About 20 minutes of Xacto-twiddling into this project, the knife slipped and plunged into my left index finger. Being a spaz, I generally do that at least once per model, and the Missus always gets queasy when I use Krazy glue to seal the wound. Whew. At least that's over with. Now, full steam ahead with the build.
I am, frankly, quite thrilled with this model, and Roden has broken new ground. Although the 1920s was probably the most critical period in aviation history, it is the era least catered to among kit manufacturers. The workhorses were the modified two-seaters in designs left over from the Great War, the planes that did the grunt work of training, of exploration, of mapping, of making the air a viable workplace in the new age. The Mk. IV "Biff" was right in the thick of it, keeping the peace in the far reaches of Empire whilst also training a new generation of air-minded cadets in Britain's universities. In one form or another, the doughty Bristol Fighter served for a quarter-century, longer than any other British design on World War I.
This Bristol Mk. IV kit is likely the first 1/48 utility biplane released by a major company since Aurora's M-2 "Mailplane," a half-century ago. Roden has already knocked out an attractive DH.4a "passenger" modification, and I'm sincerely hoping they'll get around to more post-war DH-4s, DH-9a, Wapiti, Fokker C-1 … how about a Bristol Tourer? All based on kits that have already been released by Roden. (Oh, while I'm dreaming, how about the Hawker Hart family?) All also widely used by a variety of air forces.
Stephen Lawson (JackFlash) gave us a complete preview of what to expect in the kit. Suffice to say that it is Roden's basic Bristol Fighter, with an extra tree of parts and a new decal sheet to modify it to Mk. IV standards, which is exactly what happened to the real bird. Lawson also thoughtfully forwarded Eduard's Sutton seatbelt harness. necessary for a postwar bird.
The additional sprue contains the more-streamlined cowl, with stamped louvers instead of open holes, a different radiator face, enlarged tailfeathers and long, straight exhausts, slightly modded tailskid bracing, and Handley Page slats and gears for the upper wing (the mold for which has been modified to accept the slats), plus assorted gimcracks for the message-pickup apparatus.
The decal sheet provides markings for a colorful Bristol Fighter of the Cambridge University Air Squadron, circa 1931, plus a drab Army Cooperation Squadron bird in 1930. They seem well-printed and accurate. They also require the modeleer to make a choice early on. A clean, well-maintained University plane, or a dusty, knocked-about soldier in overseas service.
Roden doesn't provide enough goodies, alas, to do the latter. Perhaps in a later issue, Roden can provide a small sprue tree with Holt flares, extra wheels and radiator, under-wing luggage panniers, tropical secondary radiator, wide-tread tires, proper Cooper racks, generators, cameras to attach to the Scarff Ring mount, maybe even a trussed antelope to tie to the wing. Biffs in overseas service tended to have all sorts of junk attached to the outside; the clutter is one of the visually appealing aspects of its historic appearance. (Roden, if you do this, dudes, throw in some Mexican, Peruvian, Afghani, Greek, New Zealand and Norwegian markings!)
Without the provided clutter, a clean machine is the fallback, and so the attractive Cambridge University mount it will be. (Mainly because I'm fond of the Cambridgeshire countryside, but that's another story.)
Next step, how serious a build will this be? On the scale of an out-of-the-box weekender up to a never-finished, compulsive-detail disorder assembly, I decide my Mk. IV will be pretty much OOB, with the only things "fixed" being the stuff I can't help myself from tweaking.
That's partly practical. I have not built Roden's Biff before, despite having several on the shelf. Do a simple build and see how it goes, then go crazy on the detail stuff when you have time later. Maybe in your second lifetime.
Except, as noted, for the bits that MUST be fixed. Which brings us 'round to the cut finger. The pilots' seat is woven wicker on the real bird, and Roden provides a simple seat shell. No problem, thinks I, reaching for my Eduard brass fret of generic WWI seats. Alas, none of them resemble the Brisfit seat. So out comes the knife for a bit of twiddling and — ouch!
Next up, the adventure of adding photos to this build blog.

Stephen Lawson's review of the Roden Bristol Fighter Mk. IV

Hi Burl,

Welcome to Aeroscale!

Very nice presentation. If the build is likewise, it will be fun to watch... minus the cuts in the fingers of course!

I'm really looking forward to the first pictures...




Yes, I agree. The kits are so nice nowadays and there are so many. Sometimes a "simple" out of the box build is just what one needs.

All the best,

Jean-Luc

Welcome Burl! Its good to see your finger has survived. Model on! Please!

Did Aeroclub's Biff provide for a Mk.IV option? Or is the Roden kit the first time this option has been available in 1/48?

Are you thinking of the Blue Max kit? The options in that one were Falcon or Arab engines, I think....

Welcome Burl. There was an interesting thread about modeling injuries. Maybe Stephen can bring it up. Be forewarned, it is not for the queasy. After I read it, I never complained about a modeling injury again. Welcome to Aeroscale, home of numerous nimble and crazy glued digits. Posting is easy. But I recommend a photobucket or similar account. Then just paste the link. I agree the 'tweeners are often under represented. But we did have a campaign for 'tweeners. I reccomend you check out the campaigns as they are really a good time, and challenge you to do models you would not always think of doing. If you have any questions or need help, just ask us. The people here are really great.

My wife is from Kapaa, on Kauai. If I lived there I would probably never find time for models.

No, I have the Blue Max kit and am aware of the engine options. I vaguely recall reading somewhere that Aeroclub also did a Bristol Fighter in 1/48 and I thought it had optional parts for the Mk. IV version. My motivation for asking is to find out; 1) if Aeroclub did indeed release that version and; 2) can anyone comment on the relative merits of the Aeroclub vs Roden kits.

My apologies to everyone for any perceived hijacking of the thread--I'll be quiet now


Thank you!

Karl

Karl you get quite on us and we'll send the hounds out looking for you! No need to apologize. Questions are welcome here.

LOL! Thank you sir!

No worries, I'm about to hijack my own thread.

Well, in this build thread we'll get two for the price of none. The Roden kit is so nice that I dug out my stash of Aurora Biffs to compare. I haven't built an Aurora Bristol Fighter since I was like 10, and I blew it up with firecrackers. How do they match up? Can I knock out a reasonable-looking build of the Aurora kit as well?
As seen in the picture above — OK, this update is an excuse to practice pasting in pictures — the side of the Aurora fuselage isn't bad at all. The length is short by about 1/8 inch right at the tail, making the Aurora kit look stubby. The problem is the top and bottom. Aurora built in camber, likely to ease molding, and this will have to be taken down to flatten it. But too much plastic will have to be sanded out. It will have to be beefed up inside. Interesting problem.
Oh, yeah, plus those molded-on markings! This is the original Aurora molding, in very hard, flaky green plastic. The 1976 edition has the markings removed and the plastic is easier to work with.

Here's the Roden fuselage interior, with a couple of ejection punches filled in. I only fill the ones that might be seen.

And here's the outsides. There are some sunken areas on the fuselage that need to be filled, and then CAREFULLY sanded to preserve the stitching detail. Roden also has one remove a couple of excess exhaust-mounts from the surface.

The front of the cowl. Hoping to avoid Roden's famous fussiness, I've glued together the bottom of the cowl but left the top open (and held together with tape). The idea is to allow the cowl to spread to pop in the engine, then glue the top.
The Biff's Falcon engine isn't easy to see under any circumstances, so I shan't go to town detailing it. Only the slim bits visible through the exhaust ports and the cooling vents. The cheek vents and the little scoop beneath the cowl have been reamed out for a more scale appearance. At the top edge of the exhaust cover is a molding flaw where the plastic didn't quite fill the mold — solved by adding a drop of medium-density instant glue from the backside.

And the underside and back end of the cowl. Another reason to glue it together early is to ream out the cooling holes into properly round openings; they're rather egg-shaped on the kit. The edges had been thinned on the cooling vents, plus the louvers have been hollowed out by twiddling carefully with a #11 point.

The seat, under way. All scale models are, by nature, impressions of the real thing, and I'm not going to town on the wicker seat. I just cut it away, added a bit of copper fuse wire and then built up the back with layers of CYA. I wouldn't do this much, except that the Biff has a big open cockpit and the seat is right there in the middle.

Nothing like a goof right out of the box. What I thought were incompletely molded cowl head covers — and what I "fixed" with a cleverly applied drop of Krazy — were actually flashed over. Thanks to finally getting a copy of the Windsock Special #2 on the Biff, plus keeping a copy of the 1/32 Wingnut kit on hand, I realized that this portion needed to be cut away. The header covers are actually open on the end, which makes cooling sense. So, out with the Mini Mite, plus a loupe, good lighting and a steadying sip of beer to grind away the cleverly applied super glue, and also the thin the plastic to scale thickness. Then the cover ends were nibbled away with an Xacto point. The plastic is very soft when it gets this thin, so the resultant piece is very flimsy. And because I'm basically lazy, the inside is colored with a silver Sharpie. How much will be visible? Who knows? The Biff was a tightly cowled aircraft.

Obsessive compulsive? Not me. I just think if you're on a roll, go with the flow. And so once I started adding some basic interior structure to the Aurora kit, I started doing it to me whole stash of Aurora kits. Don't worry, I have specific plans for each of them, but only the green-plastic one will be completed this build. The bottom fuselages are the Roden kit, just beginning to get a paint job. The ochre fuselages are the 1976 reworked Aurora molds, in plastic that's much easier to work with than the very brittle green stuff of the original issue. The Aurora fuselages have the interior "detail" ground away, and the cabane strut location filled in. The framework is made of .04 by .04 Evergreen strip, laid in with the Mk. 1 eyeball. Note that the Aurora fuselages also have Evergreen strip thickening the seam joint. That will all be ground down to give the fuselage a more accurate cross-section. I know the interior detail isn't exactly right on the Aurora kits, but I'm limited by the awkward fuselage shape. For these, I just want a reasonable-looking model when all is done.

The Roden fuselages have thin sheets of styrene added to the "floor," adding strength to the join, and also hiding the fuselage seam. All fuselages have a styrene "curtain" added to the rear of the gunner's pit, with detail to be added later.

Here's the Falcon III engine as supplied by Roden, all slapped together and painted a metallic color. It certainly looks busy, and if I were making this cowls-off I'd be adding wiring. As it is, I'll have to knock this assembly down a peg. I put it together completely, to see how she fares, but I'll have to attack virtually everything above the cylinder heads to get it to fit in the cowl — speaking of which, that's behind the engine with a fresh coat of NATO Black. Opinions vary on the Cambridge University birds' cowls — dark gray or black? I try never to actually paint anything black on a model, but this is a little too green.

BTW, it's not exactly clear on the instructions, as the cylinder banks look identical backwards and forwards, but they ARE handed. There is a tiny pip near the top of each cylinder that goes on the inside face of the engine — it's what the plumbing apparatus above the rocker arms attach to. You can get it backwards (I did on one set of cylinders) and it's no big deal, but it's something that's only obvious after the engine is built.
And Roden is not kidding about not including the plumbing and rocker arms in the engine on a cowled model. Won't fit, otherwise. With them gone, the engine rattles around in there quite nicely.

There comes a time, in any build, when the facts get in the way and everything comes to a screeching halt. Sometimes a little research is a dangerous thing.
First off, the pilot's seat, by the late '20s, is no longer a lovely wicker apparatus but a utilitarian pan of aluminum. The pilot's seat in the Roden Gladiator kit looks to be a fair replacement, however.
Also, there are differences in the location of the Scarff ring opening. The Mk. IV had additional plywood decking and the gunners' location moved father aft. Looks like an easy fix — if one decides to fix it at all — although it's fairly prominent.
Mainly, though, there's some question about Roden's interpretation of the Cambridge University squadron markings. The shield on the rudder is not Cambridge colors at all. It's a mix of Oxford and Cambridge blue when it should be red and yellow and white. The only photo I've seen of this bird (in the Pt. II Datafile) shows the word "SQUA" partially visible beneath the shield, clearly meant to be SQUADRON. Whether it's a matter of glare or a partially painted insignia, I rather doubt it would have remained unfinished for long. I wish the decal gave the option.
More troublesome are the rudder stripes. In 1931, the RAF reversed the order of colors so that red was the leading color. As this is supposed to be a post-1931 airframe, the order is wrong, although one could take the position it's a pre-1931 aircraft.
On the other hand, Roden believes the radiator edging (usually a coppery brass color) is painted dark blue, likely Oxford Blue. The photo of this airframe shows that region to be a different shade than the rest of the cowl, so it's possible. And quite tempting.

To fix the big hole aft of the pilot is easy-peasy, as the British say. First, find a circle template of the proper diameter and pencil the new hole about 1/8" down the fuselage.

Then, with a sharp new Xacto scalpel, slice through the rather soft Roden plastic following the lines. Don't whittle, get the piece in one curl.

Then, take the plastic curls, flip therm around and glue on the opposite sides. Let it dry, and back it up beneath with a little CYA.

Sand it smooth and fill any imperfections. Done.

Love your solution for the repositioned rear 'pit--elegant, efficient, brilliant!

The old Burnt Umber wash in the cockpit is making things looked lived-in and appropriately filthy, probably not bloody likely for a Tween bird, but what the hey. Now more detail to be added and close things up. In the meantime, here's a look at PART's Biff PE extravaganza, likely none of which I'll use on this model, but it's a handy reference for some stuff. As usual, the PE maker would rather you layer up PE parts than use any plastic rod,,,

I strongly reccomend you using Part's brass. Engine cooler intake for the Falcon fits great to the Roden parts and gives very good final result. Windscreen also looks nice on the model.

As work continues on the interior, it's interesting to look at this supposedly color image of a Biff in Palestine. Note that the fabric and metal areas are different shades. Assuming that this is an actual color image, and not tinted, how true is the color, taking in account image fading? I'm going by the blue and red insignia hues...

Time to give an impression of cockpit rigging. Let's see — we need an inexpensive source of straight black nylon bristles that are the right diameter …

The cheaper the paintbrush, the more suitable the bristles. This one cost me $2 and will be a lifetime supply. Hack off a batch, cut to length and fix in place with Future. It ain't fancy. Neither are my Sharpie scribbles in the rear fuselage to give an impression of an airframe should someone peer through a tiny hole in the fuselage. I did say this was going to be pretty much OOTB, didn't I?

Burl , this has been a fantastic thread to follow so far . Would have never had thought of using paint brush bristles for doing the cockpit rigging ! Now that is a cool idea and one I will try in the future . Can be a pain having to roll wire for this .

Looking forward to more of your progress !

It's possible the worst thing you can do whilst building a model is take digital photos of the progress and blow them up. This looks OK to my Mk.1 eyeball but it's obvious I'm going to have to screw in a loupe and get in there to clean things up. Yuck.
At any rate, before a bunch of cockpit gimcrackery gets in the way, this is the cloth partition at the rear of the gunner's cockpit. It's pretty much standard equipment in a Biff although kits tend to leave it out. It's heavy cloth — muslin or canvas instead of linen? — and comes in a variety of colors, all dull. Essentially, it closes off the rear fuselage on the sides and bottom while leaving a gap at the top supported by webbing. To the front is sewed a baglike sack, open at the top. The gunner tosses his spent Lewis gun drums in there.
The primary partition is made out of .020 styrene sheet, thinned at the top. The straps are paper, white-glued into place. The bag is cut and shaped from thin brass sheet, and the whole is glued together and stritching painted on the sides. It all looks pretty messy here, although these cloth enclosures likely got pretty flithy.
I made four of these for my current run of Brisfits, and if-and-when I get Bristol Fever again, I'll make a master and vac-form multiple copies. It will look better and be easier to work with.