Jump to content


Gold Member
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by SafetyDad

  1. 2 hours ago, Milos Gazdic said:

    Hello SD!
    I am sorry if I have missed Chris' post above.
    I could not find the photo from JaPo's book online but the post I have made was just to show that no matter how rare they were, Doras with the rack still existed.
    I sincerely hope we will be seeing some more of them in foreseeable future. Based on the things we know, there were plans to use them in ground attacks so I guess some kind of modifications could have been made, even maybe on unit level?!

    I totally agree Milos. It would be good to see if any further pictures emerge of bomb-carrying 190D-9s.

    Kind regards



    • Like 1
  2. 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  



    • Like 1
  3. 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. 



    • Like 2
    • Thanks 1
  4. 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?



  5. 1 hour ago, Werdna said:


    Hi SD - are we talking about the oil cooler itself, or the armoured ring in front of it?  I was under the impression that the A-9 had increased armour protection on the forward ring (hence the larger size), but not necessarily a larger oil cooler..?


    You are quite correct I think - it's the armoured ring in front that is slightly bigger. I'm being sloppy with my nouns!



    • Like 1
  6. 1 hour ago, G.R.Morrison said:

    Regarding the photo "taken at the AGO works in Oscher{s}leben 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?)."


    These were in the 7394xx series (Werknummern visible on others photographed here), and were A-8s. 


    The A-9 became operational in late August / Sept. 1944.  Their Werknummer ranges included 730xxx, 205xxx, 980xxx, 206xxx, 380xxx and 202xxx. ('Why not list them in numerical order?' -- Because I listed them in the sequence in which they begin to show up.) 

    Without a visible, or known Werknummer, it's hard to distinguish between an A-8 and an A-9.  The broad wooden prop was not always used on A-9s and F-9s. 




    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 :coat:


  7. 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



  8. 5 minutes ago, gingerbob said:

    For the benefit of the unenlightened, does anyone have an image that neatly shows the difference between the oil rings? (photo preferred to drawing)

    I'll have a look :wink:



    • Like 1
  9. 58 minutes ago, Milos Gazdic said:

    I know it's been just about over 10 years since initial discussion - but since I stumbled upon this topic let me say regarding this:

    30mm in 1/72 scale is 0.4mm in 1/48 = 0.6mm. Dimension like this can be added by simply not squeezing the oil tank fully into cowling ring when building a kit or overcoating the oil tank with 1-2 layers of some liquid / sprayable putty.


    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?


    Flensburg 190s

    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



    • Like 2
  10. 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








  11. 13 hours ago, Ingo Ritz said:

    The photo right side of the aircraft posted by Troy Smith above, clearly show the marking for the MW/50 filler point (above the first number 1 in the 11).  So it is most likely that this aircraft was fitted with a DB 605M using the higher octane C3 fuel.  These aircraft had the supercharger of the DB 605A and kept the cowling of the original Bf 109 G-6.  Because of the requirement for C3 the landing gear legs were painted red. 


    As you say across the pond - every day's a school day!


    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? 




  12. 9 hours ago, Troy Smith said:

    And, late in the war there Germans had an entire repair/recycling system for airframes,  there are some images and details of this in the last JaPo book on the Bf109.  Note large wheel bulges does not necessarily mean large tyres.  


    I'll add in a link in a mo, but the werk nummer and unit are known. 

    Bf 109 G-6/R2 W.Nr. 230 785 "Gelbe 11" 3./NAGr. 1, Fritzlar, April 1945.



    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 :giggle:). 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. :cwl:



    • Like 1
  13. Just now, FalkeEins said:



    ..at the time there was a suggestion that there was a 'green 2' underneath the greyhound, so an unusual machine wearing a combination of Geschwader and Gruppe markings if that is the case. 



    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



  • Create New...