HubertB

Apparently, HPH seem to have decided to go IM with this one, Peter (most likely short run à la Special Hobby, at least that is my speculation based on the « czech connection » pf HPH) Hubert

Welcome on LSM ! Gotta say that keeping unfinished kits for 30+ years is what you British must call « fortitude » Hubert

MEK will work fine on ABS (as on PMMA, aka Perspex) Hubert

Just a (friendly) basic physics reminder that the brunt of the weight will be taken and withstood by the main landing gear ... The nose gear will only take a small portion of the total weight, just the extra required to tip the balance the kit « nose heavy » ... Hubert

Ok. Sorry for the thread hijack. It’s certainly not up to me to tell you what to do with your kit. My inputs were certainly more for a general discussion point of view than specific to your build thread. Hubert

Wow ! Fantastic ! You have done outstandingly in rendering a beautiful kit of a beautiful aircraft. Hubert

Looking at the kit pics in this thread again, it seems an even bigger issue than the airfoil profile itself is the wrong incidence (which was 3.26 ° on the B-24). This could be corrected by altering the shape of the fuselage slot in which the wing box slides in. It remains to be decided, however, where to position the axis for this slot rotation. It seems to me that the trailing edge is too high compared to where it should be, but it is also very possible that the leading edge is too low as well. Rotating the slot cut with an axis at about 30% chord could do the trick IMHO, but this is just « Hubert’s eyeball Mk 1 guesstimate » without even having the kit in hand. If you modify this angle, do keep in mind that this will likely alter the angle of the MLG in relation to the wing, and, more importantly, a cut would be required to bring the engine nacelles back in line with the airflow, and not pointing upwards. But this would correct a key issue of the kit without major surgery on the wing itself (which would however still miss its characteristic « bump » at 30 % of the chord). Hubert

Tell me, do you really like German stuff ? Or is it a fortuitous coïncidence ? Nice output, btw Hubert

Congrats to all the winners ! (Looks like I am the only one who did not get anything, btw . But it’s ok, It’s not like my stash needs to grow any further ) Hubert

Well, I was misled by too cursory reasearch, and consequently misled you. Please accept my apologies. I felt the profile above did not look like the wing of a B-24 at the root. This is indeed a « standard » airfoil. But the airfoil section was evolving, from 22 % thickness/chord ratio at the root to 9% at the tip. 15.9 % is just the normal airfoil as Davis designed it. This means the root thickness in 1/32 should be 2.93 cms. The get the right profile, the image above should be replotted using the 22 % T/C at 29.6 % of the chord. Hubert PS: below is the plotted Davis airfoil for 22% T/C ratio and 3.26 % incidence. Sorry for the visual clutter. I did a screen capture on my ipad. Looks definitely more like the B-24 wing at the root, IMHO, and certainly not like what Hobby Boss have designed. It seems the site I could access to in 5 minutes, and enter plotting data in less than that, is not available from mainland China ...

Forgot to add the Davis airfoil profile picture. Here it is. Chord at root in 1/32 should be 13,34 cms and max depth 2,1 cms. Hubert

Back to modelling basics, which means going to research and data. The Davis wing in this scale should be 2.1 cms thick at the root, the max thickness being at roughly 30 % of the chord. And the wing should be set at 3.26° incidence. The pics published of the kit wing show a symetrical profile, and possibly a too flat incidence, which compounds the perception of something wrong. And, it would really be stretching to imagine another manufacturer release another 1/32 Lib (there was no other one than the Monogram kit in 1/48 after all, remember ?). So the options are three : don’t buy the kit, buy the kit and live with the problems, or buy the kit and correct the issues, yourself, or via an AM fix. Hubert

I’ll add my own wishes, in my mother tongue « Joyeux Noël ! » and my new country of residence’s « Feliz Natal ! ». And, Ivan, I wish you all the best in your new home country, and a smooth settlement. Hubert

Hey, as Jeff reminded, after all, it’s a Kitty Hawk kit ... so cats should like them ... H7bert

Good to hear a bout the save, Ernie. Now for those of us who have sometimes experienced spilling one of those glue bottles, a large wooden block can with a middle cavity in which you insert the bottle can save you. Alternatively, you can epoxy-glue the bottle in the middle of a metal tin lid (like a tea box lid for instance). Gives a wider base that makes spilling virtually impossible, and a container to receive the spill if it occurs. Alternatively, you can, like me, claim that you never, nor will ever, spill one of these ... Hang on, to achieve that, the best way is to not model at all Hubert

Would love to, especially if I can choose the proving ground (like the streets of Paris, where I have a few scores to settle with guys who believe the « Code de la Route » does not apply to anyone driving a vehicle with less than 4 wheels or more ... Mind you, two tracks is technically not four-wheels, is it ? ) Hbert

With the discussion going on in another thread, how many liters of displacement, and how many mpg (or liters/100 kms) ? And do they have a metallic silver option ? Hubert

Agree with Nick’s comment. The « chord » is the front hoisting sling to lift the aircraft back on the ship’s catapult. There is also another one symetrically on the right side. So the crest would have to have been under the sling, which could not have been painted, or would have lost the decoration from constant manipulation and possible replacement. Which does not detract from a great build and weathering. A real gem of a kit, this one, and you did a great job of it. Hubert

Having always been fascinated by science and scientific experiments, I have to dig this one But one thing is unclear to me. I can fairly well understand the masculine « donor » side of the test. But what about the « receiver » part of it ? No mention is made of who, and how ... (which, btw, leaves some space for a surprise, if candidates imagine one given gender for the receiver, and get the other gender ) All of this to say the experimental protocol is poorly defined at this stage, and needs to be reworked on before the study’s results can be published in « Science » or the « New England Journal of Medicine » (Very serious) Hubert

Roughly 62 cubic inches, for those still using the obsolete imperial measurements Hubert

3,6 litres. Half as much as what I had before selling my Porsche Hubert

Regarding the AB section, and I stand corrected by anyone with better memory or documentation than me, as I am citing this out of memory, it changed over the (very very very) long life span of the French « Crouzes ». So its variant (number of flame-holder pillars mainly) will depend on the era of the aircraft you are modelling... Not too sure about the cockpit / dashboard, but some components are likely to be French-specific. Hubert

As soon as the reeinders are back in the stable, groomed and fed ... Hubert

Like other early Trmpeter kits who took their inspiration from smaller-scale kits (the Avenger, the Swordfish for instance) this is a very good one, as was the 1/48 Accurate kit. Hubert

Great result. Well done ! Below is what I have been up to since the beginning of the year : Hubert