentially all new from the firewall forward and so was its cockpit. And then there were the changes made during the production of 2,356 (or maybe 2,357*) airplanes. Not to mention that the cannon-armed version was initially designed F4U-4C, which was then changed early on to F4U-4B (see http://thanlont.blogspot.com/2014/03/navy-aircraft-designation-suffixes-redux.html)

The -4 was to take advantage of the increase in power available from the new P&W R-2800 "C" engine. The most obvious external change in the engine was the replacement of the cast one-piece gearbox with two castings bolted together.

 The additional power was absorbed by a 13' 1" (or 2" according to the F4U-4 SAC) diameter four-bladed propeller.

As a result of the cowling and engine/propeller change, the face of the F4U-4 cowling extended not quite three inches forward relative to the F4U-1's and the overall length as measured along the waterline was 4.125 inches more than the F4U-1's. The F4U-4 retained the fabric covering on the outboard wing panels, rudder, and elevators. (The ailerons were plywood covered.)

One question that arises is how much the engine reduction gear case protruded forward of the F4U's engine cowling. This is difficult to discern from photographs because an angle even slightly off perpendicular will be misleading. Although Vought drawings vary (it was not a significant feature worthy of exact depiction), it appears to be very little at most on the F4U-4 (it appears to have been a bit more on the F4U-1). This Vought inboard profile of the F4U-4 powerplant installation can probably be relied on, except for the depiction of the cowl flap (one may have been shown on the top of the cowl in order to emphasize that there was an automatic cowl flap control):

The cowling changes included a guarded inlet at the bottom of the cowl ring, the elimination of the overlapping cowl panel joints, a complete reconfiguration of the cowl flaps (fewer and larger) and exhaust system (two exhaust stacks located above the wing leading edge and one below on each side rather than all three exhausting on the lower side of the fuselage just behind the cowl flaps), and an inner surface to the cowl ring.

The exhaust stacks were located under the cowl flaps and exhausted into a small recesses above and below the wing leading edge.

Note that I lifted the above illustration from the excellent Connecticut Corsair web site. See http://www.connecticutscorsair.com/pages/SRM%20-%20Engine%20Group.htm

Darren Tamanaha was able to get behind the ropes surrounding the Pima F4U-4 and provided me with the following excellent pictures of the exhaust stacks in place. Note that the cowl flaps on this airplane are fully open. Normally they are closed so the stacks cannot be seen except from the rear of the airplane looking forward.

The upper and lower exhaust recesses (you can just see the very end of the lower stack from this angle):

The collector and upper stacks:

A closeup of the upper stacks and the recess:

A closeup of the lower stack (which I've not seen a picture of until now - note that it would be virtually hidden under the cowl flap when it is closed):

As previously mentioned, there was a separate inner surface to at least the cowl ring on the F4U-4:

The addition of the scoop along with the elimination of the round "backfire" ports, change to intercooler outlet door, and mounting the catapult hooks in recesses instead of on the surface of the wing resulted in a notably different bottom to the forward fuselage.

Also note the step added to the right inboard flap toward the end of F4U-1D production (BuNo 82527) and FG-1D production (BuNo 87872). It was originally fitted with a flush fold-in cover but this was subsequently removed. Access to the cockpit of the F4U-4 was further enhanced by the addition of a bigger, fold-out step in the side of the fuselage in place of the kick-in step on the F4U-1D.

A similar but narrower step (but not the hole in the flap) was added to the left side to allow a mechanic who had started the engine and warmed it up to exit the cockpit while the pilot was climbing in from the right side.

The change in the source of carburetor air resulted in a change to and the number of turning vanes in the inlet in the inboard leading edge of the wing (there might also be a difference in the shape of the inlet but I'm not willing to commit to that yet).

On the F4U-1s, the first three or so turning vanes directed the air into a duct that supplied air to the supercharger. (The rest of the air coming into this inlet went through the intercooler that cooled the pressurized air coming out of the supercharger and, when the auxiliary blower was not in use, directly to the carburetor.) The F4U-4 carburetor took air for supercharging from the inlet on the bottom of the cowl ring, so this sharp turning of part of the air coming into the wing leading edge inlet wasn't necessary (the F4U-4's intercooler was enlarged and extended farther forward into the area vacated by duct). As a result, the number of turning vanes was reduced from six to three. The pictures above aren't adequate to model the vanes in a large scale, but for the F4U-1, see http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/71774-vought-corsair-f4u/ and for the F4U-4, see http://www.primeportal.net/hangar/luc_colin3/f4u-5nl_122189/index.php?Page=2, which is an F4U-5 but I'm pretty sure this inlet was the same in the -4.

The most obvious change to the cockpit was the addition of a floor. However, the seat was changed from the standard one-piece bucket and seat back to a separate bucket and a plate of armor that served as a seat back. The rudder pedals and the control stick pivot point were moved upward, the consoles were modified somewhat, a narrow subpanel was added below the instrument panel, and the chart board slot was eliminated in the instrument panel (it was now stowed in a rack on the right side of the cockpit).

And then there were changes during production. Almost half the F4U-4s were built with the rounded windscreen of the F4U-1D. It had a separate plate of bullet-resistant glass mounted behind the center panel. This was then changed to a flat center panel that incorporated the bullet-resistant glass. The canopy was modified as well with the change to the flat windscreen; its forward edge was not as rounded at the top and the armor (it was not just a sunscreen) over the upper aft portion of the canopy was deleted.

Toward the end of F4U-4 production, a new canopy involving a bump in the turtleback was incorporated. This was carried forward to the F4U-5.

 As far as I know, it was only installed on late production F4U-4Bs and -4Ps**.

The 20-mm cannon armament change was essentially a change to the outer wing panels. This included the incorporation of the single-stub rocket pylon in place of the two smaller zero-length supports.  One of the pylons was relocated forward onto the outboard cannon fairing.

(I need better examples for the above. The -4B shown has adapters on the rocket launchers and the third cartridge ejection port isn't visible on the -4 wing.)

This illustration from David Weeks' excellent F4U drawings shows the difference between the upper and lower sides of the outboard wing panel. Note that the F4U-4B only has two rows of ammunition boxes whereas the F4U-4 has three; the gun bay access doors are also different.

The upper side of the F4U-4 outer wing panel:

The upper side of the F4U-4B outer wing panel:

An adapter was developed for the two-post -4 rocket wing so that bombs could be carried on the outboard wing panel as well. This adapter picked up the forward and aft attach points for the rocket posts:

 A standard AERO pylon could then be utilized:

The wire antenna configuration was also changed during production. It was already different from the F4U-1 series because the entry point to the fuselage was now on the left side but the forward mast was deleted in production beginning with the 2,000th F4U-4 (BuNo 97332). This change eliminated the drag of the mast, reduced the drag of the wire antenna, and reduced weight by removing the medium high frequency radio installation. Existing F4U-4s were to be modified "as soon as practicable" according to Service Bulletin 215 dated 15 March 1945. (Thanks to Dana Bell for a copy of the Service Change.)

At some point, many -4s received a radar altimeter as evidenced by the presence of a pair of inverted-T shaped antennas on the bottom of the fuselage.

You're on your own with respect to tires.

The F4U-4P had a prominent bulge on the left side of the fuselage that housed the camera port (typical of photo-reconnaissance conversions of fighters at the time, photographs were only taken to the left side of the airplane) and another port on the belly.

 The camera ports were protected by a sliding cover when photographs were not being taken.

A large hatch in the top of the fuselage and a folding ladder were added to access the camera compartment.

 

*A production history compiled by Richard Abrams lists a 2357th F4U-4 with no BuNo assigned, delivered in 1949. It's possible that this was a Corsair built by Vought for its own use or a "dog ship" that had previously been delivered and was only then being turned back over the the Navy.

**One point of confusion in the F4U-4 production record is that toward the end of the production run, the BuNos assigned were lower than the bulk of the F4U-4s produced. The first F4U-4 was BuNo 80759. A total of 1,419 F4U-4s had BuNos of 8xxxx. The remainder of the -4s (no suffix letter) were 96yyy or 97zzz, as were most of the F4U-4Bs and four of the nine F4U-4Ps. After -4B BuNo 97531, the remaining F4U-4Bs and -4Ps that were built received BuNos of 62xxx or 63yyy.