AlexM Posted May 28, 2015 Share Posted May 28, 2015 Very interesting comparison So the Hasegawa 190 still has a "raison d'être", especially for those who don't want to show the engine cowling open, and it still seems to be better in some aspects. However in Germany it's hardly available at the moment, so the Revell 190 remains the only option. Me for my part am very happy with the Revell kit. Cheers Alex D Bellis and mpk 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andreas Beck Posted May 28, 2015 Share Posted May 28, 2015 The panel line behind the radiao hatch (Revell) is existing but merely visible. The diameter of the spinner is ok with the Revell kit (Henri Dähne who worked from original parts stated this). The area between the landing gear bays is done as on the IWM plane (see the nice pictures on IPMS Stockholm) and the plane in Hanover. A compare with photos state this configuration as correct. Another item is the transition area between fuselage (upper) and the base of the tailplane. This was not respected in the review. The solution is better with the Revell kit. mpk 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D Bellis Posted May 28, 2015 Author Share Posted May 28, 2015 ... not having a side by side comparison with the kit legs makes it a difficult judgement ... Exactly. The panel line behind the radiao hatch (Revell) is existing but merely visible. Maybe it is there on that restored airframe (I can't see it in your posted pic). But, that panel line does not exist in photographs on unpainted fuselages photographed while under construction during WWII. The diameter of the spinner is ok with the Revell kit (Henri Dähne who worked from original parts stated this). Perhaps. I used Bill Strandberg's own measurements as posted HERE (thanks again to RBrown for that link). The area between the landing gear bays is done as on the IWM plane (see the nice pictures on IPMS Stockholm) and the plane in Hanover. A compare with photos state this configuration as correct. This area may be the result of modern restoration efforts because those shrouds do not appear in any WWII photographs of late Fw 190A or F wheel wells. D mpk 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vandy 1 VX 4 Posted May 28, 2015 Share Posted May 28, 2015 That was very pleasant to read that review. Thank you all for your input on this. Happy modeling Cheers Danny mpk and D Bellis 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BGB Posted May 28, 2015 Share Posted May 28, 2015 Boris ... Read the review in the link I listed above ... apparently James had trouble with the axle 'melting'? ... Not sure, but I get that idea from what he wrote. Maybe it was the glue used? As far as the axle goes - I can only go off what I've read It may be the case ... OR - it may not be? ... Either way I'll consider the Eduard gear an 'insurance policy' - 'cause there's NO way those suckers are melting! Rog Hello Rog, I have read that review and Dieter wiegmanns to ,and as I said the melting problem didn' appear until the Eduard gear legs was realesed not a word before that and only from one person. Cheers Boris D Bellis and mpk 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artful69 Posted May 29, 2015 Share Posted May 29, 2015 ... the melting problem didn't appear until the Eduard gear legs was released not a word before that and only from one person ... Well ... that's very odd ... I'm sorry, Boris, I don't like the direction this bit is headed - ('one person') ... so I think I'll just end it with - It's a personal choice, so I'm going to give the Eduard gear legs a look ... It's not a lot of $$$, for me ... At least - I doubt they would be that inaccurate ... or enough that way to sway me. Rog mpk 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D Bellis Posted May 29, 2015 Author Share Posted May 29, 2015 I just remembered to mention that the Revell kit does not include a seated pilot figure, yet does have 'in flight' parts. Very odd since Hasegawa does include a seated pilot figure, but no 'in flight' parts. First page post edited to add that. D BGB and mpk 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radub Posted May 29, 2015 Share Posted May 29, 2015 (edited) The panel line behind the radiao hatch (Revell) is existing but merely visible. The diameter of the spinner is ok with the Revell kit (Henri Dähne who worked from original parts stated this). The area between the landing gear bays is done as on the IWM plane (see the nice pictures on IPMS Stockholm) and the plane in Hanover. A compare with photos state this configuration as correct. Another item is the transition area between fuselage (upper) and the base of the tailplane. This was not respected in the review. The solution is better with the Revell kit. That panel line behind the radio hatch is correct on the Revell kit. It appears in Arthur Bentley's drawings and many other drawings. The "baffles" on the curved inboard edge of the wheel well are present in a number of pictures, they appear in Arthur Bentley's drawings (where they are marked "exhaust deflector plates"). It is not a "restoration problem", it is visible in some wartime photos (I can scan some if further "proof" is needed) and can be seen in this photo of the excellent FW 190 in NASM (you can see them against the bomb rack fairing). HTH Radu Edited May 29, 2015 by Radub BGB and mpk 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BGB Posted May 29, 2015 Share Posted May 29, 2015 Hello, No Pilot but a nice seat cushion Cheers Boris mpk 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D Bellis Posted May 29, 2015 Author Share Posted May 29, 2015 (edited) That panel line behind the radio hatch is correct on the Revell kit. It appears in Arthur Bentley's drawings and many other drawings. Never trust drawings, especially when actual photographs show otherwise (note that there might be a line of rivets there, but no panel line): The "baffles" on the curved inboard edge of the wheel well are present in a number of pictures, they appear in Arthur Bentley's drawings (where they are marked "exhaust deflector plates"). It is not a "restoration problem", it is visible in some wartime photos (I can scan some if further "proof" is needed) and can be seen in this photo of the excellent FW 190 in NASM (you can see them against the bomb rack fairing). Again, never trust drawings (nor make up your mind that one photograph proves a drawing's accuracy): No rack, no shrouds ("baffles", "exhaust deflector plates", whatever you want to call these inaccurate parts): HTH, D Edited May 29, 2015 by D Bellis mpk and BGB 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Night Hog Posted May 29, 2015 Share Posted May 29, 2015 Hello, Didn't even notice the cowl with the muzzle flash supressors in the kit until you posted that pic, and now I have been looking at 1000 pics and can't find any with the panel lines on the engine bulge as depicted on Hasegawa kit,should it really be there? any body have some clear pics. Cheers Boris I couldn't be sure and would yield to Jerry Crandall. I believe the panels lines represent a removable panel to accomodate the trop dust filter. Not sure it was on every 190. mpk 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BGB Posted May 29, 2015 Share Posted May 29, 2015 Hello, Thanks for the info! Cheers Boris mpk 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darren Howie Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 Sorry but Arthur Bently does great drawings but this obsession that everything he does is perfect asks for trouble. The Revell 109 I believe used his drawings and if so that is evidence enough re not being perfect. Original photos win every time. Drawings taken off restored aircraft by definition suffer from not working from an original source but the restorers view of the original. D Bellis is very true in never trusting drawings particularly from restored aircraft. mpk and D Bellis 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RBrown Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 For those interested, here is another wartime photo of an Anton with shrouded gun muzzles: BGB, mattlow, mpk and 4 others 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oyoy5 Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 (edited) What an awesome kit........ Edited May 30, 2015 by oyoy5 mpk and RBrown 2 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