1. Introduction
My personal favourite propliner is the sleek-looking Canadair CL-44. It comes in a number of different versions: the military -6 has fore and aft cargo doors in the fuselage sides; the civilian -D4 has a swinging tail; the -J is the ultimate stretch; and finally, the -0 is a “guppy”. Many of the ex-military -6’s ended their lives in service with cargo operators outside the USA, because the FAA would not approve the greenhouse style cockpit windows. Modeling-wise, it makes an attractive display either in flight or on the ground in a cargo loading diorama. The CL-44 was in service with a very large number of operators, so there is a wide selection of potential colour schemes.
The only CL-44 kits presently available are the 1/144 scale Welsh Models and F-RSIN offerings, so those wanting to model in any other scale are left to convert the 1/96 Frog (Novo/Eastern Express) or 1/72 Mach 2 Britannias. The aim of this article is to provide the information necessary to convert a Britannia to a CL-44. Readers are welcome to append comments elaborating on or correcting any information provided in this article.
2. The Conversion
In this article, I will be converting the 1/72 Mach 2 Britannia 300 to an RCAF CL-44-6 “Yukon”. The Mach 2 kit is an “old school” garage kit, so yes, there are issues involving accuracy, symmetry, straightness, surface finish, etc, but I accept these as a given for this type of kit, and will just consider these issues as part of the fun of the build. I will be using the AIM Transport Wings conversion kit, which includes resin fuselage plugs, resin engines, and white metal propellers.
The conversion starts by stretching the fuselage. The following diagrams show the comparative fuselage lengths of the Britannia 300 and the CL-44-6 from which the dimensions of the fuselage plugs can be calculated. These diagrams provide other useful dimensions that may be of help to the builder. I have also included information about the Britannia 100 and CL-44J for the benefit of readers making different conversions.
Comparison of fuselage lengths:
For my conversion, to get from a Britannia 300 to a CL-44-6, I need a 93.6 inch forward plug and a 57.4 inch aft plug.
I did not use the resin fuselage plugs provided in the conversion kit. This was because I had previous bad experiences mixing resin and plastic. Instead, I created my own plugs with Evergreen plastic strips and sheets, using the method demonstrated in my earlier article on the Mach 2 DC-8-73F conversion. I staggered the left and right plugs to improve the straightness and strength of the joint. The stretched fuselage looked as follows.
Image of kit showing fuselage stretch.
The following image shows the CL-44-6 station diagrams, to help builders position various details.
CL-44-6 Station Diagrams
The Britannia and CL-44 have different engines. The most noticeable external visual difference is that the CL-44 has an air scoop on the top and bottom of each nacelle. The Britannia and CL-44 both have 4-bladed 16 foot diameter propellers, but whereas Britannias have a mix of rounded or square propeller tips, CL-44’s have only square ones.
Britannia and CL-44 Engine Differences.
The resin engines from the AIM Transport Wings conversion kit were attached with epoxy glue and blended in with putty. The result looks like so…
AIM Transport Wings resin engines shown after installation.
The CL-44 and Britannia have different engine exhausts as shown in the following images. The Britannia exhaust is shaped like a flattened oval, and fits in the nacelle. The CL-44 exhaust is circular and much taller than the Britannia’s flattened oval, so the CL-44 nacelle is much taller.
Britannia and CL-44 engine exhaust differences.
The AIM Transport Wings conversion kit does not include the different exhausts, so I had to construct them from Evergreen plastic tubing. The result looks like so…
Engine exhausts were built up using Evergreen plastic tubing.
There is a small error with the engine air scoops in the AIM Transport Wings conversion kit. The trailing edge of the air scoop on top of each inboard engine has to be filed down to make it pointed. The following image shows the correction.
Upper air scoops on inboard engines need to be modified.
3. Other Bits and Bobs
I decided to pose my kit in a cargo loading diorama. Figures 1 and 3 provided the dimensions necessary to position and size the open cargo door. I used the following images to model the details.
Cargo compartment details.
I used Evergreen plastic to build up the cargo floor and cabin interior details, as well as the cargo door. Once completed, it looked like so…
Interior of cargo compartment and cargo door were constructed using Evergreen plastic.
I felt that decal windows would be out of place next to an opened-up cargo door. Therefore, I did my best to file the cabin windows as straight and evenly as possible, and I used the fuselage station diagram in Figure 3 for correct positioning.
Image of kit showing my best effort at straightening and positioning the cabin windows.
After all that effort correctly positioning the cabin windows, I was disappointed to find that when I installed the wings and engines, the propeller plane did not line up correctly.
Position of propeller plane
Fixing this problem was going to require much more effort than I was willing to make, so I decided to live with it. To help minimize the visual impact of the error, I will use a paint scheme with no “Beware of Propeller” red fuselage stripe.
The military CL-44s have two radio compass antennae on the aft belly.
Position of radio compass antennae on aircraft belly.
Radio compass antennae were constructed from Evergreen half-round.
The CL-44, like it’s cousin the CL-28 Argus, has spoilers on the upper wing surfaces just inboard of the ailerons. The wing station diagram in Figure 3 shows their position and size. Once etched into the kit wing, they looked like so…
Image of kit showing typical spoiler.
The CL-44 has wingtips similar to the Britannia that are bevelled on the bottom.
Typical wingtips.
The bevelled wingtips on the Mach 2 kit were too subtle, so I sanded them down to bring out this feature.
Image of kit showing bevelled wingtips.
It was my impression that the fin was too thick, so I sanded it down by removing material along the centreline.
Image of kit showing reduced fin thickness.
It was my impression that when viewed from above, the nose was too wide and rounded, so I sanded it down to make it narrower and pointier.
Top view of nose which has been sanded to make it narrower and pointier.
I found that when I sat the fuselage flat on its belly, the windscreen was slanted to one side. To correct this, I sawed off the nose section and re-glued it back on with a bit of a twist so that the windscreen was horizontal. Nose section was rotated to straighten the windscreen.
The following image shows the kit resting on the flat part of its belly, which I used as the reference point for horizontal. View from head-on after nose had been cut off and rotated a bit. Everything looks (mostly) straight.
The military CL-44s have a greenhouse style windscreen similar to the Britannia, but with extra eyebrow windows. The civil CL-44’s have a windscreen that is reported to have been based on the Convair 880/990.
The Different Windscreens
It was my impression that the individual greenhouse window panels moulded into the kit windscreen were not as tall as they should be, so I extended them downwards, right to the bottom of the clear windscreen piece.
Windscreen window panels have been extended downwards.
4. Ready for Inspection
5. Additional Information
The following drawings are provided for the benefit of builders wishing to model a CL-44-D4 or CL-44J.
CL-44-D4 Dimensions
Figure 28. CL-44J Dimensions
Another admirable project requiring extraordinary patience and modelling skill. And a great article on the build to boot. Thanks a lot for sharing!
Nice work. I did the Frog Britannia 175 lengthen from 175 series into 300 series (using industrial model makers 2-part “pine” color” plastic putty for the body extensions and female molds ) . Started a conversion of Frog 1/96 kit into Canadair CL44-D swing tail until I got to the prop blades. I was Beginning to think of heat forming plastic sprue into a female mold might work til project stalled and I got too old ). I give you Kudos for that wind screen. Just doing the masking makes me wonder how bad the Mach 2 part was verses their previous clear products. I picked the doing a CL44D=4 over plain CL=44 just because of that feature, A neat note on the propstripe/ widow spacing problem. Isn’t it great finding closeup photo details of a rare project ( I know I got “Flight “magazine data from the 60’s , but who knows where I put it). I did get 80% done with the FR-SIN CL44D-4 Flying Tiger kit just to have one.
l also started a CL28 Argus mark 2, It got stalled on the engine and can’t find my Frog 1/96 DC-7C kit .
Isn’t it a pain to know you’ve got so many kits thru the years that you can’t find a kit you bought back in 1962 any more (just to mold a copy of the cowl) then restore the kit to the storage again.
Anyway nice model of an even more forgotten plane midst Britannia and the Swing tail CL44-D. This whole project is going to look like “what if plane” (maybe to Canadians too).
Beautiful build and great job on a very challenging conversion. I did much the same conversion earlier this year using 2 Roden Britannia’s and a casting of an F-Resin CV 990 cockpit to build a CL-44D-4. It was actually a fun build, but a lot of work especially reshaping the nacelles.
What did you use for the landing gear? Mach 2 or Air Graphics? The Frog was strong, but primitive, the Graphics looks too fine &
delicate.
What did you use for the canopy? A vacuum form? It looks too clear to be a Mach 2 type clear piece, my Mach 2’s have always been semi-opaque.
Good ref data both kit and full size aircraft
Wow! This is a work of love, no doubt. I rather liked the CC-106/CL-44 aircraft. The first time I saw one was at Miami when an Aerotransportes Entre Rios CC-106 came in and cleared Customs at the main terminal. At first I thought it was a Britannia because of the multi pane windshield, although it looked too long. Then I discovered the CC-106 variant, only built for the RCAF. AER crashed one on takeoff on 27L at MIA, and Transporte Aereo Rio Platense had the CL-44 variant with the other windshield and I saw those in MIA as well as Aruba. Beautiful airplanes both, and a really beautiful and well researched build of a CC-106 from the Mach 2 kit, proof that you can make a great model from a mediocre and very basic kit. Rest assured, your model would get my top vote in any contest anytime! Thanks very much for sharing with us, and I hope you can make AI 2024 in Kansas City.
Wow! This is a work of love, no doubt. I rather liked the CC-106/CL-44 aircraft. The first time I saw one was at Miami when an Aerotransportes Entre Rios CC-106 came in and cleared Customs at the main terminal. At first I thought it was a Britannia because of the multi pane windshield, although it looked too long. Then I discovered the CC-106 variant, only built for the RCAF. AER crashed one on takeoff on 27L at MIA, and Transporte Aereo Rio Platense had the CL-44 variant with the other windshield and I saw those in MIA as well as Aruba. Beautiful airplanes both, and a really beautiful and well researched build of a CC-106 from the Mach 2 kit, proof that you can make a great model from a mediocre and very basic kit. Rest assured, your model would get my top vote in any contest anytime! Thanks very much for sharing with us, and I hope you can make AI 2024 in Kansas City.
PS: You mentioned other kits to convert from Britannia to CL-44, but you forgot to mention the Roden kit for converting to a CC-106 Yukon. Being that it is quite accurate in 1/144, which the Mach 2 cannot claim in 1/72nd, the Roden kit should be a good choice for making a relatively easy conversion, or am I forgetting something? One negative feature of the CL-44 airframe an Argentine maintenance guy told me about was that the Rolls Royce Tyne engines on the CL-44 were literally hand built, thus if you needed parts for the engine, you had to supply the serial number of the engine to Rolls Royce to have parts made for that engine specifically, and you had to send them back to Rolls Royce for overhaul as no one else could do it. I found that hard to believe, but he swore it was true because so few of the CL-44 were built.
Masterpiece. Looks almost better than real one.
If I wore a hat it would be off to you right now! Well written and documented article.
All the best,
Mike Celeskey