D Bellis

Because that perceived inaccuracy doesn't exist. D

Yet the image you posted clearly demonstrates just exactly how bad it really is. D

If you really can not see how bad the Trumpeter kit is after looking at it and comparing it, then by all means don't let anyone discourage you from enjoying the kit. It still looks like a cartoon to anyone even slightly familiar with what a P-51B actually looks like. No amount of denial will change that. D

To add to Coogrfan's post, the airfoil Trumpeter used is an eyesore primarily because it results in an obviously thick and blunt leading edge - NOT the gracefully thin airfoil of any Mustang. And, Jennings hit the nail on the head: HTH, D

Equally horrible, but with raised panel lines and big rivets everywhere... D

There's a LOT more wrong with that kit than just the wing's airfoil. All of the shapes are off from the fuselage cross section all the way through to the outlines of fuselage, wings and tail. Pretty much everything is off in one way or another. The "bad rap" is well deserved, not some kind of hallucination. That shouldn't stop anyone from building it if they find the kit acceptable. Just don't pretend that those who think it looks like a cartoon are imagining things. D

He was going to, but they painted it according to Jerry's D-13 decal guide before he got there. The decal guide doesn't show soft edges on anything, so the painters faithfully replicated that. D

Oh, man - that little link icon at the bottom brings back some memories. I found this place right after the original label & name had been voted out, and everything was still in flux. Had to be early summer of '99, so that original name didn't last but a few months. Lots of twisted knickers on the old forums over the new name and 'look'. The original LSP forum's layout was reminiscent of the recently departed Network 54 of the HS forum, only here it was white background with blue text - a bit stark on the eyes. Chris Sherland, Brad Hagen and a few others ushered in the 'thread' format of forum that we still use along with an even more updated 'look' for the main page in August of 2003. I think there were only about 50 of us for the forum changeover. Our actual member-number used to be part of our member profile until the most recent change. By the time it was all set up the way we're now used to seeing it, they all suffered from burnout and left within a year or two - some never returned. Fortunately, new blood was willing to take the reins when us jaded old salts refused - we saw what could happen, the resulting burnout and jaded attitudes, and wanted no part in the staff responsibilities. So, thanks for that fellas. D

Micke D is correct. Just another example of why it is best to use period documentation for reference, NOT restorations. Also, and I'm sure you already know this, but the propeller spinner on the museum example is a substitute - not an actual D-13 spinner. D

+1, and that's the way I remember it as well. D

Not everyone has the same amount of disposable income. Buying a $100 kit to toss into the stash might be nothing for one person, but might mean the electric bill doesn't get paid to another person. Is our hobby of plastic modeling cheaper than other hobbies (and watching other people play games on TV doesn't count as a "hobby" - not even a little bit), sure it is. But, so are many other popular hobbies that are still beyond the means of many people. Golf anyone? Way, WAY more expensive than plastic modeling. Too expensive for most folks. Ever see the pics that guy on another forum posted of his built models displayed on shelves made of cardboard and string? He certainly can't afford a $100 kit. How about that guy that posted pics of his built models hanging from a cracked, partially-puttied and largely unpainted ceiling? Maybe the money spent on those models would have served him better if spent on fixing that ceiling. My point is that people only have so much to spend. So, they are going to post complaints about prices. D

On the D-13, yes. But the D-11 utilized the same arrangement as the D-9. D-11 (note the closed flap section forward of the supercharger intake scoop): And the D-13 (note that the previously closed section is articulated with the other flaps): HTH, D

While not shown in the image you posted, the Montex set does include them. Below is a pic of my own Montex D-11 set with the bulge parts identified: They are not terribly accurate, but they are there. D

For what it's worth, Grey Matter's D-13 conversion provides entire replacement fuselage halves with the bulges incorporated into them, while the Montex D-11 conversion provides the bulges as separate parts to graft onto the cowling. Just FYI. D

Interesting. Will the D-11 and D-13 sets only include the parts shown? Or, are the cowl's side bulges that are a prominent feature of the later D series included, but not in the parts pics? D