Landships II

Further to my last, I've looked at Helen's drawings and, if the MB grenade roof is positioned so as to match the position Helen has suggested (on the kit, there are 2 rivets shown on the left and one on the right that match Helen's suggested forward mounting points) then it does sit forward of the periscopes and the 2nd V support aligns in about the right place for the front of the sponsons. The 4th V is then, perhaps, a little too far forward?
Positioned thus, the extension needs to be about 3mm longer, not to worry I shall have an excuse to try out my mini guillotine cutter which should allow a bit more accuracy (and squarer cuts). You should be able to see the differences in the attached photos.

In addition I have been looking around to see if I could fins a finer hexagonal 'chicken wire' to use. It seems that what I have already is as small as is available although a slightly finer 'diamond pattern' is available.

MK1 Nut wrote:

---

I'm going with there being U Bolts to hold the straps to the frames as photos suggest, but I'm still trying to work out the reinforcing strips at the same point on the beams. Possibly there to strengthen the beams AND maybe stop the U bolts sliding down, to hold them in place? 

 

---

 Helen, had a look at a couple of small, but adequately clear photos in a book today; neither was a close-up, but both showed clearly enough that the "reinforcing strips" are wedges, obviously intended to fill up the gap in the u-bolts and squeeze the roof frame tightly against the mountings. So I would make them taper down to a point at one end - the outer end.

Putting the 'Male' tank together reminded me that the distorted moulds do cause a very minor issue in construction. There are ribs top and bottom of the sides which position the body correctly, when the body is offered up to either the top or the bottom rib the other sits under the body. However, the body can be sprung into position but it is important the hold the centre of the bottom panel against the lower rib otherwise you will end up with a slight bend in the floor. Remember this when fitting the other side!! Oh, if adding the front lower pistol port remember to add a bit of plastic card on the inside before sticking on the second side.

I decided to have a go at making the sighting slots in the male gun shields.  The two shields were mounted in a cross slide vice and the smallest dental burr I could find mounted in a collet.  The dental burr is spherical and .5mm in diameter (equating to about 1.5") so I planned to use just the tip of it to mark a reference line on the surface of the plastic to guide the .4mm drill I used for drilling out the slot (.4mm is a bit of a compromise, I could have gone smaller but the drill chuck is at its limits).  Such a small drill will follow the path of least resistance and the curved surface of the shield would have easily deflected it!

Photo 1 shows the original lines marked (only to remind me which is the top and the approx. position of the sighting slot) and the burr mounted in the collet.  The burr made a 3mm long indent which I decided was near enough given that the slot cannot go as far up as the real thing due to the thickness of plastic - see second photo.  The .4mm drill was then used to create a series of holes at .6mm centres and the slot opened up with the tip of a scalpel blade.  The final photo shows the end result.

I will now go and try the same procedure on the axle of the steering tail.  This time the burr will be followed by a .8mm drill - I tried using just the .8mm drill but it is too flexible to produce centre line and correct spacing (standby for photo in next post) whereas the dental burr is solid, if it can hack tooth enamel then  styrene will be a breeze.  Bit of a break now while I pop up to the Post Office to collect my guillotine for styrene.

I forgot! There's another option: making the cylinders of the shields out of styrene sheet, with the openings dirlled and cut before rolling them in a curve. Perhaps it's easier!
D.

The milling machine would be a great help. Making it by hand makes for a muh less accurate process.
About the gaps on the sponson openings, a recent article on the Airfix magazine offers an option for their kit, but I'm not too convinced it's appropiate (see attached). There's also gaps above and below the curved shield that can be improved on the actual shield parts (but I think it wouldn't be worth the effort if you're going to throw mud at the model later).
D.

Gee, I'm sure it's a quantum leap in molding from a kit that must have near to 50 years since designed (the Airfix). Anyway, things are looking grim here in Argentina. Due to the inept economic policies, the governement has curtailed not only the internet purchases -as I mentioned yesterday-, but also today limited them to two (2) per YEAR. Not above a total of 25 USD, both of them, and with the first one the taxes of 50% over the purchased value apply.
So unless I have someone to actually travel abroad and bring me the kits loose in their pockets (as packaged goods also have enforced taxes) I won't see these until the damned actual policies cease to apply. Which won't happen soon!

-- Edited by d_fernetti on Thursday 23rd of January 2014 01:52:38 AM

Well, there is a bit of a conundrum with regard to the proportions of the MB steering tail, assuming the length is correct overall there is a problem with the rear end. Let me explain: The rear axle is a casting and is, for the most part, H section with thickening webs at the centre and outer sections where the 3 bolts are fixed.  I am fairly confident that the H section I produced earlier this evening is pretty much right when compared to the photo I used to proportion it.  However, when the framework of the MB tail unit is offered up to the new axle the 2 outer fixing points do not align with the strengthening areas.  In fact the discrepancy is getting on for 3mm!!  If this alone was corrected then the steering wheels would be placed too far back from the tank body.

Looking at the photo of the steering tail frame, it seems to me that the trailing end of the 'triangular' forward bracing plates are reasonably well within the profile of the tank whereas the MB offering has them just within the profile and aligned with the end of the tank side frames.  So, what to do? 

Photo 1:  This photo was found on the web and was clearly taken before the Mk1 became part of a full scale diorama and impossible to access.  Note that the rear of the X beams are attached to the axle at the thickened part of the casting inboard of the final 2 holes each side.

Photo 2:  B&W, same photo but manipulated to create a plan view (done by tweaking the photo until the holes in the reinforcing plates were circular).  Measurement of the angle of the X beams are just about 60º (which ties in with the angles used by both MB and Airfix, and I am willing to bet that back when Airfix created their Mk1/2 hybrid they had access to the tail unit so the 60º angle could be correct).

Photo 3:  This is a prototype offering from Member 'IRONSHIP' of a kit I believe he is producing, note I have corrected the rivet detail, further note that the axle does not match the first photograph (not H section and too few lightening holes).  The X beams are set at 55º which would foreshorten the tail but I am more interested in the relation ship/proportion of components at the front end.

Photo 4:  This photo shows the trailing edge of the 'triangular' bracing plates aligned with the rear of the MB tank sides, and it is this that I wonder is wrong?  Below is the MB tail with my H section axle (on its side for clarity) the pencil lines projected to the point where the X frame should attach to the axle - just inside the last but one hole each side - note the gap!!  Ignore the brake gear as this needs work as well.

I think I need to ask Helen if she can send me a plan view of her drawing to see if I can identify where the error might lie and determine how best to correct it.

Any observations on my comments gratefully received and, if anyone knows of a photo that would confirm the relationship of the 'triangular' bracing plates with the tank sides I would dearly love to see them.  I know someone will be able to provide so thank you in anticipation.

So, I had hoped to present the completed tail unit this evening but it shall have to wait a while.  I am limited as to what I can do now as the tails units need to be corrected and constructed before I can cement the second side on each tank.  Finish the male sponsons I think and, using my newly arrived guillotine have a go at version 2 of the grenade roof rear extension and side extensions.  Perhaps I might turn some replacement brass barrels for the 'male', or perhaps not, we will see.

Seeing more pictures (and renderings) of how this object (the steering gear) is made up of flat, single curved sheet, it's more and more a candidate for a PE set. It might be a tad difficult to assemble -an origami of sorts- but it might even be made as a functional steering mechanism. I recall that someone build a fully retractable landing gear in brass in 1/72 a few years ago, so why not this contraption?

REAR CONTAINER:
I have been wondering about the rear container box, seen attached to the trailing wheels unit. I would hazard that these were not 'knocked together' by the crew but that something suitable was scrounged? Does anyone have any thoughts on eg: an ammunition box or similar that might match the dimensions seen in photos and that would have been pressed into service?

Peace and quiet.............  at last...........  3 days of bliss. :p 

Ha ha only joking :)

I will try and have a 1/72 plan for the tail wheel for you by your return. 

Helen x

Helen, I have tried my best to keep quiet for 3 days as promised but ......... The tail gear: proportions, relative positions and angles. There is something slightly amiss with the MB unit and I can't see were the problem lies.

Helen, that is just perfect! Although I am still at my boat, in the pouring rain, I can see exactly where a discrepancy lies, and it is precisely where I though it might be. If you compare your drawing (I appreciate that there might be some dimensional errors) you can see that the rear pierced 'triangular' bracing plates sit a fair way inside the rear 'horns' of the tank. On the MB version they line up with the trailing edge. I believe that will give me the amount needed for the C sections of the X to align correctly with the correct point of attachment to the axle. Tomorrow I shall compare model with drawing to see how to apply the corrections.

Firstly, I am indebted to Helen for making her diagrams available.  I am going to presume the accuracy of Helen's drawing, not least because it compares well with my perspective tweaked photo but also because the triangular bracing plates sit inside the rear horns.  However, the correction of the errors with the X beams is a little more subtle than I earlier anticipated. 

So, if you want to go to the trouble of correcting those errors here's the way:

1.   The moulded outer 'pivot points' need removing and placing further inboard (just about 1.5mm each) - but you might want to wait until 4 has been completed!  Remember these are the X beam fixing bolts NOT the axle pivots as these are contained within the hub itself.

2.   Second, at the front of the X, 1mm needs removing between the rear cross beam and the point where the X beam joins the longitudinals each side.  This will make the 2 bracing pieces more 'triangular'.  (See photo)  

3.   Fabricate replacement bracing plates, note the rear lightening hole is not as large as that in the MB moulding, these bracing plates should be triangular but with a 'squared off' point at the trailing edge.

4.   Remove the axle (discard the brake actuating gear as this needs re-modelling) add a 1mm (approx.) extension to the X beams, these should then line-up with the position of the fixing bolts or, if you delayed 1. then place the 'fixing bolts' in line with the end of the X-beam.

5.   Construct replacement brake actuating gear, at the hub this sits slightly below the axle and below the bracing plates but above the longitudinal centre bar.  Note that the forward outer points sit almost within the wheels.

6.   At the trailing end of the centre bar is loop which rolls up and back and the fixing bolt passes all the way through.  See photos earlier in this thread.

This should now have the overall geometry of the tail and X beams corrected.  The MB rectangular bracing plate can be affixed.  Cyno the etched brass 'thingy' on the rear of the axle, and perhaps use a fine drill to give depth to the lightening holes this tries to emulate.

 

For modellers of the Airfix tail unit much the same is required to set the geometry of the X beams, replace the brake linkage and create the longitudinal bar.  Of course the forward and rectangular bracing plates need creating.  Earlier in this thread I published a photo of my Airfix tail unit but it did not have the modifications to the X beams - so ignore the shape of the forward triangular bracing plates.

 

Eric wrote:

---

Hello,

Very interesting post. I am building the female version but it is too late to modify the steering system. I already modified the hand grenade protection.

I have a question : I plan to represent "We're all in it" and the Landship decal set state that the camo scheme is base medium grey with sand brown and black colours on it (B2 scheme). What is your opinion ? And which colour for the hand grenade protection device ?

An other question : The rear vents are represented with the opening upward. I read that they should be downward but I saw some WW1 pictures with this device with the opening upward. Any ideas ?

Thank you in advance,

---

 Hi Eric,

 

The vents should always face up, that's the way all the photos I have of MK1 tanks in the field show them positioned.

As for paint schemes, I'm afraid my knowledge on the subject is sadly lacking. I do have two photos of 'We're all in it' if it helps.

Helen x

 

My apologies for implying that the vents were 'upside down', as Helen has said and photos have shown, the rear vent is fitted to vent upwards - catch the rain if you will!
The grenade canopy appears to be wood as photos of damaged canopies show broken (timber) sections rather than bent and twisted (metal) ones. As DF suggests a grey/ brown weathered timber finish with silver/grey (zinc plated?) or rusty chicken wire.
As to paint finish, very difficult to be certain of colour or pattern and any finish would soon be covered in mud and/or dust. I have read that the colours might have been produced by mixing paint at a local level and that the actual patterns were 'interpreted' by the crew from an example. It explains the variety that can be made out in the photos. All you can do is find a photograph and extrapolate a pattern. You might also ponder whether the roof and area between the rear horns was painted, although there are photos of the box on the tail wheels being camouflaged.
Any petrol flimsies carried on the roof or in the tail box would have been the colour of the supplying company (so you can imagine SHELL being yellow perhaps etc). There is a report from a RFC pilot reporting the backs of the tanks being red (I think) from the flimsies being carried.

Dear reader,
My delay in any further report on the construction of the MB Mk1 is due to my desire to get the steering tail correct. You know, the bit at the back that no one will pay any attention to, the bit that will be in shadow on the display shelf, why oh why am I doing this? Nuts I guess!!! Suddenly it has become a steering tail with a tank stuck on the front!!
Howsoever, in case there are any other Nuts around (Helen excepted) that want to go down the same road, then I shall put some photos on here a bit later, showing progress - if that is the right word - on the H and C section construction. Bit flimsy at the moment but the rectangular bracing plates will do their job.
Of course the other truly vital component - the grenade canopy - is also making progress. I've spent more time drawing the thing out in CorelDraw than I have building the tank.

TeeELL Regarding the tail steering assembly... I wonder if there's anything small enough as C-sectioned brass extrusions. I guess that for the scale, it will be quite difficult to find. In any case, a PE brass bending device might result useful!

TeeELL, yes, I have done a couple of jigs to glue the bomb roof structure.... but I might have taken that one off the jig while the MEK cement was curing... the rectangle developed a twist in two axes (not only altering the right angles on the horizontal plane) but also affecting the "Z" axis, so to speak. It must be a result of uneven tensions between each segment during the curing of the cement. It was a most curious phenomenon, very interesting for a philosophical mind like mine.