Dornier Do 215 B-4, ICM 1/72

[popeye]

.

Preamble.

This kit was something of a first for me – the build report was finished before the model really was. The summary may be the most relevant part for anybody interested. The build report is a bit extensive and long – as was the build.

As a friend in Scotland is presently looking into building such a model for a special project I decided to share here.

[popeye]

.

The kit.

An injection kit Do 215 was something of a dream for a long time. I had already been planning to use a Frog/Revell Do 17 Z plus the DB 601 conversion set from Rai-Ro Germany to be able to extend my Do 17 family with the type.

At Nuremberg 2006 ICM announced such a variant – prayers answered, I thought.

Almost 2 years later I was able to get the kit. The early in-box reviews on the ipms Germany website and by Peter Fritz on ipms.at had been very promising.

Expectations dropped right after the first look into the box however. Many of the finely detailed parts were broken, the clear parts were disappointing and the depth of the wings was about the same as on the ancient Monogram Do 17 Z – much to broad.

Main dimensions of all other parts seemed to be ok and tie in with published data.

Soon after starting assembly I felt somehow barking up the wrong tree. I couldn’t help remembering the film “Entrapment” and Sean Connory’s repeated remark: “impossible – but doable”

Admittedly – the enthused in-box reviews are generally correct. The kit parts have no flash, are properly injected and finely detailed, panel lines are finely recessed and the plethora of small parts – if not already broken - are really superbly detailed. Just the cloudy clear parts left much to be desired - even other short-run manufacturers provide better quality nowadays.

In-box reports are fine but the proof of the pudding is eating/building it.

Those not urgently wanting to tackle this kit may better turn to the summary – the following will take some time….

Even an old hand sometimes likes to have a look in the instructions – no reason to learn by doing and from own blunders all the time.

These “instructions” are a shame – murky bad copies of some kind of CAD plans giving no detail information where it would be needed most. Especially the cockpit detailing remains a mystery. Without available other data you are left in the lurch.

.

[popeye]

.

Cockpit and Fuselage.

ICM provides 2 cockpit halves and 2 rear fuselage halves without any location lugs. The rear parts are very thin and flexible and need strengthening of the mating surfaces from the inside. The front parts are somewhat thicker and partly detailed on the inside, resulting in several sink marks on the outside.

Due to the extensive glazing of the original cockpit there are just 3 small locations for gluing and again no positive joint.

As all 4 parts are very flexible and the fit somewhat indistinct I decided to first join front and rear halves on a flat surface with the help of temporary plastic strips on the outside of the joint.

.

[popeye]

.

Some minor detailing of the cockpit, painting and inserting of the window in the entry door on the left side follows. Do not fit seats and more detail yet and don’t join the halves already - you are in for the first important dry-fitting experience.

Before joining the fuselage halves the partition behind the cockpit with wing spar stubs und the rear “spar” have to be adapted to fit and allow the halves to be mated!

The front “bulkhead and spar” and the rear “spar” seem to be a good idea and should help to fit the wings correctly, straight and securely.

Actually this “engineering” doesn’t simplify construction at all, because at the same time you will have to watch and handle the fit of the “stubs” in the wings.

.

.

[TonyT]

Looking good

[popeye]

.

Wings.

We shall turn to the wing depth later.

No help from the instructions on the recommended sequence of assembling the wings.

I am very much convinced nobody at ICM ever tried to fit the wings by “sliding them onto the spars” !

If you try to fit the detailed sides of the gear bays in the wings first you will have no chance of joining leading and trailing edges without either brutal force or drastic cutting and adapting of those side walls.

If you adapt the side walls in height the wing spars or “stubs” from the fuselage unit will not fit in the wings.

As I wanted to be able to fit the complete and modified wings after pre-painting I had to reduce the 4 “stubs” in height and thickness by almost 50%.

.

[popeye]

.

If your Do 215 will be displayed alone the depth of the wing may be acceptable and can be left alone. In company with any Airfix, Frog or RS model however the difference will be quite noticeable.

LH > Monogram / RH > Airfix E/F / below ICM

.

Edited January 23, 2010 by popeye

[sloegin57]

As the one doing the "Special Project" all I can say is:-

Keep going Rolf, you're frightening the living daylights out of me already as 1) its the wrong scale for me and 2), I don't usually build Luftwaffe but I've already dragged an Airfix Do-217 and 17 out of the "stash" in case I need "spares" !!.

Are you and Dave sure it was a 215 that took that photo in August 1940 ?.

I assume that the worst is yet to come ?

Dennis

Edited January 23, 2010 by sloegin57

[popeye]

Are you and Dave sure it was a 215 that took that photo in August 1940 ?.

I assume that the worst is yet to come ?

Dennis

Sure ? Exeptions aside, can we ever be absolutely sure on Luftwaffe subjects like this ?

Personally, it's a 85% assumption for several reasons. As for Dave, I cannot say ..... but he seemed quite convinced too

assuming the worst - well, it sure will be kind of a challenge but none a modeller like you won't master, I'm sure. AND .... landing gear will be no problem !

Cheers ! Rolf

Edited January 23, 2010 by popeye

[popeye]

.

ICM provide no individual ailerons. If you prefer to improve your model with the Friese-type ailerons of the original with a quite visible aerodynamic gap it pays to go all the way.

Cut the ailerons from the wing halves. Reduce the chord of the wing by 1 mm on the leading and trailing edge each. The nose profile can be adapted, there is enough plastic.

The trailing edges can be pared and the flaps rescribed.

The cutout for the ailerons can be moved forward and the ailerons fitted with correct gap with the help of supports made from thin plasticard.

.

Edited January 23, 2010 by popeye

[popeye]

.

Tail and flying surfaces.

ICM provide nice typical dynamic balances for the elevators but again no help as to fitting them. They can be fitted with some enlarging of the lead-trough holes in the horizontal tail surfaces and some paring of the movable square parts.

BEFORE fitting of fin and rudders you can thread them in from the side (join of fin and horizontal tail) and turning the open side through 90 degrees to the rear.

The right hand fin is toed in 3,5 degrees on the original but about 10 degrees on the kit – correct for realistic appearance.

.

[sloegin57]

.

ICM provide no individual ailerons. If you prefer to improve your model with the Friese-type ailerons of the original with a quite visible aerodynamic gap it pays to go all the way.

Cut the ailerons from the wing halves. Reduce the depth of the wing by 1 mm on the leading and trailing edge each. The nose profile can be adapted, there is enough plastic.

The trailing edges can be pared and the flaps rescribed.

The cutout for the ailerons can be moved forward and the ailerons fitted with correct gap with the help of supports made from thin plasticard.

1. Just so as there is no confusion Rolf, by "Reduce the depth of the wing by 1 mm on the leading and trailing edge each", I assume by "depth" you mean the chord (distance from leading edge to trailing edge of the mainplane) not the depth of the wing from the upper surface to the lower surface (if it is so - 1mm is a hell of a lot !). No offence meant.

2 Yes, I noted in photographs of the type that there is a hell of a gap between the ailerons and the wing - very distinctive.

TIA

Dennis

[popeye]

.

Dennis -

of course "Flügeltiefe" correctly translates to "chord" and not to "depth" - I should have known better, sorry.

Rolf

[popeye]

.

Engines, engine gondolas & airscrews.

For better appearance you may want to improve the exhausts by fitting accessories exhausts or some from your “bits & pieces” fund. This will be best done before joining the 2 engine halves.

The fit of the engines and gear bays on the wings leaves a lot to be desired. Check for vertical alignment (to the ground), as the wing underside has to have a small incidence.

There remains a step of about 1 to 1.5 mm on top of the engine which has to be puttied and faired into the gear bay top, otherwise you loose the detail of the “venetian blinds” air vents on the top rear part of the bay.

The underside of the engine gondola (part E17) can be inserted from the rear after fitting of parts E1/E2/E6/E7 but be prepared for some real dry fitting, putty and sanding.

The oil cooler intakes really are too small, i.e. not high enough. Unfortunately little can be done to remedy this – the Rai-Ro aftermarket set is much better sculpted.

Propeller diameter for the 215 with DB 601 is 3,5 meters from tech data – the kit parts therefore are too small in diameter and the prop blades are too narrow anyhow.

Try to find something better suitable from your spares.

.

[popeye]

.

As I wanted revolvable propellers I replaced the kit parts with insets of Evergreen tubing.

.

[ReccePhreak]

Great build report! I will be watching this, with much interest, since I have that kit in my stash. I picked it up at the IPMS/USA Nats, in Anaheim, California.

Larry

[popeye]

.

Thanks Larry -

good to know someone else than Sloegin57 is also interested

Rolf

[Test Graham]

I'm following it too -I also have one in the pile. From your comments it seems it might have to stay there. Mine is one of the night fighters.

[popeye]

.

well, the remark was a bit tongue in cheek - not everybody is into Luftwaffe of course.....

And my "disappointment" with the kit may also have to do with the high expectations I had. Nevertheless, the old Airfix E/F and Frog Z had a better general fit and were easier to build ....

popeye

[popeye]

.

Landing gear.

There is a collection of very delicate parts for the retraction mechanism and struts in the gondola but again no real help as to how to fit them.

Super detailers can have a field day here if the parts are not already broken or break when trying to separate them from the sprues.

With all the broken parts in my example my patience ran out for good at this point.

I resorted to fitting a brace from plasticard for the main landing gear struts and used leftovers from a Do 17 for the retraction struts.

Chickened out, I know - but I shall never again show the missing landing gear detail from this angle

.

[popeye]

.

Heads up - almost forgot to mention:

– the tail wheel doesn’t fit into the “hood“ provided without some grinding and enlarging of the opening – if done before joining the fuselage halves it would have been easier.

[popeye]

.

Clear Parts.

No, Falcon clear parts for a Do 17 Z do not really fit the kit and the parts of the kit are a pity to be honest.

Due to that and the problems mentioned earlier I almost turned to using a fuselage from a Frog/Revell Do 17 instead. This however would have entailed extensive modifications on the tail and the wing/fuselage joint.

Sanding and polishing did improve the r/h clear part of the cockpit nose to a partly acceptable standard but it did not really fit where it belonged – and the cross section attainable did not really match the clear nose cone.

.

[popeye]

.

The clear nose canopy was smaller in cross section than the fuselage.

The cross section of the fuselage behind the nose canopy was lower on the right side, i.e. not symmetrical.

Matching the fuselage profile to the clear nose part resulted in the upper profile being too much angled down in front of the windscreen.

.

.

[sloegin57]

.

Clear Parts.

No, Falcon clear parts for a Do 17 Z do not really fit the kit and the parts of the kit are a pity to be honest.

Due to that and the problems mentioned earlier I almost turned to using a fuselage from a Frog/Revell Do 17 instead. This however would have entailed extensive modifications on the tail and the wing/fuselage joint.

Sanding and polishing did improve the r/h clear part of the cockpit nose to a partly acceptable standard but it did not really fit where it belonged – and the cross section attainable did not really match the clear nose cone.

Rolf,

would it be possible to fit a fwd fuselage/ cockpit from a Do-17Z to overcome the glazing problem. My ICM kit has not arrived yet (I'll hide behind the curtains when it does!) but I have found an old Revel Do-17Z deep within the "stash" at the outer reaches of the loft and after reading the latest, thought about "robbing" (RAF speak), CTAFing (USAF speak) a few bits.

Looking on the bright side, if it's possible in January, in Scotland, with a dose of 'flu, I will not need the undercarriage/landing gear and only one prop.

There. That's cheered me up a bit.

Dennis

[popeye]

Rolf,

would it be possible to fit a fwd fuselage/ cockpit from a Do-17Z to overcome the glazing problem. My ICM kit has not arrived yet (I'll hide behind the curtains when it does!) but I have found an old Revel Do-17Z deep within the "stash" at the outer reaches of the loft and after reading the latest, thought about "robbing" (RAF speak), CTAFing (USAF speak) a few bits.

Looking on the bright side, if it's possible in January, in Scotland, with a dose of 'flu, I will not need the undercarriage/landing gear and only one prop.

There. That's cheered me up a bit.

Dennis

Dennis,

As you already have a Frog/Revell kit handy, you have nothing to loose cutting the fuselage halves exactly at the join of fwd & rear fuselage parts of the ICM kit.

Even if the cross section at this juncture is not identical you could always use some "plastic goo" and fair in afterwards - might only be some more effort than joining the original parts. (as described in the beginning of the WIP)

You might even be able to retain the "front spar cum partition" of the ICM kit - and fairing in the wing roots will certainly be no sweat.

This way you wouldn't have to modify the tail stinger which differs from a Do 17 Z.

I didn't have a Frog kit handy or I might have tried myself !

See also mail re canopy !

Rolf

Ah yes - best wishes for a speedy recovery .....

.

Edited January 25, 2010 by popeye