Paul, I’ll take this a bit further.
The Spitfire was also a bit rough in finish, and as I recall, was just ‘not quite right’. I can draw quite well (thank goodness, because that is what I’m paid to do).
I can, like any boy of my era, draw a Spitfire freehand. But it won’t be completely accurate, or depict a particular Mk.
Even though I am bliddy good at CAD, taking that sketch on to 3d would be taxing and even less accurate.
Carving a wooden plug would therefore be a bit rough. Allowing for shrinkage, more or less impossible. I’ve done a bit of wood carving, but all freehand. It would look good, but be totally inaccurate.
Given that my Dad ended up as Chief Engineer on the RR RB211 engine, we can assume that ‘rough’ was not what he would then have accepted. Ceramics and Titanium were his then play things. He was an AFRAES. (post war).
My guess would be that the ‘project’ was to make a plug, mould and then cast. Mirror reflection not required! So maybe it was a test for the entrant at an early age – 16?
When I was 16 I’d have been proud if I had cast something that came out as a monoplane, let alone a Spitfire/Lightning.
A part of my reason for this guess is that he wasn’t even slightly surprised to find that a 18 yo. boguing was casting model yacht keels in Lead in the garage armed with nothing but an A level Chem textbook telling him the melting temperature of Lead.
As a parent, I can say that a ‘yoof’ should not be expected to make a couture product. That can only come with 5,000 hours of practice. But a talented one will have a very good try.
If I had been a tutor to 16yos, I’d be pretty pleased if their models had a wing on each side.
Might we worth a post on pprune – gaining a brevet in mil av, fair few veterans who were not pilots on that.
Sign In
