1/48 Supermarine Walrus Mk.I (A09183) Build Review

[Ratch]

Hi Dominic, no I don't have all the Humbrol paints; I prefer to use Vallejo and have a chart which specifies the paints nearest to the colours used by RAF/FAA aircraft. On this one I have used Vallejo Model Color 70833 80 German Camouflage Bright Green as the Light Slate Grey Over side, lower wings, disruptive "shadow shading", FAA aircraft.

[Dominic Thomas]

Very helpful,Ratch. I appreciate the feedback. 

[Ratch]

Great care must be taken when constructing the wings. They cannot be rushed; it is best to take your time over these steps. 

I made another error. I did not realise that the outer struts project through the lower wing for the floats to hang from. I had glued them level and wondered why the wing tips were grounded, then where the struts were when it came to fitting the floats. 

Luckily, it just took a little glue to free the joint and allow me to push the struts through to the full length.

[modeling maniac]

Looks really good Ratch, can't wait to see it fully complete

[Ratch]

Not much to show today. I had already added the ordnance under the wings. I had a few small parts to attach and paint, and the tyres required re-touching. I also fixed a step on the engine strut that had been knocked off.

[modeling maniac]

Looks really really good, but smaller than I first anticipated.

[Ratch]

I airbrushed Vallejo Matt with a drop of Klear. When dry I could remove all masking from the transparencies, not forgetting the rear hatch. Then I returned to step 60 and fixed the landing light lens, part #F05 to the leading edge of the port lower wing. I noticed that part F06 (which looks like a navigation light lens) remains on the runner. I scoured back through the instructions, thinking I’d missed something, but it would appear not. Could this indicate another variant to be issued?

I could now move on to the rigging. I don’t like drilling holes for the wires to thread through, preferring super glued butt joints. Each location point has a small, raised knob on the model, making it easier to fix the wires correctly. I use Gold-Zack Strick-Elastic knitting-in elastic for the wires. These are attached with Hard As Nails Super Glue. It has a brush applicator, which I use to put a blob onto an old plastic lid. I then use a cocktail stick to transfer a dot of glue to the point where the wire is to be fixed. The thread is gripped in tweezers and the end dipped into the glue then to the attachment point. If necessary, another spot of glue can be added with the cocktail stick. This sets quickly and the other end is dealt with as follows. The cocktail stick puts glue at the attachment point. The thread is lightly tensioned over that point, then the cocktail stick (with a little glue) is used to press the thread into contact at that point. It is allowed to fix, then the loose end of the thread is tensioned, and fine-pointed nail scissors used to cut as close as possible to the attachment point. If the glue does not set quickly enough, Zip-Kicker can be used the accelerate the fixing.

The first few lines are attached here. I have one more day of modelling before I go away for a week. 

[modeling maniac]

So what is left to do? As it looks complete.

[Ratch]

A lot of rigging.

[Ratch]

I followed the instructions for the rigging. I’m not sure whether they are correct as the extended wings show the V shaped wires attached to the fin, whereas the folded wings show no wires. I cannot see these wires on the references of folded wing Walruses that I’ve found, so their omission may be correct, but I would have expected to see slack wires. My rigging is quite rough, others have better methods, but at least it gives the impression if viewed from a distance. I am, after all, an impressionist modeller from the Monet School. I could now re-attach the rudder and touch up its paintwork. With this done I could call it complete.

 

Summary:

I have enjoyed this build. Compared with the old Matchbox kit, as you might expect, this is crammed with detail and sophisticated in design. The filler used was probably down to me rather than the kit. Some areas of the instructions might be clearer and in hindsight, it would be best if the rudder (E28) was fitted at the end of the build sequence. I noted in my research that aircraft were often damaged when being craned onboard a rolling ship, and if my skills allowed would have tried to replicate this. As it is, I thought better of the idea. The scope of the parts mean that many variations are offered for others choose for their builds. Thanks to Airfix for giving me the opportunity to build the kit. I hope you have enjoyed following my efforts and maybe learned something too.

[Ratch]

700 NAS, HMS Sheffield, 1941.

[Sailorman]

Sure looks good!

 

[Dominic Thomas]

This build has been an inspiration for me on two fronts. One, as a large (1/48) biplane, I fancy having a go at the rigging. Two, I can’t quite come to terms with the shade of green on the lower wings which part of the shadow shading process, so I need to build something that has that to see what it looks like. 
Well done. 

[SD45elect2000]

The detail of the kit is very attractive.

 

Randall

[Heather Kavanagh]

The Shagbat has turned out well. Pity it's the wrong scale. 

I was also wondering about the shadow shading green on the lower wings. It seems a bit bright to me, but I'm not usually one to comment adversely on the way other folk like to interpret their models. As one of our fellow members is wont to say: "We do this for fun".

Here's a ColourCoats enamel rendering on my Airfix Swordfish:

[paul71]

nice build ratch like the rigging on it

[Ratch]

10 hours ago, Heather Kavanagh said:

I was also wondering about the shadow shading green on the lower wings.

 

I agree it looks bright, but I followed a conversion chart. If it's wrong I'd like to know what's right.

[Heather Kavanagh]

7 hours ago, Ratch said:

If it's wrong I'd like to know what's right.

Please don’t think I’m about throwing accusations about. We all approach this hobby in different ways, and I’m not here to say any particular way is more correct than another. I am not an expert; I rely on the expertise of others. I was steered towards the enamel ColourCoats range when I asked awkward questions about which of the multitudinous acrylic and lacquer ranges were more accurate for my uses. I can only say, as a satisfied customer for several years, Sovereign Hobbies does a pretty good job of trying to mix paints that are as accurate as possible.

I have read accounts saying the Vallejo colours can be questionable in their accuracy, but since I don’t use that range I can’t verify such statements. 

I am also generally wary of conversion charts, though most do a good job.

Disclaimer: this is a quick snapshot of a CMYK commercially printed colour chart. It’s taken from On Target Special No 9, which is a reference work covering camouflage and markings of aircraft in and around the Battle of Britain.

The Fleet Air Arm camouflage colours up to about the end of 1941 are those I’ve marked. Dark Sea Grey and Light Slate Grey are the counter shade colours for the upper surfaces of lower wings on biplanes. It was also used for a time half-way up fuselage sides, but let's not confuse things. There is no obvious grassy green in that range.

Borrowed from another "bible", Fleet Air Arm Camouflage and Markings by Stuart Lloyd. The drawing was prepared in March 1939 to illustrate the camouflage layout for large single-engined biplanes, known as Scheme S.1.E. Again, no bright green in evidence.

To my mind, the Vallejo conversion colour for Light Slate Grey is nowhere near the correct shade.

Ratch, obviously, you’ve painted and completed the Walrus now, and repainting to correct anything would probably end in disaster. As long as you’re happy with the finished model, that’s all that needs to be said. I say again, "we do this for fun".

 

[SD45elect2000]

Here is my take on the very low contrast camo for FAA.

 

I mixed the lower wing colors. 

 

Randall

[Dominic Thomas]

This photo gives the impression that the upper wing, lower wing, and tailplane all have different shades. 
That’s not correct, is it?

[Heather Kavanagh]

9 minutes ago, Dominic Thomas said:

This photo gives the impression that the upper wing, lower wing, and tailplane all have different shades. 
That’s not correct, is it?

The upper wing and tailplane are the same. The lower wing is painted with counter-shading colours. The idea was to compensate for shadows thrown by the upper wing.

[Dominic Thomas]

37 minutes ago, Heather Kavanagh said:

The upper wing and tailplane are the same. The lower wing is painted with counter-shading colours. The idea was to compensate for shadows thrown by the upper wing.

I understand the concept of the counter-shading. My point, badly made, was that the tailplane looks different as well, in this photo. 
Tricks of the light perhaps?

[Heather Kavanagh]

I think it is lighting. SD hasn’t posed the model, it’s just sort of perched there to show the wing colours.

[SD45elect2000]

The horizontal tail is the same color as the top wing. I “perched” the model just to take a quick snap of it. I used my shop light for lighting, I do have better lights ( more or less). I have a bunch of Swordfish in my thread or in the gallery, this particular one isn’t even finished ( no rigging), but it was handy.
 

Randall

[SD45elect2000]

That all said, I think Ratch did a fine job on the model and if he chooses to, I believe he is clever enough to change a color, we have seen examples of his remarkable abilities. 
many model builders make mistakes and get discouraged enough to give up. If Ratch does decide to change a color I hope he shares it. 
 

I think it can be done without disassembly.
 

Randall

Edited May 31 by SD45elect2000