Narses2's Blog - or what I'm slowly making progress on

[NARSES2]

I had to make a stencil for the pastry chef to spray the plates for the desert at an NHS anniversary function two years back.  Can't remember what the potatoes or meat on the main were but the veg was Creamed Savoy with roasted Broccolli.  One of the few times I'd ever agree with HW Bush...

That would have been the 70th Lee, I obviously miss-heard something in the hearing clinic yesterday.

[NARSES2]

Well the Mohawk is finished  I've struggled a bit with it for various reasons. Not the kit's fault, purely me. Just have to get used to the fact I have bad days  and slightly better days  . Can't build to the standard I was 2 years ago let alone 5 and I was never more than an average modeller. Still I do still enjoy the hobby which is the important thing 

[NARSES2]

I know they are both Real World but here are a couple of shots of the Mohawk and Ikarus

AZ Models Mohawk Mk IV of 155 Squadron R.A.F., flown by Sqr Ldr “Porky” Jefferies, Bengal, India, 1943. By this stage of the War he’d achieved 6 Italian, 4 German and 1 Japanese victory.






Azur/Fromm Ikarus IK – 2 of the 4th Fighter Regiment, Royal Yugoslav A.F. (VVKJ), Zagreb, Late 1940.

[zenrat]

Good jobs Chris.
I like the look of the Ikarus.  I've not seen one of them before.

[kitbasher]

Very pretty, Chris.
👍

[PR19_Kit]

Love the P-36, I've always liked them, more so than the later P-40s. 

And the Ikarus is decidedly weird! 

[DogfighterZen]

Yup, both look very good, mate.
I'd never seen that Icarus before. Like Kit said, it is weird indeed.

[Old Wombat]

The Ikarus looks like they tried to turn a pylon racer into a fighter, fast & manoeuvrable but not so good on the field of view side of things.

The P-36, strangely, got me thinking about a navalised version, a P-36N (or whatever the USN would have numbered it as) with folding wings, stronger landing gear & a hook.

Like the best piston-engined naval aircraft it's a radial &, like the later P-40, it's solidly constructed, so it could cope with the stresses of carrier operations.

[scooter]

The P-36, strangely, got me thinking about a navalised version, a P-36N (or whatever the USN would have numbered it as) with folding wings, stronger landing gear & a hook.

Like the best piston-engined naval aircraft it's a radial &, like the later P-40, it's solidly constructed, so it could cope with the stresses of carrier operations.

Perhaps F13C?  Instead of the real one?

[Old Wombat]

The P-36, strangely, got me thinking about a navalised version, a P-36N (or whatever the USN would have numbered it as) with folding wings, stronger landing gear & a hook.

Like the best piston-engined naval aircraft it's a radial &, like the later P-40, it's solidly constructed, so it could cope with the stresses of carrier operations.

Perhaps F13C?  Instead of the real one?

Timeline is close enough to work!

But, call me superstitious, I'm not keen on the "13" bit, so how about the F14C instead of that real one, only a little earlier?



PS: Sorry for the divergent thread drift, Chris! I'll shut up now.

[PR19_Kit]

The F13C must have been of VERY few aircraft that came in both mono-plane and bi-plane versions! 

[NARSES2]

Thanks lads.

Strangely I don't regard the Ikarus as "weird" simply typically art deco and of the period (perhaps that makes me a tad weird ?  ). The 30's was a period of considerable experimentation when it came to aircraft design and parasol monoplanes (I know the IK-2 is not a true parasol) were certainly the fashion for a time. And besides that I do like the 30's  You can certainly see where the IK-3 came from when looking at it, that's for sure.

The P-36, strangely, got me thinking about a navalised version, a P-36N (or whatever the USN would have numbered it as) with folding wings, stronger landing gear & a hook.

Like the best piston-engined naval aircraft it's a radial &, like the later P-40, it's solidly constructed, so it could cope with the stresses of carrier operations.

Don't worry about the thread drift mate that's a marvellous idea and given the number of P-36/H-75's I have in the stash may well get done  I even have a couple of the fixed undercarriage version, which might suit navalisation ?

[NARSES2]

I don't know if anyone else watches the Young Montalbano Italian crime series, but in the inspectors office he has what looks like a wooden model of a twin engined piston aircraft on one of his filing cabinets and I've been desperately trying to get a long enough look at it to see what it is. No luck however, anyone any idea ?

[Old Wombat]

I even have a couple of the fixed undercarriage version, which might suit navalisation ?

Not really, as aircraft got heavier the incidence of spinal injuries, such as cervical vertebrae fractures, increased due to the impact of the aircraft on the decks of carriers, which was (mostly) rectified by the introduction of proper shock-absorbing oleo struts.

Yes, I know many later fixed gears had oleo struts but retracting landing gear also made ditching in the drink safer because, with the undercarriage retracted, it didn't flip the plane onto its nose or back the moment they hit the water.

[NARSES2]

I even have a couple of the fixed undercarriage version, which might suit navalisation ?

Not really, as aircraft got heavier the incidence of spinal injuries, such as cervical vertebrae fractures, increased due to the impact of the aircraft on the decks of carriers, which was (mostly) rectified by the introduction of proper shock-absorbing oleo struts.

Yes, I know many later fixed gears had oleo struts but retracting landing gear also made ditching in the drink safer because, with the undercarriage retracted, it didn't flip the plane onto its nose or back the moment they hit the water.

Cheers mate 

I had absolutely no idea about the spinal injuries issue, which just goes to show you can learn something new every day as long as you keep an open mind