Jump to content

Italeri Macchi C.202 Folgore. FINISHED… well almost!


quang

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, quang said:

Please understand that I respect your opinion and that I don’t want in no way to have an argument with you.
I can be wrong but the Folgore always struck me as an exceptionally smooth aircraft built with Swiss-like precision. Like the dihedral or the incidence of the wing, it’s a part of the ‘persona’ of the airplane which I feel should show up on a model. Just one of my many obsessions…

 

Thank you for your photo.
It justified what I felt. Despite your circles, the double riveting is next to invisible to my poor eyes in this close-up shot.

 

Cheers,

Quang

 

All good! I find the engineering just as interesting to research as the actual building of the model! I was trying to understand how the engineering leads to the photos we have shared. They are very clean aircraft and at 1/32, not much of the riveting is seen, that is true. Having said that, the riveting on many aircraft is nowhere near as pronounced as it is molded by the manufacturer - I realise an endless topic on most modelling forums!
On another note, I read last night the starboard wing (in plan view) is slightly longer (apparently 21cm) to offset the engine torque with a little extra lift? I wonder if Italeri have included that feature?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SwissFighters said:

All good! I find the engineering just as interesting to research as the actual building of the model! I was trying to understand how the engineering leads to the photos we have shared. They are very clean aircraft and at 1/32, not much of the riveting is seen, that is true. 

I agree mostly as I learned a bit about industrial processing during my training years.
The issue here is artistic rather than technical. As a visual artist (like I assume every modeller is), I tend to represent what my eyes SEE while some others try to depict what their brains KNOW.

 

Furthermore our vision (which we proudly believe as ‘individual’) is malleable and can be easily influenced. See how in the 80s, we found the Monogram raised panel lines ‘normal’ just like we did the sewing-line divots on the Trumpeter kits twenty years later.

 

1 hour ago, SwissFighters said:

On another note, I read last night the starboard wing (in plan view) is slightly longer (apparently 21cm) to offset the engine torque with a little extra lift? I wonder if Italeri have included that feature?

Some sources say 20cm, some say 21. On the Italeri kit, the difference in length is 6mm (19,2cm in real life) which is quite acceptable to me.

 

I’m currently working on the landing gear doors and legs. More detailed that one thinks and rather fiddly to say the least. :BANGHEAD2:
 

Cheers,

Quang

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sounds like Italeri nailed the wing geometry. The C.202's "official" span dimensions (the C.200 and C.205 have some different details but identical geometry) from factory drawings are:

 

+ Center wing section (built integrally with the fuselage): 1738 mm

+ Starboard wing panel: 4331 mm

+ Port wing panel: 4521 mm (190 mm longer)

+ Total: 10,590 mm

 

I assume (but, uh...see my tag line!) these dimensions are taken along each assembly's structural datum line, from the centers of the spar connection flanges to the wing tips. The factory drawings show the overall assembled span at a hair less - 10,580 mm (about 34 ft - 8 1/2 in) - which makes sense if accounting for dihedral.

 

Edited by MDriskill
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you  @MDriskill for the ‘official’ data.

The more I dig into this kit, the more I’m uncovering hidden details about the real machine. They are somewhat dispersed among the myriad of tiny parts which make the assembly not as straightforward as I would like. Did I say ‘fiddly’?

Sorry guys for not having posted photos lately. The kit is for the time being in pieces so pictures wouldn’t ‘talk’ much. I’ll be back when I have something worth showing.

Until then, keep on asking questions. It’s my pleasure chatting with you. :)
Cheers,

Quang

Edited by quang
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, quang said:

                       I tend to represent what my eyes SEE while some others try to depict what their brains KNOW.

 

                                                                3kW7acU.gif

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, quang said:

The more I dig into this kit, the more I’m uncovering hidden details about the real machine. They are somewhat dispersed among the myriad of tiny parts which make the assembly not as straightforward as I would like.

We can legitimately fuss over engineering and rendering of detals, etc., but I am very impressed by the accuracy of the kit's basic shape. They did a good job fixing some errors frequently repeated in other kits and published drawings, including:

 

+ Wing dimensions 

+ Form of the wing root fairings

+ Subtle rearward "tilted" geometry of the canopy

+ Shape of the headrest fairing

+ Shape of the oil cooler

+ Shape of the radiator

+ Rendering of the distinctive Piaggio P.1001 propeller blades

 

Give Italeri credit, they obviously studied the real things at Vigna di Valle and in my opinion, got the "look" of this beautiful aircraft right.

 

IMG-5087.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, MDriskill said:

Give Italeri credit, they obviously studied the real things at Vigna di Valle and in my opinion, got the "look" of this beautiful aircraft right.

Coming from you, I’d stop worrying about the alledged errors and sail direct into the sunset. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While waiting for the build to move on, I’m trying to pick a colour scheme (and subsequently a variant) for my Folgore. 
I’ve ended with these four machines taken from Ali e Colori 004:

 

IMG-3404.jpg


IMG-3405.jpg


IMG-3402.jpg


IMG-3403.jpg

 

Obviously I like the darker camouflage and …the inner coward told me to leave the smoke rings to havana fans and other bolder spirits.

My problem is that I didn’t find any period photograph related to those subjects and like the wise man said: never trust a profile unless… etc.

So if by any chance, one of you guys have access to the above subjects and is willing to share it with me, I’d be eternally grateful.

 

Now back to the optivisor…

Cheers,

Quang

Link to comment
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...