Milos Gazdic
-
Posts
181 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Events
Profiles
Forums
Media Demo
Posts posted by Milos Gazdic
-
-
17 hours ago, Sabrejet said:
Yes it seems so: tailwheel on the drone was fixed (not rectractable).
Which is no surprise due to the length of that extension...
-
1
-
-
hahah
1 sec after I posted the above post I did a Google search AND!!!
http://www.leqg.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=16186&start=60
sadly - no source for the photo given
If that is HIS aircraft - the numeral in Eduard is NOT correct! But the aircraft is gorgeously weathered!
-
3
-
1
-
-
Hello
I have 2 hardcover books on the type with me here in China. (one in French & one in English) and neither shows a single photo of the aircraft based on my 15min inspection. Profile similar to the one assigned to Shestakov in Eduard's kit (Red tail with White 3 on it) is available in French book but it does NOT mention Shestakov at all but mentions Odessa where Shestakov led a fighter regiment. Osprey's Aircraft of the Aces about Polikarpov feither's doesn't help either.
https://modelingmadness.com/review/allies/ussr/leei16.htm
SAMI June 2019 features a build article about the same kit as seen above but by other modeler. IIRC no mention of the photographic reference was given there either.
https://trade.warcradle.com/polikarpov-i-16-ace-lev-sokol-shestakov-wgbb-772211018.html
Source of some more profiles:
http://wp.scn.ru/en/ww2/b/317/1/7-
1
-
1
-
-
For the extended tail wheel - there was only that small plug added?
-
Hello Mr Morrison!
(BTW Miško or Misko or Miloš or Milos is enough for me. No Mr. needed in there for sure)
I have never seen that photo. Will google it now. May I know the publication where it was published?
Best
Milos-
1
-
-
On 1/7/2020 at 10:40 PM, G.R.Morrison said:
The 'Herz' Staffel emblem may have been black on this machine, rather than the usually depicted red.
Dear GRM
Why do you believe that Herz was black and not red?-
1
-
-
Agreeing with standard camo approach. Nothing special with this machine!
-
1
-
1
-
-
Eduard will be selling the kit!
-
I don't believe that the ruder is having any mottle but is basically stressed metal structure with "bumps" showing as highlights & shadows which in "low res" scan of not ideally sharp image look like mottle.
-
As Mike points out that is the only real difference between H-0 & H-1 in reality too. Plus 2 small fueling points on the top of each wing that are present on H-1 and not there on H-0 (but Aoshima kit could still have it H-0! and in that case those should be filled in and sanded smooth)
-
Anyone able to help?
-
@stevehnz I have tried & installed the add on you suggested but it doesn't seem to work for me
Thank you very much anyhow!
-
Dear enthusiasts, modeler & researcher friends! Hope you are having a nice day & the weekend will be even nicer!
I was unable to dedicate time last night to these matters. Came home too late & after spending few moments with my baby who yesterday turned 6 months exactly went for a dinner with a friend who was leaving Shanghai last night after short visit.
I am aware that these were single layer paints. But still painting multiple layers in top of each other would cause some weight gain. But as I mentioned in my previous post - it is of secondary importance for this discussion but we should not ignore it completely. Why am I asking about this is because I believe that airframe arrived to the unit already camouflaged and NOT with RLM75 painted overall on the top surfaces! Especially not on the wings! And if that is the case then yes - it is a gain in weight especially with single-coat paints (which as I understand apply in ticker layer than the old style ones that demanded the primer).
And if the machine arrived to unit already camouflaged (power-egg could have been painted in Junkers style as seen in Jerry's book in the video capture) and the rest of airframe would be in camo which is standard to the factory that built the airframe and that is where I say that I agree with JaPo guys! and disagree with the fact that aircraft ever looked as in the first image in the instructions which were posted above coming from Eagle Editions! Jerry just confirmed that this is the instruction for modelers in how most easily to achieve the result closest to the original airframe and not the way airframe was painted in reality.
After coming in "standard" camouflage - Kommodore probably ordered for his airframe to be painted similar to it's power-egg style.
As for the "neatness" of the application of the paints on the original airframe, looking at the photos for they look a bit softer than on the rebuilt machine. But those are finesse...
And yes - Fw 190 D-13 "<<" WNr 836016 photos and a photo of 3rd D-13 (burnt, seen here: https://vintageeagle.com/2017/12/11/addendum-ce-vol-i-photo-46-fw-190-d-13/ ) could also help us in determining how did "Gelbe 10" look before the final camo was applied onto it, when it just left the factory.
Looking forward for more thoughts and comments guys!
Have a great weekend
M -
I've posted this on TOCH but maybe it's gonna be more interesting as a discussion for you guys...
Namely, I am looking at the photos of 1./JG 1 machines in JG1 & 11 books on pages 321 & 322 & in Rodeike's Fw 190 book on page 114 (same photo as on 321) and realizing that both "Weisse 6" and "Weisse 8" feature a circular shape where IV Gruppe disc was overpainted after machines were passed over to new unit (I./JG 1). All three machines have painted cowling overall white.
Q1: I wonder if we could assume that "Weisse 10" photographed at the approximately the same time would feature the same thing behind the fuselage cross? Eduard's new Weekend Edition kit doesn't show this feature on their instructions. Unfortunately, all three photos on Page 322 showing "Weisse 10" do not show this area (either due to the framing or because the ground crew is covering it in a total shot).
Q2: Cutting Edge Decals CED48192 features "Weisse 8" and shows it with the overpainted disc as per the above-mentioned images. It instructs that the Malteser-Kreuz should be applied to the port side of the fuselage but the only photo showing this machine is from the starboard side. I wonder if Malteser-Kreuz was applied to all the machines of 1./JG 1 or not?
Q3: The same decal sheet shows the under-cowling area to be painted red! I am not a believer in red cowlings (although I have seen few color shots showing them) and wonder it there is any reason for this to be so?
Q4: Is there any more photos of these three machines published anywhere else? I am mostly interested in the port side shot of Weisse 8 and the starboard shot of Weisse 10. Any pointer would be greatly appreciated!}
Best,
Milos -
Will try to do that Steve as soon as I arrive home tonite! thanks for the pointer!
-
Dear Rolls-Royce & Flying Doctor!
I agree with you - Nobody has spent more time from all the researchers next to that "sexy lady" than our dear Jerry! And don't understand me wrong - since the days when I have started being interested into these sexy birds (about 25 years ago) I always looked at him with huge admiration. No wonder I have 50 or so Eagle Cals Decals & all the publications they ever published (except the recent zines which I miss a few).
As painting of the real thing goes - it is great he painted it I guess all of us would have loved to be in his spot, but I personally believe that the softer edges of all the applied colors could heve been a bit more "realistic".
Now - question that bothers me is:
Was "Gelbe 10" painted as we know it:
(a) in the front line unite when it was accepted in service? or
(b) did it arrive like that from the factory?
Jerry himself is showing us a power egg of the D-13 as a still capture from the video in his book. Power egg is camouflaged in very similar manner to "Gelbe 10"! But at the rear end of it - there is big surface of "light green" patch (I forgot what it is stated to be at this moment & I don't have the book here next to me in the office). But if the power eggs were coming pre-painted from the Junkers factory as it is shown there - how is it possible that whole airframe was RLM 75 on top surfaces at any given moment?
Further - if we know that by the end of war paint was applied in very thin layers for each of the color straight on metal airframe in most of the cases - why would they paint whole airframe with the single RLM75 color on top surfaces? On top of it all it would also add some weight to airframe with multiple layers applied but let's not worry about it for such "Hot Rod".
So, once I am back home - I will put my nose in those books (both Jerry's & JaPo's) & see if what are the things I forgot & if my memory plays with me...
A thought of mine was: Junkers' power-egg comes to factory, new airframe built is mated with all the components from subcontractors (tail, horizontal surfaces... canopy) in their own colors and most probably machine leaves the factory in such "mix & match" camouflage...
I have to check books and see what both authors (group of authors) suggest that happened afterwards to the complete airframe!
BUT to be precise of what I meant when I said I choose JaPo's side when I wrote it above is that I believe that each factory was having some kind of standards & that these standards can be applied to (certain batches of) airframes built at those specific locations!
More from me when I arrive home... Time to work
-
2
-
-
Hello T-Bolt et al,
while searching for subjects for my Fw 190 A-3 build, during last 2-3 weeks, I've spent over the secondary references available to me and realized that many of A-3s didn't carry their outer guns! Basically most of the machines I find interesting are the ones with only cannons in the inner position! What is clear that all of them had that "flat panel" fitted there (which in fact is not completely flat but for some reason still has a tiny bulge present, unlike later jabo versions of Fw 190s which had it completely flat). I am not sure if this decision was coming from above, where RLM maybe realized that these machines are underpowered to carry extra 2 cannons or it was personal preference of the pilots but I see it in some images as a practice of the whole unit!
Just my 2 cents, since this is something I have not paid attention before... -
Dear Smeosky,
how I approach my selection for the subjects of my models is by going through decals available to me & trying to match them with the references, predominantly photographs & texts, followed by the profiles! Profiles can often be misleading even if done by the best aviation artists. There are so many interesting a/c which are quite well covered in photographs & even profiles that don't have decals made for them by any of the companies... and on the other hand - there are so many a/c which have been covered by multiple decal companies in the same (or all) scale(s).
I quite trust to JaPo's approach in which they match the WNr. & style applied to that WNr. and factory that build it as Troy already mentioned above but each airframe could have some special traits only applicable to that airframe and such things cannot be known without photos... so I restrain myself from building machines that are not (clearly) documented at least with one photo. Educated guesses are great but references are there to (often) prove us wrong
-
21 hours ago, Michael louey said:
I remember you from some of the forums you mentioned and I once bought a resin FW190 conversion from you.
Hope to hear some interesting news about 190's. I'm building a Zvezda 190A-4 using Exito decals currently.
I still have quite a few 1/72 models back home in Serbia and many of those cool conversions for them but in the meantime I have moved fully to 1/48 due to my eyesight. I never did any of those Zvezda Fw190s nor held them in my hand but I've heard quite good comments from a friend who is building few of them at same time because of the speed of assembly & price too!
-
Hello guys! So great to connect with some of the known people here on this forum too!
I've been moving a lot & life was taking it's toll but I never stopped being into Fw 190 & aviation. From time to time I would post over on TOCH & Luftwaffe Research Group but I seem to have lost the connection with the people interested in Fw 190 Camouflage & those discussions we had dealing with some of those funky birds! Not sure which of the forums these days you consider to be best to discuss these things? Any opinions?
I am currently building Fw 190 A-3 (wanted to do Eduard kit but chose the machine that could not be done from Eduard's Weekend version so had to move to my old beloved Tamiya kit) and Fw 190 A-8 (again Tamiya). Just laid my hands on few of new Eduard Focke-Wulfs so after these two I will choose some other scheme appropriate to Eduard's box and do another A-3 and possibly A-4 (somehow I tend to find more interesting A-4s than A-3s).
-
Is it possible to receive the second photo posted by Jes in a PM by anyone having it?
TIA
M -
I have to agree with @Troy Smith and the source he mentioned here: JaPo books!
I believe this airframe like all the others started life with standard camouflage and not with single color on the upper surfaces... from there it "developed" into one of the most interesting Fw 190s ever by overpainting on the field.
I love both Jerry's books & JaPo crew's books and use both as references (cross-referencing) when I model Fw 190s, but in this case I take JaPo side -
Vedran & DavMarx are pointing two things that are often more obvious than the repositioning of the ETC rack in the images. that & blisters on the wings are the most prominent differences...
-
Pozdrav svima! Hello
Turkish Fw 190s were always my passion for two reasons
First - Fw 190 is my favorite aircraft ever &
Second - Turkey is one of the favorite countries I lived so far in (10 so far)
Unfortunately, nobody ever wrote or researched these birds in details! And most of the texts you will find online are rewritten from site to site, from blog to modelers post...
As Mr Jure notices well these airframes were delivered mid 1943 to Turkey. By that time early war colors were outdated already! BUT By that time Fw 190 A-1s (on which Fw 190 Aa-3 frames were based on) were outdated too! By the time these airframes were getting ready for Turkey - FuG 16z started entering the production of Fw 190s for Germany. And when you look at it - Germany didn't pass to Turkey - neither Fw 190 A-3 (but old airframes update to close to that standard with the omission of the 20mm cannons on top of it all)...
... so it leaves me wonder - would they pass over the airframes painted in their standard camouflage too? Don't forget that camo is as important secret as anything else from the equipment!
So, yes, pattern could have been same or similar to German one - but were the paints same - it remains the question until someone who really spent time digging in the archives can tell us!
One of the earlier images of Turkish Fw 190s is the one where Black 12 is in the foreground. No modification to the camouflage is visible and based on my personal opinion these machines look like painted in 02 / 71 / 65 scheme. Interesting thing with that Black 12's photo is that machine looks like NOT having inner wing armament at all! Like there is no hole in the wing root. A-2/A-3 style grills are visible on the side overpainted with black. All spinners in the photo seem to be same color and that color matches the prop color (we know props were painted RLM 70 on Fw 190s by German standards, but I wonder if they were painted maybe black for Turkey... since their spinners were black in the beginning according to rare authors writing about them).
Özkan Türker in one of the articles also points out early war Luftwaffe camo.
Props later received the yellow tips according to TuAF standards & also different color spinners!. Famous is the photo of "Red? 39" showing the light spinner and prop tips (yellow for both). Basically there were 4 Regiments: Akbaş, Sarıbaş, Albaş & Karabaş - and each had the spinners repainted accordingly. I never managed to find photos proving this 100%!
Another thing I failed to locate is CLEAR image showing the covers of the inner wing armament! Considering that they Machine Guns were sent to Turkey in this position & that the airframes were in fact A-1s - would it mean that these should be same as in A-1s (flat completely?) or maybe similar to those few prototypes that had very elongated blisters there? Or were they really brought to A-3's standards bottom some of Turkish modelers building TuAF Fw 190 Aa-3s show them (IMHO wrongly!) There is a photo of "Black 27" showing this area but I never found high res photo which will be clear about it! Also same photo features a very dark Fw 190 that obviously has very different camo than all the others!!!
So... we need someone to bite on this & deliver some great research about these amazing aircraft!!
Sorry for reviving the subject that was sitting still for ages!
Regards from Shanghai!
Miško
PS Oh! Yes! British colors could have been easily used later on! Apparently Turkey had quite a bit of those in stock!
Shestakow I-16 ( White 3)
in Aircraft WWII
Posted
I am very sorry that I am not really deep into this since I am traveling in few hours for Chinese New Year holidays so very little "free time"
My main question before you start stripping paint & all - is to ask someone who is real expert on Shestakov to confirm that the photo really shows HIS aircraft!
Please note that the tail & the start are obviously different shade of gray. So is that tail red or green? If it is green: is the profile wrong? or is the photo of some similar aircraft but not that of Shestakov?!