oyoy5 Posted January 28, 2019 Share Posted January 28, 2019 (edited) Cause I am horrible at cutting it off the entire nacelle and repositioning it. I am to the point I think I will live with the kit as is. Edited January 28, 2019 by oyoy5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cees Broere Posted January 28, 2019 Share Posted January 28, 2019 That would be the best way to do. CATCplSlade 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheetah11 Posted January 28, 2019 Share Posted January 28, 2019 (edited) Try and look at as many photo side on (there are not many as the He 219 stood fairly high off the ground) and then decide. I do not think the Revell kit has as large a problem as made out to be. The Revell nacelles are in the same relative position to the fuselage center as the 1/48 Tamiya kit . Looking at the side on photo I think the SWS kit has the nacelles a bit high relative to the fuselage center. I am leaving my Revell kit as is. Nick Edited January 28, 2019 by Cheetah11 Additional text added CATCplSlade and Azor 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaldEagle Posted January 28, 2019 Share Posted January 28, 2019 Will be starting mine soon. Ill be leaving them as they are! Tel CATCplSlade and Azor 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony T Posted January 28, 2019 Share Posted January 28, 2019 The nacelle incidence bothers me little; rather it's the flatness of the upper nacelles. If building the Revell I might just build up the top surfaces of the nacelles so that these are deeper and rounder in cross-section. The night-fighter finish will be largely fictitious on any build here (irrespective of whether the plastic is modified), thereby introducing a far greater inaccuracy: mottled grey over pale blue, more like a speckled egg (and less like some spaghetti thrown over mushroom sauce). Searching for such an A-7 scheme to mitigate inaccuracy. Tony Out2gtcha and Gazzas 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reuben L. Hernandez Posted January 28, 2019 Share Posted January 28, 2019 (edited) I always ask myself a few questions before any build, 1) I’m I building this for myself, 2) I’m I building to have fun and relaxation, 3) Is any former (add your model here) pilot/mechanic/crew chief/engineer/designer ever going to set eyes on it in my house and tell me this or that is correct or incorrect? We can all get lost in trying to replicate the perfect model but for me in the end it’s all about having fun putting a kit together, painting, and weathering and if looks good to my eyes and only my eyes then it’s all good. Just my $.02 Reuben Edited January 30, 2019 by Reuben L. Hernandez AlanG, MikeC, CATCplSlade and 3 others 5 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dennismcc Posted January 28, 2019 Share Posted January 28, 2019 I am not particularly knowledgeable about Lufwaffe subjects so could not comment on the accuracy issues, other more knowledgeable people have identified the problems with the kit but I just used it as a fun build and did not try to correct anything. At the end of the day I ended up with (to my eyes) a most impressive model and enjoyed months of fun building it all for a very reasonable cost and no lost sleep worrying about it. Cheers Dennis catbloke, Mustang JBB, Padraic Conway and 14 others 17 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oyoy5 Posted January 28, 2019 Author Share Posted January 28, 2019 Thank you all for all the infoemation, I am leaving the nacelles as is based on your comments thank you for the feedback. Azor and CATCplSlade 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troy Molitor Posted January 28, 2019 Share Posted January 28, 2019 I can agree to your initial concern. Perhaps the diameter of the entire nacelle is the real question and not just the rear portion of the actual nacelle in particular? The slope rear portion of the Revell kit represents a better profile (IMHO) to that of the real thing as compared to the nacelles restored by the NASM. The high straight upper edge of the rear ZM kit doesn’t seem to represent the real aircraft profile. Look at several awesome examples displayed here on LSP and compare them to the real aircraft photos and make own judgement. The forward canopy is also a concern between the two respectful companies. In reality, its more a combined example of both kits that would be ideal situation but this is economically unfeasable to many. We’re just lucky to have two companies doing their best to represent a great example in their own right of the awesome He-219. Good of luck with your quest and keep us posted. Troy Jan_G, alaninaustria, Cheetah11 and 2 others 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shawn M Posted January 28, 2019 Share Posted January 28, 2019 (edited) I built it as is, and unless you are looking at it dead on in profile, you cannot tell Edited January 28, 2019 by Shawn M dennismcc, MikeC, Azor and 10 others 10 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BiggTim Posted January 28, 2019 Share Posted January 28, 2019 Some fantastic paint jobs, there!! Shawn M 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oyoy5 Posted January 28, 2019 Author Share Posted January 28, 2019 Yes those are some great builds for sure Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mustang JBB Posted January 28, 2019 Share Posted January 28, 2019 there was build here on LSP a few years ago where the guy simply tilted the whole wing. By cutting the spar slots on the fuselage so that the front spar was higher and the back lower(or the other way. Can' remember which way the nacelles need to be fixed). The flat side of the fuselage makes this fix ideal. Not 100% accurate fix, but gets the nacelle angle corrected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LSP_Kevin Posted January 28, 2019 Share Posted January 28, 2019 1 hour ago, Mustang JBB said: there was build here on LSP a few years ago where the guy simply tilted the whole wing. By cutting the spar slots on the fuselage so that the front spar was higher and the back lower(or the other way. Can' remember which way the nacelles need to be fixed). The flat side of the fuselage makes this fix ideal. Not 100% accurate fix, but gets the nacelle angle corrected. That was Iain's build, which we turned into an eBook for KLP Publishing (see my signature for details). Kev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheetah11 Posted January 28, 2019 Share Posted January 28, 2019 Once the Smithsonian He 219 is assembled it would be interesting to see which nacelle angle is closest, Revell or SWS. Having looked at dozens of photos and drawings I know which one I favour. 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