Kotare teaser - it's a Bf 109K!

[Martinnfb]

Andreas and Mark, thank you for chiming in and clarifying the situation. I love the way you guys designed the exhaust assembly. Are the stacks hollow? Also is there a chance to change the position of the tail manipulation hole, seems kinda off.

Thank you again

Martin

 

[pvanroy]

27 minutes ago, Martinnfb said:

Andreas and Mark, thank you for chiming in and clarifying the situation. I love the way you guys designed the exhaust assembly. Are the stacks hollow? Also is there a chance to change the position of the tail manipulation hole, seems kinda off.

Thank you again

Martin

 

 

The tailplane jacking point is in the correct position for a Bf 109 K - it was moved forward and upward compared to all the earlier versions. This is one of the very many small changes that was made on the K.

 

I don't have a problem with the absence of rivets - even on a real 109, you generally have to get really close to see them. I think adding HGW rivets is probably the best way to represent the riveting. 

 

The raised detachable underwing panels on the other hand are a bit boggling... as is the one-piece tailwheel, but that's easily exchanged for a very detailed Reskit set.

[Martinnfb]

Mea culpa! Thank you for correction, I just looked at it and boom, I was so wrong. All those years, 

[dutik]

BF-109 surface rivets are very subtle in most places, with the exception of a few prominent ones. G-2 here:

 

 

They tend to become mostly invisible under a coat of paint, except for a few locations. G-14:

 

 

Well, this reminds me to restore the G-2, G-6 and G-14 walkarounds here...

 

Regards

- dutik

[Juggernut]

Borrowing the same image Mike posted....  Not knowing what is and what is not possible regarding plastic injection molding, maybe a one-piece outer duct would be nice with the inner intake "elbow" as a separate part to be cemented to an integral ridge?  That would effectively eliminate the length-wise seam down the intake.  Alternatively, a two-piece outer duct with the same "step" molded in to receive the "elbow" would be ok as well....again, effectively eliminating the interior seam of the outer duct.  The weld-seam on a  two-piece outer duct could be addressed by the modeler whereas it might have to be tooled into a one-piece offering.  Hopefully, the lines I've added are visible enough to get my idea across.... MS Paint does not like dashed lines so I had to do a workaround to get them.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited January 22 by Juggernut

[CRAZY IVAN5]

12 minutes ago, Juggernut said:

Borrowing the same image Mike posted....  Not knowing what is and what is not possible regarding plastic injection molding, maybe a one-piece outer duct would be nice with the inner intake "elbow" as a separate part to be cemented to an integral ridge?  That would effectively eliminate the length-wise seam down the intake.  Alternatively, a two-piece outer duct with the same "step" molded in to receive the "elbow" would be ok as well....again, effectively eliminating the interior seam of the outer duct.  The weld-seam on a  two-piece outer duct could be addressed by the modeler whereas it might have to be tooled into a one-piece offering.  Hopefully, the lines I've added are visible enough to get my idea across.... MS Paint does not like dashed lines so I had to do a workaround to get them.

 

 

 

 

 

Hey, that'll work!

[John1]

22 hours ago, D Bellis said:

Locomotive rivets aside, the ridiculously raised panels under the wings are a deal breaker for me (unless they fix it prior to release?):

 

 

A shame, really, since I had been looking forward to this kit as hopefully superior to the Hasegawa offering. I guess not...  

D

As noted, maybe that raised panel and the boilerplate rivets are a glitch of the test shot and won’t be present in the final product.    But even the other surface details I’m seeing are “rough”.  I pulled my 12 year old Revel 109G-6 kit out and the details in this picture are a retrograde step from my old Revel kit.   I never built any of Kotare’s Spitfires but heard they had very nice surface details.  This isn’t what I expected to see.  

Edited January 22 by John1

[Juggernut]

17 hours ago, Mark Robson said:

Hey team, thanks for the interest.

 

I don't know what the algorithms have done to the images but the underwing paneling looks waaayyy more subtle than that pic would have you believe.  We will get some better pics up soon, and then we can see what everyone thinks.

 

We are VERY open to constructive feedback, especially if you supply the pics on which your feedback is based.  

 

But just ask yourself;  would Radu and Richard Alexander ever design something that looks that gross??

 

As to riveting the whole thing; not our thing. Some will dislike this approach and we accept that, it's cool, each to their own 

More soon, 

Cheers

 

Mark Robson

Kotare Models 

 

 

11 hours ago, Andreas Beck said:

From what can be seen here is rather obvious. Something must have gone wrong with data transfer from the design unit to the electrode. The marked panel is wrongly embossed on the lower l. wing (also the next but one outwards) and the rivet-presentations  are embossed, too. I think this has the consequence to make a new electrode and this mistake will be eliminated with TS 2. 

 

 

 

With the above information from the Principal and not sure what Andreas' part is but: THIS IS ONLY TEST SHOT 1... To quote Oddball: "Have a little faith."

 

 

Edited January 22 by Juggernut

[Martini_Man]

To me the surface finish of a Bf109 looks more realistically without rivets - so Kudos to Kotare for choosing that approach!

 

The main problem with the test shot I see is the incorrect long tail wheel. It looks like it has an oleo cover like the earlier Bf109 F/G.

 

But pictures show clearly that the retractable tail wheel of the Bf109K did not have that feature. Hopefully it will be corrected until the kit's release 🙏

 

https://ibb.co/pzxtrD0

 

https://ibb.co/Rbkz5tq

 

 

Edited January 22 by Martini_Man
Wrong pictures link

[Juggernut]

109 K-4s had both types of tail wheel strut; the long one and the short one as shown below on a Bf109K-4.  How many Bf109K-4s were built with the short tail wheel is beyond my knowledge but there's at least one.

 

 

If you look in the upper Left corner of the 2nd image you posted of the sprue, you'll see the long stroke tail wheel strut and below it, the tail wheel halves that when cemented together, appear to slide into the yoke.

Edited January 22 by Juggernut

[Martini_Man]

9 minutes ago, Juggernut said:

109 K-4s had both types of tail wheel strut; the long one and the short one as shown below on a Bf109K-4.

 

 

That was a very rare exception! The short - and fixed - tail wheel was only installed in very few aircrafts - either via repairs or when the original long retractable tail wheel was not available during production.

[Juggernut]

But it exists, doesn't it....and Kotare does provide the long stroke tailwheel strut.

[Martinnfb]

Yup. Both types of the tail wheel are present. But, honesty aren't we all stack up on Barracuda wheels and intakes ?

 

[Martinnfb]

another shortie  332xxx. source

 

 

[Martinnfb]

and what about the ERLA built one, also shorty