Andrea Ferrari Posted February 2, 2019 Author Share Posted February 2, 2019 Let's see if this works https://photos.app.goo.gl/zJ78qH5M6ErfwHpt9 spacewolf, MikeMaben, BiggTim and 1 other 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LSP_Mike Posted February 2, 2019 Share Posted February 2, 2019 That works for me. BiggTim 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrea Ferrari Posted February 2, 2019 Author Share Posted February 2, 2019 Great! Whoever might be interested can now see the finished kit for himself/herself and decide to live or not with that ridiculously overlong rear fuselage. As for myself, I'd start cutting at it right away if I hadn't decaled it yet . Shame on Trumpeter for screwing up such a legendary and well-documented warplane! Harold, Cheetah11 and BiggTim 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunwinglow Posted February 2, 2019 Share Posted February 2, 2019 The thing is with CAD, you can make very, very precise mistakes, very, very quickly...... nmayhew, Cheetah11, Martinnfb and 4 others 3 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BiggTim Posted February 2, 2019 Share Posted February 2, 2019 22 minutes ago, wunwinglow said: The thing is with CAD, you can make very, very precise mistakes, very, very quickly...... I've said that almost verbatim to the people I train on Revit at work. Just because it can be very precise, does not mean it's accurate. It's only as good as the monkey with the keyboard and mouse makes it! Cheetah11, spacewolf, Andrea Ferrari and 5 others 6 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darren Howie Posted February 3, 2019 Share Posted February 3, 2019 (edited) Its not just they person behind the keyboard. Wingnut Wings found to their dismay not all CAD programs are made equal. 6 programs later and several years of delay in the Fokker DVII to get curves correct then be able to tool them correctly proved that. Blind faith in CAD even with 100% accurate info does not equal an accurate production if CAD does not render it correctly or even a correct render does not equal an accurate result. For the OP im not sure what the story is but in future doing this type of leg work before you build a kit is probably a wiser move... Edited February 5, 2019 by Darren Howie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeMaben Posted February 3, 2019 Share Posted February 3, 2019 13 hours ago, Andrea Ferrari said: Let's see if this works https://photos.app.goo.gl/zJ78qH5M6ErfwHpt9 Nice work Andrea Andrea Ferrari 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LSP_Ray Posted February 3, 2019 Share Posted February 3, 2019 It does look good, Andrea! Andrea Ferrari 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrea Ferrari Posted February 3, 2019 Author Share Posted February 3, 2019 Thank you all ! I agree - it does look good enough...but it's wrong! And about doing research in advance - I always do, and quite a lot, but in this case it was more about the specific individual plane, its codes and above all its peculiar field camouflage rather than the kit itself. Some obvious faults - such as the wrong bomb cradle or missing details in the cockpit - were immediately spotted and corrected. Other details - such as the Flammenvernichter night exhausts - were scratch built. After all, Trumpeter is well known for scaling up their 1:32 kits to 1:24, and their 1:32 D-5 has the correct fuselage length, so how could anybody expect them to make such an incomprehensible blunder? Even now, looking at the finished kit, one realises subconsciously there's something funny about it, but it's pretty hard to pinpoint the exact fault. I only wish we could talk to someone at Trumpeter... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LSP_Mike Posted February 3, 2019 Share Posted February 3, 2019 Chabuduo. The Chinese expression for: "it's good enough" trumpy has earned a reputation for what many now call the A, B and C team efforts. in our scale, the SBD, TBM, and swordfish are all stellar kits. The initial Wildcat, the P-40, and a few others suffer.....inaccuracies we'll say. Chabuduo. Not too sure about jets as I have only a few, but I did spring for a MiG-29a. That said, they produce ships, tanks, subs, and planes in a variety of scales, and I have a fair sampling of their kits; I shop carefully when considering their products though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Markjames1968 Posted February 3, 2019 Share Posted February 3, 2019 Not wanting ro be antagonistic here but no proof of this fuselage being 3cm too long has been given,, theres a photo above that shows idont know what,..? And then everybody seems to be agreeing that the kit is wrong... have i missed something(entirely possible)? can someone show me a photo of the Airfix 24th Stuka next to this Trumpeter kit please ( regardless of mark, they are the same from the wing root back ... and this is where the supposed problem lies...?) Mark P and Martinnfb 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark P Posted February 3, 2019 Share Posted February 3, 2019 Agree with the above. We need to see a comparison photo of the Airfix and Trumpeter fuselage side by side to make a determination and see exactly where the problem is, if one is identified. Mark Proulx Andrea Ferrari and Harold 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrea Ferrari Posted February 3, 2019 Author Share Posted February 3, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, Markjames1968 said: Not wanting ro be antagonistic here but no proof of this fuselage being 3cm too long has been given,, theres a photo above that shows idont know what,..? And then everybody seems to be agreeing that the kit is wrong... have i missed something(entirely possible)? can someone show me a photo of the Airfix 24th Stuka next to this Trumpeter kit please ( regardless of mark, they are the same from the wing root back ... and this is where the supposed problem lies...?) I do not have either kit unbuilt, so I am unable to show an image of both fuselages placed side by side. On the completed model the rear fuselage length of the Trumpeter D-5 - measured from the wing's rear edge to the tail strut attaching point - is about 18cm, while that of the Airfix B-2 is about 14cm. This link to my Google photos album shows however both my completed models, as can be seen the Trumpeter D-5 rear fuselage is more than 3cm / 1,18 inch longer (measured by tape) than the Airfix one. I have also added a photo of the fuselage sprue of the 1:24 D-5 Trumpeter kit and one of the 1:24 Airfix kit which I downloaded from the net, but it's difficult to judge from those. https://photos.app.goo.gl/zJ78qH5M6ErfwHpt9 I am quite sorry, but I seem unable to post the images directly to this thread. If anybody can explain me what I have to do, I will gladly post them here. To add to the confusion, I am now told that "according to William Green the D is 27" longer than the B" - that would translate in 1:24 scale to about 3cm, and that would make the whole length of the Trumpeter kit (not necessarily its rear fuselage) more or less correct. But if this is true, why all profiles show the rear fuselages of the B and D models to be of the same length, and no book about the Ju87 mentions this discrepancy? Edited February 3, 2019 by Andrea Ferrari Harold 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheetah11 Posted February 3, 2019 Share Posted February 3, 2019 (edited) The only handy reference I have available at the moment is the Squadron Signal book. It states the D engine cowling was lengthened compared to the B and quotes the following lengths. B-2 length 11,05 m and the d length 11,5 m. (36ft 3inches and 37ft 8,75inches.) The photo of the Trumpeter 1/24 scale Stuka is available on their website. Overlay any un-build 1/48 or 1/32 kit over the image sized to the proper scale and the problem will become apparent. Nick Edited February 3, 2019 by Cheetah11 spelling Andrea Ferrari 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hanna Posted February 3, 2019 Share Posted February 3, 2019 (edited) I measured my kit to fuselage length of @22 inches from tip of spinner to back edge of rudder. Thanks, Mike Krizan Edited February 3, 2019 by hanna Spelling Andrea Ferrari 1 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