Revell's (not so) new 1:32 He 219 "UHU"

[Guest Nigelr32]

Thank you for clarification. I've got this:

 

 

 

as: Tamiya must be right with this, so lets use it as a primary source.

 

I don't know you or what was in you mind. I have to go with what you (or other members) wrote. Nothing else. And I try for myself to explain as good as possible what I want to say. i know that my English has limitations, and that there is a monitor in between, so I am redundant here and there and may sometimes sound not as kind as intended. So why you are so aggressive with your reply?

 

Regards!

dutik

 

I work with many foreign people, in the UK and in Germany. I should know better when it comes to language barriers!!

 

In my statement about Tamiya, I was referring to the fact that their Zero's, Spitfire's and Mustang's are near perfect, particularly in overall shape. Their F-16 has panel line errors, as do the F-15's, and the F-14 is awesome, except for the raised panel lines and one piece wings. Their Phantoms are awesome, except for the exhaust areas..................... and so-on

 

I am currently working on a Revell Mig-29 and P-39 (Re-box), a Trumpeter P-51B, all with serious errors in their shape and dimensions. Many of the Trumpeter 1/32 kits have shape issues as do the Academy F-16's.

 

I was merely stating the fact that we very rarely hear of Tamiya making a big error in any of their kits. I don't recall ever hearing of a major issue myself. In my opinion, the Tamiya 1/48 He-219 looks right, so lets see what they did around the nacelles and wings. Your response of "No" was considered aggressive when I read it.

 

The word "No" is the most negative word in the English language, especially when used in it's own one word sentence.

 

We must not lose the scope of this thread, as set out by Iain and Matt. There are differences between the ZM and Revell kits. Neither look to be totally correct as we stand today... together we will find out which part of which kit is incorrect.

Edited December 15, 2012 by Nigelr32

[Iain]

together we will find out which part of which kit is incorrect.

 

As one of my heroes (and not the sandwich! ) is a certain Oddball from Kelly's heroes I'd have to say 'hey man, keep with them positive waves'

 

I really don't mind anyone questioning what we're trying to accomplish - but would be appreciated if it could include some positive input - photo's/thoughts/links/images/drawings.

 

General trashing of what we're trying to do really not in the spirit of the thread.

 

Photo's of the Revell and ZM kits show they differ - our aim is to try and establish what needs doing to the Revell kit to make it better.

 

In some ways I wish I'd just ignored everything else and just continue the build as it comes in the box - it certainly looks good.

 

Why do I *never* learn!

 

Iain

 

Woof, woof...

Edited December 15, 2012 by 32SIG

[misha71]

Hello

I hope my post won’t be perceived to be aggressive.

I just want to share some results of my research.

And I like this forum because here we can share our opinions and ask for advice and help.

I respect every idea and approach in making models . Somebody only builds out of the box and does not care about shape. (I advice to my friend this as he has very limited time and too many models on the shelfs ). For me is more interesting to make something by myself and to get challenging projects.

Before revell and zukei announced their forthcoming models I was going to make 1/32 UHU.

And I ordered tamyia model hoping it was exact one to use as guide together with many books and pictures I have.

But I was disappointed when I compared fuselage shape to the up scaled pictures and some drawings. The nose shape was wrong and in height as I remember it was bigger. Also some problems near tale area. But soon revel announced new model and I gave up on the research.

Now I will try to check nacelles. Maybe this area is good enough.

New tamyia models are simply amazing. I have mustang and my friend zero and it seems both are nearly perfect. But as most manufacturers they also have bad and even very bad old models.

UHU is not very old one but. For quality I can say it is perfect model but shape unfortunately is not good.

Cheers misha

[DougN]

Ok, since there is interest, here are a few snaps I just took of my built Tamiya He219 for discussion. I left the flash on as it highlights the shape better and negates the effect of the camo scheme a bit.

 

Here is the nacelle area:

 

 

 

 

Here is a shot showing how it aligns with the rest of the rear:

 

 

 

Here is a shot showing the forward nacelle area and how the top is in line with the fuselage:

 

 

 

Anyway, hope these help the discussion for those that wanted to see how Tamiya's interpretation of the He219 looks

 

Doug

[Guest Nigelr32]

Thanks for that input Misha,

 

I wish you'd posted this information yesterday, then I could have saved the money I've spent on the Tamiya kit!! Never mind, I'm sure it will sell on again on Ebay??

 

I am very interested to hear your opinions on the kit. How do you know the drawings you have are correct? As we've seen in this thread, drawings are not always reliable. I am currently building a Revell P-39, which is out of shape, and have found drawings on the 'net that differ considerably in overall dimensions and proportions.

 

On to the Revell kit:- I have just been looking at mine, and have spotted something, which Iain has probably already covered, but, just in case...

 

The wing is located onto the fuselage with a tab and two spars per side. The tab runs fore-aft and the spars are vertical.

 

In this picture the front is to the left.

 

 

I wonder why the wing has such a steep angle of attack? I would have thought this line would be parallel to the fuselage plane?

[Guest Nigelr32]

Ok, since there is interest, here are a few snaps I just took of my built Tamiya He219 for discussion. I left the flash on as it highlights the shape better and negates the effect of the camo scheme a bit.

 

Here is the nacelle area:

 

 

 

 

Here is a shot showing how it aligns with the rest of the rear:

 

 

 

Here is a shot showing the forward nacelle area and how the top is in line with the fuselage:

 

 

 

Anyway, hope these help the discussion for those that wanted to see how Tamiya's interpretation of the He219 looks

 

Doug

 

Doug,

 

You have committed the ultimate sin!! You've posted a 1/48 pic on LSP!! You will be visited at midnight by the administrators who will beat you and remove all your PC and camera equipment for decontamination!! Naughty Boy!!!

 

On a positive note, thanks for posting them...It saves me having to even look at my kit when it arrives. From a quick glance, the nacelle area looks good to me??

 

Come on Iain, you must have some comments on this one???

 

BTW, Nice build Doug. She's a beauty!!

Edited December 15, 2012 by Nigelr32

[Iain]

On to the Revell kit:- I have just been looking at mine, and have spotted something, which Iain has probably already covered, but, just in case...

 

The wing is located onto the fuselage with a tab and two spars per side. The tab runs fore-aft and the spars are vertical.

 

I wonder why the wing has such a steep angle of attack? I would have thought this line would be parallel to the fuselage plane?

 

Indeedy - from post #120

 

"Looking at photos of the wing roots and the angle of wing tips compared to fuselage it appears that if the wings’ angle of incidence is reduced by removing a small amount from the top of the ‘front spar’ we should be able to correct the thrust line issue - this appears to be backed up by the relative position of the wing root leading edge to the horizontal panel line just below (assuming that’s correctly positioned)."

 

Iain

[Iain]

Come on Iain, you must have some comments on this one???

 

BTW, Nice build Doug. She's a beauty!!

 

Very nice build Doug!

 

Shapes 'look' better to my eye at present - certainly juxtaposition of wing trailing edge fairing with the nacelle top and bottom.

 

<wanders off to do some reading>

 

Iain

Edited December 15, 2012 by 32SIG

[Iain]

Thanks Steve - really good input that ties in with my earlier thoughts...

 

Dropping the top of the front 'spar' should fix the wings angle of attack and the engine thrust line - but, as you say, the back end of the nacelle is noticeably out.

 

Thrust line shouldn't vary with respect to the fuselage though?

 

Iain

[KOTR]

Hm, comparing the picture of both nacelles with the photograph, I'd say the Z-M nacelle is pretty much there, shapewise, but I also have the impression, the wing trailing edge sits a little low?

[flyian]

I thought I'd have another go at posting pictures, this time of the He-219 on display in Washington DC. I don't think they'll add any insight to the engine nacelle discussion, however.

 

 

 

 

 

 

(Iain previously posted links to some these photos http://www.flyian.net/aircraft/museum/nasmanx/he219.htm)

 

I took these pictures on a visit to the museum specifically to see the Uhu. I'd like to volunteer to take additional photos 1) when they resume restoration work and 2) when the complete aircraft goes on display! If Iain can find enough interim projects maybe the real aircraft will be finished before he resumes work on his Uhu model!

 

Earlier in the thread there was a question about where the rear seat had shoulder straps or not. I have no idea what the correct answer is, but believe they might easily be omitted. Shoulder straps prevent a pilot from pitching forward into his instrument panel during an "impact". That same impact would only press the rear facing observer into his seat, eliminating the need for shoulder harnesses.

 

Ian (One I)

[misha71]

Nige i will try to resume my research and try to clear wing alignment.

Tamyia from pictures is not bad. Better then revell. But from picture of real aircraft zukei is better but about angle I am not sure.

The best way I think is to try to find some good pictures and I will upscale them to 32 scales and will send to you.

You can never trust drawings for 100% from my experience. I always compare models to real ones.

[AndersN]

I should know better

 

This is for a fact a He 219A-7 310117.

 

Revell He 219A-7 sitting in my kitchen. Looks like an Uhu to me.

 

Cheers

[dodgem37]

Good show, Anders.

 

Sincerely,

Mark

[afvmodeller]

Nice comparison Anders, don't forget to fix your main gear struts though

 

Regards David