Rob's Lancaster BIII Dambuster *Finished*

[rob_van_riel]

and came to grief at the same point on the front fuselage fit.

Well, at least it wasn't just me then. Maybe some degree of blaming the kit is justified

Great review and progress report though mate.

Thanks.

[rob_van_riel]

That left priming, with also went quicker than I thought it would

Good thing too. The Xtracolor Dark Earth is still tacky, more than 12 hours after being applied. This could mess up my schedule..

[ShaunW]

Very interesting and detailed build Rob - I don't know if you've put me off this kit or not now to be honest I've used Xtracolour and also found it takes it's own sweet time in drying!

[rob_van_riel]

Very interesting and detailed build Rob - I don't know if you've put me off this kit or not now to be honest

By all means, have a go at it. Despite some of it's more interesting characteristics, it still is a very good kit (from a builder's point of view, can't judge accuracy). To read some of the reviews on the net, it is perfect, and that, it is not, and this mismatch between expectations and reality has caused a bit of grumpyness on my part at times. If I concentrate on the trouble spots in my write-ups, that's because those are the points where readers (or myself, on a second visit), will have to pay some attention, and thus the points that are technically relevant, while the parts where everything just works tend to get less attention.
Also, keep in mind that this is the first time ever that I've built a large propellor driven aircraft, and that some of the things that tripped me up and/or surprised me may well be business as usual to someone more familiar with WWII bombers. If I can go from a boxed kit to a complete Lancaster in about three weeks, there can't be any major problems with the kit.
Now, if you're a stickler for total accuracy, you may have to deal with the wing issue, and that would be a whole other level of work. That said (and with this I risk the ire of the specialists) the wing anhedral doesn't look so strange when compared to pictures of the plane in flight. Could it be that the wings flexed visibly upward when flying with a heavy load? Not unusual for heavy aircraft.

I've used Xtracolour and also found it takes it's own sweet time in drying!

I guess good results take time. This may well be the last (albeit very large) batch of Xtracolor I ever get my hands on, so I might as well enjoy enjoy it.

[rob_van_riel]

It's treason, I tell you. The paint has been sabotaged!
I got a nice, even coat if Xtracolor X002 laid down on the top of the Lancaster. At though it looked a bit odd at the time, but paint will occasionally do that, and then dry up perfectly. Not this time. For comparison, the picture shows the tip of the wing of a 1/48 Hurricane I did a while ago, with in theory exactly the same paint. On the Hurricane, it looks like Dark Earth to me. On the Lancaster, not so much..

Somewhat against my better judgement, I'd made a small start at masking the pattern on the wing, with the local equivalent of BlueTack. Again, this had worked well on the Hurricane, but on the darker paint on the Lancaster, it left 'bitemarks'.


I have since repainted the plane with Humbrol 29. This looks a lot more like Dark Earth, but I know from experience that this paint is very vulnerable, so before doing anything else, I'll hit it with a barrier coat of varnish.

[ShaunW]

Most odd with the paint Rob and I've also had the blu-tak bite on paintwork before. I always use a protective layer of varnish now.

[rob_van_riel]

The protective coat of varnish went on yesterday, so today I put on the camouflage. Mayby this is old hat the the others here, but the picture below shows how I tend to mask such jobs:

I scale up some image of the correct camo pattern, run it through the printer, and then cut out the bits that need to be masked. Earlier, I would have clipped these paper masks down a bit and attached them with BluTack, but since that bit me yesterday, I took an alternative approach. I cut windows in each of the masks, and put Tamiya tape over those. That give me just enough adhesive power to keep the paper closse to the plastic. I was a bit worried that paint would sneak under the edges, but the results were good.

[Clashcityrocker]

Nice masking. Think I'll try this when I do my Spitfires.

Nigel

[Jagewa]

Looking great, nice mask work.

Cheers
Jim

[rob_van_riel]

Nice masking. Think I'll try this when I do my Spitfires.

I normally set my airbrush at low pressure and little paint. I suspect this may have helped in keeping the paint from sneaking under the edges. Also, spray at as right an angle to the paper as you can; I've seen some of the edges flutter in the airflow, and if you are throwing paint at it at such a time, the paint won't even have to sneak.

[AndrewR]

the wing anhedral doesn't look so strange when compared to pictures of the plane in flight. Could it be that the wings flexed visibly upward when flying with a heavy load? Not unusual for heavy aircraft.

There is a comment about that in Paul Brickhill's book, when the first Grand Slam mission was flown; the wings flexed upwards quite visibly when the aircraft took off.

Nice masking idea. I often use post-it stickers cut to shape and secured with small bits of previously used masking tape, which is much less sticky.

Cheers

Andrew

[lancfan]

the wing anhedral doesn't look so strange when compared to pictures of the plane in flight. Could it be that the wings flexed visibly upward when flying with a heavy load? Not unusual for heavy aircraft.

There is a comment about that in Paul Brickhill's book, when the first Grand Slam mission was flown; the wings flexed upwards quite visibly when the aircraft took off.

The gradual flexing of the whole wing as it bears flight stresses cannot be compared to the sharp crank at the dihedral break, Revell simply got it wrong- why when there are four in Britain they could have worked from I do not know, but get it wrong they did, this was one of a number of small puzzling accuracy faults with this kit, that said it is still my preferred Lancaster model.

David.

[rob_van_riel]

The build is almost done. I've finished airbrushing, and put on the decals. All that remains is a dozen or so small bits sticking out of the aircraft, the wheels, and the glazing.

With any luck, I'll be able to finish this up tomorrow, ready to wreak some 1/72 havoc on the night of the 16th

[rob_van_riel]

Also, I somehow managed to get one of the sets of main struts on out of whack. Don't know which, can't for the life of me find where it went wrong

Well, I finally found what went wrong. Time for the kids' classic: spot the differences..


See it? So did I, finally, just now, while trying to fit the door actuators. Just not going to happen on the port nacelle, on account of me having f*cked up really thouroughly and having stuck the braces where the actuators should have gone
The worst part is, there's not a thing I can do about it anymore. There's no way I can separate the parts of the port gear without destroying them. Putting the wheels up and mounting the plane on a stand might be possible, but without any crew on board, that's going to look just as daft (and it's a bit early to declare it a drone). I fear my best bet now is to swallow my pride and simply accept his error. Unless you know it's there (which unfortunately everyone does now..), it's mercifully hard to notice.

[ShaunW]

Well, she's looking good Rob. Don't worry about the error with the landing gear, I won't tell a soul (I bet if you'd not mentioned it, the chances are no one would have noticed).