1/48 B-Wing Scratch Build

Julien, you mean the "blue" B-Wing? The orange dot one also has a split (on the trailing edge), or at least it is visible in Jason's pictures. I've gotten a few images of the blue one, I'll look for that damage.

Thanks for clarifying the B-36 point. I am finding myself truly torn on whether the B-Wing's wing was made of kit parts or not because of several things:
- One is the little radius on the trailing edge at the gun pod junction. It appears to be the curvature found on a donor kit's wingtip.
- If it is the wingtip, then my measurements still result in the location where the 'root cut' would fall on the B-36 wing to be of insufficient chord, regardless of the wing taper. So, Carlos would be correct in taking his portion from the center in order to allow it to be wide enough - but then what of that radius?
- The wing 'skin' looks thick enough to be from an injection molded kit (this is visible in the 'cutout'.) Granted, the ILM shop must have had good sized vacuforming machines to allow for forming thicker sheet plastic so that alone doesn't prove anything.
- Although the wing is relatively thick, it does have a fairly sharp leading edge while the trailing edge appears to be thin but somewhat blunted. Again, nothing definitive.

Too bad we cannot ask George about it! (Or... can we?) ;^P

Either way, guess it is time to make a creative judgement call and put something to "paper". Literally, on to the drawing board (or CAD in this case...)

Regards, Robert

rbeach84 said:

Julien, you mean the "blue" B-Wing? The orange dot one also has a split (on the trailing edge), or at least it is visible in Jason's pictures. I've gotten a few images of the blue one, I'll look for that damage.

Thanks for clarifying the B-36 point. I am finding myself truly torn on whether the B-Wing's wing was made of kit parts or not because of several things:
- One is the little radius on the trailing edge at the gun pod junction. It appears to be the curvature found on a donor kit's wingtip.
- If it is the wingtip, then my measurements still result in the location where the 'root cut' would fall on the B-36 wing to be of insufficient chord, regardless of the wing taper. So, Carlos would be correct in taking his portion from the center in order to allow it to be wide enough - but then what of that radius?
- The wing 'skin' looks thick enough to be from an injection molded kit (this is visible in the 'cutout'.) Granted, the ILM shop must have had good sized vacuforming machines to allow for forming thicker sheet plastic so that alone doesn't prove anything.
- Although the wing is relatively thick, it does have a fairly sharp leading edge while the trailing edge appears to be thin but somewhat blunted. Again, nothing definitive.

Too bad we cannot ask George about it! (Or... can we?) ;^P

Either way, guess it is time to make a creative judgement call and put something to "paper". Literally, on to the drawing board (or CAD in this case...)

Regards, Robert

Click to expand...

Yeah I mean the blue B wing, I need to check my pics but I dont think Ive ever seen the orange one in person, it was each time the blue one.

I think the radius at the pod jonction may just be an artifact of the vacforming process. They probably did not trim the rounded edges of the pull, maybe on purpose or maybe not !

I was not talking about the thickness but more about the way the parts splitted, an injected styrene part is more rigid than vacformed styrene or resin. And the kitparts tend to become brittle and crack over years instead of what can be seen on the blue (parts are a bit distorded), again I have no definitive answer to how the main wing was done, and like I say they May have used a kitpart and vacform over it to create the master... And this master could have been molded and pulled in resin !
Anyway I think only Bill George knows it and yes maybe someone could ask him ! He's a member of this board I believe.

Looking at the Orange model, the trailing edge (TE) split appears to be due to 'insufficient gluing surface', which came about when the edge was sanded to a more blunt profile:
You can see the split on 'Orange' and how the TE was blunted.

Notice how the leading edge profiles change along the length of the wing (also, good angle to see how the 'blanking plates' are oriented in the slots... one is tilted compared to the others.) Note the visible seam on the leading edge near the root.

Interesting how 'Blue' (below) has a different profile (more blunt) than on 'Orange', indicating they were constructed differently. It would be useful to have some images of the Blue primary wing from above its surface so the taper could be seen and compared to Orange. Very likely they have slightly different taper angles.


One other thing visible is that the leading edge becomes more blunt (rounded & less 'sharp') the further out from the center. This is again from the armature pipe.

R/ Robert

Little update: I have confirmed that the Tamiya 1/48 A-10A Thunderbolt II kit (MRC # 61023) is the source of the engine bells, spec. parts #9, 10 & 21 (engine cowlings upper and lower.) I compared the pattern of raised panel detail on the Orange B-Wing as shown in Jason's images and it is an exact match. It also appears that the engine cowling fronts (kit parts #10) from the same are used under the pattern of 'tire tread' that surrounds the Airfix Space Shuttle booster rocket nozzles (I have an example and tested it, near perfect fit though I expect the cowling front parts were reamed out slightly to allow the nozzles to 'seat' in a bit further.

Pictures are pending...

Thanks!

R/ Robert

Nice one ! Cant wait to see the pics.

Okay, pictures of the Tamiya engine cowling parts:

First, the engine bell comparison:
ILM model (extract from Jason's picture):

Note the slightly sunken seam where the pylon was cut off & the gap filled.

Kit part with same ID markers (red) & approximate joint lines (blue):

(Click to enlarge)

Test of Space Shuttle booster nozzle in the A-10's front intake (my candidate for the 'tread' nozzle...) shows that the Shuttle part tapers more than the ILM model. Problem for me is that the 1/144 shuttle booster stack I have is a junk parts bin item so I can't positively ID it as the Airfix shuttle. If my 'specimen' is from another kit, then the nozzle may be different - and a match- on the Airfix kit. The diameter is a good match, so I may use this arrangement on the 1/48 model just as a practical consideration.



Another possibility is that section from the booster rocket's body (with parallel sides) was used, especially if the interior of the intake ring was reamed out to fit. Also possible, instead of the kit part, it was vac'ed over and then that slightly larger piece was used.
I'll work this up on the drawing to see what looks feasible.

Regards, Robert

I think the inner engines are turned metal. the thickness of the shuttle part is too thin, and seriously great find on the A10 A engines, that a massive coupe. Though you have now led me to believe more shuttle parts may have been used such as the bay doors, I think these may have been the curved extension to the leading edge of the hornet wings, though Ive not tested for length yet

Guy Cowen said:

I think the inner engines are turned metal. the thickness of the shuttle part is too thin, and seriously great find on the A10 A engines, that a massive coupe. Though you have now led me to believe more shuttle parts may have been used such as the bay doors, I think these may have been the curved extension to the leading edge of the hornet wings, though Ive not tested for length yet

Click to expand...

Guy, certainly I couldn't make any headway without community help so I am tickled immensely to add even a tiny bit to the "effort".

I agree about the use of possible metal bits for other than the halogen lamp 'reflectors'. Seems reasonable given the heat those elements generate. It could be that the 'nozzle' portion is just a standard sized brass tube. You can see how the edge of that part was chamfered, leaving some tooling marks. There also appears to be a black layer between the 'nozzle' tube and the reflector, perhaps a rubber O-ring.

You've hit on a little mystery for me re: the Hornet wings, namely the curved section applied to the kit part's trailing edge. Although I don't have access to an Airfix Shuttle, the Lindberg 1/200 (well, again, ~1/204 scale) kit payload door is certainly long enough. However, checking a Revell 1/144 Shuttle kit I have, it measures at 33% larger than the smaller kit (should be 50% more.) So the 1/144 kit payload door is apparently too short to do the job - unless now we're talking about the Hornet wings being trimmed shorter than I'd supposed up to this point or the Revell kit is way off compared to the Airfix kit.


Don't know if this helps at all! It certainly is smacking me around, aye! ;^P

Regards, Robert

Thanks for the pics ! That would be great if you could post the A-10 kit scan in the scans thread of the SS section. There are probably more parts from this kit on other ROTJ models.

I dont the exhaust nozzle ring tapers, I think the slight taper we see is due to resin shrinkage.

MonsieurTox said:

Thanks for the pics ! That would be great if you could post the A-10 kit scan in the scans thread of the SS section. There are probably more parts from this kit on other ROTJ models.

I dont the exhaust nozzle ring tapers, I think the slight taper we see is due to resin shrinkage.

Click to expand...

To make things easier with this particular assembly, I propose some standardized names for the parts:


(This is for the purposes of this thread. In fact, I best start providing the same for all the areas under discussion for clarity's sake...)

So, Julian you are referring to the 'exhaust nozzle' parts? I had begun to think they are 'tubes' but no, they do have a slight taper... Given the visible tool marks, where the edge was thinned a bit, it may have been a cast part or simply a kit part that was separated from the reflector by an O-ring.

In any case, I have some options for the 1/48 scale rendition.

Regards, Robert

Rob, are you building the studio scale model or a smaller version? I think your should build the studio scale version as not sure what the 1/48scale would be size wise but your heading in such a researching direction why not go the hole hog?

Guy Cowen said:

Rob, are you building the studio scale model or a smaller version? I think your should build the studio scale version as not sure what the 1/48scale would be size wise but your heading in such a researching direction why not go the hole hog?

Click to expand...

Guy, I'm going with a 'scale-down' because the 1/32 scale of the original makes it so I don't have to scratchbuild *everything* for my go-to modeling scale, 1/48 (didn't you hear me cackling like a fool when I found out about the Hasbro Falcon?) Plus, I sure I don't have the patience to go 'whole hog', which requires much more time finding donors - once they're ID'ed! ;^P

This way, I can also exert some creative input of my own in rendering the model. I'm not going so far as doing a 'Rebels' morph, as my intent is to be as true to the original model as practical. Hopefully, keeping to a less restricted scope I can finish the model in a reasonable time frame (reasonable for me-ha!) At risk of repeating myself from other discussions, I like building models of real craft, which in the case of movie miniatures is of course nonsensical. So I have to choose between making a model of the 'real' object (aka, the model itself) or a model of what it was intended to represent. I usually go for the latter which can create it own set of problems when I think "shouldn't those controls make sense?" or "How would that function?" I like to think of it as the "NSEA Protector Paradigm"... in a way, it offers me a taste of what the effects team do, from a creative standpoint.

Well, of to make those A-10 kit scans! Cheers...

Regards, Robert

-----------update--------------
Posted A-10 scans under Studio Scale 'KIT SCANS' sticky... 9-Feb-2016
RR

Bump! Posted the A-10 scans as noted above (but didn't trigger an update in the queue...)
R/ Robert

This may be known already, but the 'fan' inside the aft crew nacelle opening appears to be the 1/32 Tamiya F-14 exhaust turbine part. Unfortunately, I haven't yet found a kit scan that shows the 'face' of that disk-shaped part to completely verify. But to explain my thoughts, there are some features on the disk to help ID it. These include:
- 'D' shaped depression or hole in the center to allow the afterburner flame holders parts to 'socket in' at the correct orientation. This is visible in pix of the 'blue' B-Wing model; the 'orange spot' model has a part glued over the hole.
- Three concentric rings around the 'fan blades'.
- Dense pattern of 'blades' that doesn't match the engine compressor (front disk) pattern. This would be an accurate depiction of the power (aka exhaust) turbine's narrower blades.
- Size is roughly the same as the quad engine's diameters. Being one is the exhaust from a 1/32 scale kit and the other the intake from a 1/48 scale kit, it makes perfect sense.

One thing I can do is size the disk's diameter and 'mock up' its fitment in the shuttle EFT nosecone.

Best image I've found so far is from a build over on Carrierbuilders.net by Masa Narita:

As you can see, pretty sorry example (although fine paintwork) to see the details, though the three rings are visible as is the bit of 'lip'. There is another view more directly on that gives a glimpse of the narrow blade pattern.

If anyone perhaps has a scan of this part & could share, it would be most appreciated. Of course, this is not necessary for my purposes except to support my search for a comparable part, or the scratching-up if needed. The ideal source would be a 1/48 Tomcat kit but I expect those will all have the flame holders molded with the disk.

Regards, Robert

Slowly getting my drawings done; here is a taste of what I'm messing with so far:




I am doing these in 2D CAD, so nothing fancy. I will share the drawings in their entirety once I'm finished but will post as I go as well.

Regards, Robert

So, here is today's progress; this is a 'screen print' so it most likely has a bit of distortion in the image. My plan is to finish up the drawings and then print and scan the result, then save as a PDF for ease of sharing. I am drawing to 1:1 scale so any dimensional data will show as full size.

So, point is: this is more of a progress report than usable drawings. That said, if you see anything that looks 'off', please advise me so I can correct it.
I do know the Saturn V section is oversized but that is because it requires trimming. I included it simply for reference.


Also, if any one has any idea how a landing gear might operate on this thing, I'd appreciate your thoughts.
Cheers!
Robert

Another update for the drawing: the 'engine box'.


Note that I have made a 'plan projection' of the box shell's cutout for the engine bells. This can be used as a pattern to accurately cut those relief cutouts. Also, there is a slight 'tilt' to the engine bells that I noticed when I tried to draw in the bells and found there wasn't enough clearance between the top & bottom rows. I didn't change the angled end of the engine bells to fit anything specific. I'd expect the ILM team had sanded off that angle so the bells could sit straight on the rear bulkhead or at least at the angle they needed for clearance. The depth the rear bulkhead is set back is unknown so I took a reasonable 'guess' based on the model pix.

I also noticed that the F-14 drop tanks were rotated such that the seam between the two tank halves is about 45 degrees from horizontal (or vertical for that matter...) This implies that the tank mounting is such that the 'cutout' is aligned with the surface of the engine box sides. Also, the spacing between the tanks precludes the armature pipe from passing between them, hence there shouldn't be a mounting point on the outside of the crew pod. Wait! I see a pipe opening in this picture. Perhaps the armature pipe was not a 3/4" (19mm) pipe after all... 5/8" perhaps? Or perhaps two different sizes?

Looking closer, it appears there are cutouts in the tanks visible where the armature would need to pass... so they just cut the part to fit around the pipe. Interesting...



I noticed a few things working on this. One, the 'orange' (O) & 'blue' (B) models differ on some intake details:
1. The upper and lower 'bay' blanking plates on the O are vertical while on the B they are angled. I used the angled B version in my drawing simply because I like the look of it better.
2. On the O intake, the upper and lower horizontal divider plates have a leading edge even with the outer shell edge (as on the drawing.) The B plates are set back slightly in the opening and with forward edges that appear to be slightly curved inward.

Both versions share a feature: the center 'side' bays appear to be open at the back as I've not been able to discern any blanking plate to them, unlike all the the other "bays". It has already been shared that the four center 'openings' define a covering plug that allows access to the mounting point on the armature. Most of the pictures of the models show that plug dislodged a bit, protruding instead of being flush with the center divider.

While working on the mounting for the auxiliary wings, I noticed that the whole 'wings' section, comprised of the main and auxiliary wings. was dislodged in the pix of the 'orange dot' model taken by Jason Eaton. It appears that the section had rotated slightly around the axis of the armature pipe running its length. Whether this is damage or just a loose assembly joint is unknown. It does make determining the placement of the aux wing's pivots problematic, however.

Regards, Robert

The landing gear are a bit of a mystery. While we see a landed ship in the movie, we can;t make out any details. You might look to that episode of Star Wars Rebels where they had the B-wing. They show it landing/taking off IIRC. Of course there are difference between it and the ROTJ one, but it could be something to get you started

Excellent idea! Given the quality of Rebels animation, it might be just the thing - plus, it would be somewhat "canon", what?

Regards, Robert

With fellow RPF'er Martin's help, I have updated my draft with a depiction of the Ferrari 312 kit part:



This should be quite accurate to the original donor part. Still, I need to add whatever the part is that is tacked onto the aft end of this piece, which looks like three boxes in a row...

Regards, Robert