Jump to content


Gold Member
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by SafetyDad

  1. Good spot - new to me as well. And (slightly OT) are those flame dampers on the other exhausts? SD
  2. For me this is a fair, objective summary of these two kits. Thanks SD
  3. I totally agree Milos. It would be good to see if any further pictures emerge of bomb-carrying 190D-9s. Kind regards SD
  4. The photo you uploaded Milos was available here (as Chris aka @dogsbody stated above) at the time of the original post - this Close-Up was published in 1986. From the size and shape of the Balkenkreuz it would seem to be a Fieseler-built airframe. The JaPo books on the Fw190D add some further detail to this particular airframe They make the case that the racks seen here are non-standard, and perhaps not from the production line. Also very unusual - see below So only two known Fw 190D-9s fitted with underwing ETC 50 racks. Both Fieseler built - a coincidence or a small conversion batch? Source: Deboeck M, Larger E and Poruba T (2007) Focke-Wulf 190D Camouflage and Markings Part II JaPo Hradec Kralove SD
  5. I'm not a P-51 expert, but do recall a lot of rather vitriolic commentary on another modelling board about the Z-M kit. Some participants took a very one-sided view where the Tamiya kit was portrayed as close to perfect, while the Z-M kit was the object of multiple and vociferous critical comments (down to, and beyond, nit-picking level). As far as I recall, more measured commentary would seem to say that the Tamiya kit has the edge over the Z-M in terms of accuracy (although the details escape my ageing brain cells), but that the Z-M kit is not without merit. I suppose it boils down to your definition of 'a steal'. The Hasegawa version (which must be at least 30 years old) still commands £30 or so on eBay. It's much more primitive than the Z-M kit - a product of its time. SD
  6. Hi Milos. I knew the differences - just wanted to point you at a set to produce a very early variant (although not the first) Regarding the V-13 - I've just scrolled through eBay and, while there are no RV resin V-13 kits for sale at the moment, two of them sold in the last month or so. So they're out there - might be worth keeping a eye out for one? SD
  7. You could try one of these https://www.scalemates.com/kits/medallion-models-mm20-fw-190a-1-2-3-4-trimaster--203444# Getting a little old now, but Medallion products were beautifully moulded. HTH SD
  8. Thanks for these Julian - great pics and inspiration for any of use attempting to modify B-17 models. The addition of the 'Cheyenne' turret is especially interesting SD
  9. And, it would seem, armed with Panzerblitz rockets. Nice picture! SD
  10. You are quite correct I think - it's the armoured ring in front that is slightly bigger. I'm being sloppy with my nouns! SD
  11. Thanks @G.R.Morrison that,s very helpful. the W Nr info helps too. As they are A-8s, this probably explains why the oil coolers look similar! Coat time methinks SD
  12. Well @gingerbob, that's been an interesting exercise! The clearest pictures I could easily lay hands on are here: This first is uncaptioned with regards to its sub-type in its original source , but its a nice clear side-on picture. It was taken at the AGO works in Oschersleben after capture in 1945. I have seen the 190s there captioned as A9s in other publications, (but would appreciate the input of any other BMers with additional information?). So, armoured cooler. The second picture shows an A6 - this should have the smaller cooler, rather than the armoured version. Source: Campbell J (1975) Fw190 in Action Squadron Signal Carrolton TX Can I see the difference? I'm not sure I can. If my information is correct, it seems that there is only a minute difference between the two coolers. Not worth fussing over, perhaps worth considering in the very largest scales? (Perhaps not even then). This seems to be one of those airframe differences that is much discussed, but in practice almost unnoticeable. Hope this helps SD
  13. I'll have a look SD
  14. I would wholeheartedly agree. As the OP says, telling A8s and A9s apart in photos is not easy - if the oil cooler was that obvious, then we'd have no problems differentiating with the real airframe! I know it's a 10 year old thread, but, for the sake of completeness, going through the other changes we find: 14 bladed cooling fan - apparently these did not give the additional cooling hoped for, in fact they were less efficient than the 12 bladed version, so some texts suggest the 12 bladed fans were retrofitted. (When did the ground crew get time for this?). Here's a comparison picture taken at Flensburg in 1945 after the surrender. How many A9s can you see? Source is (I believe) the Harleyford publication Fw190 a Famous Fighter. The broader prop is perhaps an easier identifier (but not always easy to spot depending upon the angle of the picture). As here Not sure about the source of this pic, so very happy to remove if anyone is unhappy about my posting it - posted for the purpose of research/discussion. Finally, I've read that all A9s had black fuselage outline Balkenkreuz (as above), BUT so did quite a few A8s so this needs care and caution too. The Wk Nr would be the best identifier, but sometimes we don't have that (again as above). I know, 10 years on, but I still HTH SD
  15. You've gotta love the chap standing smoking a cigarette next to the tank on the wheeled dolly above! Empty or full (and the caption would suggest the latter) he's literally playing with fire! SD
  16. Leading Edge in Canada did decals for this precise airframe - the bad news is that their website is now only showing the 1/72 set in print http://lemdecal.com/Images/Product Promo/72.11 promo decal 1000.jpg Might be worth emailing them to see if they have a 1/48 set somewhere? Alternatively, there may be someone here on BM with a sheet to spare - perhaps a post in the 'Wants' section might be productive? Good luck SD
  17. Very very nice indeed. Your paintwork is very convincing. Great job! SD
  18. Thanks Troy for this. I had seen parts before, such as the changing of the rear turrets, but not the complete film. As others have said, how fortunate that this film has survived. Very evocative in terms of recreating the feel of those times SD
  19. As you say across the pond - every day's a school day! Thanks! Although I still maintain that the large wing bulges give some credence to the idea of a wing/undercarriage replacement. It would be interesting to see if we can locate any pictures of other airframes from the W.Nr. 230 000 thru 230 800 batch - it's unlikely that we'll be able to differentiate the coloured legs but it would be useful to see what wing bulge was fitted? SD
  20. I've just had a thought about the red gear legs - these were allegedly a reminder to ground crew to use 100 octane fuel for the AS engined Bf109 variants. This aircraft cannot have an AS engine with those cowl bumps, (and @Ingo Ritz has helpfully shown above that it's certainly a G-6 variant). However if the entire wing, complete with undercarriage, had been donated from an AS airframe then that would account for the large bumps and the red legs (not sure I can say that ). So perhaps not a batch of G-6 machines with the larger wing bulges, but a one-off? Intended to confuse all of us 76 years later. SD
  21. And is that a red tape line underneath the wing at the joint between aileron and wingtip? SD
  22. Yes, I've just been over to your blog and reviewed your description - the Green 2 is beyond my ageing eyes, but it's a neat looking 262. Thanks for the pointer SD
  23. Thanks for that. I thought I had stumbled across something new! Where's my coat? SD
  • Create New...