Folgore over Rhodes - Hasegawa 1/72 MC.202 - Completed

[Giorgio N]

A quick update: for some reason I seem to have lost my box of grey chalks, very annoying ! So it was that I decided to try something different and make my own wash. I grabbed a Vallejo dark sea grey and then added a few drops of Vallejo glaze medium. This is a very interesting product that can be used to quickly turn any of the vallejo colours into a glaze. The more medium added to the colour, the more transparent the glaze. I then added some tap water and checked if this wash managed to fill the panel lines on the lower surfaces. To say that it worked is an understatement, it worked very well ! I could easily wipe away the excess using a cotton bud after a few minutes while the wash remained firmly in the recessed panel lines. The final result is very nice, being subtle as I like it.

I know that the same Vallejo medium also works with Lifecolor paints and since these and Vallejos are the paints I use most, I can now simply make a wash starting from the very same paint used to finish the model, just darken the base paint as needed and apply the wash.

Pictures will follow tomorrow as I feel that in a picture taken in artificial light most of the effect may vanish.

 

Now the next step will be to apply some more decals, however I have to solve a couple of doubts:

1) The wing markings: these are supplied in a number of different styles in the Skymodels sheet, the original standard style and a number of later simplified designs. I have no idea of what style may have been used by the aircrafts built by SAI ! I know that one of the simplified style was used by Macchi on late MC.202s but at the moment I know nothing about my aircraft. Should I not find any hard evidence pointing toward one or the other, I'll just use the standard style

2) The aircraft code is 396-2, where as per Regia Aeronautica standard 396 indicates the Squadriglia (Squadron) and 2 is the individual number. On the left side the code reads 396-2 and I know this because I have a picture. What about the other side ? Standard Regia policy was to have the Squadriglia number before the individual one, however there were exceptions. I've not found any picture of the 396th taken with the right side visible, however I've found some of the Fiat G-50s of the 395th... this unit was part of the same 154th Gruppo and carried the same fuselage group badge. These aircrafts always have the individual number toward the tail, with the Squadriglia number forward. Should I not find any information on the MC.202s of the unit, I'll probably follow the pattern seen on the Fiats

 

EDITED AUGUST 2023: I have now found a picture of this aircraft showing the right side and my line of thought was wrong. The aircraft code on this side also read 396-2, with the 2 in red in the middle of the white band and the 396 in black behind the band

Edited August 23, 2023 by Giorgio N
Found new info

[trickyrich]

I don't check on this build for a couple days and looks what happens, it catches something.....you know there's probably an ointment for that! 

 

She's looking very nice indeed, well done. Those "spots" looks as much fun to do as my "smoke-rings" (I still have another to do...), but get that camouflage correct you need them. I have seen these decals before, , are they really thin and is the printed part of the decal just sitting on top of the clear film or does it have some clear film over it?

 

I agree with about the really interesting colour schemes that are around for Italian aircraft. The Macchi I built is my first Italian aircraft but won't be my last! Once I get the smaller 205 out of the way, it'll be in the same scheme as the big one, I have a C.202 and a couple of SM.79's that I'm going to try with some of the more extreme colour schemes! 

[Stew Dapple]

She's looking really good Giorgio

 

I agree about the colourful Regia Aeronautica schemes, but - for me at least - they require a lot more research than a standard RAF 'A' or 'B' scheme... and in the course of that research I invariably find that the gap between what I thought I knew and what was actually probably correct is a lot bigger than I imagined, and tends to get bigger rather than smaller as I go along!

 

Anyway, good progress mate, not too far to go now...

 

Cheers,

 

Stew

[Giorgio N]

Regia Aeronautica subjects indeed need more references to get them right as there were several variations in the camouflage and markings, while most RAF subjects could be built quite confidently even without a picture as long as codes and serial numbers are known. The doubts I'm having about the markings on my aircraft are a perfect example of the kind of uncertainties surrounding these aircrafts.

At the same time though I'm not an expert and I never read through all the various specifications and factory documents like others have done and the more I look for information on these aircrafts the more I realize how they are more predictable than I thought.

The main problem is that factories had much more flexibility in the camo scheme than they had in other countries and the same factories interpreted differently the same set of (admittedly vague) instructions from the relevant authorities. Once a modeller becomes familiar with the various factory schems however it's easier to predict certain feature. My aircraft for example is a Serie IV, I know these were built by SAI and aircrafts built by this company had large green spots and used a unique design of white cross on the tail. If I see an aircraft with smoke rings, it's a late Macchi built aircraft as only this factory used the smoke rings from a certain series. I can then expect a certain type of white cross and a certain type of wing fasces. Once the factory is pinned down by one or more features, it's possible to guess all other lfeatures with a certain degree of confidence.

Sure it's a bit more complicated than RAF aircrafts, although variations occurred also on the Spitfires built by Supermarine Vs. Castle Bromwich (the fuselage roundel position for example).

One serious problem for modellers around the world is that all the primary sources are of course in Italian language and there arent' that many authors who have translated all the information into English. From this point of view the Ali d'Italia / Ali e Colori series and the Aviolibri series have done some very useful work and a lot of useful information has been made available by the Stormo website while there have also been a couple of books on the subject. IMHO though there is still room and need for books covering all the various aspects

[Giorgio N]

All decals applied ! The model is now ready for a good final coat. I've had to take some decisions as a couple of aspects of the markings were not clear, in any case now the decals are on, I hope to never see any picture proving me wrong..

A couple of things I didn't like of the Skymodels sheet: the wing fasces are supplied in a number of different styles, yet the standard one is missing.. I believe they oversimplified the designs actually used, fortunately the differences are not all that visible... in any case some more research would have avoided this issue.

A worse accuracy issue exists with the fuselage fasces ! All Regia Aeronautica aircrafts carried on the fuselage a black bordered blue disc containing a fasces image in colour (some exceptions had a black only style but the coloured one was the most common): This featured an animal head above the blade, with a bear head being the most common. The Skymodel decals however don't make any attempt at representing the bear head ! The best example I found in terms of printing was actually the one in the Hasegawa box of my model, unfortunately wehn applied it was found to be off register, so I had to discard them. The ones I used were from another Skymodel sheet, the one on the Macchi MC-200. This sheet has better fuselage fasces and better wing fasces too. Unfortunately the blue used for the fuselage fasces is too bright, should be darker, in any case these are much better than the ones included in the MC.202 sheet.

Small bit of trivia: variations on the fuselage fasces were relatively few and (again) factory related. The reason why the variations were few is that these markings were not painted but were decals ! So once a factory had agreed a design with a contractor, the same design was repeated in hundreds identical decals. The marking found on the white cross on the tail was also a decal. on some aircrafts it's sometimes possible to see the film of these decals, let's say that Microscale liquids weren't used by all factories...

 

Anyway, here are the upper surfaces

 

 

 

 

And the lower surfaces. Unfortunately the subtle weathering does not show...

 

 

Finally one part that had to go through some decaling too, the propeller assembly:

 

 

The blades on my aircraft seems to have been in black with yellow tips, quite common. Propellers were however also in a light blue grey on several aircrafts and even in some production series of the Macchi MC.202. Yet another thing to check when building one of these aircrafts. The prop blades are still missing the manufacturer logo, the decal sheet has 3 different ones and I've yet to decide which one was likely to have been applied on my aircraft (meaning that decaling isn't really completed....)

The Spinner was in the camo colour, other aircrafts had white spinners.

[Stew Dapple]

Beautiful

 

The landing gear bay looks great too

 

Cheers,

 

Stew

[Col.]

Lovely work Giorgio. I'm enjoying the information you're imparting within these updates as well.

[Giorgio N]

Thanks guys ! Unfortunately I hit a small problem.... I thought I had finished decalling so applied what was supposed to be the final semigloss coat using my trusted Vallejo satin varnish. It was while checking the result (pretty good) that I noticed how I had forgotten some important bits: the type designator on the tail and the serial number on the rear fuselage.

Not wanting to use the airbrush again, I applied some old formula Klear on the areas where these decals had to be applied, and no problem here. The designator on the tail went on well (this is typical of WW2 Italian aircrafts, on a number of lines the manufacturer, type of aircraft and weight are listed) but the serial number was another story. Skymodels supply individual figures for this, in addition to the "MM" titling. Problem is that the numbers are so small and so densely packed that it's hard to cut them. Even when I managed to cut the numbers, I found that these don't seem to stick well at all to the model. So now I'll be able to use the MM only but will have to find a way to apply some white numbers that are less than 2 mm high... very hard !

[Beard]

I'm sorry to hear of the problem Giorgio and hope you sort it out. Good luck.

[Giorgio N]

On 24/11/2016 at 7:55 PM, Beard said:

I'm sorry to hear of the problem Giorgio and hope you sort it out. Good luck.

 

Unfortunately no, I couldn't find a way to sort this. In the end I had to decide and my choice was to forget about the serial number and only apply the MM titles. Whenever I'll find a way to put together the serial, I'll add this to the model. For now, my model will do without. The picture below gives an idea of how small these numbers are. It's to Skymodels credit that they are perfectly readable, however applyng them was impossible.

 

 

Once I took this decision, it was simply a matter of spraying a final satin coat and then start adding the landing gear.

The Hasegawa landing gear parts are not really great and I considered modifying or replacing these parts. A solution often seen in the Italian modelling community is the use of the gear legs from the ancient Revell MC.200. This kit is pretty awful but the gear legs are quite nice. In the end though I realised that since the model was far from perfect anyway, there was no point in replacing the gear legs.

The same applies to the wheels: the Hasegawa wheels are adequate but not really great, totally lacking the details of the slatted hub area. I have some resin replacements but I've decided to keep these for another MC.202 model.

One part that I decided to replace is the gear retraction jack. The Hasegawa solution is not really realistic because of the choice of offering a closed wheel well. The replacement was courtesy of two Albion Alloys tubes of different diameter. The picture below shows the original Hasegawa part on the left and the scratchbuilt replacement on the right. The latter is IMHO much more realistic.

 

 

And here's what the model looks like at the moment, after the addition of the propeller, some paint on the exhausts and in some intakes and most wheel well doors

 

 

Speaking of wheel well doors, here I hit another problem: the Eduard PE sheet includes the retraction jacks for the inner doors. Unfortunately I totally lost one, so now I don't know what to do. The options are:

1) scratchbuild both. Really PE parts are too flat, however scratchbuilting these parts is not easy.

2) Take them from another Eduard sheet (that I have in the stash): Of course this simply means postponing the problem to the next MC.202/205 model ! I'm tempted by this solution though, at least would allow me to finish this model properly.

 

The model is now really close to being completed. The only parts needed are the final couple of doors, the pitot tubes, the dorsal antenna and the canopy. I may open the latter open, so to show the quite nice interior. The wing pitot tube will be made from Albion Alloys tubes while the dorsal antenna is well reproduced by Hasegawa (this part changed in shape over the production of the MC.202 but the one in the kit looks fine for my subject. I should also add some exhaust stains

Til now I'm pretty happy with this model but I can see a lot of things that could have been done better. For this reason, I'm now kind of treating this as a "testbed" to try some detailing techniques to aply to my future MC.202 and 205. I've noticed that a local shop website shows they have a Hasegawa MC.202 combo for £23.. I may give them a ring tomorrow to check if this is really in stock, I've really enjoied this kit and I definitely have to build more !

 

 

 

Edited November 27, 2016 by Giorgio N

[Beard]

I'd be very happy with how it's turning out.

[modelling minion]

Same here.

I would be very happy with the results, especially in 1/72 scale.

[rob85]

She looks a real cracker, codes or no

 

Rob

[Giorgio N]

Thanks guys !

Don't get me wrong, I'm very happy too with the way this is turning out. I'm even happier because overall it's been a pleasing building experience, those few tense moments I had were all of my own making while the kit itself is very satisfying.

Everytime I build a modern Hasegawa kit I realize that the fame of this company is fully deserved, parts fit very well and there's very little drama. And when I say modern we should keep in mind that this kit is over 25 year old !

[stevehnz]

That is a really nice looking result you have there Giorgio, something to be well proud of. If I might suggest a solution to the serial number problem, if you floated them onto a small dab of Klear & pressed them down into position with a q-tip, the Klear will stick them down beautifully.

Steve.

[Giorgio N]

Steve, I tried that method too but gave up in the end. The day I'll be able to print white I may add the codes.

For now I've just been adding small details, and one of them drove me crazy ! I had mentioned how I lost one door retraction jack, so I decided to rob another PE fret. Well, let's say that it wasn't easy to glue both jacks in place ! The problem is that Eduard has designed these parts to go onto the rear wheel well wall but this is level with the opening edge in the Hasegawa kit. One of my first modifications was to move this wall slightly backward, for a more realistic wheel well. This meant losing contact points for the retraction jacks and resulted in a lot of swearing and the loss of another jack...). The etched fret also offers another couple of bits for the wheel wells, but I'm now tempted to leave them aside as I may hit similar problems.

One way or the other, both parts are now glued in place. I've also added the dorsal antenna mastand the wing pitot tube. This was easily scratchbuilt using two sections of Albion alloys tube, way better looking than the original part. Here's the model as it is now

 

 

 

Next steps are likely going to be the final ones: add the canopy, a Venturi tube under the fuselage and the antenna wires.

The canopy will have to be open. There's too much detail in the cockpit to close the canopy and I've also found that fit is not great. An open canopy is an elegant way to solve the matter.

The Venturi tube will have to be scratchbuilt somehow. It's typical of WW2 Italian aircrafts, on the MC.202 it could be under the fuselage or on the right side depending on the production series.

The antenna will be more of a problem... I have some mending thread I could use, I could also try stretching some sprue but I rarely achieved any success with this method. For a starter I painted the isolator on the rear fuselage in black, part of the wire will be glued there. I should have probably left a hole in the tail for the cable, I didn't and this will give me trouble for sure.

As said before, this model is looking good but during this build I've mainly put together some good ideas for my next Macchis...

[trickyrich]

She looks great!!!! I feel your pain with the decals, I had a drama with mine, I manage to destroy one of the Sq numbers!! Am still looking for a replacement! 

 

I've still got a C.202 in the stash, so when I get around to building that one I'll look up this thread again!

[Giorgio N]

Thanks Rich, should you start building the 202 let me know, I've learnt a lot of things on the type while building this model, will be happy to pass any info I have on to you

 

Venturi tube scratchbuilt and glued in place, canopy glued in open position, I only have to sort the antenna... tried mending thread but didn't work well, tried with a ultrathin copper wire but couldn't find a way to keep this straight. I even considered using optical fibres, as these are nice and straight but I only have 250 micron diameter fibres and would look too big. Guess I'll have to stretch some sprue... shouldn't I sort the antenna in time, I'll consider the model finished as it is. Have to say that I often disregard wire antennas in 1/72 scale as they would have to be so thin to be almost invisible (and they often are invisible in pictures).

Edited December 6, 2016 by Giorgio N

[Giorgio N]

Unfortunately I have had very little time to dedicate to the hobby, so I'll have to consider this completed without antenna wire... no big deal, as I rarely add them in 1/72 scale anyway.

Pictures will be posted tomorrow in this thread and in the gallery

[JosephLalor]

Hi Georgio. Regardless of the trouble with the decals, that's come out looking very well indeed. I hope I can get somewhere near as good a result with my 1/48 Hasegawa 202. I'll be going with one of the kit's markings options, and I'm stalled pending a decision to go with the earlier 'mimetic' colours or Tavolo 10 colours.

[Mitch K]

A superb built!

[Giorgio N]

Thanks folks, glad you like it !

And here are the final pictures. The model would benefit from a couple more details like the wire antenna and the canopy handle, I may add these in the future or I may not. In any case I'm pretty happy with the final result, it looks much better than my previous efforts.

Most important, I learnt quite a few things during this build, I've understood much better the Macchi 202, I've tested some improvements that I'll add to my future MC.202/205 builds and I've tried a couple of interesting techniques. Last but not least, I've really enjoied building this kit. It's a pity that Hasegawa kits are now so expensive as they are almost always a very good modelling experience.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thanks again to the hosts of this great GB and to all those who commented on this build. I would have not been able to complete this model without your support. I hope that my build may have raised the interest in this subject and also to have spread some useful information on the MC.202

[Giorgio N]

I'm posting again on this thread many years later as I recently found a picture showing I made a mistake when applying the decals. The codes on the right side should read 396-2, with the 2 in red over the white band and the 396 in black behind the band. 

Since threads like these can sometime be found and used by modellers as reference, I believe that adding this new (to me) information may be useful. 

As to my model, I may modify the codes or I may not, as the work involved would not be trivial