Author Topic: V1 anomaly?  (Read 1362 times)

Pen-Pusher

  • Guest
V1 anomaly?
« on: January 16, 2016, 07:25:11 PM »
A curious anomaly found in V1 kits from Frog/Revell/Matchbox (Same mould) and Airfix. Study the photo below. At first glance you woud think the Frog/R/M (dark plastic and Airfix (light plastic) major parts would match - not so! Although similar there is a subtle but discernable difference in the nose contour. Second, taking the Frog/R/M issues, there seems to have been a change to the design of the pulse-jet attachment, with the later varient having a sloping blade (found on the Matchbox and Revell issues) at the front as opposed to the single vertical strut. This is not to be confused with the Heller V1 (F.103) manned version seen built on the transporting frame above. Just curious...?


[attachment deleted by admin]

[attachment deleted by admin]
« Last Edit: January 17, 2016, 10:49:29 AM by Pen-Pusher »

Pen-Pusher

  • Guest
Re: V1 anomaly?
« Reply #1 on: January 17, 2016, 08:09:22 AM »
Seems Frog may be the culprit? Note the differences between their Spitfire/V1 and Arado/V1 issues. The former has a single upright support whereas the Arado version has the 'blade'. Other models seem to favour the 'blade' attachment too.

[attachment deleted by admin]

[attachment deleted by admin]

Pen-Pusher

  • Guest
Re: V1 anomaly?
« Reply #2 on: February 06, 2016, 09:45:31 AM »
Using the MAC Models 1/72 kit you can build up a nice collection of all 'known' versions of the V-1 (Doesn't take up much room on the shelf either?) The kit(s) vary from 9 to 12 parts depending on which you choose but the fit is good and canopies (where necessary are crisp and very clear) both manned versions have nice seats and lend themselves to some additional detail. Using some of Haddock's kindly gifted copper mesh, I managed to achieve a very nice grill effect in the intake of the rocket/pulse jet motor. Finally, there are more schemes available than you might think?

[attachment deleted by admin]

[attachment deleted by admin]

Pen-Pusher

  • Guest
Re: V1 anomaly?
« Reply #3 on: February 06, 2016, 09:46:40 AM »
Creating the USAF/USN post-war version you have to be careful about the forward support fin between the engine housing and fuselage. The USN in particular experimented a lot with this and a different fin (See below) was fitted for the 'Loon' as carried aboard some of the Nautilus Class submarines. A short film on some of the test firings is worth watching here.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CxxUmyIcns4

[attachment deleted by admin]

[attachment deleted by admin]
« Last Edit: February 06, 2016, 10:01:52 AM by Pen-Pusher »

Pen-Pusher

  • Guest
Re: V1 anomaly?
« Reply #4 on: February 06, 2016, 09:57:34 AM »
A 'Loon' carrying sub was produced as a model in 1/305 scale by Revell in the USA and by Aurora in 1/420 (by far the better model and the first to have a transparent side to show innards!!) The photo below is a professional display model at 1/350 from the USS North Carolina floating museum in Wilmington.

[attachment deleted by admin]

[attachment deleted by admin]
« Last Edit: February 06, 2016, 10:11:39 AM by Pen-Pusher »

Pen-Pusher

  • Guest
Re: V1 anomaly?
« Reply #5 on: February 06, 2016, 10:13:54 AM »
Aaaah - found it! A Loon carrying Nautilus!! Revell re-issued this kit in '79 but with a Regulus missile instead!!

[attachment deleted by admin]

[attachment deleted by admin]
« Last Edit: February 06, 2016, 02:28:57 PM by Pen-Pusher »

Pen-Pusher

  • Guest
Re: V1 anomaly?
« Reply #6 on: July 30, 2016, 12:12:41 PM »
Someone asked me about this at the club meeting and apologies for not replying sooner...!

The Soviets apparently did consider using piston-powered cruise missiles in World War II, but details are vague and in any case nothing came of the efforts. More significantly, in October 1944, the British sent the remains of a V-1 that had been shot down over England to the USSR. The Soviets found it very interesting and promptly set up a design bureau, designated "OKB-51" to reverse-engineer it. The team was led by Vladimir Chelomei, who would later become famous for directing development of the big Soviet Proton space launch booster.

The V-1 provided by the British was lacking a few significant parts, but special Red Army detachments assigned to collect "loot" in the wake of the advance of front-line troops were able to provide more gear. The Mittelwerk facility at Nordhausen fell into the Soviet zone of control of occupied Germany, and though the Americans had hastily cleaned a great deal of gear out of the mine before the Red Army arrived, there was still material left over.

In any case, by early 1945 the Chelomei group was building copies of the V-1, designated the "10Kh" (roughly meaning "X-10" since the Cyrillic "Kh" character resembles an "X"). By April, test flights were being performed over the steppes of Central Asia with the missiles launched from Petlyakov Pe-8 heavy bombers. Work was also performed on a ship-launched variant, the "10KhN", and a ground-launched variant, the "10KhM", but flight tests showed the missiles to be unsatisfactory both in capability and reliability, and so OKB-51 went back to the drawing board, building a "14Kh" with twin pulsejet engines, a triple-fin tail, and many improvements. It was followed in turn by the "16Kh", with a similar configuration but a twin-fin tail.

The only kit I am aware of is the AMC Models Russian Missile 16Kh, 1/72 scale, kit no. 7202

The kit comes as 25 pieces cast in a light yellow/tan resin. The parts are generally well done with only a few pinholes on the nose and wings. The fuselage is solid and comes in two pieces, a nose section and a tail section, split vertically directly in front of the wings. There are no decals. For the price of this kit I would have expected some photo-etched pieces for the engine screens and possibly for the pitot-heads but none are included. Panel lines are engraved. Most are well done being nice and straight but some, in particular the access panels are not so straight (almost as if they were done free hand on the master). On my sample copy, the left wing was slightly warped. The vertical stabilizers lacked rudder lines on the rear sides, which will have to be scribed. The lines representing the elevators are straight on one side but crooked on the other. I'll be tempted to built the kit straight out of the box. The kit has four subassemblies: airframe, the engines and transport cart.

There are no locating marks for anything except the wings, which will make it difficult to determine exactly where to place the rear horizontal stabilizers and the engine pylons. There is no detailing for the engine inlets. It would have been nice to have some photo-etched parts here too. The tubes for the exhaust are solid with a small indent at the outlet. I would have preferred it if the kit had used plastic tubes instead. I will replaced them myself using those from the Frog or Airfix V1.

All in all, this definitely one of the better resin kits I have seen, but doubt it'll be “a walk in the park” build. The kit is expensive and I'd only recommend getting this one if you really need to have it in your collection.