1/32 Seafang from Iconicair

[stona]

I've started this in 'aircraft under construction' which might be a bit optimistic as I'm not sure when I'll have time to start it.


Iconicair do some good stuff, including this and other less mainstream subjects. Here's a link to the website. http://www.iconicair.com/


I ordered the kit a while ago and after a false start (which was in no way Iconicair's fault) it arrived today. I dealt with Graham at Iconicair and his response to my queries definitely makes him one of the good guys in my book!


Here's the box.






The blurb in the bottom corner which is not easily legible in the photo sums this up very well.


"Unassembled resin model kit...Suitable for experienced modellers. Includes metal and photo etched parts."


I'd agree with that. Although my last couple of models have been mainstream newish kits which more or less jump out of the box and build themselves I'm looking forward to this. Those who have followed some of my builds know that I'm no stranger to resin and limited run kits.


I will do an in box review before I start. I haven't found another one on the internet so I may be a pioneer for this kit!


I've had a quick look in the box and have to say that it looks very promising indeed.


Cheers


Steve

 

[papa 695]

I've never seen one of these Steve, looking forward to seeing you work your magic on this one. Any chance of sprue shots ?

 

[stona]

So, what's in the box?


You get lots of bags full of the resin parts and metal etch bits as well as a decal sheet and instructions, all very nicely packed and protected with bubble wrap. I'm not going to post a photograph of a load of bags which is not going to enlighten anyone about the kit, instead I've pulled out a few bits and pieces to show the sort of things we have in the various bags.


First is a nicely cast and detailed fuselage half.






Some smaller bits and pieces, also look very nice.






Now some clear parts






I'll hold my hands up and say I'm not a fan of clear parts in resin. There is nothing wrong with these, they look as good as any others I've seen, whether I'll use them or not I don't know.


Here's a fairly hefty fret of photo-etch and some nice white metal undercarriage.






It will be out with the files for one of the jobs I least like, cleaning up white metal, but these parts are very nicely done and should look good in the end.


A decal sheet






These look okay though the proof of the pudding will be in the eating. They do look the correct size (I haven't measured) and most importantly the correct style, unlike those provided in a certain mainstream Seafang kit.


Finally the instructions.






I always approach these with some trepidation in this sort of kit. There is always an element of jig-saw puzzle about a kit in which the parts are mostly not numbered! This little booklet is very well drawn with clear views and some helpful instructions which is a relief.


Overall I'm very pleased and impressed with what's in the box. If it all fits together as well as it has been cast then I might just be able to conjure a nice Seafang out of the parts. I'm not sure when I'll start due to other potential commitments, but I'll revive this thread when I do.


Cheers


Steve

 

[papa 695]

That does look like a well detailed kit looking forward to when you start it Steve, and thanks for the sprue shots and info about the kit

 

[yak face]

Nice ! I was just looking at these in a magazine and wondered what it was like, cheers tony

 

[stona]

Nice ! I was just looking at these in a magazine and wondered what it was like, cheers tony

I'd say very nice on a first look. Of course I would qualify that by saying I haven't stuck two bits together yet


I would have thought a man of your skills on all those ancient and obscure kits would find something like this a relatively simple proposition.


Cheers


Steve

 

[treyzx10r]

I've never heard of this brand ,will be watching this come together for sure.

 

[Robert1968]

This looks like a very nice kit and ( resin ) scary for me. I would love to be able to do a kit like this but for now I'll watch you make it look easy ( in your indomitable fashion


I'll be ready to watch this creation come to life.


Kind regards


Robert

 

[monica]

will look forward to seeing this one,real like the looks of these detail parts,

 

[colin m]

Not an aircraft I'm familiar with, but it does seem to have nice curves. And can I see contra rotating props ? I do like contra rotating props.

 

[stona]

Not an aircraft I'm familiar with, but it does seem to have nice curves. And can I see contra rotating props ? I do like contra rotating props.

It is a navalised Spiteful, which was essentially a Griffon engined Spitfire with a different wing. You can see contra-rotating propellers. Only a few were built as the jets were coming, though the earliest were a bit dodgy for carrier operations. The FAA went for the Hawker Sea Fury as its last piston engined fighter leaving no British market for the Seafang and it didn't sell overseas.


If the claims for performance are to be believed this was probably the fastest piston engined fighter ever built in Britain.


Cheers


Steve

 

[stona]

I've made a start this morning, just assembling the half dozen or so parts that make up the inner wing assembly and wheel well.






So far so good.


A word about 'resin'. What we all call resin is just another plastic, almost invariably polyurethane. You will read all sorts of stuff about it which might lead you to think it's as dangerous as asbestos and will have the same effect on you as kryptonite on superman. This is a load of tosh. I am not talking about working with the chemicals mixed to create the plastic, for which different precautions would be required, but working with polyurethane parts.


First, you are not going to be gassed by the parts (yes, I've actually read that you can be on one forum). Any out gassing going on (if it is) when you get the parts is minimal and not dangerous.


Second the dust is not a material so hazardous that it will almost certainly destroy your lungs within seconds of exposure. The dust, like just about any other dust, is not good for you and you should take precautions to avoid inhaling it. You do not need a Darth Vaderish mask of the sort I wear to protect myself from solvents etc when I spray paints and lacquers, but if you are producing a lot of dust then a suitable dust mask is a good idea. You can minimise the dust you produce by wet sanding, not exactly rocket science! I also minimise the level of dust in my work area by vacuuming up any deposits fairly regularly, being careful not to vacuum up kit parts.


Really this is nothing you shouldn't do when sanding wood and certainly things like car body filler or fibre glass (which really is nasty stuff). It's just common sense.


There is no reason to be frightened of working with resin. It is an easily worked plastic, easy to cut and sand, and works well with CA glues (superglue) and epoxy resins. The fit of resin parts, how ever well made, won't be as good as injected polystyrene parts and this is due to the way resin shrinks as it hardens. This is one area where there will almost certainly be a bit of work to be done. Cleaning parts up is no more difficult than cleaning polystyrene parts. I use the same general tools, good knives, razor saws, files and wet 'n' dry, all of which most of us will have in the tool draw.


I'm not suggesting everyone should go out and buy a resin kit, I think a bit of experience is a sensible prerequisite, but nobody should be put off by a kit with some resin parts nor should they be scared to take a swing at a resin upgrade set or similar.


Having said all that, let's see what a dog's dinner I make of this over the next few weeks


Cheers


Steve

 

[Fenlander]

I do like to put kitchen towel down and just dampen it while sanding resin. I also work in the extractor space so airborne gets taken out and heavy drops onto damp kitchen towel and stays there.

 

[Robert1968]

I've made a start this morning, just assembling the half dozen or so parts that make up the inner wing assembly and wheel well.
View attachment 151310


So far so good.


A word about 'resin'. What we all call resin is just another plastic, almost invariably polyurethane. You will read all sorts of stuff about it which might lead you to think it's as dangerous as asbestos and will have the same effect on you as kryptonite on superman. This is a load of tosh. I am not talking about working with the chemicals mixed to create the plastic, for which different precautions would be required, but working with polyurethane parts.


First, you are not going to be gassed by the parts (yes, I've actually read that you can be on one forum). Any out gassing going on (if it is) when you get the parts is minimal and not dangerous.


Second the dust is not a material so hazardous that it will almost certainly destroy your lungs within seconds of exposure. The dust, like just about any other dust, is not good for you and you should take precautions to avoid inhaling it. You do not need a Darth Vaderish mask of the sort I wear to protect myself from solvents etc when I spray paints and lacquers, but if you are producing a lot of dust then a suitable dust mask is a good idea. You can minimise the dust you produce by wet sanding, not exactly rocket science! I also minimise the level of dust in my work area by vacuuming up any deposits fairly regularly, being careful not to vacuum up kit parts.


Really this is nothing you shouldn't do when sanding wood and certainly things like car body filler or fibre glass (which really is nasty stuff). It's just common sense.


There is no reason to be frightened of working with resin. It is an easily worked plastic, easy to cut and sand, and works well with CA glues (superglue) and epoxy resins. The fit of resin parts, how ever well made, won't be as good as injected polystyrene parts and this is due to the way resin shrinks as it hardens. This is one area where there will almost certainly be a bit of work to be done. Cleaning parts up is no more difficult than cleaning polystyrene parts. I use the same general tools, good knives, razor saws, files and wet 'n' dry, all of which most of us will have in the tool draw.


I'm not suggesting everyone should go out and buy a resin kit, I think a bit of experience is a sensible prerequisite, but nobody should be put off by a kit with some resin parts nor should they be scared to take a swing at a resin upgrade set or similar.


Having said all that, let's see what a dog's dinner I make of this over the next few weeks


Cheers


Steve

Liking the start Steve


Didn't the FAA also have the Sea Hornet at the same time before the jets cane in.


I really like the contra rotating props, also wasn't there another with contra rotating was it the wyvern? Not sure


Regards


Robert

 

[stona]

My father's squadron (801) was the only FAA squadron fully equipped with Sea Hornets, but had converted to Sea Furies by the time he joined.


Contra rotating propellers were used on various carrier aircraft as they largely eliminate both the torque effect and other undesirable aerodynamic issues which arise fromthe differing slipstreams over the different sides of the aircraft (particularly the inner wing area) caused by a single propeller. This was a serious problem on the late Marks of Seafire, before they eventually got a contra rotating propeller. The Wyvern did indeed have contra rotating propellers, it has always surprised me that the Sea Fury didn't.


Cheers


Steve

 

[stona]

I've had a chance this morning to fit the wing tips. I did toy with the idea of having them folded as this was a feature of the Seafang (as opposed to the Spiteful). They did, and still do, require some work for a nice neat fit but they can be made presentable.






I got bored with them so stuck on the magnifier and started on some of the very small cockpit parts. Here's the rudimentary assembly for the rudder pedals.






I have never seen a photograph of a Seafang cockpit and know of only two of the Spiteful cockpit, which means that most of this cockpit detail is going to be an educated guess by the folks at Iconicair. I won't be worrying over much about that and will only add a Sutton QS harness (the later type with the parachute type quick release box). That harness will be my educated guess, as will be how and where the various parts attach A safe bet with this aircraft is to base anything you have to guess at on a late Mark Spitfire/Seafire.


Cheers


Steve

 

[Snowman]

little booklet is very well drawn with clear views

I do appreciate well illustrated guides myself. Maybe its the draughtsman in me..?

 

[flyjoe180]

Contra rotating propellers were used on various carrier aircraft as they largely eliminate both the torque effect and other undesirable aerodynamic issues which arise fromthe differing slipstreams over the different sides of the aircraft (particularly the inner wing area) caused by a single propeller.

Contra-rotating propellers do indeed largely eliminate aerodynamic effects of high power application at lower speed, but the effects are not due solely to air flow over the fuselage or inner wing. The larger the blades, the greater the effects of aerodynamic forces on those blades for any given RPM. Asymmetric blade effect, gyroscopic effect, etc. (remember school physics, precession?). Contra-rotating propellers are largely about absorbing power, increasing the solidity of the propeller disc (Avro Shackleton comes to mind). If you don't absorb increased power output with more blades or contra-rotating blades, you have to increase the chord of the propeller blades (the Germans were of this mind it would seem, some of those late war German types look like they had very large-chord blades).


As you say Steve, no doubt the Sea Fury could have benefited from contra-rotating blades, it had a massive engine swinging a massive five-bladed propeller. Must have been a real eye opener for new pilots doing conversions


Like you statement about resin kits, I know nothing about the substances so it it good to read that many of the comments out there are not true.


Great looking kit, will watch with interest.

 

[stona]

Yes, it's a combination of several factors. I think Commander Mike Crosley DSC, RN can explain far better than me!


"Pilots found that the extra 1000hp of the Griffon VI, turning the other way to a Merlin, gave far more torque reaction. This was because of several factors, not just the increased engine power. First, the propeller was twisting the air stream far more than in the Merlin engined version, for it had to absorb nearly twice the power in a propeller of the same diametre and at the same rpm. Second, the 'three point' unstick incidence of the Seafire XV was greater and nearer the stall, owing to the longer stroke oleos. Third, the aircraft weighed a ton and a half more than the Seafire III, and therefore needed to unstick at a higher airspeed than the Seafire III. The static torque from the engine attempting to turn the aircraft in the opposite direction to the propeller was not the main reason for the trouble at take off, for the torque on its own could be easily corrected by upfloating the port aileron a couple of degrees. It was only equivalent to a 200lb weight on the port wing abreast the outer gun, and was not serious. The main cause of the 'right wing low' at take off, or 'torque stall' as it was wrongly called, was a partial stall of the entire starboard wing. With two tons of lift on the port wing and very little indeed on the starboard, it was small wonder that the aircraft carried out a full half turn of a spin to the right, on unstick, on occasion.


At the moment of unstick, if the aircraft was wrenched off at maximum incidence, both the wings would be very near stalling incidence. The slightest dissimilarity in their airflow would upset the balance of lift between the port wing and the starboard - too great to correct by aileron. In the case of the Seafire XV, the starboard wing root stalled first as it was subjected to greater slipstream incidence. This stall then spread outboard, until the wing started to lose lift. The starboard wing then started to drop and in doing so increased its incidence yet more, and fully stalled. Attempting to raise it with aileron would make matters worse.


In the case of 'minimum distance take off' on the flight deck when the pilot was pulling back on the stick to get off as soon as possible, the starboard wing might not establish a proper airflow, and therefore lift, at all.


Once the starboard wheels steadying effect was gone as the aircraft left the deck and flew over the ship's bow, it was inevitable that it spun to the right, into the sea, right in the path of the carrier. Further causes of this problem might have been a gyroscopic 'kick' to the right as the pilot pulled the nose up too sharply on unstick.......


It is interesting to note that the Blackburn Skua had a lift spoiler fixed to its leading edge on its down going propeller side, to equalise the stall characteristics between port and starboard wing when power was on."


Cheers


Steve

 

[flyjoe180]

Interesting reading Steve, cheers. Remarkably cunning solutions. I'm intrigued that modern turboprop aircraft don't use contra-rotating blades as they are limited in speed by propellers, and it also eliminates the critical engine scenario in multi-engined aeroplanes. Anyway, don't want to digress from your kit build