Plastic Thunderhawk Gunship

[Naryn]

It's amazing how much cleaner/more professional the squaring up of the edges has made an already exemplary build. Lovely work as usual!

[Brother Christopher]

6 hours ago, Naryn said:

It's amazing how much cleaner/more professional the squaring up of the edges has made an already exemplary build. Lovely work as usual!

 

I'm impressed that you are able to see that in the photos ;) Thanks!

  

23 hours ago, ZeroWolf said:

Honestly, some of that sanding makes it look like the thunderhawk has flown to hell and back! Great to see progress 

 

Yeah, it's inspiring in a way... I might go with the battle damage approach to painting it.

 

***

In other news, I'm often wandering why am I the way I am: instead of taking the simple way and doing it like it used to be done on the resin models, I figured - heck, why not waste another hour. Inspired by the THawk from Space Marine 2, I figured that I can make these silly squares at the front headlamps. And instead of either painting a flat surface yellow (to imitate the lamp) or glue on a smaller square (to do the same), I decided to make the lamp concave, i.e. I took little bits of 0.25 mm plasticard and cut the inside to make a frame that I later glued on top the the actual detail thingy.

 

Was it worth it? Maybe not. But I must be succumbing to scratchbuilding madness since I wanted to do it. I think that once painted, the 'frame' will make the front pop a bit more and might help take people's eyes off some of the other minor faults.

 

 

 

 

I also added some minor details to the top armour plate:

 

And retook a photo of the front section, this time with better white balance and exposure.

 

I'm away for a couple of days but when I'm back I'm set on painting and fitting the front ramp, as well as gluing on the sponsons. I'm a bit concerned whether they'll fit at the right angles but I expect this to be the second to last hurdle with assembling the model (the last being fitting the canopy).

 

Overall, the process is absurdly messy. But - let me reiterate this - this is the aftermath of my previous inexperience and later naivety. Yet, I'm more and more hopeful that the amount of gap filling, putty work, devotion and time will be enough turn this around and will result in a 'final product' that will be as intended.

 

 

[ZeroWolf]

Nothing wrong with pushing yourself 

 

You're an inspiration to us all undertaking this project. Can't wait to see it all finished

[Brother Christopher]

Quick question: do you think that the sponsons look flimsy from the front? Especially when the guns are facing forward like in the picture below.

 

 

The side and/or angled view is okay (see below), but I a bit concerned that the front view is quite unfavourable because of how far the guns are from the actual side of the fuselage. This was necessitated by my lack of forward-thinking and: because of the size of the mags, the guns need more space to be able to move freely than they would do with a 'normal' ammo feed. I mean, these considerations are all after the fact. The milk is spilt since I probably won't be able to do anything about this without having to redo it but I'm curious what you think.

 

Edited January 30 by Brother Christopher

[ZeroWolf]

Hmm, the supports definitely look thin, from the front at least. Might not be that noticeable once it's all together and more to look at

[TheArtilleryman]

I think it’s all the open space around the guns that is giving that impression. The sponsons on the GW version are the armoured kind rather than the swivel mount.

 

 

I would say your design idea is fine as it’s similar to the land raider sponsons, but those are much more compact:

 

Maybe make the supports shorter and bring the gun closer in to the ship so the whole sponson surround is smaller. You could then maybe try to box the back in if you feel like it. Depends if you want full 180° swivel or not.

 

Hope I’m making sense …

Edited January 31 by TheArtilleryman

[Brother Christopher]

10 hours ago, ZeroWolf said:

Hmm, the supports definitely look thin, from the front at least.

 

That's what I'm thinking, too.

 

Or perhaps it's not so much about the thickness of supports but the space between the bolters and the fuselage.

 

@TheArtilleryman You're making sense and nailing the problem. I wanted to stay truer to the OG Thunderhawk that had LR-styled sponsons.

 

 

But those had 'normal' ammo feeds instead of the overly fancy I opted for. As a result, they appeared way more compact, similarly to those that you posted on the LR.

 

The thing is that mine aren't that much larger - there's a roughly 2mm difference between them and the ones on the LR. But somehow it makes an amazing difference.

 

I definitely need some more time to consider what to do with this. To be brutally honest, I'm a bit tired of doing this cursed section of the vehicle. I think that I don't want to redo the sponsons (which would probably be the best thing to do quality-wise).

 

Right now I think that if I just added some more bulk to the supports. The way I see it, the areas marked red in the photo below create the flimsy feeling.

 

 

The area between the red squares should remain as-is to make room for the bolters.

 

I'm considering adding - similarly to a LR - triangle armour plates (see the areas marked green) or perhaps add some targeters/lamps/stuff under the top sponson support.

 

Would you agree that this would alleviate the problem and make the thing optically more bulky?

[ZeroWolf]

It's worth a shot would definitely give the impression that they are reinforced.

 

I can see why you wouldn't want to just completely redo the sponsons

[Firedrake Cordova]

What @TheArtilleryman said.  If you want to look at it another way, the sponson weapons on the Predator kit don't exactly look substantial ...

 

1 hour ago, Brother Christopher said:

Or perhaps it's not so much about the thickness of supports but the space between the bolters and the fuselage.

Yes, I think the gap is creating a perception.

 

Edited January 31 by Firedrake Cordova

[TheArtilleryman]

3 hours ago, Brother Christopher said:

 

That's what I'm thinking, too.

 

Or perhaps it's not so much about the thickness of supports but the space between the bolters and the fuselage.

 

@TheArtilleryman You're making sense and nailing the problem. I wanted to stay truer to the OG Thunderhawk that had LR-styled sponsons.

 

 

But those had 'normal' ammo feeds instead of the overly fancy I opted for. As a result, they appeared way more compact, similarly to those that you posted on the LR.

 

The thing is that mine aren't that much larger - there's a roughly 2mm difference between them and the ones on the LR. But somehow it makes an amazing difference.

 

I definitely need some more time to consider what to do with this. To be brutally honest, I'm a bit tired of doing this cursed section of the vehicle. I think that I don't want to redo the sponsons (which would probably be the best thing to do quality-wise).

 

Right now I think that if I just added some more bulk to the supports. The way I see it, the areas marked red in the photo below create the flimsy feeling.

 

 

The area between the red squares should remain as-is to make room for the bolters.

 

I'm considering adding - similarly to a LR - triangle armour plates (see the areas marked green) or perhaps add some targeters/lamps/stuff under the top sponson support.

 

Would you agree that this would alleviate the problem and make the thing optically more bulky?

The easiest fix might be to add a solid piece of plasticard to fill out the back third of the sponson. That way it would be closed in at the back and you wouldn’t be able to see right through it.

 

Like this(ish):

 

My markup is terrible but does that make any sense at all?

 

Edited January 31 by TheArtilleryman

[TheArtilleryman]

2 hours ago, Firedrake Cordova said:

, the sponson weapons on the Predator kit don't exactly look substantial ...

Eurgh they are the worst design ever. They break so easily and once they’ve broken once, you’re screwed. It wouldn’t be as bad if they had a support below, but it’s the way they just hang off the top that makes them so bad.

Edited January 31 by TheArtilleryman

[m-p-constructions]

WOW! This project is so impressive, i looked it up irregularly in the past years and i would never have made it that far if i where in your place. Your tenacity really is inspiring.

I am looking forward for the coming updates.

[Brother Christopher]

22 hours ago, TheArtilleryman said:

The easiest fix might be to add a solid piece of plasticard to fill out the back third of the sponson. That way it would be closed in at the back and you wouldn’t be able to see right through it.

 

Like this(ish):

 

My markup is terrible but does that make any sense at all?

 

 

Thanks for the mock-up. That's definitely the last resort solution.

 

I feel I want to try and make the sponsons I made work better. I really liked the design of the sponsons on the Baal Predator (with the minimalistic support on the bottom) and the weapons from the LR Prometheus and I've already devoted some time to transfer these inspirations onto my flyer. If the result of bulking and blinging this part of the model up, I'll fit the armour in the back, as you described. However, then I'll just glue the sponsons in permanently.

 

22 hours ago, m-p-constructions said:

WOW! This project is so impressive, i looked it up irregularly in the past years and i would never have made it that far if i where in your place. Your tenacity really is inspiring.

I am looking forward for the coming updates.

 

Thanks for dropping a comment! I appreciate it. Right now, the project hit a bit of a rough patch but I do hope to get through it sooner rather than later.

[Sir Clausel]

Awesome to see you are still going strong on this!

My 2 cents on the heavy bolter sponsons: Maybe get them a little bit closer to the hull? and shorten the "pole" they are attached to? That will tone down the flimsiness.

But what else has been said will also work.

[Brother Christopher]

@Sir Clausel Thanks! I am going strong (well, strongish, minus the setbacks I encountered recently) and am determined to finish this model ASAP.

 

Your solution would be the best and easiest to implement but for the space necessary for the guns to rotate freely.

 

I went with my gut feeling and am in the process of adding some more details to the existing design. Given the absolutely shoddy work I did with glue, I think I'll spare myself the embarrassment of posting WIP photos, though.

 

The good thing is that I think the result won't be as distracting as the initial design was. The bad thing is that this entire situation shows that I should most definitely refrain from designing my own models - I should stick to building stuff using existing templates and introducing minor alterations. The entire sponsons debacle emphasises my lack of foresight. To drive the point home: I realised that the exact position of the sponson mounts gets in the way of the small front wings (apparently, the proper term is 'canard') so I'll have to reposition those.

 

In the original old model, the canards are a bit above the top panel of the sponson housing; mine are at the same level which appears to make the model look off, at least from the initial dry fitting I did. Well... here's to me trying the 'fancy' ammo feeds! I hope it was worth it. If the preliminarily diagnosed issue with the canards turns out to be true, I think I'll just reposition them ca. 1 cm higher so that they are 'integrated' with the thicker armour plating around the cockpit.

[Brother Christopher]

I've finally made some minor progress. I finished the ramp:

 

 

 

I also basecoated the whole front and started doing the edge highlights. Regrettably, paint didn't satisfactorily hide the poor fixed (putty- and file-work) so there is a visible -- and unwanted -- texture on certain crucial edges and surfaces. However, I can't seems to fix it. Admittedly, I managed to fix some of the issues but I'm concerned that putting more work in the attempts to refine these parts will only result in more damage.

 

The absolutely strangest thing is that the surfaces appear to be alright. I can't feel the texture/roughness but after applying a coat of paint, the sordid fixes surface.

 

The silver lining is that they aren't that bad and become apparent only at certain angles.

 

 

 

In the end, I suppose, I'll try to mask these bits with battle damage or whatnot.

[ZeroWolf]

Can say that I only really noticed the afflicted areas when you circled them out. Especially the littler one. It's odd though that it only showed up through the paint.

 

Still good work though. Every step forward is a step closer to the end than you were originally.

[Rusted Boltgun]

That must be so frustrating after all the work you have put in.

Some battle damage should hide it. Don't let it set you back, this is tremendous!

[apologist]

Keep going, @Brother Christopher – it's looking fantastic! I think your decision to beef up the sponsons was a good one.

 

While the surface texture might seem disheartening, I'll echo the choir that it's very subtle – and you might turn it to your advantage. Rather than weathering it, have you considered something like a Black Templars version of this Ravenwing banner?

 

 

Having something like that hanging on the side might add to the overall feel, and reinforce the Chapter identity.

 

Alternatively, perhaps a cluster of purity seals – something that I always think adds a great deal to the 40k feel of vehicles – or if you prefer something more functional, perhaps a scanner/directional light or similar? The point is that a little decoration and greebling will make a virtue of the minor damage, where weathering might draw the eye.

[Firedrake Cordova]

The front-end with the lights looks great  

 

With regard to the uneven texture on the side ... I understand the frustration, but I don't think it's the end of the world. If you look at some of the old WWII-era tanks, the welding on them is pretty ropey, and some of the surfaces are not uniformly "rolled" (especially the Soviet ones as they were produced "in a rush"). One thing you could look at is using something like Vallejo Plastic Putty to extend a texture across a wider area to blend it out?

[Dr_Ruminahui]

Love the crisp yellow lights!

 

I echo the various other posters - the blemishes are understandably annoying, but don't necessarily need any significant addressing.  I would imagine a brick shaped re-entry vehicle like this one would undergo significant heat stresses whenever it hit atmosphere, and it is natural that there might be some deformation or surface mussing involved, and your blemishes could well be seen as an example of that.  If you feel they need some more, maybe a heat effect like people sometimes paint on the barrels of assault cannons and the like?

 

Personally, I'm not a fan of the dangly bits or purity seals approaches, as I don't think either would survive its use as an aircraft.  Those things work on ground vehicles, but they go beyond an acceptable level of silly (for me) for a cross-atmospheric aircraft.

Edited February 12 by Dr_Ruminahui

[Brother Christopher]

Firstly, thank you for all the kind words and support. Also, many thanks for the feedback regarding the 'damage' and ways of dealing with it. As @Rusted Boltgun put it: it is frustrating but I feel that at this point, I'm almost past the point of caring too much. I think that I just have to accept it what it is: a project that has been going for way too long. I want to press onwards and see where I land. In an attempt to do so, I started preparations to work on the rest of the model and discovered that I left notes in 2020. And I felt that it wasn't that long ago.

 

@apologist Thanks, I think I like the sponsons now - or at least don't dislike them. They should be okay with the guns installed, though I still have this luring feeling of annoyance with my poor design. Adding bling of the type you mentioned surely is a solution and I'll bear that in mind. Right now, the plan is to continue painting the rest of the model and give myself time to breathe and think. If I'll still be annoyed with these kinds of defects, I'll have to make some relatively hard decisions: whether to go with the rule of cool (i.e. bits that you suggested) or take the more realistic route that @Dr_Ruminahui mentioned (i.e. go with a more austere aesthetic forced by the use of the craft).

 

I don't want to come of as overly frustrated/annoyed with with the imperfections. I'm noting these issues because they are disappointing in the sense that I intended the model to be more like a mint plastic kit. Of course, the justifications for the texture all of you mention - blemishes, battle damage, marks of repairs - are perfectly fine and I feel I'm close to accepting them. The issues I'm having are not very rational and stem from the fact that I sometimes find myself too set in my ways and need more time to process change.

 

@Firedrake Cordova Thanks for recommending the putty - I'll make sure to look into it. From the video you posted, it looks very useful. The only putties I've used before offered a similar messy finish, like Milliput.

 

***

In the meantime, I did some more work on the highlights on the front section. I also primed some parts that make up the rear of the vehicle. The plan was to paint them while they're not assembled and later glue them onto the "core" of the rear of the flyer (basically a large box) and then assembling the front and back sections. However, eventually I decided to correct course and I will be putting the rear together way sooner, hopefully, today. This way I'll be able to address the inevitable problems more quickly.

 

While most of the parts fit together nicely, I've discovered one substantial issue but fixing it shouldn't be that difficult (I have no idea how I missed that during pre-assembly!). And with the most recent putty-related issues, I know to rely on plasticard to fix it. In 2025, this project is a comedy of errors :D

 

On thing's for sure: the vehicle will be enormous!