MENG Messerschmitt Me 163B. Winkle, winkle little komet

[quang]

THIS IS THE STORY OF
… a little sailplane they sent up to counter flying fortresses.

Needless to say that they gave it an experimental rocket engine fuelled by two eminently hazardous propellants, that each mission lasted 10 minutes and that it killed more German pilots than allied bombardiers.

Then you’d know that I’m talking about the Messerschmitt Me 163 Komet and the Meng 1/32 kit which was first released in 2013 and met with diverse 🙃 reactions from the modelling community.

 

Excellent casting in a pleasant styrene

 

Fine and subtle engraving

 

Flawless clear parts

 

Vinyl tyres to be replaced by styrene Bf 109 ones

 

My only gripe: decals are made in-house instead of original Cartograf.

 

Obviously dispensable photo-etchings

 

THE BUILD
My subject is Messerschmitt Me-163B VF241 captured by the RAF and test-flown by Eric (Winkle) Brown in 1946.

 

 

 

Option included in Meng’s kit

The model will have all servicing panels closed up and armament and engine removed as on the contemporary photos

My intent is to make a classic out-of-box, old-school build (hopefully) without the help of any aftermarket item.

 

Until next time,
Cheers, 

Quang

Edited November 2 by quang

[MikeC]

Looks good, I'll keep an eye on this one. Did he ever fly it with the rocket motor powered up? Officially no, but I must dig into my copy of Wings of the Luftwaffe to refresh memory.

[Gazzas]

Count me interested.  I've heard so much about how much surgery is required to close the hatches up.  I just find it odd that Meng chose to mold it with no 'closed-hatches' option.

[quang]

2 hours ago, MikeC said:

Looks good, I'll keep an eye on this one. Did he ever fly it with the rocket motor powered up? Officially no, but I must dig into my copy of Wings of the Luftwaffe to refresh memory.

Officially he did not. But in a revised edition of ‘Wings of Luftwaffe’, he described with much detail how he managed to make a powered flight with the help of ex-Luftwaffe personnel just before the RAE ban.

 

1 hour ago, Gazzas said:

Count me interested.  I've heard so much about how much surgery is required to close the hatches up.  I just find it odd that Meng chose to mold it with no 'closed-hatches' option.

 

The first thing I did was to dry-fit the armament panels on the wing. Apparently they went on with no issue. Hopefully, the rest would follow. Fingers crossed.

Having said that, shape-wise, the Komet is a rather simple aircraft. I understand that Meng wished to spice it up a bit by providing the internal details.

Edited November 2 by quang

[quang]

THE BUILD
Starting with the spartan cockpit, Meng gave us the essential: seat, control stick and instrument panel. They are accurate, reasonably detailed and would just need some careful brushwork to be brought to life.

One of the characteristics of the Komet was its fuel system consisting of basically two extremely corrosive fluids designated T-stof and C-stof.
The propellants were stored in two tanks on either side of the pilot’s seat. They were covered with a protective  sealant which gave them a distictive texture.

 

 

This is how I tried to replicate it.
The stock cockpit

 

The consoles on either side are sanded flat and the moulded details erased.

 

Bits of worn micro-mesh sanding cloth are cut to shape and glued to the consoles to simulate the texture

 

Retaining straps made from tin sheet coming from a (emptied) wine bottle.

 

The fuel admission pipes are added and the cockpit given a coat of Mr Surfacer 1200.

 

The seat is painted and worn

 

New head pad from milliput

 

Pedals with added straps

 

Painted cockpit components ready for assembly

Seatbelts from masking tape and left over photo-etchings

 

 

Two instrument panels are provided. A traditional style with moulded instruments and a modern one with photo etchings and instrument decals.

 

Unfortunately the Meng in-house printed decals are fuzzy and useless

 

I went old school and brush-painted the IP like in them old Monogram days.

 

Not quite Quinta but definitely boomer’s stuff

 

Cockpit ready to be installed 

 

 

 

That’s it. Until next time

Comments and questions are welcome,

Cheers,

Quang

 

Edited November 3 by quang
Syntax

[mozart]

One word…….Wizard! (Take it as an adjective about the model or a noun about you!……or both!)

[AngryJazz_Models]

Really nice work on the cockpit! Like the idea with the mesh for the extra details 😊

 

One suggestion if I may - maybe put a X22 or UV resin on the dials for that extra glass effect? Since you already made such a nice instrument panel 😉

[Gazzas]

Splendid looking cockpit!  I like the micromesh idea.

[Biggles87]

35 minutes ago, mozart said:

One word…….Wizard! (Take it as an adjective about the model or a noun about you!……or both!)

I’ll second that!

 

John

[quang]

1 hour ago, mozart said:

One word…….Wizard! (Take it as an adjective about the model or a noun about you!……or both!)

You’re too kind, old chap! This is not sorcery, it’s mere illusion 😎

 

48 minutes ago, AngryJazz_Models said:

One suggestion if I may - maybe put a X22 or UV resin on the dials for that extra glass effect? Since you already made such a nice instrument panel 

I used to… years ago.
Until I realized that the glass effect works best when the IP is laid flat horizontally and you’re looking down on it. But the effect disappears when the IP is vertical as positioned in the cockpit. Just a matter of optics.

Furthermore I find the looking-glass effect blurs somewhat the inscriptions in the instrument and defeats the crispness I tried so hard to convey in my brush work. 😜

41 minutes ago, Gazzas said:

Splendid looking cockpit!  I like the micromesh idea.

It also works well for walkways on aircraft wings.

 

38 minutes ago, Biggles87 said:

I’ll second that!

 

John

Merci mon ami! 🫡

[Cheetah11]

 

1 hour ago, AngryJazz_Models said:

One suggestion if I may - maybe put a X22 or UV resin on the dials for that extra glass effect? Since you already made such a nice instrument panel 😉

 

Always a dilemma whether to put clear on modern instruments. Since early in the war instruments in Luftwaffe aircraft had non reflective coatings. So dead on you see only the semi gloss face but from the side some reflection. I have not yet found a satisfactory solution.

 

[AngryJazz_Models]

Very interesting points on the glass guys - thanks! Something to ponder for my next build 😊

[quang]

40 minutes ago, Cheetah11 said:

 

 

Always a dilemma whether to put clear on modern instruments. Since early in the war instruments in Luftwaffe aircraft had non reflective coatings. So dead on you see only the semi gloss face but from the side some reflection. I have not yet found a satisfactory solution.

 

Same rationale applies when you deal with reflective materials like glass, water, chrome, etc…

First thing to ask yourself: what do I WANT to replicate?
a/ The very nature of the material: transparency of the glass or the water, polished chrome coating,…
b/ The illusion to make the viewer believe he’s looking at the effect induced by glass, water,…

One can choose one or the other but you can’t have both. 😜 

[Cheetah11]

1 hour ago, quang said:

Same rationale applies when you deal with reflective materials like glass, water, chrome, etc…

First thing to ask yourself: what do I WANT to replicate?
a/ The very nature of the material: transparency of the glass or the water, polished chrome coating,…
b/ The illusion to make the viewer believe he’s looking at the effect induced by glass, water,…

One can choose one or the other but you can’t have both. 😜 

Yes Quang, trouble is the anti reflective coating makes the glass disappear to the eye, but it is still there, so how do you replicate it on a model. Putting gloss on it makes it look like glass but not like an aircraft instrument.

Edited November 3 by Cheetah11

[quang]

49 minutes ago, Cheetah11 said:

Yes Quang, trouble is the anti reflective coating makes the glass disappear to the eye, but it is still there, so how do you replicate it on a model. Putting gloss on it makes it look like glass but not like an aircraft instrument.

My  answer is simple: if you don’t SEE it, don’t paint it.
If you paint a portrait, you’re not obliged to depict the brain even if you KNOW that it’s there… somewhere 🤔