Airfix 1/72 Nimrod WIP

Chris,

I can't wait until these make their way across the pond.  I really like the lines of this aircraft, and look forward to hearing how you like the kit along the way.  Keep the WIP pics coming!

 Hope you keep us posted on this one. I`ve always loved the lines of this aircraft.Thanks for sharing

Chris, you're a lucky dawg!!!!  What did you shell out for that beauty?  I got to see 2 Nimrods at a airshow back in late 91.  One came in for the airshow and got struck by lightening.  So they had to fly another one in with the parts to fix it!!!  My family and I got the grand tour from the aircrew!!!!  It was great!  Keep us posted on how she builds up!

Oh, I so want one of those! I wish that the Comet would be produced in 1/72 plastic, but I guess it's kind of notorious.

I'm hoping to get one of these before the end of the limited run, especially as I used to work on Nimrods whilst serving with the Royal Air Force. I must say that the shot provided here gives a far better idea of this kit than the test shots released by Airfix.

Does it include the option for building the R1?

Hi folks,

first, thanks for the kind comments.

scorpr2, I paid £35.10 (roughly $US68.50) for the kit. The UK RRP is £38.99 (roughly $US76.00), but my LHS gives me 10% discount because I'm a good customer, do research, and build the occasional display model for them.

bondoman, looking at the breakdown of parts, a resin/ vac Comet 4 conversion would seem entirely feasable. An injection-moulded 1/72 Comet 4 from Airfix would seem less likely, because the amount of work that the wings would need would be too great, I'd have thought, for the occasional modeller. Remember that the Comet 4, on which the Nimrod is based, had a very good safety record.

Kit builder, Yes you can build an R.1 from the kit. The kit provides decals and parts for all three aircraft of No.51 Sqn at RAF Waddington last year, in overall Camoflage Grey with Light Aircraft Grey fuselage roof.

I've started work on the model by modifying the crew figures. I swapped their bone-dome heads for bare heads taken from some Dapol (ex-Airfix) railway passengers. I also removed the flight crews' oxygen masks and piping, and gave them headphones, scratch-built from discs of 20 thou plastic card and 5 amp fuse wire.

I'll be building the kit as XV234 of 201 Sqn, based at Ascention Island during the Falklands Conflict, because of the Hemp/ Light A/c grey colour scheme, the underwing Sidewinders, nose art and dark type 'B' and 'D' roundels.

I'll keep you posted.

Cheers,

Chris.

 

Outstanding.....I love the Nimrod....and it's nice to see that Airfix have lifted their game....all the Airfix models I've ever tried to make were absolute dogs...
Post some pics as you start the build - I'd love to see it.

leemitcheltree wrote:

and it's nice to see that Airfix have lifted their game....all the Airfix models I've ever tried to make were absolute dogs...

Lee - there are some really good Airfix kits. Try their 1/48 late-mark Spitfire and Seafire. Or their new 1/48 Spitfire Ia, either of the 1/48 English Electric Lightnings, the 1/72 Martin Marauder (almost as good as the Hasegawa kit and half the price) and their 1/72 Shorts Skyvan.

Cheers,

Chris.

Routine preparatory work yesterday. Lots of visible ejector pins to fill. I used Mr. Surfacer 500, which I prefer to gap-filling CA and accelerator for concave surfaces. Here are before and after piccies for the bomb doors. After doors unfilled:

Forward doors filled:

The ejector-pin indentations on the intake trunking are particularly deep. So far, I've needed to use three applications of Mr. Surfacer, and I can see that more will be needed to hide the join when the two halves are joined together. Aftermarket opportunity here, folks!

I've also been making up sub-assemblies, such as control surfaces and flaps, interior bulkheads and decks, weapons, tailplanes, u/c bays, ESM and ECM pods, u/c legs and wheels. Fit here is pretty good, though the trailing edges of the control surfaces are a bit thick. Nothing that can't be cured by a few minutes work with sanding sticks, though.

You need to pay close attention to which parts are needed for which version. Fortunately, there is a separate stage in the instructions for each of the decal options (not all Nimrod MR.2Ps are the same...) which, so long as you pay attention, makes this clear. One slightly  tricky area is the tailplanes. These have locating holes for finlets already opened up, but the finlets aren't used on all versions. On some of the versions without these finlets, locating slots for antennae have to be openend up, but their location is easy to miss if you're not concentrating.

I'm also painting up the crew figures. More sub-assembly assembly today, maybe work on the cockpit fittings.

Cheers,

Crhis.

All I can say is, pay particular attention to your references, as no two Nimrods are exactly the same to those who know what to look for. One of our was actually shorter than the others by a small amount, though I can't remember after so long which one.

For anyone wanting to build an MR1 in its grey and white scheme, pay close attention to the aerials and things like tailplane finlets and so on.

If you wish to add detail, the main undercarrige doors can be lowered manually for maintenance and cleaning, but are normally closed on the ground. The camera bay doors are usually only open on the ground for cleaning the windows, but are sometimes left open during landing, which usually results in the lower edges being groun away.

Immediately behind the bomb doors are the clamshell fairing doors, which give access to elements of the keel drain system and the potable water replenishment point. The liquid oxygen vent is visible as a small hole on the starboard side, just above these doors-you do have to be careful where you stand! The fill point is behind a circular panel a little lower down.

The small door under the tailcone is louvred and gives access to the air conditioning system, chaff and flare launchers. On the end of the MAD boom is a short static discharge wick, and more of these are fitted to the trailing edges of the flying control surfaces.

The insides of the bomb doors and clamshell doors are lined with a high density foam material, which is coloured in a shade of green similar to a slightly washed out au de nil (sp), though it becomes heavily discolured by spillage from the keel drain system. This spillage is a mixture of hydraulic fluid and water, from internal condesation. Note that the hydraulic fluid used in Nimrods is straw coloured.

In the nose gear bay on the fwd bulkhead, slightly offset to starboard is a hatch which is removed for access to the inside of the radome. The silver strips on the radome exterior are bonding strips.

Just above the radome is a small probe. This is another static discharge wick and the tip of it has four small 'barbs' arranged in a cross, vertically and horizontally and pointing aft at about 30 degrees.

There is much more detail available to the super detailers and I don't have time to mention more than a small part. I hope these small memories of this marvellous aircraft provide some insights to any area where references may be limited.

Just an afterthough on finlets. Early in their fitment, there were two sizes in use, though I think they were all eventually replaced with the large square-ish ones. These and an enlarged strake under the tail were installed to compensate for the yaw characteristic disturbance caused by the fitting of the refuel probe.

Very useful info there, Kit Builder, especially about the insides of the weapons bay doors and the nose gear detail.

I seem to recall that the fitting of IFR probes to Nimrods at the time of the Falklands Conflict was a bit of a rush job, which would explain why the subject of my build, XV234, operating out of Wideawake in May-June 1982, didn't have any finlets.

Spencer Pollard has a build article of a test shot in the new (March 2008) issue of Military in Scale, which he's built up into a very attractive model of a generic MR.2P in overall Camo Grey with washed-out markings. He reports no special problems except for the fight deck windows, which, on his sample at least, needed filler to fair in.

A piccy of the inside of the weapons bay would be really useful!

Cheers,

Chris.

You're quite right about 34. She was one of our aircraft at the time (St Mawgan) and initially had no finlets. It was in operating her that the pilots discovered that the probe contributed to a loss of yaw stability, especially at the optimum speed for tanking from Hercules, on which I was serving at the time of th Falklands airbridge. I have lain on the flight deck floor of a Nimrod, carrying out night air to air refueling from a Hercules during a training sortie, with and without radio and lights. The lightning flash caused by the static discharge as the probe came up to the drogue basket was more than a little spectacular!

I don't know if I have or can get any phots of the weapons bay, but if I can I will scan them in.

On the subject of flight deck windows, the small triangular ones are DV windows, which can be removed from the frame. They are unlocked by a lever and then pull out by swinging the rear edge in nd disengaging the front edge from the frame channel.

One small detail I've just thought of in the weapons bay is the periscope around a third of the way back, on the starboard side. We used to tell cadets that this was to watch submarines by flying low enough to dip it into the water. The real reason is to confirm weapon release. 

More good info there, KB. Earlier today, I found some piccies of the inside of the weapons bay of a nimrod at Fairford in 2004:

http://www.primeportal.net/hangar/howard_mason2/nimrod_mr2_fairford/index.php?Page=1

 (good Nimrod walkaround here) As you can see, the weapons bay doors are LAG, or maybe grimy white. Any idea when they changed from plae eau-de-nil, or do you think this is a special case?

Work on the Nimrod today has been limited to finishing painting the crew figures. Piccies to follow.

Cheers,

Chris.

BTW, KB, if you can't find a Nimrod, or would like one quickly, my LHS has plenty spare. Contact me, and I'm sure we'll be able to sort something out.

chris hall wrote:

Some builds of test shots have shown issues with the upper wing root fit, but mine were pretty good.

Chris check my thread about "Reading the Seams", I talk about my technique for addressing wing root seams on a DC-3. I think you might find it helpful if you do run into issues.

 

Useful stuff there, Gerald. That was pretty much the approach I was intending to take. Having built the Heller/ Airfix 1/72 Concorde ,

 

I know a thing or two about filling seams!

Cheers,

Chris.

Here are the crew figures. Mostly done by painting a base coat of very dark green enamel, then dry-brushing the detail and highlights.

 

 Bear in mind that the images are at least six times larger than the real thing. they don't look anything like so scary in real life! For scale, they're sitting on a 6 * 1 Lego brick.

Cheers,

Chris.

 

Chris, as I said, the colour is similar to, but very much paler, looking somewhat washed out.

In strong light the colour can appear to wash out totally. A camera flash would be blue enough and bright enough to cause the appearance of off white or pale grey. 

I can't actully open the link you've provided above to have a look, but as far as I am aware, the bomb door insulation hasn't changed. Even the R1 uses the material to insulate its sensor bay.

It's the MRA4 that I couldn't comment on, as I've not had the chance too see one in the flesh yet, but certainly for the period you're building to represent, it would be the pale au-de-nil.

For weapon loading, the doors open the loading position, which brings them to a point where the cross section of the door across its edges is parallel with the ground. This is so the weapons trolley will fit under, this being manhandled in from the side and turned into line as it passes into the bomb bay.

I will see if I can find you a colour match in terms of paint. 

 

Edited to say, I've had a look and Humbrol's matt 90 is fairly close for an out of the tin shade. 

Kind of OT.....but I think I'm missing out on something funny here!

What does SWMBO mean?

The things I come up with are either rude or obscene. 

namrednef wrote:

Kind of OT.....but I think I'm missing out on something funny here! What does SWMBO mean?

She Who Must Be Obeyed.... who thinks nothing of spending $100 on a pair of shoes, or $120 on a hairdo, but gives you the 3rd degree if you spend $30 (of your own money, note) on pieces of plastic...

Cheers,

Chris.

Kit builder wrote:

Chris, as I said, the colour is similar to, but very much paler, looking somewhat washed out. ....Edited to say, I've had a look and Humbrol's matt 90 is fairly close for an out of the tin shade.

Good stuff KB. Check out these piccies of the weapons bay:

http://www.britmodeler.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=10691&pid=122917&mode=threaded&start=#entry122917

and I've seen piccies of a Nimrod at Fairford in 2004 whose weapons bay was a similar colour. Would have been an MR.2P.

Will go with the Eau-de-Nil/ Humbrol 90, though. I used to teach history, and always emphasised the importance of primary sources. Plus, it adds a bit of colour!

Cheers,

Chris.

That's GOOD! Thanks!

A small point. The kit instructions suggest that if ,as I am, you're building option 'B', XV234 at the time of the Falklands conflict, then you should mount a Harpoon AGM forward in the weapons bay. However, research suggests that aircraft fitted for Harpoon weren't available until after the end of hostilities, so it might be a better idea to leave the Harpoon out. That, of course, makes it more difficult to get away without detailing the weapons bay....

Cheers,

Chris.

Chris, I've PM'd you about the Stingrays.

If you look at the doors in the top photo', with the Harpoon, you'll see that they're clad as I've described and that the door structure is visible. The later pic, taken since I left the RAF shows the doors internally skinned and finished in gloss white. I will try to find out for sure when this modification was carried out, but they were certainly not like this for most of the mighty hunter's career. 

Incidentally, the Harpoon and the front row of Stingrays appear to be warshots (yellow bands). 

Thanks for that, KB.

More evidence of sloppy research by Airfix: The instructions suggest that for XV234 at the time of the Falklands, (Spring/ Summer 1982) you should use the Stingray torpedos provided. The Stingray, however, didn't enter service with the RAF until 1983, so Mk.43s (also provided in the kit) would be a better choice.

The kit provides weapons bay actuators, but they're entirely the wrong design. I found piccies of the right design in (much) less than half an hour's work on the web. How hard is it to get things right?

As to the Stingrays, BTW, the nose is the right shape - once the thing has entered the water, and discarded the frangible protective nose cap which, of course, it would still be wearing when hung in the weapons bay. I rounded off the nose using a pencil sharpener (!) and sanding sticks.

Furthermore, the colour callouts suggest semigloss black nose and tail, dull aluminium body. For RAF warshots, at least, this is wrong. They're semigloss dark green, close to Humbrol 163, with yellow striping and lots of stencils. The instructions also suggest H.33 matt black for the Mk.43. Pretty much all the photos of the real thing that I've found show warshots to have white bodies and black noses (though that may be a protective cap - some piccies show them as overall white), and drill shots to be orange.

Cheers,

Chris.

Hey Chris,

 She's comin along quiet well.. I have always liked the Nimrod when I first saw her at the C&E Airshow in Toronto..!!

 Looking forward to the WIP's

Flaps up,

Mike

Rangers Lead The Way 

Hi Mike,

truth is, there's still not much to see at the moment. Most of the last week has been spent doing research, correcting detail errors and building up sub-assemblies. This stage is almost complete, though, so I should have more to show people in the next couple of days. In the meantime, I've just taped together the major components again, this time with the weapons bay, flight deck and bulkheads included, and I'm pleased to report that fit of these major components continues to be good:

You may notice in this picture that I've installed the main gear bay doors. These are always closed except when the gear is cycling, or for maintenance. Thing is, the gear bay roofs above these doors are pretty well detailed, while the areas that you can see when the gear is down aren't detailed at all.

Again, sloppy research. It's almost as if the project was the responsibility of a master craftsman, who took care of the accuracy and buildability of the kitas a whole, but who then delegated the detail stuff to a not-very-skilled apprentice, and then forgot to check their work.

Cheers,

Chris.

As I noted previously, the main gear outer doors are closed unless the gear is cycling. However, as provided in the kit, the main gear extension/ retraction linkages (parts 13E) foul the main gear outer doors when cemented in place. The solution is to cut the tops off the linkages:

(their absence won't be visible on the completed model) which makes everything look nice and neat:

The wing halves are just taped together here, and the u/c leg just slotted in place. The fit of the u/c legs to the u/c bay is a bit tight, so some thinning down is needed. Don't forget to take into account the thickness of the paint on the leg and the bay, so go for a very slightly loose fit.

Meanwhile, I checked out the fit of the flight deck glazing. Reports elsewhere have suggested that the glazing piece is slightly oversize for the surrounding fuselage, and this proved to be so. However, inserting a shim just forward of the glazing solved the problem:

though it may also be necessary to insert a shim just aft of the glazing. If not, then filling the slight gap  and overlap that appear there with gap-filling CA may do the job. I've already dipped the glazing in Future to protect it from CA fumes.

Detail-painting may start later today.

Cheers,

Chris.

 

Coming out of deep lurk 

chris hall wrote:

I seem to recall that the fitting of IFR probes to Nimrods at the time of the Falklands Conflict was a bit of a rush job, which would explain why the subject of my build, XV234, operating out of Wideawake in May-June 1982, didn't have any finlets.

 

yes it did, I've seen a picture of it with the small finlets fitted.

 

Furthermore, the colour callouts suggest semigloss black nose and tail, dull aluminium body. For RAF warshots, at least, this is wrong. They're semigloss dark green, close to Humbrol 163, with yellow striping and lots of stencils. The instructions also suggest H.33 matt black for the Mk.43. Pretty much all the photos of the real thing that I've found show warshots to have white bodies and black noses (though that may be a protective cap - some piccies show them as overall white), and drill shots to be orange.

Can I ask where? The reason for asking is that the relevant defence standards state that underwater weapons are to be overall (non-significant) black, with golden yellow bandings and markings on Warshots and Deep Saxe Blue on exercise/practice rounds.

 

e.g.:

 http://www.bombheadsworld.co.uk/index.php?name=coppermine&file=displayimage&album=2&pos=125

 

and

 

 

 

The only funky thing is the... name.

Hmmm.