Thunnus Posted December 11, 2017 Author Share Posted December 11, 2017 Thanks guys! It turned out faster than I had envisioned. A big exterior resin replacement was new territory for me so I'm glad it's turning out positively. I think I'm almost ready to attach the wings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tucohoward Posted December 12, 2017 Share Posted December 12, 2017 Looking good, John! I am still wondering why Reaver chose to have the engine cowling sit up higher than the gun cowling. You can find pictures of examples of this but it's certainly not the norm, and some of them either don't have the cowling fully latched down or the rubber seal between the cowlings is sticking out a little. No reflection on your work at all which is fantastic! You may want to move the antenna wire spring to a different spot. On these units the wire went down through the mast and into a tube which connected to a lever on the left side of the canopy by which it was tensioned. I have found pictures that show the wire was not slack even in the untensioned state, in case you were wondering. Jay Thunnus 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thunnus Posted December 12, 2017 Author Share Posted December 12, 2017 (edited) Thanks for the comments Jay! As a fellow 109-fanatic, I always appreciate your informative insights! As far as the height diff between the back of the engine cowling and the gun breech cover, I've always assumed that this was a common occurrence on G-10's. This seems to be corroborated on my review of Erla G-10 pics. Here are a few that I've found... Hartmann's G-10 WNr 491320 Black 12 WNr 491353 Black 7 WNr 491499 WNr 49xxxx Red 12 I found more examples of this irregularity than I have of the engine cowling being flush with the gun breech cover, including non-Erla G-10s. I personally like this aspect of the AMUR Reaver cowling and I feel it is a good representation of the oddly assymetrical shape of the G-10 engine cowling as well as that imperfect fit that many photos show. I can remove the tension spring from the antenna mast. Even the photos above indicate a lack of tension spring on the mast that is mounted on the canopy. Thanks again for your comments, Jay! I'm by no means a 109 Experten and I'm just going in the general direction of what the available evidence is showing. My builds are not meant to be 100% accurate but I do like to get the details right if I have good documentation and the mod is within my limited means. Edited April 17, 2018 by Thunnus daHeld, tucohoward, sandokan and 3 others 5 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thunnus Posted December 12, 2017 Author Share Posted December 12, 2017 (edited) Back to the build... from this angle, before the wings are mounted, you can get a sense of how drastic the bulge is over the DB605 engine. I made up a tab from brass sheeting to mount the aerial on the rudder. This tab will be cut to size when the time comes but right now it is easier to handle (and not lose) as a overly long piece. I am going to re-think the spring on the antenna mast per Jay's comment. The wing pitot tube has been replaced with pieces of brass tubing. Time to attach the wings. I've decided to mount the upper wings first so that I can get a good flush fit at the wing root join, which is always a tough one to clean up. The joint here is not the most positive so I elected to mount the bottom of the wing on the port side after the top of the wing attachment was solid. The bottom of the wings are presented in halves like the top so the order was port top, port bottom, starboard top, starboard bottom. There are some gaps at the bottom that need to be filled and faired in. You can see a shim that I used to bridge some of the gap. A few days will probably be spent cleaning up that joint as well as the seams between the wing tops and bottoms. The wing root joint will be cleaned up too and then the joint re-scribed. Edited April 17, 2018 by Thunnus rafju, daHeld, Paul in Napier and 6 others 9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gazzas Posted December 12, 2017 Share Posted December 12, 2017 (edited) The work looks great! Making me want to start a collection of large scale 109's Gaz Edited December 12, 2017 by Gazzas Thunnus and Kahunaminor 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dodgem37 Posted December 12, 2017 Share Posted December 12, 2017 Masterful cowl fix. Great update! Sincerely, Mark Thunnus 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monthebiff Posted December 12, 2017 Share Posted December 12, 2017 That looks fantastic John, really like what you have done with the replacement cowl. Regards. Andy Thunnus 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thunnus Posted December 13, 2017 Author Share Posted December 13, 2017 (edited) Thank you for the comments! The wings are on and it is starting to look like an aeroplane now. I'm just plodding along cleaning up the cowling transition on the bottom. The first application of Milliput and Mr Surfacer 1000 has been sanded... The primer shows that I need to do at least one more iteration of putty/sanding before I can start rescribing the panel lines. But it is relief to know that the worst is behind me. Edited April 17, 2018 by Thunnus Trak-Tor, Kahunaminor, Daniel460 and 9 others 12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trak-Tor Posted December 13, 2017 Share Posted December 13, 2017 Really impressive! Juraj Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dodgem37 Posted December 13, 2017 Share Posted December 13, 2017 Smooth transition. Good show. Sincerely, Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Airfixer Posted December 13, 2017 Share Posted December 13, 2017 (edited) Bloody gorgeous, John! Very impressive WIP and a treat to follow. Can't wait to see your G-10 finished! Anyway, I hope you don't mind my making a few remarks regarding the riveting on the vertical tail: "As is", the tail on your Erla-built G-10 would be representative for a/c with the all-metal tall tail which was mainly conceived as a drop-in retrofit for existing aircraft. Said retrofit comprised a new extended fin cap and a new rudder. Both the joint between intermediate tail assy and fin cap as well as the overall riveting would be faintly visible. However, when the G-10 (and soon to be followed by the K-4) started to hit the production lines, the wooden tall tail had already become a "standard" feature of new-built late G-6 and G-14 airframes. The wooden tall tails were subcontractor manufactured and finished - smooth laminated wood surfaces devoid of any rivets; and being an integral assembly, no joint between "tail body" and fin cap. Both types, metal and wood, were designed to be interchangeable with each other. Original drop-in metal tall tail retrofit/assembly: Photographically documented on G-5, G-5/AS, G-6, G-6/AS, G-8 and G-14, G-14/AS aircraft. Wooden tall tail: Given the omnipresent no-rule-without-exception mantra, a metal tall tail would be just that exception. I'm 99.489% sure the wooden tail would be the way to go, hence requiring some filling and sanding. Maybe one of the other fine gentlemen here will be able to shed some more light on this matter. Edited December 13, 2017 by Airfixer sandokan, MikeMaben and Thunnus 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thunnus Posted December 13, 2017 Author Share Posted December 13, 2017 Thanks for the comments. Airfixer... your observations are always appreciated! I personally liked having a little bit of detail on that tail piece but, for the sake of accuracy, it is a very easy matter to fill in the panel line and rivets to depict the likely wood tail. Especially since I have not attached the rudder. On an unrelated note... I really like how you highlight your points graphically! Kahunaminor and sandokan 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thunnus Posted December 14, 2017 Author Share Posted December 14, 2017 (edited) Wrapping up the transition between the engine cowling and the fuselage. Added a panel line along the bottom. I've learned to use magnification to help improve my work, especially these types of close-up photos. They can be brutally revealing but using them to identify and correct flaws results in better work. The wing root joint has also been cleaned up although it was never bad to begin with. Say good-bye to the rivets and panel line on the wooden tail! Thanks for the suggestion, Airfixer! The slight surface irregularities revealed by the primer will be evened out. Edited April 17, 2018 by Thunnus daHeld, Shawn M, Kahunaminor and 11 others 14 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Out2gtcha Posted December 14, 2017 Share Posted December 14, 2017 This looks really good. I too find the macro a harsh mistress, but in the end those kind of shot do in fact make for higher quality work. Model on! Thunnus and TwoHands 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thunnus Posted December 15, 2017 Author Share Posted December 15, 2017 (edited) The Revi gun sight has been added to the instrument panel. I'll be putting on the canopy and windscreen soon. Revell has engineered the kit so that the control surfaces are movable. I don't particular like that idea as they would most likely flop around, droop to the lowest position (for the horizontal surfaces anyway) and wear off paint. So I am going to glue the control surfaces into place. The rudder is the first to be glued on. I am thinking about the camo finish although it is a few steps ahead. I am going to do Hartmann's White Double Chevron G-10. Anders Hjortsberg has a nice profile of Hartmann's G-10 on his Profile Paintshop website... Anders concedes the speculative nature of this profile since only the fuselage from the cockpit forward is represented in the existing photos of this machine. Anders chose to portray the bottom as natural metal with light blue (RLM 76) wing tips and control surfaces. Is an all RLM 76 bottom just as likely? Both Eagle Cal and Barracuda Erla G-10 decal sets have representatives of both bottom treatments. Should I just pick one or is one more likely than the other for this particular machine? I am leaning towards doing the RLM 76 bottom as I feel I can do a better job of it than the metal finish, which I don't particularly like to do. Edited April 17, 2018 by Thunnus Greg W, Gazzas, Victor K2 and 5 others 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now