Jump to content

VintageEagle

LSP_Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    349

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

 Content Type 

Everything posted by VintageEagle

  1. VintageEagle
    The rear canopy has some strange edge where it meets the fuselage, but that can probably be easily corrected. Some of the instruction drawings show the nightfighter version. E.g. step 51.
  2. VintageEagle
    Thank you! And here's the direct link: https://stage.revell.de/fileadmin/import/images/bau/03875_%23BAU_MESSERSCHMITT_ME262A1_A2.PDF White 4 of EJG 2 and 9K+BH of KG 51 as decal options.
  3. VintageEagle
    First videos and photos are out. On 00:48sec in the following video, you can see a Corsair on display, which was not listed in the list posted somewhere above. So, still little hope, but I assume if there were a new 1/32 model, we would know by now: https://tamiyablog.com/2019/05/first-video-of-the-tamiya-booth-at-the-58th-shizuoka-hobby-show-2019/
  4. VintageEagle
    https://www.menzels-lokschuppen.de/Modellbau/Bausaetze-Militaerflugzeuge/Revell-03875-Me262-A-1-Jetfighter.html
  5. VintageEagle
    There is now also a picture of the box and a completed model. Beautiful if you ask me (and no, I am not working for Revell, but love the shape of the Me 262 :-)
  6. VintageEagle
    The boxart is apparently out! But no info about decal options yet. I assume White 4 will be one of the options. But White 4 was never equipped with R4M. It was a training aircraft attached to EJG 2. It was also fitted with the experimental wooden vertical stabilizer and rudder.
  7. VintageEagle
    It was the Fl 23338 compass. The casing if the Variometer was completely rectangular. I think yours is not yet. Yes it was the 32510 with the mounting plate attached from behind. One additional thing I noticed: the 4 holes for the canon indicators underneath the SZKK2 are not yet there. They were present even if not used. Looks like a map box?
  8. VintageEagle
    Looks great! Just a few remarks: The large repeater compass had a relatively flat front face without the jigsaw type of ring around the bezel. The AFN2 should be moved slightly to the right if I compare your drawing with photos. The lower left instrument was the Borduhr with a cutout in the lower center that us not present in your drawing. The watch itself was rarely installed. I’d just leave the hole but not the watch. There was a hole for an indicator to the left if the blind flying panel. It was unused, but would have to be added to your drawing. The instrument on the far right in the 2nd row from the bottom was a voltage indicator that was attached from behind and which had a smaller diameter than 57mm. You can find photos in Ken Merrick’s cockpit book. The rate if climb indicator was if the kast type with rectangular face. I am sure there was also a 262b with round indicator, but if you want to stick to the only reference photo, I’d go for the rectangular one. The item behind the right side console looks like a connectir or ‘Verteiler’ to me which was at some point covered. Mist likely box type shape. Cheers Roger
  9. VintageEagle
    Looks absolutely fantastic and realistic! Just one small remark: the pilot would climb the aircraft via the foot holds in the forward engine nacelle and not via the wing root. Still there would be some chipping at the wing root, but maybe not so far back. Cheers, Roger
  10. VintageEagle
    The 1.8ata instrument was Fl20556 which was an 80mm instrument. There was no place for an 80mm instrument elsewhere except to the left of the SZKK2. But that space was originally intended for the cabin pressure gauge and I am not sure if it was covered by fabric or used in the nightfighter. I believe the 20556 was the only instrument in the auxiliary panel. Yes, the South Africa BFP us original. Thanks for your efforts! It will be an amazing set!
  11. VintageEagle
    That additional instrument was most likely a dual manifold pressure gauge up to 1.8ata that showed the thrust in both jets. The pointers would have to show the same pressure for a straight flight course. The same was also installed in the Ar 234 B-2 panel. Cheers, Roger PS: Please create a blind flying panel for the nightfighter where the large compass and horizon were centered on the same vertical line. It was made out of metal and was quite thin. The BFP where the compass was offset from the vertical line was made out of wood, but was intended for the bad weather fighter version of the single seater.
  12. VintageEagle
    That is Black X in Australia
  13. VintageEagle
    One thing to be noticed from the photo of W.Nr. 111711 is that putty was not applied on all rivets. The following photo shows the nose of a painted Me 262 where you can still see the panel lines and other details, but I agree that the effect is probably more subtle than if they had not applied any putty at all. So, I'd not highlight the panel lines and rivets with a too dark wash on the model:
  14. VintageEagle
    Rivets and panel lines can still be seen in close up photos. The surface was not completely smooth, but imperfections removed. See for example a close up of W.Nr. 111711: https://airandspace.si.edu/collection-objects/messerschmitt-me-262-family-photograph-41
  15. VintageEagle
    I was hoping to see the new Me 262 A-1a, but they only have the kit box without the model on display....
  16. VintageEagle
    I probably need to explain a bit more. Originally the 16B was specified. When Hitler demanded that it should be built as Blitzbomber only - sometimes in summer 1944 if I remember correctly - they tested the 16D. The first Blitzbombers had only 2 MK 108 due to CG and landing gear weakness reasons. That’s why the Me 262 that the Russians captured was an early Blitzbomber that was fitted with the 16D for dropping bombs. However, they later (around late fall 44) changed the specification again to the 16B to be used in both the fighter and fighter bomber versions. At the same time they issued the manual how to drop bombs with the 16B. The EZ 42 came late. A few test installations were made around winter 44/45 but introduction into serial production only began in the last couple of weeks of the war. The EZ 42 could be used both as a fighter gunsight and with fixed mirrors as a bomber gunsight according to the manual. However, by the time it was introduced almost all Me 262 were used as fighters.
  17. VintageEagle
    The Revi 16D was only installed in few early aircraft. A Me 262 with 2 MK 108 captured by the Russians had one fitted for example. Later ones used the 16B also for dropping bombs. I have found the manual of how to use the 16B for dropping bombs with the Me 262 in a US archive. Bentley’s drawing would also be my recommended reference. There were at least two different brackets for the EZ 42 in the Me 262. You would also have to design the box with the span and range dials (if I remember correctly), which was attached to the horizontal gunsight tube to the right of the gunsight. Some installations also had the box installed on the side console. Cheers, Roger
  18. VintageEagle
    Hi Jan, looks outstanding. How do you achieve such a convincing chipping effect? Chipping fluid? Cheers, Roger
  19. VintageEagle
    PS: also the pitot tube heating indicator and the two fuel indicators were only installed in early production jets. They were later omitted in order to simplify production and reduce parts (so-called “Entfeinerung”). The KG 13B trigger was usually in safe position on the ground. It would be more realistic to print the stick like that. The handle on the lower right if the panel was only installed in late production Me 262s. It was used to regulate the cockpit heating which was only installed in later examples. But it would be easy to remove so that one could build a jet with and without heating.
  20. VintageEagle
    I am interested too. Looks very nice and the proportion are very good. Please note that the round counters were almost never installed (except in early production Me 262s) since the required electrical connection at the MK 108s was missing and not implemented before production of the MK 108 stopped. There were also variations of the panel. Later production versions did not have the differential pressure gauges and oil pressure gauges. It would be nice if you also include a SWA10 box for the R4M rockets besides the ZSK244 for the drop ordnance. And it would be excellent if you also did a nightfighter panel with the large repeater compass (which was in the same vertical line as the artificial horizon and not offset like in the Eduard detail set). Cheers, Roger
  21. VintageEagle
    Thank you very much Chuck for the additional details abour how you apply the panel line wash. I will test the TPLAC on a spare part. So far I have used a few of the AK Interactive and Mig washes, but some of them were not good anymore even after I mixed them well. The solid and liquid had separated and I did not get a uniformly diluted paint anymore. Cheers, Roger
  22. VintageEagle
    OK, I checked my wartime photos of a few captured jets and found the following: W.Nr. 500071 (German museum aircraft) without glass and bracket W.Nr. 500453 (NASM aircraft) most likely with glass and bracket W.Nr. 111711 without glass and bracket I think David Brown narrowed down the W.Nr. block of Yellow 3 to 110xxx, which was not a very late war production. So, it may well have had the bracket and glass, but it may as well not have had the bracket or even a bracket without the glass installed. They installed whatever was available and it may well be that earlier production Revis were fitted to late war production Me 262s.
  23. VintageEagle
    The Revi 16B in the NASM Me 262 is a replacement as the original was no longer present when they restored it. They went with the manual, which showed one with sun shade glass, but most likely it did have a late production Revi 16B.
  24. VintageEagle
    Hi John, Late war Revi 16B did not have the sun shade glass anymore. First ones retained the screw holes for the bracket, but in the last production version even the screw holes were not drilled nto the cast casing anymore. See for example the photo below. It would therefore even be more realistic not to install the sun shade glass, but in that case, more often than not, the bracket was also not installed. If the bracket was a separate piece on your model, you could consider removing it instead of adding the sun shade glass back to its previous position. Cheers, Roger
  25. VintageEagle
    Thank you Chuck for the explanation and the nice photos to illustrate! I agree with you that not all lines should be highlighted to achieve a realistic look. I assume you are using some water-based paint for highlighting the rivets and lines on the unpainted parts (to check the quality of scribing, riveting, etc.)? Cheers, Roger
×
×
  • Create New...