nmayhew Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 thank you so much!! i really appreciate the time you have taken for this on this basis i think i am likely to pass on the Revell kit, but not because it is bad, but rather it is pretty close to the Hassy kit, so no real "need" for me to get one right now i will however get the Eduard legs as I believe - thanks to your excellent comparison shots - that they should fit on the Hassy kit thank you again D Bellis and mpk 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BGB Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 Hello, Here is a pic of the exhausts deflector plates. http://www.wwiiaircraftphotos.com/LCBW4/FW190-F3-39.jpg so maybe some had those and others didn't. Cheers Boris mpk and RBrown 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artful69 Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 Hello, Here is a pic of the exhausts deflector plates. http://www.wwiiaircraftphotos.com/LCBW4/FW190-F3-39.jpg so maybe some had those and others didn't. Cheers Boris You mean those little bits on the edges of the wheel wells either side of the bomb rack, yes? Rog mpk 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radub Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 Never trust drawings, especially when actual photographs show otherwise (note that there might be a line of rivets there, but no panel line): 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 Those baffles are not part of the rack. Do you have the book "Focke Wulf Jagdflugzeug" by Peter Rodeike? Go to page 300. There are two photos of that area without the rack and the baffles are there. That is the clearest photo, but there are more in the book. Here is one more photo of another plane in a museum. You can see that the baffles are not pat of the rack. Maybe some planes had them, some did not. You can always sand them off if you are sceptical about it. 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. I am a great admirer of Arthur's work and I do not see any need to apologise for that. I spent time in his company, I have seen his extensive collection of data and I will listen to him. Does he make mistakes? Maybe. Statistically speaking, in every thousand of things created there may be one, two or more wrong things. But anyone who says that one "wrong thing" among thousands of "right things" invalidates his work is a... (insert your own word of choice here). Now... the Revell 109... As some of you already know, I was directly involved in that project from day one. I can tell you precisely who was involved. Arthur's "drawings of the 109" were only a starting point - his drawings of the 109 were not complete at that time and they are still not finished, but they contain vital dimensional data. Based on his "dimensional data" I completed the G-6 drawings and they were published in Brett Green's book about "Building the Revell 109 G-6". I can tell you in the strongest and most certain terms that Arthur is not to blame for what "happened" to the 109 kit. In actual fact, the things that were absolutely correct with that kit, such as dimensions, dihedral, which are all perfect, were due to Arthur's research. But sometimes, someone else, strayed from the path laid by Arthur. For example, I can show an email in which Arthur clearly showed the difference in distance between the guns between MG 17 and MG 131. Those "mistakes" (which are all to do with details, not dimensions) can be traced elsewhere and maybe someday, when I will write my memoirs, I will explain what happened. So, if anyone tells you that Arthur is to be blamed for the Revell 109, tell them that they are wrong. For that precise reason, to say that Arthur's FW 190 drawings must not be trusted because (allegedly) he is to be blamed for the Revell 109 is an outrageous injustice. HTH, Radu mattlow, BGB, D.B. Andrus and 3 others 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BGB Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 Hello Rog, Yes thats right. Cheers Boris mpk 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radub Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 More photos of the exhaust baffles. BGB, mpk, D.B. Andrus and 1 other 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radub Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 Here is one more photo of the baffles. HTH Radu RBrown, D.B. Andrus, mpk and 1 other 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radub Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 As for the "extra panel line" at the front of the drop tank, it is visible on some tanks. It is a different type of joint/weld. It is not present on some drop tanks. It may be a manufacturer-specific detail. So, I think that the best thing would be to check your photos and then fill/leave that panel line as needed. HTH Radu RBrown, mpk, mattlow and 2 others 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artful69 Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 Those baffles are not part of the rack. For that precise reason, to say that Arthur's FW 190 drawings must not be trusted because (allegedly) he is to be blamed for the Revell 109 is an outrageous injustice. HTH, Radu Interesting ... It seems evident to me from the photographs (<- note the plural) that these protrusions (whatever they are and whatever their purpose) are definitely not part of the bomb rack ... Nor, it seems, are they 'fictitious' - unless someone is really good with photoshop! ... Thanks for the contribution Radu. Hello Rog, Yes thats right. Cheers Boris Thanks Boris ... The photograph that D quoted for his 'pointers' didn't seem to have a good depth of field ... that one you used and these others seem to nail it! Rog. mpk 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BGB Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 Hello, The purpose was to deflect the hot exhaust gases from the wheels as I understand it. Cheers Boris mpk 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artful69 Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 Ok ... Comparing the two kit parts - against the photographs below ... With the exception of the inboard shell ejection chutes, Revell's new kit seems (to me, anyway) to be more on the ball, than the Hasegawa kit ... most especially when looking at the second photograph and the fourth. That area looks deeply recessed and there are definite 'protrusions' attached (welded it looks like) to the lower wing. Probably not as 'refined' as it could be on the kit ... but definitely more accurate looking than the Hasegawa. Also ... I'm inclined to take Henri Daehne's word as far as anything involving propellers and their associated bits ... I've seen his work - and if he could be accused of anything, it would be overkill!! ... If he says that the Revell spinner is ok, that would be good enough for me. Rog mpk and Dany Boy 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce_Crosby Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 Hi Guys, This has been a really great thread, with a lot of people wading in with ideas, photos etc. The bottom line is that both Hasegawa and Revell have pretty decent kits. Both need a little work, a few extra details to suit personal taste but overall there's nothing the average modeller couldn't live with. And the two deflectors are for real and some external tanks have a front weld rib. My own stash has 5 Hasegawa A series, two PCM A series, 6 Hasegawa or Revell D series, two PCM Ta 152C-1, 2 Zoukei Mura Ta 152 H-1 kits AND only 1 Revell F-8. That will change soon as Revell are surely (must be, had better be!) working on different variants of the A airframe and then Zoukei Mura are going to jump right in the deep end with their take on Kurt's masterpiece. We have access to loads of correction and detail sets such as wheels, IP's, guns, cowls, etc. Dare I say it? If you are into Fw 190 modelling, you've never had it so good. I'm working away from home for the next few weeks, staying in a hotel. I'll be taking a few of the above listed stash to work on in the evenings. First job is to open up the Revell ejection chutes and maybe thin down the two deflectors or scratch build a couple from ally sheet. It'll be like being back at Halton in the basic workshop phase. Lump of ally in one hand, file in the other! Regards, Bruce Crosby Artful69, Sharkmouth, BGB and 2 others 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LSP_Mike Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 Thanks D, for the excellent review, and comparison of these kits. I'm glad to see the detail of the exhaust baffles cleared up with clear pics. and indeed the gas tank detail clarified as well. educational is always good, especially when striving to "get it right", which we are now better able to do. D Bellis and mpk 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D Bellis Posted May 30, 2015 Author Share Posted May 30, 2015 (edited) Got an email with some more shots of those little shrouds being discussed, so there are shared here as well (Thanks Steve!): I failed to have guessed that the big slabs on the inner wheel well lip were supposed to represent the tiny strips of sheet metal that were indeed on some airframes. In any case, these things on the Revell kit are still fictional due to being much larger than the originals: However, they cane be shaved off easily enough as stated above. Also from Steve via email is this priceless shot showing the muzzle flash suppressors as seen on part E41: Drawings and restored airframes: Believe them if you want, but they are no substitute for period photographs of the real thing when researching details. D Edited May 30, 2015 by D Bellis BGB, mpk and D.B. Andrus 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilM Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 Got an email with some more shots of those little shrouds being discussed, so there are shared here as well (Thanks Steve!): I failed to have guessed that the big slabs on the inner wheel well lip were supposed to represent the tiny strips of sheet metal that were indeed on some airframes. In any case, these things on the Revell kit are still fictional due to being much larger than the originals: However, they cane be shaved off easily enough as stated above. Also from Steve via email is this priceless shot showing the muzzle flash suppressors as seen on part E41: Drawings and restored airframes: Believe them if you want, but they are no substitute for period photographs of the real thing when researching details. D Thanks for all of this info and the comparisons ... I think you have got yourself a job for any and all future competing kit releases Don't know if it's just me and my eyesight, but do these latest pics of the "shrouds" show two slightly different versions of them? The second pic seems to show a "deeper" version (more like the kit interpretation, though of course not as thick?), set away slightly from the circular wheel well edge (and thus showing a gap of wing undersurface?) The first pic seems a shallower set, at / on the wheel well edge, and the fixing extended around the front edge of the wheel well? If so, perhaps not surprising if they were added retrospectively (?) from "kits" perhaps made in different places? mpk and D Bellis 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