Northrop's P-61 Black Widow by Revell: WIP

[David G.]

18 hours ago, HJK said:

Hi David, I've got another idea regarding the balance problems of your plane. Although I don't know whether it's possible or not but this is my thought.

You mentioned that you intend to use the plane in a diorama which means you will know where the front will be placed in the end. So you might be able to place a small metal plate in the ground below the wheel.

If  you're able to add a little magnet inside the front wheel it might be able to support the balance. Well, it's just an idea, you have to check whether this thought is rubbish ?.

Keep up your great work. Take care, Juergen

Thank you Juergen. I had considered using magnetism but I ended up putting lead shot into the front wheel instead. It brought the weight of the wheel up to one whole gram!  

 

17 hours ago, magicmustang said:

Instead of a clear plastic rod, why not add a lowered rear boarding ladder?  You could have the lower rear entrance hatch open, and the ladder extended to the tarmac (for a support brace).

 

This is something I'm also considering. Thanks for the tip Gerald, I'll certainly explore this option as I get closer to finishing the build.

 

16 hours ago, James2 said:

^^^^I like this^^^^

Me too.

Thanks again for all the tips and pointers and thanks for taking the time to share them with me.

David G.

[peteski]

On 10/13/2024 at 7:33 AM, David G. said:

Taking the 2 ounces of lead shot needed to balance the plane and adding as much of it as I can to the nose cone, there is some left that won't fit. Even with this, the plane barely balances. Also, the nose is unsettlingly heavy. The plane will be part of a diorama so I don't plan on handling it much. but I have concerns over what effect that much weight may have on the front gear over the long term.

It is a common misconception that the spindly nose gear supports the weight of the nose. In reality, the main gear is supporting all of the weight!  Think about it.  The plane is a tail-sitter. Without any added weight, the main gear and the tail sitting on the ground are supporting all the weight.  The nose gear is up in the air, not supporting any weight.

Now you keep adding weight to the nose (or any part of the plane forward of the main gear). The entire plane is getting heavier and heavier, and all that weight is still supported by the main gear.  You keep adding weight to the point that the nose gear barely touches the ground.  Again, all the weight of the plane is supported by the main gear.  The nose gear is just sitting there looking pretty, barely touching the ground.  Think: teeter-totter with the main gear being the pivot point. So you add a gram or two more so the nose gear doesn't accidentally come off the ground just by some nearby air movement.  Now the plane sits solidly on the ground and the nose gear only supports couple of grams.  The main gear is still supporting 99% of the entire model's weight.  You can easily confirm that by placing your finger under the nose and gently lifting it off the ground. That shows you just how little the nose gear supports.  I hope that you can visualize what I'm describing.

[David G.]

7 hours ago, peteski said:

It is a common misconception that the spindly nose gear supports the weight of the nose. In reality, the main gear is supporting all of the weight!  Think about it.  The plane is a tail-sitter. Without any added weight, the main gear and the tail sitting on the ground are supporting all the weight.  The nose gear is up in the air, not supporting any weight.

Now you keep adding weight to the nose (or any part of the plane forward of the main gear). The entire plane is getting heavier and heavier, and all that weight is still supported by the main gear.  You keep adding weight to the point that the nose gear barely touches the ground.  Again, all the weight of the plane is supported by the main gear.  The nose gear is just sitting there looking pretty, barely touching the ground.  Think: teeter-totter with the main gear being the pivot point. So you add a gram or two more so the nose gear doesn't accidentally come off the ground just by some nearby air movement.  Now the plane sits solidly on the ground and the nose gear only supports couple of grams.  The main gear is still supporting 99% of the entire model's weight.  You can easily confirm that by placing your finger under the nose and gently lifting it off the ground. That shows you just how little the nose gear supports.  I hope that you can visualize what I'm describing.

Hmmm, you maybe correct Peter. I'm not sure I agree with you on all the weight being evenly distributed among the three wheels though.

I know that most road vehicles have an unequal weight distribution between the front and rear axles. Old American front-engine cars carry about 2/3 of their weight on the front axles. For my old VW Bug, the weight distribution was the opposite. I've also driven trucks across scales and when their carrying cargo, most of that weight is over the rear axles under the cargo box. That's why there are more wheels and tires back there.

Unequal weight distribution between the front and rear of vehicles is also the main factor behind tongue weight when towing a trailer. A tremendously important factor to consider when setting up a rig.

Even the human body has an unequal weight distribution between the left and right legs. It's not much but it's there.

 But now I'm curious. I do have a kitchen scale that I think I can use to set up a semi-scientific test. I'll ty to find some time to do that today and I'll record and report the test and results. 

Cool!  

Thanks for the suggestion Peter.

[James2]

23 hours ago, David G. said:

Thank you Juergen. I had considered using magnetism but I ended up putting lead shot into the front wheel instead. It brought the weight of the wheel up to one whole gram!  

 

This is something I'm also considering. Thanks for the tip Gerald, I'll certainly explore this option as I get closer to finishing the build.

 

Me too.

Thanks again for all the tips and pointers and thanks for taking the time to share them with me.

David G.

Hopefully we won't all get bogged down by over thinking things. (Oh look a squirrel...... LoL)

[David G.]

32 minutes ago, James2 said:

Hopefully we won't all get bogged down by over thinking things. (Oh look a squirrel...... LoL)

Yes. The danger is real!  

-D-

[peteski]

8 hours ago, David G. said:

Hmmm, you maybe correct Peter. I'm not sure I agree with you on all the weight being evenly distributed among the three wheels though.

Maybe you misunderstood me. I never stated that the weight is evenly distributed on all the wheels in this specific instance of a tricycle gear. The main gear wheels support most of the weight of your model.  I am also not discussing the actual 1:1 aircraft - just your tail-heavy model.  In your model the nose wheel is now supporting very little weight.  You added weight at the front of the model to counteract the heaviness of the tail section (well everything behind the main gear).  You only added enough weight to bring the nose down, with the nose gear supporting very little of the total weight of the model. Many modelers seem to find this hard to visualize.

None of this is related to weight distribution in cars.  In the 1:1 aircraft the air frame is relatively light, and most of the weight is in those 2 large hunks of metal: engines.  The are located ahead of the main gear which was placed in a location where it will bear the brunt of the total weight, with the nose gear supporting much less weight.  Cars don't have wheels in the middle of the chassis like this aircraft.

Edited October 17 by peteski

[David G.]

1 hour ago, peteski said:

Maybe you misunderstood me. I never stated that the weight is evenly distributed on all the wheels in this specific instance of a tricycle gear. The main gear wheels support most of the weight of your model.  I am also not discussing the actual 1:1 aircraft - just your tail-heavy model.  In your model the nose wheel is now supporting very little weight.  You added weight at the front of the model to counteract the heaviness of the tail section (well everything behind the main gear).  You only added enough weight to bring the nose down, with the nose gear supporting very little of the total weight of the model. Many modelers seem to find this hard to visualize.

None of this is related to weight distribution in cars.  In the 1:1 aircraft the air frame is relatively light, and most of the weight is in those 2 large hunks of metal: engines.  The are located ahead of the main gear which was placed in a location where it will bear the brunt of the total weight, with the nose gear supporting much less weight.  Cars don't have wheels in the middle of the chassis like this aircraft.

Good enough for me. No sense in doing the experiment then.

-D-

[James2]

On 10/15/2024 at 2:36 PM, magicmustang said:

Instead of a clear plastic rod, why not add a lowered rear boarding ladder?  You could have the lower rear entrance hatch open, and the ladder extended to the tarmac (for a support brace).

 

^^^^THIS^^^^

No discussion needed.....

[peteski]

23 hours ago, David G. said:

Good enough for me. No sense in doing the experiment then.

-D-

Okay.   If you want, a very simple and quick test would be to set your model on a flat surface and using your finger try to lift the model by the nose.  Then with your hand lift the model by the wingtips and compare the weight you feel to how much pressure it took to lift the nose.

Edited October 18 by peteski

[David G.]

Hello Everybody!

Being able to display the radar unit is one of the reasons I decided not to use weight to balance the plane. Until that decision was made, I didn't pay a whole lot of attention to the fit of the radar or its radome. Obviously, now I need to tidy up the fit and function. The nose cone didn't fit properly over the radar unit as I had it installed so I started by removing the radar, which was fairly easy as I glued it in using PVA. I then set about cleaning up the mounting location. Remember the lead shot I glued into the area behind the radar? ?  ...yeah. 

That being done, the cover still wouldn't fit properly so I attacked it with my little grinder and began removing material from the inside.

 

Finally! After enough of the inside was ground away the fit was clean and tidy. As it should be. Yes, it took me an entire build session to accomplish this. Well, I did get the top turret finished and fitted too but that only took a couple of minutes at the end of the session.  

As always, thanks for taking the time to look and please feel free to comment if you wish.

David G.

[rv1963]

Good work David, you did a lot of work on a very old kit should look great when it's finished.

[Straightliner59]

Very cool, David! I have built  few planes, over the years, along with a couple of pieces of armor, a few small figures, and weathering and detail painting on a couple of N-scale rail cars. I think that variety helps us become better modelers. Great job solving a problem, my friend!

[David G.]

17 hours ago, rv1963 said:

Good work David, you did a lot of work on a very old kit should look great when it's finished.

Thank you Robert. I always try to do my best with each kit I build.

2 hours ago, Straightliner59 said:

Very cool, David! I have built  few planes, over the years, along with a couple of pieces of armor, a few small figures, and weathering and detail painting on a couple of N-scale rail cars. I think that variety helps us become better modelers. Great job solving a problem, my friend!

Thanks Daniel. I too have built a variety of different model types over the years. I even had an N-Scale model railroad for a while. When people ask what I do with my time since I retired, I tell them I build models. And they almost always ask, "Oh, what kind of models do you build?" My answer is, "Model cars, mostly." so I chose that as the name for my Facebook page: "Model Cars, Mostly". I've placed a link in my signature line. 

To me, it's important to step outside of my comfort zone. It's the place where growth happens. 

Thanks again,

David G.

[David G.]

Hello Everybody!

"Slow and steady" as the saying goes. The work on the Northrop P-61 continues.

Cleaning up the underbelly. I tried to express and brush on some primer. It didn't go as well as I would have liked, so... "Silly Putty to the Rescue!"

 

 

That should be good enough. For the least visible location on the model, it's good enough.

 

That's all for now.

As always, please feel free to post any comments you may have.

David G.

[Straightliner59]

16 hours ago, David G. said:

Thank you Robert. I always try to do my best with each kit I build.

Thanks Daniel. I too have built a variety of different model types over the years. I even had an N-Scale model railroad for a while. When people ask what I do with my time since I retired, I tell them I build models. And they almost always ask, "Oh, what kind of models do you build?" My answer is, "Model cars, mostly." so I chose that as the name for my Facebook page: "Model Cars, Mostly". I've placed a link in my signature line. 

To me, it's important to step outside of my comfort zone. It's the place where growth happens. 

Thanks again,

David G.

I always wanted to build an N-scale railroad. So glad I never started! This hobby costs me enough. Plus, I would probably end up detailing the insides of buildings--you know, dishes in an open cabinet, a dresser with an open drawer with folded clothes. It would just be stupid! ?

I have a few aircraft kits, now. Monogram's 1/48 Warthog, because I love A-10s, Revell's 1/32 Hawker Typhoon,  and about 10, or so 1/144 scale kits. That's my favorite scale, for planes.

There's been more than one occasion in which something I learned building other genres of models has come in handy, when building my cars! The more you know...

[David G.]

5 hours ago, Straightliner59 said:

I always wanted to build an N-scale railroad. So glad I never started! This hobby costs me enough. Plus, I would probably end up detailing the insides of buildings--you know, dishes in an open cabinet, a dresser with an open drawer with folded clothes. It would just be stupid! ?

I have a few aircraft kits, now. Monogram's 1/48 Warthog, because I love A-10s, Revell's 1/32 Hawker Typhoon,  and about 10, or so 1/144 scale kits. That's my favorite scale, for planes.

There's been more than one occasion in which something I learned building other genres of models has come in handy, when building my cars! The more you know...

I actually did start an N-scale model railroad back in the early-mid 2000's and managed to get it to a respectable level of completion. Here are some old photos I dredged up.

Opening day. These are wonderful kits and work as advertised.

 

Some of the landscaping.

 

Here's the final day when I was dismantling the entire set.  

 

As you can see I was able to get the scenery about half completed but it was always operational. 

Thanks for your comment Daniel. It's nice having a reason to remember and share things like this. I ought to go through these old photos and put together an album for my Facebook page.

Thanks again,

-D-

[Straightliner59]

That's way cool! All I got done was buying a few things--building kits, landscaping stuff,  a few of Kalmbach's old books. I never got past the planning stage.  It is always neat, to find old photos of stuff like that!

[David G.]

21 hours ago, Straightliner59 said:

That's way cool! All I got done was buying a few things--building kits, landscaping stuff,  a few of Kalmbach's old books. I never got past the planning stage.  It is always neat, to find old photos of stuff like that!

Thanks. Sometimes I miss having a model railroad but I don't miss the space that they require. That's the reason I got back into building model cars. They take up less space. I can complete one in a reasonable length of time and I can put them away when I'm not working on them.

-D-

[peteski]

11 hours ago, David G. said:

Thanks. Sometimes I miss having a model railroad but I don't miss the space that they require. That's the reason I got back into building model cars. They take up less space. I can complete one in a reasonable length of time and I can put them away when I'm not working on th

There are alternatives.  I'm also into N-scale model railroading. You might have a local NTRAK or T-Trak modular clubs in your area you could join.  Then you build a module (2' X 4' for NTRAK or much smaller module for T-Trak) or more than one, and participate in their larger layouts. That way you just own a small piece of a layout to build and maintain.  My NTRAK club assembles our layout during model train shows for a day or two of fun.  We run trains and interact with the show's spectators.

I also have few friends who have full size N scale home layouts.  We operate them regularly and I participate in their construction and maintenance. That accounts for many fun hobby hours.  Actually, I have too many hobbies!

[Ace-Garageguy]

P-61 is coming along nicely. Keep her goin'.  

I have a fair few aircraft and armor models to get to...someday.

Not too far back I got back into HO-scale model trains, and started buying all the stuff I missed between being about 16 and now.

It got to the point where I realized I was going to need the entire house if I ever used it all, so I had to put on the brakes.

And then...oh look...a giant squirrel !!!    

 

[mustang1989]

On 10/21/2024 at 12:39 AM, Straightliner59 said:

I always wanted to build an N-scale railroad. So glad I never started! This hobby costs me enough. Plus, I would probably end up detailing the insides of buildings--you know, dishes in an open cabinet, a dresser with an open drawer with folded clothes. It would just be stupid! ?

I have a few aircraft kits, now. Monogram's 1/48 Warthog, because I love A-10s, Revell's 1/32 Hawker Typhoon,  and about 10, or so 1/144 scale kits. That's my favorite scale, for planes.

There's been more than one occasion in which something I learned building other genres of models has come in handy, when building my cars! The more you know...

  My thoughts exactly for why I haven't delved into railroad modeling or armor modeling for that matter. Something else that you mentioned caught my eye and that is if you're going to build an A-10 that the newly released Academy version is EONS ahead of the Monogram offering. I've heard (and seen) so many good things about the assembly being much easier and there is more detail OOB. It's worth a look if you want to check it out. Academy 1/48 A-10C Thunderbolt II Kit First Look

[mustang1989]

On 10/21/2024 at 6:32 AM, David G. said:

I actually did start an N-scale model railroad back in the early-mid 2000's and managed to get it to a respectable level of completion. Here are some old photos I dredged up.

Opening day. These are wonderful kits and work as advertised.

As you can see I was able to get the scenery about half completed but it was always operational. 

Thanks for your comment Daniel. It's nice having a reason to remember and share things like this. I ought to go through these old photos and put together an album for my Facebook page.

Thanks again,

-D-

 I just love stuff like this and find myself in the same boat as Daniel. It would be sensory overload for me and I'd end up wanting to superdetail like.......everything. lol 

From what I could see it looked like you did a great job with that layout. 

Looking forward to seeing how you tackle the whole balance issue on this Widow Dave. 

[Straightliner59]

42 minutes ago, mustang1989 said:

  My thoughts exactly for why I haven't delved into railroad modeling or armor modeling for that matter. Something else that you mentioned caught my eye and that is if you're going to build an A-10 that the newly released Academy version is EONS ahead of the Monogram offering. I've heard (and seen) so many good things about the assembly being much easier and there is more detail OOB. It's worth a look if you want to check it out. Academy 1/48 A-10C Thunderbolt II Kit First Look

Thanks, Joe. I'll take a look at one. I have the Monogram kit because I saw it in a little collectible toy shop in downtown Anoka, MN, for $10. Back in the '80s, it was "all that"! ?

[mustang1989]

3 minutes ago, Straightliner59 said:

Thanks, Joe. I'll take a look at one. I have the Monogram kit because I saw it in a little collectible toy shop in downtown Anoka, MN, for $10. Back in the '80s, it was "all that"! ?

LOL!! I hear ya on that. Heck I built one as a kid because they were pretty cool kits for us beginners back in the day. Back then I could give a rip less about seams and misaligned parts. lol 

[David G.]

13 hours ago, peteski said:

There are alternatives.  I'm also into N-scale model railroading. You might have a local NTRAK or T-Trak modular clubs in your area you could join.  Then you build a module (2' X 4' for NTRAK or much smaller module for T-Trak) or more than one, and participate in their larger layouts. That way you just own a small piece of a layout to build and maintain.  My NTRAK club assembles our layout during model train shows for a day or two of fun.  We run trains and interact with the show's spectators.

I also have few friends who have full size N scale home layouts.  We operate them regularly and I participate in their construction and maintenance. That accounts for many fun hobby hours.  Actually, I have too many hobbies!

Thanks Peter. I did look into NTRAK but it just didn't seem that it would satisfy my model railroading desire. I found meeting the technical specifications of track alignment at the meeting points a little intimidating. That and the track plans for NTRACK layouts are by their nature a little restricted. It's almost always going to be a point-to-point, pass-through or a switching yard. I enjoy watching the trains run around the layout. Over and over. Round and round. Again and again. That's a little more difficult to do with just one NTRAK module.

I was also facing the "too many hobbies" dilemma and model railroading was the one I chose to drop for many of the reasons I cited earlier.

 

13 hours ago, Ace-Garageguy said:

P-61 is coming along nicely. Keep her goin'.  

I have a fair few aircraft and armor models to get to...someday.

Not too far back I got back into HO-scale model trains, and started buying all the stuff I missed between being about 16 and now.

It got to the point where I realized I was going to need the entire house if I ever used it all, so I had to put on the brakes.

And then...oh look...a giant squirrel !!!    

 

Thank you Bill, I do aim to finish this one.

This is my one step outside of my comfort zone for the year. After this, it's back to cars until I get the urge do build something different again. When that urge comes around again, I do have some Star Wars kits in the ol' stash.  But armor, hmmm... ?

 

1 hour ago, mustang1989 said:

 I just love stuff like this and find myself in the same boat as Daniel. It would be sensory overload for me and I'd end up wanting to superdetail like.......everything. lol 

From what I could see it looked like you did a great job with that layout. 

Looking forward to seeing how you tackle the whole balance issue on this Widow Dave. 

Thanks for your comment Joe. To keep the plane level I think I'm just going to use the peg. Though I do plan on looking into extending the aft crew ladder and using that instead.

Thank you all for your interest and your comments.

David G.