Micro Mir Beverley

[MarkyM607]

Saw this on an email from Hannants and had to get it despite not having built one of Micro-Mir's kits. I didn't know how good or bad they were but it was an injection Beverley in 1/144th so I ordered one!. It looks good although there are some fit issues along the seams. Nothing that can't be sorted with some scraping and a little filler!.



There is a small photo etch sheet and a canopy mask which in this scale I may not use, my hands are not that precise or dainty!!.

[DavidWomby]

Oooh. That looks very tempting.

David

[ShaunW]

I've never built anything by Micro Mir either and certainly this doesn't look to be a shake and bake kit but hey ho. I like your spirit Mark - dodgy fit issues can be rectified with patient work and you'll have a Beverley for your collection.

[Lone Modeller]

I remember seeing one of these flying regularly at Farnborough in the mid-1960's - they were huge so even in 1/144 the model will be big.

For the benefit of those who never saw one of these things in the air, I will relate two incidents which occurred at Farnborough.

The first concerns my brother who was an apprentice at the RAE in the 1960's. He was asked to look into the wing section of the Beverley - the space was so large that he could crawl on all fours without any chance of banging his head or anything else - in fact he could stoop easily with space to spare!

The second concerned a pilot who started to taxi the machine to the end of the runway. Over the radio came the message from the control tower: "Have you received planning permission to move that council house?"

[MarkyM607]

Thanks chaps. Yes it does seem to be just shy of not fitting at all well but in truth the fit isn't too bad. It is easily fixed and as you say it is a Beverley, and a plastic one too. There is also a very decent amount of internal detail for the cargo bay as well as a floor!. So far worth a go. It's about 20cms (approx) long just with the fuselage so a decent size.
I've heard things like that LM, such as it's nickname of 'the flying block of flats'!!.

[Eric Mc]

The Farnborough (XB259) one was bought by Court Line in 1973. They had a plan to use it is a spares carrier for their Lockheed Tristar fleet. Sadly, the airline went bust so the plan came to nothing. It was flown to Luton and is now displayed at Fort Paull, Hull and is the only complete Beverley in existence.

http://www.beverley-association.org.uk/html/259/259.htm

[Dazzled]

I've built one of their submarine kits, the USS George Washington, and didn't experience any undue or unexpected difficulties with it. The plastic is nice to work with and seems to like liquid cement (eg, Humbrol Liquid Poly) and there were no issues with it rejecting filler although a little fettling and filling was required. I'd certainly build another Mikromir kit

[MarkyM607]

Thanks Eric, that was interesting to read. Thanks Dazzled, I have looked at their submarine kits but price means I can't buy all of the ones I want at once!!. It is good to know they aren't a bad maker, more sub kits may well be purchased!.

[MarkyM607]

Sorry, sort of forgot I put this on here, got wrapped up with GB's!. However work has continued with the Beverley. Mostly good, the wings and tail surfaces fit very well although the engine cowlings did not all fit and I had two gaps on two of them. This was easily filled and fixed though. The undercarriage legs went on well but watch the holes and tabs, the main legs need the hole in the wing opening up a bit and/or the tab at the top of the leg reducing in size. The horizontal 'leg' also needs the holes in the fuselage sides enlarging as they are not quite big enough, or deep enough into the body either. Again, easily fixed.
The main problem was with the engine fronts that go inside the cowlings. These are supposed to provide a backing for the propellers (more on those in a moment), however they do not seem to get far enough towards the front of the cowling for this to happen. The solutions are to either make the fronts smaller so that they get closer to the front or, as I did, leave them out and glue the props to the front of the cowling. Although you have to make sure you leave some gap for the props so they don't (or wouldn't in real life), rub on the cowling it is still accurate for the Beverley.
The main problem with the props is fit. They are made up of three parts, a backing plate, the propeller and the spinner. With the first and last of these the parts fit well, almost perfectly. When you try and fit the prop between the two things go wrong. I think the holes in the spinner for the prop are either too small or not the right angle. I managed to get them looking good enough to go with but in this scale I didn't fancy too much fiddly work. Here she is so far...


(P.S. The wings fit very well and only required a small bit removed from the rear of the wing root for them to slot in nicely.)

[MarkyM607]

Update time. Painting underway, not the best pic of the topside but it shows the pale stone (Hum 121), Dark Earth to go on next (Hum 29).

[ShaunW]

Great to see this progressing Mark. From some angles the Beverley reminds me of an Me-363 Gigant.

[JamesPerrin]

It may be the photo's but the pale stone looks too pale. It should be Middle Stone which is more orangey.

[MarkyM607]

It may be the photo's but the pale stone looks too pale. It should be Middle Stone which is more orangey.

I was thinking the same actually. Hoped no one would notice! . Do you have a suggestion for the correct colour (preferably Humbrol)??. Could only really match up 121 myself.
Shaun: I see what you mean looking at the top view!!.

[JamesPerrin]

Middle Stone is Hu225

[MarkyM607]

Thanks, will give it a try later!.