Nakajima Ki-43 Hayabusa by ccoyle - FINISHED - Orlik - 1/33 - CARD - Japanese Army fighter Allied code name "Oscar"

[ccoyle]

I'm on a bit of a personal roll here, so I'm going to ride the wave while it lasts. For my next project, I'm going to take on the 1/33 scale Ki-43-I Hei published by Orlik of Poland. This is another Lukasz Fuczek design -- you might recall that he designed the Curtiss Hawk 75 kit I gave up on a while back. Nevertheless, having finished one of Lukasz's other designs (Yak-3), I have decided to give him another go. This kit ticks several boxes for me:

• I have the laser-cut frames set and a canopy.
• I don't yet have any completed models of Japanese aircraft.
• It's a monoplane -- no complicated rigging (I need a break from rigging, whether ships or planes).
• It has only a few colors needing to be matched for edge coloring.

 

 

 

The Ki-43 Hayabusa (Peregrine Falcon) was the Japanese Army Air Force's primary fighter at the onset of hostilities with the west in 1941, having replaced Nakajima's earlier Ki-27 (Allied code name "Nate"). The Ki-43 was built for maneuverability, which it excelled at, but had no armor or self-sealing fuel tanks and was armed with only a pair of machine guns. Once Allied pilots learned not to get into turning engagements with an Oscar and to instead use boom-and-zoom tactics against them (and other nimble Japanese types), the Oscar's days as a premier fighter were numbered. Despite this, it was produced right up until 1945. Many were expended in kamikaze attacks. 5919 of all marks were built; the Ki-43-I Hei variant was the first to carry two 12.7 mm (0.5 in.) machine guns.

 

(By Stumanusa - Own work, CC BY 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=9430904Photo courtesy of Wikimedia)

 

So, there's your intro. Construction to start soon -- stay tuned!

 

[amateur]

Something without a keel!

Nice. 
 

Jan

[popeye the sailor]

I'm all eyes Chris.......looks like a fun model  

[Egilman]

I'm here brother....

[Edwardkenway]

Pulling my chair up!

[ccoyle]

Construction begins with a bit of prep work. The parts sheets have been separated and treated with matte clear spray. The laser-cut billets have been given a coat of shellac and are now drying, stacked between sheets of wax paper and weighted down to help prevent curling. A trip to Hobby Lobby and the hardware store was made to procure some paint and contact cement.

 

Now comes the fun of mixing edge/touch-up colors. As I said earlier, there are only three main colors: a sort of plum brown, a light gray for the undersides, and an aqua for the interior. I've started with the aqua.

 

 

See those two big splotches on the printed color swatch? Good! Those aren't the final color. Hopefully what is far less noticeable are the eight dots in the lower right corner of the swatch, representing eight attempts at matching the printed color. I think I will call the last dot a match, since it is very close, and any more tinkering is as likely to mess up the paint batch as improve it. Within the confines of the finished interior, it shouldn't stand out, and that is the goal after all. BTW, the brown and gray blotches are simply samples of unmixed base colors to see which shades to begin with -- I haven't mixed those yet.

 

Cheers!

[Canute]

Interesting to follow the process of blending the matching colors. I'm in, Chris.

[popeye the sailor]

dialing in the color spectrum......gotta be one of the hard parts  

[ccoyle]

First night's construction.

 

[Old Collingwood]

Looking great Chris  - nice rigid frame there by the look of it.

 

OC.

[ccoyle]

9 hours ago, Old Collingwood said:

nice rigid frame there by the look of it

 

Sadly, it doesn't take a whole lot of manhandling to make it quite a bit less rigid!

[ccoyle]

Slowly adding cockpit elements. I am not adhering strictly to the numbered parts sequence. Instead, I'm working from fore to aft and keeping an eye out for build steps that might create tight spots for bits that are supposed to be placed later.

 

[CDW]

Love the precision fit and colors of your cockpit. Must be very satisfying to bring something like this together as you are here.

[ccoyle]

I'm trying very hard to do this kit justice and make everything as neat as possible. The first real test of the build's success will be seeing if the inner cockpit skin fits correctly (it should -- I've already cut it out and have test-fitted it). You may recall that the inner cockpit skin was where the Curtiss Mohawk build started to go sour.

[CDW]

8 hours ago, ccoyle said:

The first real test of the build's success will be seeing if the inner cockpit skin fits correctly (it should -- I've already cut it out and have test-fitted it). 

 

Are misfits common in card modeling with some companies, or is it more often errors made in cutting out the parts?  

[ccoyle]

Nearly every card model goes through a beta build, so somebody was able to build it correctly! Error creep can happen in several different ways, improper cutting and gluing being one such way. Another has to do with the tolerances built into laser-cut parts; sometimes, a colored part laminated onto a laser-cut part can make the part too thick. I'll try to get some photos to illustrate this later.

[ccoyle]

Okay, for all those who are interested, here's a lesson in card model error creep.

 

In this first photo, I have used my incredibly expensive and precise calipers to measure the width of a slot in one of the wing spars. As you can see, this slot is about 0.4 - 0.5 mm wide.

 

The billet that contains the part that will fit into that slot is also about 0.4 - 0.5 mm wide, which of course means that the part should fit snugly into the slot -- no problem.

 

Now before we go further, we must keep in mind that a card model kit is designed and printed so that it can be built without after-market laser-cut frame sets. Normally, the internal frames would be glued onto either chipboard or laminated sheets of card and then cut out. It's up to the builder to make sure that the cardboard + printed parts + glue (this last part is often overlooked) comes out to the desired thickness, or about 0.4 - 0.5 mm in this instance.

 

In many instances, if a laser-cut replacement part is used, the printed part is simply omitted from the construction. But what if a printed part has color on it, i.e. it's supposed to be visible after construction? Take a look at this next photo -- here I've measured the thickness of an internal bulkhead. It's a laser-cut part + printed part + glue. Notice it is now about 0.6 mm thick, not 0.4 - 0.5 mm. That's because of the added thickness of the printed part (printed on bond paper) and glue; it would be even thicker if the part were printed on card stock. We're only talking about 0.1 mm of error here, but the key word in error creep is creep -- little errors can add up to irksome headaches in precision kits.

 

The solution in this case was to cut off and use only the colored portion of the printed part, thus avoiding the extra 0.1 mm that would have been added to the end of the floor piece if the entire printed part had been used.

 

Will this reduce error creep in this model? We hope so! Stay tuned to find out if it worked. 🙂

[ccoyle]

Seat installed. After I finished the bottom portion of the seat, which consists of two layers of card, I discovered I had put it together incorrectly, with the outside layer on the inside and vice versa. Oops. 🙄 I thought it wasn't going together very easily -- now I know why.

 

 

A thing to keep in mind as a builder when fretting over cockpits is that viewers like you, dear MSW member, are seeing this from an angle that will be quite impossible once the skins are on.

[Egilman]

4 hours ago, ccoyle said:

In many instances, if a laser-cut replacement part is used, the printed part is simply omitted from the construction. But what if a printed part has color on it, i.e. it's supposed to be visible after construction? Take a look at this next photo -- here I've measured the thickness of an internal bulkhead. It's a laser-cut part + printed part + glue. Notice it is now about 0.6 mm thick, not 0.4 - 0.5 mm. That's because of the added thickness of the printed part (printed on bond paper) and glue; it would be even thicker if the part were printed on card stock. We're only talking about 0.1 mm of error here, but the key word in error creep is creep -- little errors can add up to irksome headaches in precision kits.

It's more than just models brothers, the issue kreeps in with all full size machines... (ships, airplanes, especially large ones) I learned this when cutting 747 wing spars for Boeing 40 years ago.... when you finish one, the overall length is measured from an index point and the outer spars are cut for each end with an adjustment of a few thousandths of an inch longer or shorter then marked for THAT aircraft... The part belongs to no other aircraft..... In the engineering/machining world it is known as building within tolerances, in the machining/assembly world it is understood as cutting to the mating part requirements.....

 

This is the same thing as cutting to the mating part requirements... You adjust the part to fit and the overall assembly to remain in tolerance.... Scratch builders deal with it all the time....

[ccoyle]

Once the inner cockpit skin is applied, the visual value of a tidy cockpit is somewhat lessened.

 

 

BTW, another minor knock against this kit -- on the port-side interior of the cockpit (not visible in this image) is a cylinder of some sort, perhaps an oxygen cylinder or fire extinguisher. There are no location markings for the cylinder on the cockpit skin. The cylinder is shown in two different diagram views, but its location is different in each view. Thus, in the absence of corroborating evidence from other sources, the correct location for the cylinder is a bit of a guess. This lack of specificity in the diagrams was something I wrestled with during the Mohawk build.

[Egilman]

1 hour ago, ccoyle said:

Thus, in the absence of corroborating evidence from other sources, the correct location for the cylinder is a bit of a guess.

I'll bet the designers had the same problem, so they resorted to their best guess as well...

[ccoyle]

Moving forward with the outer skins. The first two sections have been joined together, but not yet to the inner cockpit skin; before the final placement of this shell, I will make sure that the first three sections, which will cover the length of the cockpit framing, align perfectly (or nearly so) and will fit the frames without any forcing. Each skin is slightly moistened, to weaken the paper fibers, then carefully formed into the correct shape -- it will hold its shape once the paper dries. Most of the sections will be butted together with the aid of a joiner strip; the flat piece in the photo has had its joiner strip attached and is now waiting for the glue to set before shaping can begin.

 

[ccoyle]

Cockpit area skinned. I joined the three sections together before adding the framed assembly. The fit was actually quite loose -- to offset this, I only tacked the outer skins on in a few spots, no forcing or squishing things together. I am quite pleased with the result -- the seams are snug, the panel lines align perfectly, and I didn't get any glue globs or smears anywhere. Everything is good to this point.

 

[CDW]

1 hour ago, ccoyle said:

Most of the sections will be butted together with the aid of a joiner strip; the flat piece in the photo has had its joiner strip attached and is now waiting for the glue to set before shaping can begin.

 

Chris

What do you use for the shaping. Is it just by hand, or using some round object to aid in shaping?

[Old Collingwood]

1 hour ago, CDW said:

 

Chris

What do you use for the shaping. Is it just by hand, or using some round object to aid in shaping?

I was wonder the same  - as paper/card  can be quite  soft and  create dents  and bumps  quite easy.

 

OC.

[ccoyle]

First of all, "moistening" in this case means very lightly wetted -- only enough to cause the paper to slightly curl. There are times when I purposely want card parts to delaminate, but when forming parts, if the card starts to delaminate, then it has gotten too wet. And yes, I do use a variety of "tools" to form parts. Some are actual tools, but most are just whatever cylindrical object is handy: knife handles, paint bottles, dowels of various diameters, etc. The side of a Titebond glue bottle happens to be perfect for many of the oval cross-sections of a fuselage.

[CDW]

Just now, ccoyle said:

First of all, "moistening" in this case means very lightly wetted -- only enough to cause the paper to slightly curl. There are times when I purposely want card parts to delaminate, but when forming parts, if the card starts to delaminate, then it has gotten too wet. And yes, I do use a variety of "tools" to form parts. Some are actual tools, but most are just whatever cylindrical object is handy: knife handles, paint bottles, dowels of various diameters, etc. The side of a Titebond glue bottle happens to be perfect for many of the oval cross-sections of a fuselage.

Thanks for that explanation Chris. By moistening, do you use a damp sponge or something of that sort? And what are some instances when you might want the part to delaminate?

[ccoyle]

5 hours ago, CDW said:

By moistening, do you use a damp sponge or something of that sort? And what are some instances when you might want the part to delaminate?

 

It might sound gross, but licking the part actually does the job nicely. 🤢 (BTW, licking might sound like a risk for damaging the paper fibers, but paper fibers consist of cellulose, for which humans lack the necessary digestive enzyme). For larger surfaces, I use a damp paint brush.

 

I will sometimes delaminate a part if I judge the card stock part to be too thick. An example of this is the flags used in my 1/250 ship models. The flag is usually printed on card stock and designed to be folded to produce a two-sided finished flag. But such a flag is too thick to drape properly. Thus, I lightly wet the card stock, allow the water to penetrate the layers of fiber, then use a knife tip to separate the printed top layer from the remaining layers. I'll even gently scrape away any unwanted residual fibers from the back of the part. Card stock is also generally bad for forming tubes of very narrow diameters. To understand why, one must remember that a sheet of card stock is a three-dimensional product -- it's actually a very thin rectangular prism made of multiple layers. The layers of paper in the printed part want to shift as the tube is rolled, because each successive layer, going from top to bottom, must form a narrower tube than the one above it -- visualize what happens when you try to roll a magazine into a tube. The narrower the tube, the worse the problem is. One solution for this is to delaminate the printed part and then wrap it around a piece of styrene rod.

[CDW]

Just now, ccoyle said:

 

It might sound gross, but licking the part actually does the job nicely. 🤢 (BTW, licking might sound like a risk for damaging the paper fibers, but paper fibers consist of cellulose, for which humans lack the necessary digestive enzyme). For larger surfaces, I use a damp paint brush.

 

I will sometimes delaminate a part if I judge the card stock part to be too thick. An example of this is the flags used in my 1/250 ship models. The flag is usually printed on card stock and designed to be folded to produce a two-sided finished flag. But such a flag is too thick to drape properly. Thus, I lightly wet the card stock, allow the water to penetrate the layers of fiber, then use a knife tip to separate the printed top layer from the remaining layers. I'll even gently scrape away any unwanted residual fibers from the back of the part. Card stock is also generally bad for forming tubes of very narrow diameters. To understand why, one must remember that a sheet of card stock is a three-dimensional product -- it's actually a very thin rectangular prism made of multiple layers. The layers of paper in the printed part want to shift as the tube is rolled, because each successive layer, going from top to bottom, must form a narrower tube than the one above it -- imagine what happens when you try to roll a magazine into a tube. The narrower the tube, the worse the problem is. One solution for this is to delaminate the printed part and then wrap it around a piece of styrene rod.

You taught me some things I certainly did not know, that there are layers in card stock. Thanks for taking the time to share your knowledge of the subject. Prospective card modelers want to know. 🙂

[ccoyle]

I forgot to mention that an easy way to "delaminate" a card stock part, if you have a good scanning copier, is to simply scan and print the parts sheet onto 20# bond copier paper.