1:72 MPM Boulton Paul Defiant Mk.1

[dr_gn]

Despite the Special Hobby (part of the same CMK, MPM, Azur etc. conglomerate) Curtiss Hawk

http://www.pistonheads.com/xforums/topic.asp?h=0&a...

...turning into a nightmare (cowling doesn't fit properly and it's a 'mare to sort out) I bought this Defiant. I've always been fascinated by this aircraft. It somehow manages to look simultaneously right, and wrong:



It's a multi-media kit with decent styrene parts (not quite as good as the Hawk), resin interior, photo etch fret, vacform canopy and nice decals:





As with the Hawk, there's a lot of DIY involved, even the propeller blades are separate and will need drilling, pinning and dowelling. Wierd.

Instructions are beautifully unclear, which I suppose is good given the amount of fettling that will be required to align everything. There is a resin fuselage insert for the "in-use" turret and a styrene insert with the aerodynamic fairing. No mention s made of this in the instructions though.



I just hope I wont have to CAD and rapid-prototype any significant components as with the Hawk...

Undecided about finish - fancy black just for a change, but I love the green and earth schemes too.

I'll be adding Master Model brass gun barrels and perhaps a vacform turret transparency.

Wish me luck.

Edited by dr_gn on Friday 30th August 20:27

[Eric Mc]

I've got one of them in the stash - and the horrendous Airfix one too.

[Brigand]

I haven't seen a kit of one of these for a long time, I remember having the Airfix one when I was a lad. Can't say I've noticed any around since then whilst I've been browsing.

I agree with you though dr, its a strangely good looking aeroplane...

[dr_gn]

Brigand said:

I haven't seen a kit of one of these for a long time, I remember having the Airfix one when I was a lad. Can't say I've noticed any around since then whilst I've been browsing.

I agree with you though dr, its a strangely good looking aeroplane...

MPM/CMK/Special Hobby do a range of them in 1:72 . Forget the Airfix one - it's hopeless.

http://www.cmkkits.com/en/aircraft/index.php?fSort...

Classic Airframes also do 1:48 scale versions.

[Eric Mc]

The Airfix one is still in production and readily available. I saw it in a shop today.

Don't ever buy it.

[dr_gn]

Eric Mc said:

The Airfix one is still in production and readily available. I saw it in a shop today.

Don't ever buy it.

I built one back in the late '70's, even then I realised it was bad, very bad.

[Eric Mc]

It was bad when it first came out (1959 I think).

The passage of time has made it worse.

Valiant Models provide a resin replacement nose which corrects the main area of error.

[dr_gn]

Interesting thread here comparing the Airfix & MPM mouldings. Check out the relatave turret and fin/rudder dimensions. I wouldn't have ever known which one was correct in terms of dimensions if two well built models were side by side, but, it is quite an extreme illustration of the differences.

http://airfixtributeforum.myfastforum.org/Airfix_v...

I've read that the MPM turret glazing is too tall, so I ordered a vacform replacement (for an Airfix Halifax ironically) and some master model gun barrels (I got 8 in fact, four for m Mosquito project):

http://master-model.pl/index.php?page=shop.product...

Here's Bomberguy's video on the Defiant for anyone interested:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ce9My4IKydo

[Eric Mc]

I like Bomberguy's stuff on youtube. I'cve eatched most of it - at least once.

[dr_gn]

Glued the wings together tonight. A common issue with short run kits like this is the trailing edges are too thick. These required some internal thinning, and they are still a little heavy. Once filled and sanded externally it won't be too obvious I hope. As with the Hawk, the fit is surprisingly good, and the surface detail extremely refined:



A common complaint about this kit seems to be that the u/c legs are not strong enough. I was puzzled by this until I saw that there are no locating stubs for the legs - they are pretty much butt-jointed to the wheel wells. All it needs to sort it out is a few minutes with a pin drill and some 0.5mm brass rod. Bizzarrely, the propeller blades are also separate from the hub. Never seen this before on a 1:72 kit, but again, no real problem, just reinforce with brass rod:



It's nice to do some modelling rather than just assembly, and the bits you really have to work on make it more unique.

I also started cleaning up the resin bits. Again, as with the Hawk, some really nice details included, but fitting will need some trial and I suspect a bit of error:

Edited by dr_gn on Tuesday 3rd September 21:47

[Eric Mc]

A lot of MPM/Special Hobby 1/72 kits have separate propller blades. A right pain in the butt.

The Academy 1/72 Spitfire XIV also has separate blades.

[lufbramatt]

Had the opportunity to examine the real Defiant when it was being restored at MAPS (I live 5 mins from their workshop) for Hendon. It's a beautifully engineered aircraft- things like the control column pivoting on a lovely machined ball and socket (whereas on a hurricane it just looks like a bit of scaffold tube pivoting on a bolt). The main wheels even have little bushes that get rid of mud from the tyres as the gear retracts. The wings and fuselage are very smooth- the panels fit perfectly and everything is flush riveted, not the motley collection of ill-fitting panels you find on a spitfire. Must have been a nightmare to manufacture in any sort of quantity!

[dr_gn]

lufbramatt said:

Had the opportunity to examine the real Defiant when it was being restored at MAPS (I live 5 mins from their workshop) for Hendon. It's a beautifully engineered aircraft- things like the control column pivoting on a lovely machined ball and socket (whereas on a hurricane it just looks like a bit of scaffold tube pivoting on a bolt). The main wheels even have little bushes that get rid of mud from the tyres as the gear retracts. The wings and fuselage are very smooth- the panels fit perfectly and everything is flush riveted, not the motley collection of ill-fitting panels you find on a spitfire. Must have been a nightmare to manufacture in any sort of quantity!

I guess all those nicely engineered features added weight. I wonder how it would have performed without the turret, but with fixed machine guns? The wing looks thick enough to house a howitzer.

[lufbramatt]

dr_gn said:

I guess all those nicely engineered features added weight. I wonder how it would have performed without the turret, but with fixed machine guns? The wing looks thick enough to house a howitzer.

OK this info is shamelessly taken from Wikipedia but apparently even without the turret the Defiant was over 600kg heavier than a Hurricane. Boulton Paul also developed a variant with wing guns (the P.94) that had a top speed of 360mph, comparable with a Spitfire.

[Eric Mc]

Boulton Paul's problem was that they had invented the powered turret and were keen to shove it into any aeroplane they could. The aircraft they built themselves - the Overstrand, Defiant, Roc etc were all about the turret.

[dr_gn]

Eric Mc said:

Boulton Paul's problem was that they had invented the powered turret and were keen to shove it into any aeroplane they could. The aircraft they built themselves - the Overstrand, Defiant, Roc etc were all about the turret.

According to Wikipedia they didn't "invent" the turrets:

"Boulton Paul's designs were largely based on originals licensed from the French company SAMM (Societe d'Application des Machines Motrices)"

[Eric Mc]

Fair enough. But they certainly became extremely enthusiastic about making planes that used them.

Did the French air force order any aircraft - especially fighters - fitted with the French turrets? I seem to recall some of their ungainly Potez and Amiot bombers had turrets - but I can't think of any French fighters so equipped.

[dr_gn]

lufbramatt said:

dr_gn said:

I guess all those nicely engineered features added weight. I wonder how it would have performed without the turret, but with fixed machine guns? The wing looks thick enough to house a howitzer.

OK this info is shamelessly taken from Wikipedia but apparently even without the turret the Defiant was over 600kg heavier than a Hurricane. Boulton Paul also developed a variant with wing guns (the P.94) that had a top speed of 360mph, comparable with a Spitfire.

It says 680kg heavier without turret was for the prototype - seems excessive to me.

Again, from Wikipedia, the loaded weight of a Hurricane MkII was 3480kg, and the Defiant 3781kg (difference about 300kg for approx. the same size aircraft). I'd have thought the turret plus gunner would have been at least 300kg, potentially - minus the turret - making it lighter than the Hurricane. Plus there would be the additional weight of the fairing mechanisms and the compromised aerodynamics to consider.

Without turret, less manouverable, but top speed almost the same as a contemporary Spitfire, but with 12 brownings or 4 20mm cannon...sounds like it could have been made into a formidable ground attack aircraft.

[dr_gn]

Eric Mc said:

Fair enough. But they certainly became extremely enthusiastic about making planes that used them.

Did the French air force order any aircraft - especially fighters - fitted with the French turrets? I seem to recall some of their ungainly Potez and Amiot bombers had turrets - but I can't think of any French fighters so equipped.

I guess they were simply responding to:

"Air Ministry Specification F.9/35 required a two-seater day and night "turret fighter" capable of 290 mph at 15,000 ft." (Ref. Wikipedia)

If they were making turrets and aircraft, it would make sense that they'd be enthusiastic about a turret equipped fighter aircraft requirement.

[Eric Mc]

Why wasn't it?

Presumably with production at the time concentrating on the Spitfire and Hurricane the Air Ministry was not keen to support a production line for a yet another single seat, Merlin powered fighter - even if it might have been better in theory than the Hurricane or Spitfire.

I expect that the ONLY reason production was sanctioned was because it WAS turret equipped and therefore offered a different class of aircraft to the mix.