A few months ago, I bought the Revell 1/72 Lancaster Dambuster, it’s the second time that I build it (the first turned out really bad…).
So, I have a few questions for you:
*Is it normal that the Lanc has so much rivets, or should I sand them away?
*It has mixed engraved and raised panel lines, do they all have to be engraved?
And when it does, what’s the best methode, Swanny’s one?
*The kit has windows on the fuselage (not clear parts), is it normal, or should I fill them up?
*Does the Dambuster version has a bomb-aim sight? I once saw in a documentary on TV, that the crew had invented a new tool to aim, just a lath and 2 smaller laths on the top. The smaller ones needed to be on the places where the flak of the dam was, when they approched the target…
I believe the simple device they used on the Dambusters raid was a tiny handheld version of the giant rangefinders you see on battleships. It was basically a little board with two nails on either end and a stick for a handle. The bomb aimer or whoever held the board up to eye level on the approach. When the two flack towers at either end of the damn were exactly lined up with both nails in the bomb aimers line of sight, it was time to pickle the bomb. There was also a simple sight to maintain altitude at exactly the right 60 feet or whatever it was. It involved two light beams, like powerful car headlights mounted on the bottom of the a/c, one in front of the other, and pointed down at the water at a slight angle toward each other. When the two beams of light met and became a single beam of light shining off the water, that was the exact altitude. Again, primitive, but it worked pretty well in the days before radar altimeters. Both systems were variations on simple geometry using triangles. Believe me, if I can understand it, it IS simple.
This is, at least, how I recall the two systems when I read the famous book years ago. Of course, there have been several books since.
Anyway, the only one of these that might show up on a model are the two lights on the bottom of the fuselage.
TOM
Interesting that you bring this up…I just picked up a 1/72 Dam Buster myself. The rivets I can not answer directly, but usually they are way over done.
The “windows” I think need to be eliminated…refer to the other Lancaster posts from today, they have an excellent link to a photo site.
The sight is another story…You had written lath, I can assume you mean lights. There were a set of lights that were “synchronized” . When the plane travelling at a certain speed had reached the optimal height and distance from the dam the lights would merge into one beam, this was the indication to release.
I am excited to get into my build…I rank this as one of the greatest feats of military aviation (Midway and the IAF strike of the nuke reactors in Iraq as the other two). The research will probably lead me to getting the movie from Netflix !!!
The original bomb sight remaind in situ - some crews preferred marks on the perspex to the hand held “triangle device” but it is unlikely that these would be visible on a 1;72 model. The bomb carrier was “external” and I could email you designs if you wish (but will need a few days) - basically it was tow arms for the support of the bomb - which was a cylinder rather than a spere - and two driving wheels with chains to set the weapon rotating in reverse to the direction of flight. I belive that a lot of th details have only just been declassified. Try the web sites on the matter.
Sharkskin is correct on both points. He was correct on the bomb aimer simply lined up the stick on both points of the dam and it’s points of reference. And he was correct on the two lights that were used to vary the height of the aircraft.
The rivets were too heavy on the Revell, I personally went with Tamaya on the 1/48th Dambuster.
If I read you correctly Joe Rugby the lights were merely to set the height - they did not otherwise influence the relase point. This was determined by the sight.
FlyingRaptor…Sorry mate…no offense meant…Mid Upper Gunner, I forgot about those nails…I stand humbly corrected…not budging on the assertion of one of the greatest feats ever though…LOL
I believe that the cockpit is RAF interior gray green. I just used some Poly Scale on the Battle of Britian GB. Good questions on the arms and bomb bay, interested myself as my kit should be here any day now…
The arms were flat lamp black as was the bottom of the airplane and half way up the fusalage. The windows were present in all mks. but were usually painted over.
It’s been my observation that in most pictures of painted aircraft, that if the picture was taken more than 6 foot from the subject, the rivets just disappear into the paint. And if they’re flush rivets it’s even worse. Usually if you notice them, it’s because the paint has been rubbed off of them but not the surrounding surface or the rivets have been replaced but not painted. So I would say, sand away!
As far as scribed lines go, I can live with it, but the majority of the lines come from overlapping sheet metal. Which means raised lines. Not much, .032 " or .040" usually, but that’s enough to catch the light and stand out. And again they tend to show up less on a painted aircraft.
I’ve been inside a lanc, And the clour close to Humbrol H78, I have photo’s but they need to be scanned, If you like will try and post them,in the next week or so.
The first pic shows interior green, However the second shows satain black in the actual cockpit, But the canopy frame is matt black hope this helps, I do have some more it you want me to post them[:)].
And here’s a view looking towards the rear gunner’s station, Not the interior of the turret is black , If you want more I’ll have to find them first to be scanned.
