Jump to content

Airfix new Be2c and Fokker Eindecker 1/72


noelh

Recommended Posts

  • 3 weeks later...

I never(*1) make bi-planes(*2), the rigging make me break out in a cold sweat, but for some reason I'm really excited about the Eindecker. Before this announcement I had no desire to make an Eindecker, but something inside me snapped and makes me *really* want this, I've even gone out and bought a load of Osprey WW1 books to get me in the mood!

(*1) that's a lie, I've made 2, both without rigging, but with loads of gluey finger marks and swearing :)

(*2) And the Eindecker is obviously not a bi-plane, but it stil has rigging so therefore gets placed in the same gluey-fingered, sweary category.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

Thanks. Probably not an easy fix to change to an E.III then :(

Hmmm, I'm even more confused now! I've been reading a little more :

When Airfix first announced it, it was labeled as an E.II/E.III, but it's now lost it's E.III designation.

Some sources claim that the types had different length wings, and others claim only interior differences! Other sources indicate that some E.Is might have got E.III wings and that the time gap between the E.I and E.III was so short that there was some overlap in the specs, I.E. it's possible that some planes were either built or were repaired as hybrids...

It's all a bit moot anyway, as there don't seem to be any decal sheets available in 1/72!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's all a bit moot anyway, as there don't seem to be any decal sheets available in 1/72!

Find someone who has an ICM or Eduard kit - there are lots of spare decals on those!

(Edit) Just checked, the ICM kit was an E.IV, but you can probably adapt the decals - apart from the serials they were fairly generic back then.

Paul.

Edited by Paul Thompson
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The differences between E.II's and E.III's have always been a mare's nest to historians. The late Dan-San Abbott asserted that the E.II had a shorter wingspan until E.II 66/15, which had the longer span wing normally associated with the E.III. A more consistent difference is the shape of the fairings on the side just behind the engine cowl. On the E.II these are squarer at the rear, on the E.III more streamlined. The illustration of the Airfix kit seems to indicate the squarer fairings. Hope they used the longer wingspan, since that will make it easier to 'aftermarket' an E.III.

By the way, the Wikipedia entries are not particularly useful insofar as dimensions go - the spans given contradict the text above.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From, Scott, J., 2012, Fokker Eindecker, Compendium 2, Albatros Productions Ltd., Berkhamsted, UK, ISBN No. 978-1-906798-23-9, pp. 56.

(P. 16), "While it would be gratifying to say that there are definitive and demonstrable differences between all of the Fokker E types, such cannot be said about the E.II and early E.III. The first full order for the M14, 86-121/15 included bothe types. the precise nature of the change from E.II to E.III has not been entirely resolved. The changes are assumed to have be internal, consisting of alterations to the fuel system, with a larger tank being installed behind the pilot. All of the aircraft from this batch retained the outward appearance of the E.II..."

(P. 18-19), "The classic appearance of the E.III begins with the 400-435/15 batch... With the main fuel complement moved behind the pilot, room was now available to bring the ammunition storage within the fuselage framework. An uncovered access opening was provided on the port side of the upper decking, between the rigging pylon and the fuel gauge... Symmetrical, curved cowling cheeks were fitted. The overhanging top deck now had straight horizontal edges on port and starboard, with a bend down to meet the upper longerons.

HTH

Christian, exiled to africa with his reference library, or as I call it, my sanity blanket...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From, Scott, J., 2012, Fokker Eindecker, Compendium 2, Albatros Productions Ltd., Berkhamsted, UK, ISBN No. 978-1-906798-23-9, pp. 56.

(P. 16), "While it would be gratifying to say that there are definitive and demonstrable differences between all of the Fokker E types, such cannot be said about the E.II and early E.III. The first full order for the M14, 86-121/15 included bothe types. the precise nature of the change from E.II to E.III has not been entirely resolved. The changes are assumed to have be internal, consisting of alterations to the fuel system, with a larger tank being installed behind the pilot. All of the aircraft from this batch retained the outward appearance of the E.II..."

(P. 18-19), "The classic appearance of the E.III begins with the 400-435/15 batch... With the main fuel complement moved behind the pilot, room was now available to bring the ammunition storage within the fuselage framework. An uncovered access opening was provided on the port side of the upper decking, between the rigging pylon and the fuel gauge... Symmetrical, curved cowling cheeks were fitted. The overhanging top deck now had straight horizontal edges on port and starboard, with a bend down to meet the upper longerons.

HTH

Christian, exiled to africa with his reference library, or as I call it, my sanity blanket...

Thanks, thats supporting other sources which may or may not be true... Early E.IIIs could look like E.IIs...

The old mantra still holds true then, find a picture of the actual aircraft you are trying to model!! :)

I can say, with some confidence, that an E.IV definitely (milliput and razor saws withstanding) cant be made from the kit. :)

Edited by tangerine_sedge
Link to comment
Share on other sites

oops lets try again. I didn't speak to anyone behind the Airfix stand on Saturday I did hear them tell a punter that they were aiming to make the BE2 as easy as possible to construct. The kit would be engineered in a customer/builder friendly manner including jigs for strut and wing alignment etc. Lets hope its not those bloody awful cross braces we seen on the Gladiator and Tiger Moth recently. A colleague also told me that Airfix told him that they were just dipping their toe in the water with these two. To check out the market, if they sell well then they will make more WW1 subjects from new moulds, if not then Airfix would probably drop the idea. So my friends, "IT'S UP TO US" I normally model 1/48 with the occasional foray into 32nd when pocket and space allow, but with the quality of their recent models, and to support my 72nd colleagues I'm up for supporting them in this new venture.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So my friends, "IT'S UP TO US" I normally model 1/48 with the occasional foray into 32nd when pocket and space allow, but with the quality of their recent models, and to support my 72nd colleagues I'm up for supporting them in this new venture.

Well, I pre-ordered 2 BE2cs when they originally announced them. Don't really need any more Eindekkers - got 2 Eduards to do and 2 built, plus a few in 1/48th, and to my mind they're much less individual than the options available with the Be2, especially if you enjoy chopping kits around a bit. So I guess I'll have to add a few more to the pre-order, and maybe one E.III to show willing. Pity they didn't go for replacing their Albatros D.V instead, there are hundreds of different colour schemes possible and thus reasons for multiple buys, but I guess they wanted something perceived as easy for beginners, which is laudable enough (although if properly engineered, with those N shaped centre section struts, an Albatros doesn't have to be any harder than a BE, and can even be set up without a jig).

Paul.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hopefully Airfix will provide lozenge decals if they eventually produce some kits with this kind of finish. Some people are probably capable of painting the lozenge pattern by hand; I am not one of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hopefully Airfix will provide lozenge decals if they eventually produce some kits with this kind of finish. Some people are probably capable of painting the lozenge pattern by hand; I am not one of them.

I'm dubious about that. Whenever comoanies have included their own lozenge in the past it has usually been in wildly unusual colours. There are many aftermarket companies doing very good lozenge these days, and not at unreasonable prices either. Cookie cutter lozenge decals of reasonably close colour and pattern would of course be ideal, and I'm sure Cartograph could cope with those for Airfix, but I'd expect the kir price to move up substantially. A temptation for Airfix not to bother would be that there were also many aircraft with sprayed camo instead of printed variety. Either way, I hope they're enough encouraged by sales of the soon-to-be-released kits to go ahead with more.

Paul.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...