Question Re: Trumpeter Mustang Mk III

[coogrfan 339]

13 hours ago, MikeMaben said:

 

You can change anything on a plastic model.

 

It's plastic.

 

 

 

All right. How would you go about fixing that wing?

[coogrfan 339]

15 hours ago, Avenger2614 said:

Well, I'm sorry if I offended anybody with my opinion of the kit. I'm still going to go ahead and build it, though, because that's what we do with kits...

 

Absolutely, I never meant to suggest otherwise.    

[Out2gtcha 30,897]

4 hours ago, coogrfan said:

 

 How would you go about fixing that wing?

 

 

That would be a toughie, but possible.  It might be possible that you could get the the profile of the laminar wings and make "1/2 ribs"   all the way down the wing on the bottom, then cover them with some super thin styrene sheet, taking into account the thickness of the sheet, and reduce the height of the ribs accordingly.  Once roughed in with the ribs and card stock, one could get some two part  body putty or Milliput  or the like and blend things in. It may also be necessary to move the wing root too.  LOADS of work

 

Im sure even something as hard as making a non-laminar flow wing into a laminar one would be possible with the right person, and skill set. Im not sure that would be me, as Im going to wait till someone (HKM?) puts out a new too B/C.   

It would be a lot LOT of work, but I think possible.

 

Now if it would be worth the headache or not is another question......................

[Brad-M 363]

I guess one could always build the old Revell kit.

 

Brad

[D Bellis 2,540]

2 hours ago, Brad-M said:

I guess one could always build the old Revell kit.

Equally horrible, but with raised panel lines and big rivets everywhere... 

 

D

[Out2gtcha 30,897]

9 minutes ago, D Bellis said:

Equally horrible, but with raised panel lines and big rivets everywhere... 

 

Did they do Lamar flow on the Revell kit?

 

Not seen one  in person

[MikeMaben 5,642]

20 hours ago, Jennings Heilig said:

 Some kits are really, really bad scale replicas of what they’re intended to represent. 

 

I don't think Stefan's B looks really really bad.

But that's just me 

 

 

[MikeMaben 5,642]

9 hours ago, coogrfan said:

         All right. How would you go about fixing that wing?

 

I'll stick with my original statement. It's self explanatory.

Define laminar flow and how the Trumpeter wing is horribly wrong.

 

 

[coogrfan 339]

3 hours ago, Out2gtcha said:

 

Did they do Lamar flow on the Revell kit?

 

Not seen one  in person

http://www.aeroscale.net/modules.php?op=modload&name=SquawkBox&file=index&req=viewtopic&topic_id=208256

 

The wing is one of the few things the Revell kit gets right:

 

Compare that to Trumpy's:

[coogrfan 339]

2 hours ago, MikeMaben said:

 

I'll stick with my original statement. It's self explanatory.

Define laminar flow and how the Trumpeter wing is horribly wrong.

 

 

[D Bellis 2,540]

2 hours ago, MikeMaben said:

Define laminar flow and how the Trumpeter wing is horribly wrong.

To add to Coogrfan's post, the airfoil Trumpeter used is an eyesore primarily because it results in an obviously thick and blunt leading edge - NOT the gracefully thin airfoil of any Mustang. 

 

And, Jennings hit the nail on the head: 

On 11/5/2018 at 9:40 PM, Jennings Heilig said:

You could convert a P-51 into a 737 if you really wanted to, but what would be the point?  Some kits are really, really bad scale replicas of what they’re intended to represent. 

 

HTH,

D

[MikeMaben 5,642]

19 hours ago, D Bellis said:

To add to Coogrfan's post, the airfoil Trumpeter used is an eyesore primarily because it results in an obviously thick and blunt leading edge - NOT the gracefully thin airfoil of any Mustang.

 

So I took a shot of Trumpeter's wing mated to Tamiya's root. (I hear they're pretty accurate)

 

 

Not perfect (of course) but not the horrible abonination some have described.

The root span is short and all the things in Florin's article are true ( I read it a

long time ago too ). It's not what it could be / should be, but it depends on

(as is always the case) one's expectations.

 

19 hours ago, D Bellis said:

     ...And, Jennings hit the nail on the head:

 

Jenning's response was just snarky ( OK with me) but a plastic model 'can'

be fixed without "converting" it to something else.

 

[coogrfan 339]

My expectation for a P-51B kit is that it should, at a minimum, accurately replicate the basic shapes of the P-51B. Trumpy's kit does not. If you're ok with that, great. Have fun. That's what the hobby is about. 

Edited November 7, 2018 by coogrfan

[D Bellis 2,540]

2 hours ago, MikeMaben said:

 

Not perfect (of course) but not the horrible abonination some have described.

If you really can not see how bad the Trumpeter kit is after looking at it and comparing it, then by all means don't let anyone discourage you from enjoying the kit.

 

It still looks like a cartoon to anyone even slightly familiar with what a P-51B actually looks like. No amount of denial will change that.

 

D

[MikeMaben 5,642]

6 hours ago, D Bellis said:

If you really can not see how bad the Trumpeter kit is after looking at it and comparing it, then by all means don't let anyone discourage you from enjoying the kit.

 

It still looks like a cartoon to anyone even slightly familiar with what a P-51B actually looks like. No amount of denial will change that.

 

D

 

My (photo) point was that the laminar flow airfoil that has been claimed to be horrifying

isn't that horrifying.

Darin , I am familiar with what a B actually looks like. If you read what I said, I

didn't deny anything about the overall kit.  Anyone "slightly" familiar with it wouldn't

notice things like laminar airfoils. Fanatics obviously do.

 

6 hours ago, D Bellis said:

    ... don't let anyone discourage you from enjoying the kit.

 

Not possible