1/32 Hasegawa Bf109K-4 Weisse 8

[StefanGebhardt]

15 hours ago, Vincent/MDC said:

i wrote that article and you can go by it

 

The MK108 ejection port was on the left because of the internals (fuel filters mostly)

 

Hi Vincent,

 

Thanks for the quick feedback already BUT I need to challenge you to provide some more details to convince me. As far as I know there are no surviving K-4's out there and the Allies didn't do any evaluation of this specific version because it wasn't 'special' compared to previous models.

 

First and most importantly can you specify the definition of left when it comes to point of view? Do you mean on the left side looking from the propeller backwards (as shown in the part just used as an example to show the modification you made) or do you mean left from the pilot point of view?

 

Can you clarify the item I highlighted above comparing the picture labeled as not showing the K-4 belly with the incorrect position of the ejector port while on the other side replicating the position exactly this way on the model part shown? 

 

Do you think that there was just one positioning for the ejector port? If yes how do you explain the picture I posted above which seems to show an ejector port on the left side of the fuselage (from the pilots point of view).

 

Are there any photos available confirming the position of the ejector port as described in your blog entry.

 

Attached are drawing published in JaPo's K-4 book. They are showing to different belly configurations and it isn't clear to me if these are two different possible configurations or whatsoever...

 

 

Cheers,

Stefan

Edited May 4, 2019 by StefanGebhardt

[Guest Vincent]

right from the pilot's perspective, left from front view

 

there was no other possibility because of the fuel filters located on the left. they are also the reason why the drop tank is off center

 

see here:

 

 

the funny thing is that the u4 version did not eject the 30mm cases, only the k4 did

 

 

Edited May 3, 2019 by Vincent/MDC

[StefanGebhardt]

Correct me if I am wrong but the suggested positioning is based on the drawings showing the internals but not this specific detail, right?

 

Don‘t get me wrong. I don’t want offend you and your research etc. With this in mind, do you have or do you know any pictures showing the ejector port in the suggested position?

 

What is your opinion on the pic I posted showing the ejector port on the left side of the fuselage from the pilots perspective?

 

Keep the good work going!

Stefan

Edited May 4, 2019 by StefanGebhardt
Text adjustment

[Thunnus]

Thank you Stefan and Vincent for this information!  You both seem to have resources that I lack and am grateful for any additional details that I can get for this build.  The position of the ejector chute was one of the things hanging me up since the drawings of the K-4 that I have are contradictory and show the Mk108 ejector chute on both the right and left side.  Trying to verify the position using archive photos has been difficult and there are very clear photos of the bottom of in-service K-4's.  I've seen all of the photos referenced so far.

 

Here is another thing that is bothering me.  In my search through my collection of K-4 photos, I also tried to verify the oil breather outlet just forward of the 131 ejector chutes described in Vincent's excellent article.  These two photos seem to indicate an absence of a circular port forward of the 131 ejector chutes.

 

 

Overall, I consider these rather small details that will not be noticed by many people, if at all.  But since they are small details that can be easily added, it would be nice to get some confirmation on the correct positioning of these things.

[Thunnus]

22 hours ago, Vincent/MDC said:

I would remove the pedal straps and replace them with a lead foil strip. They are way too thin and the late war ones often did not have a buckle. Below picture is from a G10

 

 

I can do that!

 

 

22 hours ago, AceofClubs said:

Great work Thunnus!. I like the tan seat. I'm looking for next wips

Ciao

F

 

11 hours ago, Jerry Crandall said:

Looking great, but the wooden seats were painted RLM 66 also.

         Cheers, Jerry

 

Vincent is correct.  The tan seat is just a base for chipping purposes after it is painted RLM66.  Here is the seat after the RLM66 was applied and then after it has been chipped.

 

Going through the Tweak List and performing some corrections. The bulges above and below the horizontal stabilizer bases were not present on the K-4 and need to be removed.

 

These were carefully removed by saw and knife.

 

 

[Thunnus]

The rectangular hatch on the port side is not quite the right shape.  The kit represents as a right rectangle but on the K-4, the bottom edge is not parallel to the top edge.  To make this change, I need to remove the existing bottom panel line.  I'm removing the circular hatch bolts as well since their position will change slightly.  I am using black CA glue to fill.

 

Black CA glue is rubberized so it is easier to sand than regular CA glue.  It also leaves a nice black record of your filled area.

 

The new panel line is drawn in pencil.

 

To scribe a straight line, you need a guide.  I like to use Dymo label tape.  It is thick plastic, which makes a nice guide for the scriber blade and it is adhesive backed so it stays securely in position during the scribing.

 

I use a scriber (by UMM-USA, not pictured) to cut a line but not all the way to the corners since the hatch has rounded corners.  2-3 passes are enough to scribe a line deep enough to remove the Dymo tape.

 

A metal template is used to scribe the rounded corners.  You can't fit a scriber's cutting blade into these templates so a sewing needle chucked into a pin-vise is used instead.

 

A needle is not a true cutting instrument and will simply gouge a trough in the plastic.  So it takes a few iterations of scribing and sanding to get a clean panel line.

It's difficult to gauge the results so I spray a light coat of Mr Surfacer 1200 to check the new line.  After this dries, I will put new circular bolts in the corners.

[rafju]

Hi All

@Thunnus, about colours, I'm thinking this video recently posted by Brett through Hyperscale forum, can be of a good inspiration for such a build: (look at the seat colours)

 

Edited May 4, 2019 by rafju

[rafju]

Thunnus

one more time, be careful with drawings view, i'm not sure that the actual radio/first aid kit hatch was not rectangular? possible and again Vincent will give us a reply ;-)

I'm thinking what we can see on scale drawings are an effect of drawing as the fuse is somehow conical.

Edited May 4, 2019 by rafju

[TAG]

1 hour ago, rafju said:

Hi All

@Thunnus, about colours, I'm thinking this video recently posted by Brett through Hyperscale forum, can be of a good inspiration for such a build: (look at the seat colours)

 

 

amazing video, crispy HD is CRISP, look at all the tonal differences going on. no wonder late-war RLM colors are such a can of worms...

 

thanks for posting, rafju!

 

 

 

[StefanGebhardt]

11 hours ago, Vincent/MDC said:

right from the pilot's perspective, left from front view

 

there was no other possibility because of the fuel filters located on the left. they are also the reason why the drop tank is off center

 

see here:

 

 

the funny thing is that the u4 version did not eject the 30mm cases, only the k4 did

 

 

 

This can't be the only option! Please check the following previously posted photo again and let me know your thoughts.

 

I need to apologise. I found a second picture in the book identifying the machine as a Bf 109 G-10/U4 White 24. This will rule out the photo-evidence for the left side (from the pilots point of view perspective) ejector port for the MK 108. I will update my previous posts accordingly.

 

 

Edited May 4, 2019 by StefanGebhardt

[Guest Vincent]

I'm not sure it's the ejection chute we see on the picture. As said, the U4  version did not have ejection of the spent cases at all

Edited May 4, 2019 by Vincent/MDC

[StefanGebhardt]

There is one specific part to the ejector port for the 30mm shells I don’t understand, especially with the fact in mind that the previous G-models kept the 20mm shells inside. The designer tried to improve the aerodynamic of the plane to improve the max speed and this was most noticeable around the engine/gun area. They pretty much used Erla’s design for the G-10 for the K-4. With all these streamlining in mind I can’t imagine why they would add a ‘hole’ in the bottom of the plane for the 30mm shells. The ejector port for the 13mm are already quite large and we are talking now about a shell more than twice the size. That doesn’t really make  sense to me. I am still wondering if JaPo was correct with their statement (previously posted) that the shells were kept inside. 

Edited May 4, 2019 by StefanGebhardt

[Guest Vincent]

1 hour ago, StefanGebhardt said:

There is one specific part to the ejector port for the 30mm shells I don’t understand, especially with the fact in mind that the previous G-models kept the 20mm shells inside. The designer tried to improve the aerodynamic of the plane to improve the max speed and this was most noticeable around the engine/gun area. They pretty much used Erla’s design for the G-10 for the K-4. With all these streamlining in mind I can’t imagine why they would add a ‘hole’ in the bottom of the plane for the 30mm shells. The ejector port for the 13mm are already quite large and we are talking now about a shell more than twice the size. That doesn’t really make  sense to me. I am still wondering if JaPo was correct with their statement (previously posted) that the shells were kept inside. 

 

Well, ejecting the cases removed the need for the air circulation system that was part of the design since the F version and MTT found out that the gain in speed was worth it i suppose.

 

I can tell you with 100% confidence that the chute was on all K4, ejecting to the right of the pilot.

 

The K4 parts manuals that i have is pretty clear on that :

 

July 1944

Bewaffnung

Baugruppe 209.804 - seite 3

The part number is 209.804-005

and it's called Abführschacht

 

 

There was a good reason previously why the designers wanted to keep the shells inside and i believe it had to do with recovering the brass from the cases. Once they switched to the MG131 using lacquered steel cases, they ejected them. Early MG151 cases were made in brass as well but MK108 shells were always lacquered steel

 

Edited May 4, 2019 by Vincent/MDC

[StefanGebhardt]

1 hour ago, Vincent/MDC said:

 

Well, ejecting the cases removed the need for the air circulation system that was part of the design since the F version and MTT found out that the gain in speed was worth it i suppose.

 

I can tell you with 100% confidence that the chute was on all K4, ejecting to the right of the pilot.

 

The K4 parts manuals that i have is pretty clear on that :

 

July 1944

Bewaffnung

Baugruppe 209.804 - seite 3

The part number is 209.804-005

and it's called Abführschacht

 

 

There was a good reason previously why the designers wanted to keep the shells inside and i believe it had to do with recovering the brass from the cases. Once they switched to the MG131 using lacquered steel cases, they ejected them. Early MG151 cases were made in brass as well but MK108 shells were always lacquered steel

 

 

The info is moving us forward BUT I need to challenge you in this case. The first take-offs of a K-4 took place as early as August 11, 1944 (Werksnummer 330103). Other pre-production K-4's at this stage still had engine-mounted MG 152/20 installed (Werksnummer 330112). The first assignment of K-4's took place in as early as of mid-October 1944. All these info were extracted from JaPo's Messerschmitt Bf109 K page 78. 

 

Why am I stating this info? The answer is simple and straight forward. A K4 parts manual dated July 1944 does not necessary show the parts used for production starting a month later while in minimum some of these ones (as stated above for 330112) not even used the final armament. I am not saying that the info is not correct, I am just challenging you :-)

 

Is there anyone around having proof in form of a picture that the ejector port is located in the position described by Vincent?

 

Attached is a photo from the same book showing the lower part underneath the MK 108. 

 

 

 

Edited May 4, 2019 by StefanGebhardt

[Guest Vincent]

Well, i'm leaving you to your challenge and suggest that you open a new topic and see if anyone is interested in contributing. This topic is for the model Thunnus is building, not for continuous challenges when given reliable information.

 

Sorry buddy

 

V