modelfreak Posted August 31, 2014 Share Posted August 31, 2014 Post me your basic questions here and we will chat about them! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnd Posted August 31, 2014 Share Posted August 31, 2014 Ok, here's one. Airfix do a 1/72 109E-3 in their starter set but the regular kit is an E-4. Apart from the decals and paint, what are the differences? Canopy? Thanks, John. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duncan B Posted August 31, 2014 Share Posted August 31, 2014 Ok, here's one. Airfix do a 1/72 109E-3 in their starter set but the regular kit is an E-4. Apart from the decals and paint, what are the differences? Canopy? Thanks, John. From new (fresh from factory) the squared off canopy would be the most obvious difference but once in the field a lot of E3's had that canopy fitted so it is not a guarantee that an Emil with the squared off canopy is an E4. A lot of damaged E1's and E3's went back through repair units and were fitted with upgrades in the process. Duncan B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
modelfreak Posted August 31, 2014 Author Share Posted August 31, 2014 Hi john on the subject of canopies as Duncan said the main difference is the canopy which the lines are usually more defined on the e-4 Happy to help, J Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnd Posted August 31, 2014 Share Posted August 31, 2014 Ok, thanks. So is the Airfix E3 supplied with an E4 canopy? John. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stonar Posted August 31, 2014 Share Posted August 31, 2014 Standard on the E-4 were also pilot's head armour, armour to protect the fuel tank and the MG FF M cannon. A detail for the anal modeller would be a stencil on the ammunition drum access panels (inside and out) "Achtung! MG-FF 'M' ". The stencil was there because this weapon could not fire the ammunition of the earlier cannon. As stated above most E-3s had been brought up to E-4 or even E-7 standard by 1941. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fernando Posted August 31, 2014 Share Posted August 31, 2014 I think the "Starter kit" comes with the "new tool" 109 while at least some of the "regular" are reboxings of the old E-4. Seeking confirmation for this. Fernando Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hepster Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 The Airfix kit does not include the early style canopy. The starter kit E-3 represents an E-3 that had been refitted with the later canopy. It is shown in both a photo and side view on page 21 of 'Jagdwaffe Vol 2 Section 1' by Classic Publications, where it is described as carrying a 70/71 scheme rather than the usual 02/71 scheme, but I don't know how they can say that from a b&w photo. My copy of the starter kit features the newer tool fix to the wing root fault, but has badly off centre decals, so Aeromaster to the rescue. I'm also dubious about the shape of the prop, so I'll replace it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stonar Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 (edited) The 70/71 scheme is two colours with very little contrast between them in B+W photgraphs.They are so similar that it is often difficult to discern two different colours.This is not the case for colours in the 02/71 scheme. The difference between the two, in a B+W photograph, should be obvious. Trying to tell an 02/71 from a 74/75 on a B+W photo is a different story Edited September 1, 2014 by Stonar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Boak Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 There is very little difference between 70 and 71 when the paints are fresh, but rather more so after some weathering. So depending upon the circumstances of the photo, it may not be that obviously different from the later schemes. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hepster Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 Actually, Stonar, I agree with you - the Jagdwaffe book calls it a 'high demarcation 70/71 camouflage scheme', but I think it's a misprint for 02/71. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tango98 Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 While I don't have the particular kit, which markings have a possible misprint for 02/71 versus 70/71 as per the Jagdwaffe book? Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troy Smith Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 (edited) The Airfix kit does not include the early style canopy. The starter kit E-3 represents an E-3 that had been refitted with the later canopy. It is shown in both a photo and side view on page 21 of 'Jagdwaffe Vol 2 Section 1' by Classic Publications, where it is described as carrying a 70/71 scheme rather than the usual 02/71 scheme, but I don't know how they can say that from a b&w photo. My copy of the starter kit features the newer tool fix to the wing root fault, but has badly off centre decals, so Aeromaster to the rescue. I'm also dubious about the shape of the prop, so I'll replace it. There are colour photos of this plane, I can only find the thumbnail. <Pic removed, as apparently, the site it comes from is unsafe according to Sophos - sorry!> Werner Pichon-Kalau von Hofe, III./JG 51 Airfix specify 02/71 though Edited November 15, 2014 by Mike Removing picture hosted on an unsafe site Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tango98 Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 Hi Troy, I have an original copy of that photo somewhere in my files here and the colours used for the profile were based on those as seen in my copy of the photo and another in Eric Mombeeks' collection. I think the colours were 70/71 but mind you, after 14 years I could be mistaken. Cheers Dave 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stonar Posted September 2, 2014 Share Posted September 2, 2014 (edited) There is very little difference between 70 and 71 when the paints are fresh, but rather more so after some weathering. So depending upon the circumstances of the photo, it may not be that obviously different from the later schemes. Are you suggesting that weathered 70/71 could be mistaken for 71/02 in a decent B+W photograph? 70/71 always shows very little contrast. As it happens and for reasons not relevant here, I've recently been comparing the 70/71 scheme on some factory fresh Bf 110s in a photograph taken at BFW Augsburg with that on crashed Bf 110s in the same scheme taken during the BoB. Whereas the demarcations are just about visible on the freshly painted aircraft I can't see them at all on some of the crashed aircraft, many of which I know to have seen several months of service. There are of course many reasons why this might be the case, but the point is that in none of the photographs is there anything approaching an obvious contrast between the colours. The demarcations are usually equally difficult to see even on much larger aircraft. I suppose the question is whether 02 could be mistaken for 70? I'd be surprised if it could be in a decent image, but nothing is impossible No wonder Airfix's old 1/24 Stuka used to have a one colour call out for its upper surfaces Cheers Steve Edited September 2, 2014 by Stonar 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Posted September 2, 2014 Share Posted September 2, 2014 Airfix "Red Box" 1/72 Bf109Es: New mould : http://www.airfix.com/aircraft/1-72-scale-military-aircraft/messerschmitt-bf-109e-7-trop-1-72.html http://www.airfix.com/aircraft/1-72-scale-military-aircraft/spitfire-mkia-and-messerschmitt-bf109e-4-dogfight-doubles-gift-set-1-72.html http://www.airfix.com/aircraft/1-72-scale-military-aircraft/messerschmitt-bf109e-3-starter-set-1-72.html http://www.airfix.com/aircraft/1-72-scale-military-aircraft/messerschmitt-bf109e-4-1-72.html http://www.airfix.com/aircraft/1-72-scale-military-aircraft/battle-of-britain-experience-gift-set-1-72.html http://www.scalemates.com/products/img/6/0/8/197608-13280-81.jpg?nr=a50148&company=airfix&name=el%20alamein http://www.airfix.com/aircraft/1-72-scale-military-aircraft/aircraft-of-the-aces-gift-set-1-72.html Old mould : http://www.airfix.com/aircraft/1-72-scale-military-aircraft/messerchmitt-bf109e-4-e-7-1-72.html HTH John 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hepster Posted September 2, 2014 Share Posted September 2, 2014 Very good John! My reference to 'newer tool' refers to the fact the the first of the new tool 109s had an error on the wing root which was later corrected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Posted September 2, 2014 Share Posted September 2, 2014 I can't help any further with that, but it is worth noting that the 1977 "E" is still around in the newest style of box. J Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vppelt68 Posted September 3, 2014 Share Posted September 3, 2014 So here´s a stupid Bf 109 question: were pilots preparing to land their Messerschmitts instructed to shake the leading edge slats out, or was it common for more experienced pilots to do that anyway? Thanks in advance, V-P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vppelt68 Posted September 3, 2014 Share Posted September 3, 2014 I wonder why they did that. Anyway, how about the landing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stonar Posted September 3, 2014 Share Posted September 3, 2014 It was known for some very experienced pilots to have the slats locked closed so they wouldn't activate during combat manoevres. Really? I've never heard of that. Do we know which 'experienced pilots' might have done this? I'm curious now! We are talking Bf 109 not Westland Whirlwind Cheers Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonC Posted September 3, 2014 Share Posted September 3, 2014 (edited) I think the reason for locking the slats closed was to avoid asymmetric activation during tight turns, leading to a spoiling of target tracking and the guns solution. The slats did not just activate at slow speed, but rather high angle of attack. This occurs at slow speed of course, but also during tight turns at higher speeds. The movement of the stagnation point changes the pressure balance over the slat surface, and the slat is 'sucked' open. Locking them shut would have led to some loss of sustained turn performance, but presumably this was thought to be an acceptable trade by some pilots. regards, Jason Edited September 3, 2014 by JasonC 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FalkeEins Posted September 3, 2014 Share Posted September 3, 2014 (edited) Erwin Leykauf; " for us, the more experienced pilots, real manoeuvering only started when the slats were out " ( in van Ishoven 'Messerschmitt Bf 109 at war ") Edited September 3, 2014 by FalkeEins 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vppelt68 Posted September 3, 2014 Share Posted September 3, 2014 That´s what many Finnish Messerschmitt pilots have told in their memories, too. Helped them turn tighter and get "inside" their adversarys' radius. V-P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stonar Posted September 3, 2014 Share Posted September 3, 2014 I think the reason for locking the slats closed was to avoid asymmetric activation during tight turns, This could happen, it was noted by Eric Brown. However, I've never read an account or seen any evidence that the slats were wired closed by an 'experienced pilot'. It's why I am curious to see such an account or evidence. As in Falkeeins and vppelt68's posts above I have seen accounts extolling the virtues of the effect of the slats on the aircraft's performance in combat manouevres. Leykauf reckoned he developed a technique using the slats and careful use of power whereby he could out turn a Spitfire in his 'Emil'. Experienced pilots, flying smoothly, had no problem with asymmetic deployment (Rall). Franz Stigler found them useful after one too many! ".. pilots did like them, since it allowed them better positions in dogfights along with using the flaps. These slats would also deploy slightly when the a/c was reaching stall at higher altitudes showing the pilot how close they were to stalling.....this was also useful when you were drunk " There are other accounts too. Cheers Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now