Jump to content

Revell 1/32 Me-262 in stock Spruebrothers


Paul2660

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, Jennings Heilig said:

Has anyone who's done the Revell 262B night fighter tried to fix the too-tall step between the slat well and the wing upper surface?  The real thing does have a very slight step there (unlike the A-4 Skyhawk), but IMHO the kit step is just a little too tall to pull it off realistically.  It shouldn't be a hard fix.  Just wondering if anyone's done it.

 

 

 

The "step" is caused by the tooling limitations. There has to be a minimum thickness of 0.3 mm at the trailing edge. Ideally the trailing edge of the slats should be sharp like a knife edge, but tooling limitations (and plastic flow limitations) preclude that. Incidentally, the same is the case with any trailing edge on any other kit out there, for example the slats on the Hasegawa 1/32 Bf 109. 

Radu

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Jennings Heilig said:

Be that as it may, the slats are usually open when the aircraft is parked, and the kit is designed for them to be open.

 

Well, as Ray pointed out, the "well" had to be created to accommodate the flaps on retracted position. If I were to have a choice, I would have left the slats retracted. I have seen five different 262s when this was designed. On all five, if the slats were pushed back, they stayed back. Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know, I know, gravity+airflow controlled slats and all that, but fact remains that on an aircraft resting on the ground, slats stayed however they were pushed. If pushed back, they stayed back. When the engine started, vibrations would "disturb" that "resting position" and they would deploy anyway. They are movable. For years I have seen people tearing into each other over this kind of stuff, yet all they did was argue over what they read on the internet, basically fighting over Google results. I had the opportunity to touch these machines and I am telling you what I saw, not some third-hand copy-pasted stuff. 

Radu

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Radu, watch the Discovery show (if you can find it...I have it on vhs), Wings of the Luftwaffe on the Me262.  There is a scene where ground crew are making sure the leading edge slats remain open on the ground.  It shows a ground crewman bending the trailing edge of the slat so that it returns to the open position when manually pushed closed.  I cannot say this was done in practice, it's just what is shown in what appears to be a Luftwaffe training film.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Juggernut said:

Radu, watch the Discovery show (if you can find it...I have it on vhs), Wings of the Luftwaffe on the Me262.  There is a scene where ground crew are making sure the leading edge slats remain open on the ground.  It shows a ground crewman bending the trailing edge of the slat so that it returns to the open position when manually pushed closed.  I cannot say this was done in practice, it's just what is shown in what appears to be a Luftwaffe training film.

 

Yes, I know the video, it has been used for decades as a "weapon" by the people fixated on the idea that movable things should move only one way, whatever way makes them look "smart". That is a well-known training video issued by the Luftwaffe. In that film the mechanic checks the free movement (which is actully more "buttery" than "free"), it sticks a bit, then takes a pliers and straightens something at the corner of the slat to make sure that it does not get "stuck". Of course it is of outmost importance that the slat moves freely - that is the very point of it. But that is no evidence of anything. My point still stands: if you push the slat back, it stays back. It will slide open when the engine starts anyway, so it makes no difference. 

It also does so on the Bf 109. There are a multitude of photos in print and on the internet that substantiate that, but they are conveniently ignored by those who only seek open slats. 

Radu 

Edited by Radub
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Radub said:

 

Yes, I know the video, it has been used for decades as a "weapon" by the people fixated on the idea that movable things should move only one way, whatever way makes them look "smart". That is a well-known training video issued by the Luftwaffe. In that film the mechanic checks the free movement (which is actully more "buttery" than "free"), it sticks a bit, then takes a pliers and straightens something at the corner of the slat to make sure that it does not get "stuck". Of course it is of outmost importance that the slat moves freely - that is the very point of it. But that is no evidence of anything. My point still stands: if you push the slat back, it stays back. It will slide open when the engine starts anyway, so it makes no difference. 

It also does so on the Bf 109. There are a multitude of photos in print and on the internet that substantiate that, but they are conveniently ignored by those who only seek open slats. 

Radu 

Utterly amazing. Throwing out insults while rejecting logical data. 

 

Just throwing out the Bf 109's slats as a reference for Me 262 slats displays a fundamental lack of understanding of how the slats function, their orientation on the respective aircraft and how gravity affects them while at rest on the ground:

VLILtbq.jpg

 

Radu,

You are not the only person on the planet that has looked at and touched museum examples of aircraft. You aren't even the only person to assume they are displayed in flyable condition. There are many good reasons why the slats MUST not stick in the closed position, and why the Luftwaffe felt so strongly about the need for them to operate freely that they included several minutes of instruction in their training film. 

 

44 minutes ago, Jennings Heilig said:

Build your model any way you want to. Bottom line.

Absolutely. Things like this only present a problem when a person attempts to disseminate incorrect information to cover their own lack of understanding. 

 

D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, D Bellis said:

Utterly amazing. Throwing out insults while rejecting logical data. 

 

Just throwing out the Bf 109's slats as a reference for Me 262 slats displays a fundamental lack of understanding of how the slats function, their orientation on the respective aircraft and how gravity affects them while at rest on the ground:

VLILtbq.jpg

 

Radu,

You are not the only person on the planet that has looked at and touched museum examples of aircraft. You aren't even the only person to assume they are displayed in flyable condition. There are many good reasons why the slats MUST not stick in the closed position, and why the Luftwaffe felt so strongly about the need for them to operate freely that they included several minutes of instruction in their training film. 

 

Absolutely. Things like this only present a problem when a person attempts to disseminate incorrect information to cover their own lack of understanding. 

 

D

 

Yeah... when you imagine that somehow I am "insulting" some unidentified entity, that is wrong... But when you are insulting me, that is right. Gotcha! 

OK, since you are so convinced that movable things can only be in one position, please clarify the following:

- mug handles: left or right?

- doors and windows: open or closed

- canopies: open or closed?

Can you envisage any scenario when one of the above can be one way, the other way or in-between? Go!

Radu

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Jennings Heilig said:

I'm not arguing slat position, and I'm not disparaging the kit.  I merely asked if anyone had tried to move the slat well.  

 

To each his own.

 

Not on this kit, but I have used .010 or .015 pieces, cut from sheet to make the well look more appropriately shallow when slats were extended.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...