Hawker Typhoon Mk IB - Maly Modelarz

Discussion in 'Aircraft & Aviation' started by Tad, Dec 22, 2005.

  1. Tad

    Tad Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    303
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi,
    I'm a little confused about this forum right now - don't know where are my previous threads and photos, where should I post what I want - I miss the old Cardmodels as it was clear, rich with modellars stuff and easy to use. Even don't know if this corner is right for showing my works. But will try -

    let me introduce to you my newly built plane - Hawker Typhoon from the old kit of Maly Modelarz. When I started this project I didn't know about new Typhoon from Gomix kit - which is actually strongly rebuilded project from MM with a lot of nice adds (please see my description of this kit here).
    Kit from MM is still very good, hovever it paper is very bad. I did a lot of changes and adds - made a whatering which is controversional to some. Canopy is from Gomix; I varnished the plane twice - with some matt varnish and then with acrylic varnish - it was due to my watching pictures of a real plane. Much more photos you can find on my site - I invite you to visiting it (sorry for my bad english).
    And some photos.

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    Regards,
    TAD
  2. dwgannon

    dwgannon Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2004
    Messages:
    377
    Likes Received:
    0
    Tad,

    Nice job. This looks fantastic. :grin:
  3. Tad

    Tad Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    303
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thank you Dwgannon - nice to hear you again.
    And some more photos:

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    TAD
  4. Tad

    Tad Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    303
    Likes Received:
    0
    And last three:

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    Regards,
    TAD
  5. Willja67

    Willja67 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2005
    Messages:
    907
    Likes Received:
    0
    I really like your spinner. Great looking model!
  6. eatcrow2

    eatcrow2 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2004
    Messages:
    374
    Likes Received:
    0
    Outstanding!!!!!
  7. wunwinglow

    wunwinglow Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2004
    Messages:
    1,093
    Likes Received:
    1
    Excellent woork.

    Being a Brit, can I be just a tiny tiny bit picky picky? The aircraft is top notch, but those rockets don't look ANYTHING like any rocket a Typhoon carried! I can scan some original drawings of a proper 60lb RP for you if you want to replace them.

    http://m2reviews.cnsi.net/reviews/allies/gb/cleaverbtyp.htm

    'll dig out the drawings tonight.

    Tim P
  8. Tad

    Tad Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    303
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi,
    before establishing such strong opinions (with all those: antyhing, never, noone) it's good to rethink if our knowledge is really complete. Wunwinglow - thank you for your example - in my report from building this plane and also on my private site you can find much more of interesting photos of Typhoon (in private I can send hundreds photos of this plane). I understand that you are acccustomed to see photos of Typhoon with 60 pounds rockets - as they are common. But Typhoon also carried rockets with armour piercing heads (in my model), with double rail launches (rather hard to use with big 60 pounds rockets), with bazooka launchers and even with napalm bombs (used in Europe!). Using in that way our incomplete knowlege - estimating e.g. due to plane in Hendon in GBR - we could say that Typhoon has no weapons at all apart from cannons.

    Here is a part of scheme from "Warpaint Series no. 5 Hawker Typhoon" with only some examples of weapons carried by this plane:
    [​IMG]
    - you can find on it armour piercing rockets looking like thoose in my model.

    Sorry for not understanding rest of your message ("Being a Brit, can I be just a tiny tiny bit picky picky?") - it's due to my poor english.
    Best regards,
    TAD
  9. dwgannon

    dwgannon Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2004
    Messages:
    377
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes you can be a bit pickey. But you can not fault the builder for the what the desiner did. This is still an out standing build. :rolleyes:Good Job.
  10. tausugAir

    tausugAir Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2004
    Messages:
    123
    Likes Received:
    0
    Tad, whatever, I agree it's STILL an outstanding build! and, very much comparable in quality to the reviewed Hasegawa kit....My salute!!!

    Muhammad
  11. hpept

    hpept Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2005
    Messages:
    357
    Likes Received:
    0
    tad, i really like the way you built the propeller cone and the rocket heads... just clean and perfect.
  12. andrew ferguson

    andrew ferguson Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2005
    Messages:
    119
    Likes Received:
    0
    That looks amazing. I've been avoiding MM kits but after seeing that Tiffie i may have to re-think my opinion of MM.

    And yes, those rockets are perfectly fine. Both the 60 pound bulbous warheads and the armour piercing warheads were carried..
  13. wunwinglow

    wunwinglow Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2004
    Messages:
    1,093
    Likes Received:
    1
    Oh come on guys! Read my post again!!

    And yes, there was an armour piercing type, in fact there were two, the original 25lb solid nose, and a later 28lb version with a double curved section. The armour piercing rocket was originally designed for use against tanks, and the explosive one for other targets, including shipping and submarines. During tests, it was discovered that the solid nosed rockets had interesting hydrodynamic properties so that if the rocket struck the water short of the target, it would follow a curving path back towards the surface. This meant the target was still struck, often below the waterline, and the damage caused, combined with the remaining contents of the rocket motor, were quiet sufficient to mortally damage a U-Boat. The revised 28lb solid warhead was designed to improve on this underwater behavior.

    Meanwhile, the armour piercing rockets proved singularly USELESS against tanks, as they needed to hit the target exactly to do any damage, and a tank is a far smaller target than a ship or a submarine! However, the explosive effects of the 60lb warhead were more than enough to disable a tank even if it was a close miss rather than a direct hit.

    Thus, these rockets ended up being used for exactly the OPPOSITE task than that for which they were designed.

    That is exactly why you will often see the solid armour piercing rockets on Swordfish or Beaufighter aircraft, and by far the most often used type on Typhoons was the explosive version. No doubt there were some trials done, but operationally, Typhoons used the explosive ones. I'll dig out the figures, I do have them somewhere!

    OK, I was wrong to say always, and I hope I was fulsome in my praise of the model itself, AND I did ask for the indulgance for being picky.

    Apologies if I offended, that was certainly not what I intended.

    But the fact remains, Typhoons almost always used the explosive rockets. There was a concrete training rocket as well, which had a cylindrical replacement warhead, but that is a different story!

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:3_in_RP_60_pdr_Loading_On_Typhoon.jpg

    Tim P

    PS Somewhere I have a picture of an F106 Delta Dart with Multiple Ejector Racks under the wings, and a bunch of 500lb slicks loaded!
  14. mininote

    mininote Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2005
    Messages:
    34
    Likes Received:
    0
    black outline?

    This thread with excellent pics of finished typhoon model is an opportunity to tell two things.
    Firstly, I admire the guys who builded those models. Awesome result!
    Secondly, something disturbs me about MM and some other commercial papermodels previously displayed on the forum: the black outline around camouflage patches, lettering, national insignia... doesn't exists on the real thing.
    This is definitively unrealistic.

    Ouuuugh, please, please, forgive me.... I won't say it again!
  15. Tad

    Tad Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    303
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi,
    thank you all for compliments. Question with rockets is now clear.
    About MMs - they are not so bad as someone can think. Especially those new kits are really good, quite cheap and worthy to use for building nice models.

    Mininote - well, nobody says that those kits are perfect. Especially with whatering of my vision the plane isn't realistic. But on the other hand - this is just a model - some idea of person who build it, and without some adds it woud be poor, uninteresting, much worse comparing to those made of plastic. That's better or worse trial to improve model (not a real plane...).

    Nice disccusion - I like this. Quite cool, with solid arguments (Wunwinglow) - it's pleasure to me.
    Regards,
    TAD
  16. fluthecrank

    fluthecrank Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2005
    Messages:
    504
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hello tad

    nice zo meet you again in this forum, still an impressive job .......congratulations....

    FLU