Jump to content

Eduard's new Mustang tailwheel-question.


Thomas V.

Recommended Posts

Hi all,

 

I still did not make new Eduard's Mustang,

but have few in the stash, and plan on adding more.

There is one thing that to me seems odd, on all models that can be found on internet tailwheel position is far too back and far too low, question for those who tackled the model, is it an inherent flaw or can be rectified?

 

Big thank you.

 

Tom

 

 

Edited by Thomas V.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not a modeller but I am interested

 

The problem with the sit of the Eduard P-51 might be partly to do with the tailwheel but the main problem is to do with the length of the main undercarriage legs. The design of the main undercarriage leg is based on a lightly loaded aircraft. If measurements were taken from museum exhibits then the aircraft studied would not have had any fuel on board and most likely no guns or ammunition. If you look at photos of fully loaded war time P-51s then the bottom edge of the undercarriage cover is usually to be seen level with the centre of the wheel hub. On the Eduard model the large gap between the centre of the wheel hub and the bottom of the undercarriage cover would normally only be seen on a lightly loaded aircraft.

 

In the “Info Eduard” for December 2019 there is a feature on a model of a Pacific VLR Mustang with the main undercarriage barely compressed. Fully loaded with full wing tanks, full overload tanks and a full fuselage tank that aircraft would be carrying almost 3000lbs of gas plus 6 x .50s plus ammunition…

 

I don’t know how you would fix it!!

 

Steve

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree - when I saw the completed kit the first time, the very first thing that jumped out at me was that the model appeared to be standing on its tiptoes.  The too-short tail wheel leg increases the effect.  Amazing they could make such a basic mistake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, SteveBrooking said:

I am not a modeller but I am interested

 

The problem with the sit of the Eduard P-51 might be partly to do with the tailwheel but the main problem is to do with the length of the main undercarriage legs. The design of the main undercarriage leg is based on a lightly loaded aircraft. If measurements were taken from museum exhibits then the aircraft studied would not have had any fuel on board and most likely no guns or ammunition. If you look at photos of fully loaded war time P-51s then the bottom edge of the undercarriage cover is usually to be seen level with the centre of the wheel hub. On the Eduard model the large gap between the centre of the wheel hub and the bottom of the undercarriage cover would normally only be seen on a lightly loaded aircraft.

 

In the “Info Eduard” for December 2019 there is a feature on a model of a Pacific VLR Mustang with the main undercarriage barely compressed. Fully loaded with full wing tanks, full overload tanks and a full fuselage tank that aircraft would be carrying almost 3000lbs of gas plus 6 x .50s plus ammunition…

 

I don’t know how you would fix it!!

 

Steve

 

That accounts for some of the deck angle issue, but the ride height of the Eduard tailwheel is wrong straight out of the box regardless of loading

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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...