Jump to content
Hartmann52

Bf-109G-10 "Erla", Erich Hartmann

Recommended Posts

Colleagues, help with the definition of the paint scheme of Erich's airplane close to the original. Because Revell and Edward have a completely different view on this issue. Who is right and whose scheme for RLM colors can be taken as a basis ???

109G-10.jpg

82164-12.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Jennings Heilig said:

You're making the rash assumption that one or the other is right.  I wouldn't bet a lot on that being the case.

What did I ask wrong? Revell offers camouflage RLM-76 bottom, and the top RLM-83/74 with spots additional RLM-02 on board. Eduard offers bottom unpainted aluminum + RLM-76, top - 75/82. Which of them is right? If you know, tell me

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hartmann's aircraft was an early Erla-produced G-10. If I'm not mistaken, research has shown that early Erla machines were camouflaged in the old 74/75/76 scheme. At some point in the 151XXX W.Nr. block, Erla switched over to a solid application of 81, or possibly 81/82 in some machines. Have a look at the links, they may be of use:

 

https://falkeeins.blogspot.com/2011/09/erich-hartmanns-last-bf-109-g-10.html

 

http://theprofilepaintshop.blogspot.com/2011/09/erich-hartmanns-bf109g-10.html

 

http://theprofilepaintshop.blogspot.com/2014/03/barracuda-studios-bf109g-10-erla-decals.html

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Difficult to say for a simple reason: there were just two (bad) pictures showing only a small section of the plane. Nothing more. So, you are on your own and the best approach is probably to rely on what was probably the status of a specific production batch. Revell and Eduard reproductions are just assumptions, nothing more. Nobody can demonstrate if this is 'right' or not, just more or less probable! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Are the bumps over the wheel wells the small or large ones. I can not clearly make it out in the photo. Revell and Eduard seem to have different interpretations.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The few existing photos show that the smaller bulge was used on Hartmann's Erla G-10. For a very long time it was thought that this particular aircraft was a K-4 and was depicted in models and artworks with K-4 features including the long wheel "bumps".  Maybe that is why the artist who drew the Revell decal instruction artwork thought thought that the bumps should be of that type. 

Radu 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Radub said:

The few existing photos show that the smaller bulge was used on Hartmann's Erla G-10. For a very long time it was thought that this particular aircraft was a K-4 and was depicted in models and artworks with K-4 features including the long wheel "bumps".  Maybe that is why the artist who drew the Revell decal instruction artwork thought thought that the bumps should be of that type. 

Radu 

Well, according to the influxes on the wing, everything is more or less clear, because small influences are a feature of the Erlа factory. Something is even visible in the photo. And I can't understand how Revell was so wrong. But with the colors of camouflage, complete uncertainty. :wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

As far as I'm aware, all documentary evidence (color photos and crash reports) suggests that Erla G-10s from the 490XXX (September 1944 - November 1944); 491XXX (December 1944 - January 1945), 150XXX (December 1944 - January 1945) and part of the 151XXX (December 1944 - March 1945) block were camouflaged in the old scheme of RLM 74/75/76. So, in fact, it seems that the majority of Erla G-10 was finished in the classical RLM 74/75/76 scheme.

 

At some point in the 151XXX block (probably February-March 1945), Erla switched to a solid coat of RLM 81 on the top surfaces and sides. The top color usually also wrapped around the rear fuselage; undersides of the wings and cowl were left unpainted. In a few cases, a pattern of RLM 81/82 may have been used on some machines.

 

As regards the wing bulges: early machines produced by Erla (blocks 490XXX and 491XXX) had small wing bulges and regular 660 X 160 wheels; later Erla G-10s had the large rectangular bulges and oversized 660 X 190 wheels. So, the rectangular bulges by themselves aren't wrong for an Erla G-10 - but are only appropriate for the later machines. Hartmann's aircraft was from an earlier production block, and had the small bumps and wheels, so that specific airframe can't be built straight out of the box from the Revell kit - you either need to get the upper wing inserts with small bulges from the Revell G-6, or get the Barracuda Cast inserts.

Edited by pvanroy
typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/17/2020 at 3:35 PM, Hartmann52 said:

 Which of them is right? If you know, tell me

 

That's my point.  Don't assume either of them is right.  Neither company has a great reputation for the research that goes into the colors & markings information they provide.  Eduard might be a little better than Revell, but not by much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...