Trumpeter 1/32 P-40F Soon to be Released??

[VMA131Marine]

1 hour ago, 1to1scale said:

I just checked two places, one had a P-40, the other had the P-47, not to mention the flood of them on ebay. 

 

 

Eduard has >10 of the 1/32 P-40N Limited Edition kit still in stock and currently on sale at half price ($82.50 to the US market). That actually seems like a really good deal considering all the included extras.

 

https://www.eduard.com/store/eduard/warhawk-1-32.html?cur=2&listtype=search&searchparam=1%2F32

[VMA131Marine]

59 minutes ago, rafju said:

Hi All

about the front cowl profile, i remember this:

http://www.p40warhawk.com/Models/Technical/F L cowl.jpg

http://www.p40warhawk.com/Models/Technical/Nose/F-L_Front_side_top.gif

 

 

One thing about drawings like this to be careful of is that they typically say on them "DO NOT SCALE." Which basically means you can use dimensioned lengths and radii, but you shouldn't take measurements directly from the drawing and scale them up (or down). To know if this drawing accurately represents the P-40F/L cowling profile you would need to use the toleranced dimension data from the manufacturing drawing of the individual parts of the cowl assembly.

[rafju]

X2 links with actual planes:

https://www.airplane-pictures.net/type.php?p=4252

I didn't know there was one in the Duxford Fighter Collection...

 

and that one, "the australian"

http://www.warbirdregistry.org/p40registry/p40-4114112.html

with the last info dated  2012, anymore news from now?

[LSP_K2]

8 hours ago, 1to1scale said:

This is where they went wrong..

1. serious modelers don’t care about metal signs and posters

 

I have to completely disagree with this notion. I consider myself a serious modeler and I love the artwork that was included in the P-47 and P-40 kits. I like the P-40 art enough that I chased down a copy to frame for my wall here.

[LSP_K2]

4 hours ago, VMA131Marine said:

 

One thing about drawings like this to be careful of is that they typically say on them "DO NOT SCALE." Which basically means you can use dimensioned lengths and radii, but you shouldn't take measurements directly from the drawing and scale them up (or down).

 

Having myself been a draftsman for many, many years, Do not scale or NTS (Not to scale), means just that, the drawing is a pictorial representation only and is not drawn to scale at all, or that portions of the drawing are not drawn to scale,... period. Therefore, nothing can be assumed to be  in scale, which naturally enough includes all straight lines and curved lines, the only two types of lines that are ever present on any drawing.

[MikeMaben]

2 hours ago, LSP_K2 said:

 

Having myself been a draftsman for many, many years, Do not scale or NTS (Not to scale), means just that, the drawing is a pictorial representation only and is not drawn to scale at all, or that portions of the drawing are not drawn to scale,... period. Therefore, nothing can be assumed to be  in scale, which naturally enough includes all straight lines and curved lines, the only two types of lines that are ever present on any drawing.

 

A drawing represents 2 basic things. Contour and dimension.

The drawings linked look like general arrangement drawings (GA}

Dimensions are one thing , contours are another. Because a dimension

is not scaled , doesn't mean it's relationship to other dimensions would

be different if it 'were' scaled.

I've wondered if the lack of dimensions being 'called out' on a GA meant

that the contours could be wrong as well. What I'm getting at is whether

or not one could use the GA to verify contours even is it's not scaled.

 

 

Edited December 12, 2018 by MikeMaben

[LSP_K2]

2 hours ago, MikeMaben said:

The drawings linked look like general arrangement drawings (GA}

Dimensions are one thing , contours are another. Because a dimension

is not scaled , doesn't mean it's relationship to other dimensions would

be different if it 'were' scaled.

I've wondered if the lack of dimensions being 'called out' on a GA meant

that the contours could be wrong as well. What I'm getting at is whether

or not one could use the GA to verify contours even is it's not scaled.

 

Dimensions on a drawing that are not made to a specific scale, do not necessarily need to be proportional to one another, and thus the drawing is "not to scale", even though those non-proportional to each other dimensions should at least represent the actual dimensions of the real thing.

 

General arrangement drawings are created just to show the arrangement, in general, of various components to one another, so if the drawing is not drawn to a specified scale, illustrated contours should not be trusted to represent the real proportions of the item drawn.

 

The drawings offered, do appear to have station locations depicted, but with no data showing as to whether or not the drawings were made to any specific scale or not, I'd just assume it to be a general arrangement drawing, with no degree of accuracy implied or inherent.

 

[KiwiZac]

On 12/12/2018 at 7:11 AM, rafju said:

and that one, "the australian"

http://www.warbirdregistry.org/p40registry/p40-4114112.html

with the last info dated  2012, anymore news from now?

Ignore the second photo, that was Col Pay's P-40E that is totally unrelated to the F. The F is still airworthy and displays at airshows around Australia.

[MikeMaben]

18 hours ago, LSP_K2 said:

General arrangement drawings are created just to show the arrangement, in general, of various components to one another, so if the drawing is not drawn to a specified scale, illustrated contours should not be trusted to represent the real proportions of the item drawn.

 

Thanks Kevin,  my only experience with GAs was when they were used as

a reference to notations on the drawing on which the dimensional info

already existed. So the contours could be close but not the final word. 

 

 

[justjim1]

hi I have two questions ,1 is the grey matters conversion still available ,as I looked online and it does not appear . " I read that great wall were going to start releasing a range of P40,s  would it be better to wait for these  , I have a very large stash so no hurry as I think only old age and mortality may beat me to them . jim

[MikeMaben]

42 minutes ago, justjim1 said:

hi I have two questions ,1 is the grey matters conversion still available ,as I looked online and it does not appear . " I read that great wall were going to start releasing a range of P40,s  would it be better to wait for these  , I have a very large stash so no hurry as I think only old age and mortality may beat me to them . jim

 

Ebay UK

 

Hi Jim, what was your source on the GWH info ?

Just curious.

 

[petrov27]

Hadn't heard of a range of P-40s, just the B model but if that has changed would be interested to hear as well

 

[ringleheim]

 

[Collin]

So when do we get some P-40F Checkertail Clan decals headed our way?  

 

Cheers

Collin. 

[1to1scale]

I have an P-40F in my possession, I am happy to announce that NOTHING is a carryover from the P-40B kit. This is 100% new.

 

The good...

1. All new cockpit, appears to be the same dimensions as the Hasegawa for depth, and it appears to have better detail!

2. Options for flaps up or down, in the down position, they included a beautiful set of PE to replicate the internal structure ribbing, with slots in the wing for the ribs, alignment appears to be guaranteed.

3. No fiddly fictional joints all over the fuselage to fill and sand.

 

The bad...

4. The decals, apparently trumpeter still can’t get stars right!?!?

5. Rubber tires, seriously? I don’t understand why they persist with this. Maybe they own a miniature rubber tire factory?

6. Here is the controversy, yes, the top curve of the nose is off, it is not as flat as it needs to be, it has a distinct hump, as it gains altitude as it leaves the windshield then curves back down. It is my initial assessment that if this bothers you, there is enough plastic on top to sand this flatter, which should get you pretty close. The bottom cowl appears to be correct profile.

 

My comparison to the the Grey Matter conversion I did, the top is better on the Grey Matter, and the bottom is better on the trumpeter. So I’m going to call it a toss up. I’m going to start the build on this ASAP, I will then take some side by sides of the two for people to compare.