Academy 1/72 Fw 190 A-8

[Jure Miljevic]

Jimmy, I certainly did not want to discourage you either. Your desire to improve the Academy kit is commendable but, just as you said, limit your efforts to the most visible and the least complicated issues. If you are looking for drawings of Fw 190, there is plenty of them available on the web, the one listed below contains some 19 sets of Fw 190 drawings, if you also count the ones of Ta 152:

http://www.airwar.ru/other/draw_fw.html

Just scroll down towards the bottom of the page to German fighters section. Again, taking accuracy issues too far is not recommended.

Yes Nick, the old Revell Fw 190 you mentioned is probably the one. Mine is of 1983 vintage and although I knew it was older than that, I had no idea it was that much older.

Roman, I am familiar with Revell's A-8 and I agree with you it compares favorably with Academy kit. I had already built some and find the kit rather good for 1/72, although not without issues. My first Revell's A-8 was OOB ground attack plane and I simply replaced the canopy with the spare one from Italieri kit. Cheers

Jure

[tempestfan]

Jimmy, if you are looking for drawings I recommend those by Arthur Bentley , printed over 3 issues of SMI in IIRC 1978. Check out eBay, I don't think they will break the bank (the complete volume may even be cheaper if you are lucky ).

74/75/76 certainly were well known in 1992 for over a decade, so not many excuses for Academy to give a "green" bird. Just as inexcusable are those giant ailerons with straight leading edge.

[AlCZ]

Huh, Academy Butcher Bird looks really - strange.

Short nose FW-190 is my beloved German fighter and i make it from few kit producers.

Italeri - nice but with positive panel lines.

Revell - my favourite - i build it a 5x-6x pieces...

New tool Airfix - overal nice, but with really ugly whells (WHY AIRFIX ?) and few innacurates in panels...

In my kit stack i have two Eduards (in Czech it is in weekend editon one of cheapest and now released heavy armored "Sturmbock". )

Academy have problem with "Emil" too... and "Anton" is as i see another case :/

Probably build without problems, but accuracy IS problem.

[dfqweofekwpeweiop4]

There's still only 2 Fw190A( and F) series kits worth bothering about in 1/72, the Eduard and Hasegawa ones. They are by a long way the best detailed, engineered and most accurate in scale. The Valiant Wings book on the Fw190 radial engine variants gives you a good idea on this (except it was written before the Eduard kit came out). They didn't like the new Airfix kit as apart from some accuracy issues, it's poorly engineered and didn't fit together very well. The Revell kit has a really poor canopy that can't be replaced with spares from other kits, due to the way they have moulded it. Also, every one I've had has been covered in flash and the cooling fan fins have been broken off and the cowling isn't quite right. I sold off all my Revell Fw190 kits, except for the torpedo carrying one and that's only because it has the extended tail wheel for carrying the torpedo.

If cost is an issue, get the Eduard Weekend kit(s) as they are similar to the Airfix Fw190F kit in cost but much, much better. No one need buy inferior Fw190's in 1/72 now thanks to Eduard.

thanks

Mike

[Jure Miljevic]

Hi, Mike

No arguing about superiority of Eduard kit over Revell's but in my opinion your criticism of the latter is a bit strong. For me the main issues are the front part of the cowling and overdone aileron ribs. None of my kits had flash or broken cooling fan blades you mentioned. Also, I do not think sawing or cutting off aft part of the canopy and replacing it with a spare one presents a problem to anyone these days, not even to beginner. Cheers

Jure

[rav]

[Fw 190 A] Academy's worst 72nd scale kit

Really? And what about Spitfire Mk.XIV? P-40 and P-51D are also strong in this competition.

Academy Fw 190 F is still the only 'short' 190 I have built, more than 10 years ago. I'm not defending it. Since then we got cheap Revell, Airfix and Zvezda plus excellent Tamiya and Eduard, so there is no need to start with Academy kit now. But I'm not going to bin my Academy model even when I'll have the later ones finished.

[stevehnz]

I agree that for all its short comings, the Academy fw 190A-8 makes up nicely if not especially accurately so is good for modelling practice & painting. If you really want to develope a severe dose of AMS, have a squizzey at this thread on WW2aiecraft.net, all 32 pages long on making & fixing thje Academy Fw190.

Steve.

[Phantome]

I have built the Revell, Airfix, Hasegawa, and now have an Edward A-8 in my hands. Thoughts:

Eduard: For all intents and purposes THE one Fw 190 to rule them all. My only gripe with the A-8 is that the gun bulges on the nose appear too pronounced compared to the real thing, where they appear a bit more subtle. It's not a killer flaw but I'm surprised nobody has mentioned it, from what I've read. Kit looks perfect otherwise and very well priced given the mind-blowing quality.

Hasegawa: Next best and if my suspicions on the Eduard gun bulges are correct, may be the most accurate A-8. However, surface detail is nowhere near Eduard (or Revell for that matter) and cockpit is sparse and in need of PE to bring up to standard. Has every "long" version (A-5 and after) including some rare ones that Eduard might never end up making like the F-9, although I've read that not all are entirely accurate. Less pieces than the Eduard which also makes for a quicker build. Not one of Hase's standard kits, however, so will need to nab on eBay (usually goes for around a tenner) or get an overly expensive new combo kit.

Revell: Could have made the Hase obsolete but got the cowling wrong (too narrow), useless canopy, and inability to build with an open cockpit without major surgery. Surface detail is excellent. Also not sure why Revell never bothered with any other non-A-8/F-8 variant. Has the rare torpedo version. Quite cheap as well and looks very good when finished if you don't mind the inaccuracies and the awful canopy. There's a resin cowling replacement and if you compare with closed canopy Hase, the Revell will look way better.

Airfix: Worse surface detail than any of the above (and probably Academy too) and atrocious fit. I binned it. It did look accurate though and if you don't mind the heavy panel lines (better than earlier new Airfix kits but still unacceptable by 21st century standards) might be worth considering.

Have never built the Academy but I concur that it's probably the worst. The only advantage is that I think the A-6/A-8 boxing has the rare desert filter in case you want to build a North Africa unit.

(P.S. wee, my first post here! )

Edited June 30, 2016 by Phantome

[Jure Miljevic]

Hi, Phantome

From one newbie to another, congratulations on your first post on BM! Thanks for your information on Eduard, Hasegawa and Airfix kits, which I have not had an opportunity to inspect yet. So far I had built Heller's (IIRC one and the only nice thing about that kit are added tropical filters) and an old Revell's Fw 190s more than thirty years ago and two of the Revell's new kits more recently. I was a bit surprised to read that removing aft part of the canopy qualifies as a major surgery these days. To make sure I have not lost my touch I chopped it off on one of my three or four Revell's Fw 190s, waiting their turn in their boxes. It took me less than five minutes and that includes drinking my morning coffee in the process. I have plenty of Italieri kits with both regular and blown canopy in my stash so replacing that part with a spare one is not really a problem. Please, correct me if I am wrong, but I think such minor modifications still fall in the frame of OOB built. Cheers

Jure

[dfqweofekwpeweiop4]

Hi, Mike

No arguing about superiority of Eduard kit over Revell's but in my opinion your criticism of the latter is a bit strong. For me the main issues are the front part of the cowling and overdone aileron ribs. None of my kits had flash or broken cooling fan blades you mentioned. Also, I do not think sawing or cutting off aft part of the canopy and replacing it with a spare one presents a problem to anyone these days, not even to beginner. Cheers

Jure

It's not the canopy part you cut. They moulded the rear canopy to the fuselage plus the moulding on the one's I've had aren't good and the clear part isn't so clear.

thanks

Mike

[Jure Miljevic]

Hi, Mike

I was referring to the non-transparent part of the canopy, which on Revell's kit is part of the fuselage. Just to be certain here is the photo of two of my Fw 190s fuselages, one of them with the part in question removed.

As I mentioned earlier, on my kit I built some time ago, I used a spare Italieri kit canopy. There were no issues with transparency on Revell's kit windshield. Here is the photo:

Obviously, not the sharpest of the photos (my friend took it during my pre-digital days, back in 1999 or earlier), but will serve the purpose. Unfortunately, I gave the model away years ago. Cheers

Jure

[Graham Boak]

The previous Airfix Fw190A was highly accurate, and I gather went together well. It's rather sad to learn that its replacement is so disappointing. I presume that the older kit is now considered impossible to work with because of raised panel lines (as opposed to deep trenches?).

[Jure Miljevic]

An old Airfix Fw 190 had and interesting colour scheme, red rudder, red 2, red second Gruppe bar and red ring around the cowling. Colour profile of that plane, for which it had been stated that it belonged to II/JG26, had appeared regularly in older publications. I have never seen the photo of the actual plane, though. Cheers

Jure

Edited Staffel to Gruppe

Edited July 1, 2016 by Jure Miljevic

[PattheCat]

The previous Airfix Fw190A was highly accurate, and I gather went together well. It's rather sad to learn that its replacement is so disappointing. I presume that the older kit is now considered impossible to work with because of raised panel lines (as opposed to deep trenches?).

I just primed a new Airfix A8 today and it looks "quite acceptable" for me (well I've got this nasty habit of ruining nice petite surface detail when sanding or using filler, that may explain why I prefer less refined kits).

Not being a specialist - if a kit looks right, I build it as is - I can't tell about accuracy.

I must admit it needs some patience (sanding and scraping to have it all fit... some more than the Spit V in 1:48 also on the bench, but it seems to be common to all new Airfix). Still I find it to be a nice little kit for the money (except those horrible wheels and the gear legs being too long, but I can live with that).

But OK Eduard plays in another league and if they give us an A4, A6 or F8, I'll give it a go (JG54 winter scheme or JG2 desert one).

Does this make other offerings unworthy? I don't think so.

Edited July 1, 2016 by PattheCat

[Phantome]

FYI, someone posted a new Airfix kit in the Ready section. Clearly has more patience than I did:

http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235004816-airfix-fw190-a-8-172/

Edited July 3, 2016 by Phantome