Jump to content

Junkers F.13 - Revell 1/72nd scale with tweaks


Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, billn53 said:

Wisconsin Central Airlines started with two Bobcats, before purchasing their Electras. I believe they were painted red overall, but have no idea of their specific markings, else I’d be sorely tempted....

Hum...

This is all I have on my files, it was obviously taken from a profile, but don't know where or when.

Searches show zip.

I uploaded this temporarily, will take them down soon.

49921097816_f769be87fa_o.jpg

 

49921097806_d90ff9d46d_o.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, not too far now:

IMG_0076+%25281280x960%2529.jpg

 

 These are the evil things, small, full of flash, almost translucent due to the plastic's nature.
The plain "U" handles will be replaced with wire, of course. The others will be cleaned and glued only when all preliminary surface work is completed, otherwise they would be continuously knocked down.

Their positions are marked with too prominent holes, I may put something there.

The little buggers...:

IMG_0077+%25281280x960%2529.jpg

  • Like 12
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Moa said:

Hum...

This is all I have on my files, it was obviously taken from a profile, but don't know where or when.

Searches show zip.

I uploaded this temporarily, will take them down soon.

49921097816_f769be87fa_o.jpg

 

49921097806_d90ff9d46d_o.jpg

You temptress, you!
😁

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, billn53 said:

FYI, I understand Space Ranger has been researching Bobcats for a book, I sent him a PM asking about the WCA birds. 

The boxing includes decals for Songbird (of TV fame) , another of my favorites, but I most likely will go for this one:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/133813370@N04/25671630338/in/faves-130382521@N04/

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Never was the abbreviation YMMV so apt. How a mass produced kit with identical parts can be easy for one modeller and difficult for another is one of lifes great mysteries never to be solved. 

My fuselage fitted as per my earlier tweet yet @Moa's did not. His fuselage/wing joint was fine, mine was not (solved it by taking off the guidance pips). Hey ho..onward and upward.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The corrugated model surface is looking fantastic! I have an old Airfix Ford Tri-motor kit in the stash that you have encouraged me to tackle!

 

On another note, what do you use to affix the toothpicks to the various parts?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, sjsald said:

The corrugated model surface is looking fantastic! I have an old Airfix Ford Tri-motor kit in the stash that you have encouraged me to tackle!

 

On another note, what do you use to affix the toothpicks to the various parts?

I have several trimotor kits (the usual Airfix and Monogram, none of which are a particular delight to build, having some issues) and I love the type.

I am also tempted!

Regarding the toothpicks, I just insert them in the available holes in the kit, in lieu of props, landing gear, etc, to better manipulate them, until I am done with priming and painting.

 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Work on the Junkers Airfield continues.
The Miniart kit of the building is not molded to high standards. The fit is indifferent -to say the very least- and the engineering is poor. Gaps will show, mating surfaces will not make positive contact all the way, etc. The quality is much more like that of a toy than of a serious kit, which is disappointing, especially considering the good quality of other of their products. This is obviously a modular system designed to use the same parts in different boxings, and if it does work for some details, it doesn't for others.
There are two ways this kit is useful:
1) You don't give a damn and just use it in the background.
2) You do give a damn, and you modify it to suit your own ends, which will take some work. The least that can be done is to somehow hide the thin gaps that show everywhere where panels join, perhaps from inside with some cardboard or strips or styrene, or styrene sheet to make "walls", or from the front with fillers like Perfect Plastic Putty, which is water-based and very forgiving.
The parts come as you can see in colors, but more serious modelers will apply at least washes and weathering, plus details:

IMG_0087+%25281280x960%2529.jpg

 

Nevertheless, they can be put to good use.

And of course I am very happy that any diorama elements come in 1/72nd, instead of having to adapt train stuff (no disrespect, @Heather Kay 😁)

I am still waiting for a smaller building that got trapped in the Post Office growing Maelstrom, as well as many decal sets that I need to finally complete a bunch of models that are otherwise ready and languishing in the closet:

IMG_0088+%25281280x960%2529.jpg

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I should get myself one of these and build it when I end up with the courage to attempt my Zepplin Staarkin E4 scary thing.

 

Stephen the courageous or is it the crazy.

Excellent modeling as always, Moa 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/22/2020 at 11:53 AM, Properjob56 said:

My fuselage fitted as per my earlier tweet yet @Moa's did not. His fuselage/wing joint was fine, mine was not (solved it by taking off the guidance pips). Hey ho..onward and upward.

I guess in my kit have both issues.  Need to take a look what modifications this will need. This will be made in Aero's colours. Need to look my notes. I also remember that this can't be made out of box. Good thing is that Artic Decals makes good set of decals.

 

B5jMpLa.jpg

 

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I keep a spreadsheet of kits and their reviews and this is the relevant section for the F.13. The first reference is to Scale Aviation Modeller International and the second is self explanatory (but I'm now getting a 404 error code). As we've discovered this kit is the archetypal for 'YMMV'!

 

"Plastic. 4 options. Well detailed cabin. Delicately moulded corrugtions. Fuselage is built from slabs and isn't easy to get to fit well and filler was required on all joints. (Modellingmadness says fit is good save the roof) Completed cabin can be fixed after through wing gap but best used as an internal jig while fuselage is being put together. Transparencies also don't fit well so use acetate if poss.Wing also needs filler as does the fuselage to wing joint which is partic poor. Dont use floats options as they are difficult to align properly. Note land based version has too small tail but float plane is right. Elevator fully down at rest. Decals struggle with corrugations"

 

17(3) Mar 11 pp 314-7                                                                                                                                                                       http://modelingmadness.com/review/civil/abf13.htm1992.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Properjob56 said:

I keep a spreadsheet of kits and their reviews and this is the relevant section for the F.13. The first reference is to Scale Aviation Modeller International and the second is self explanatory (but I'm now getting a 404 error code). As we've discovered this kit is the archetypal for 'YMMV'!

 

"Plastic. 4 options. Well detailed cabin. Delicately moulded corrugtions. Fuselage is built from slabs and isn't easy to get to fit well and filler was required on all joints. (Modellingmadness says fit is good save the roof) Completed cabin can be fixed after through wing gap but best used as an internal jig while fuselage is being put together. Transparencies also don't fit well so use acetate if poss.Wing also needs filler as does the fuselage to wing joint which is partic poor. Dont use floats options as they are difficult to align properly. Note land based version has too small tail but float plane is right. Elevator fully down at rest. Decals struggle with corrugations"

 

17(3) Mar 11 pp 314-7                                                                                                                                                                       http://modelingmadness.com/review/civil/abf13.htm1992.

Interesting how subjective this is, but I adjudicate the differences, not to the model (in general), but to the poor instructions and the particular approach and skill of the modeller.

I you position the bulkheads in a certain way, and shave their tops a bit, the fit of all parts is perfect, no filler, at all. My wing to fuselage joint had no gap to speak of.

I had no trouble that I can remember with the floats. The vertical stabilizer varied depending on model: the version on floats had a larger area extended below the fuselage, but the land planes used both, the pure triangular and a smaller, angled one. Later versions had a different vertical stabilizer and a longer fuselage, so it's not a matter of slapping different decals.

The most visible inaccuracy of this kit is the ailerons, that were slightly broader and had a curved trailing edge in all the subjects released by Revell, as far as I can tell.

Earlier F.13s had a shorter (in span) wing, thus it's wise to check photo references on the chosen subject. I believe that shorter wing can be produced from the kit's one.

Again, much later F.13 models had a different wing. Engines varied greatly, so did the applicable exhausts and props.

My subject, D-1, had at one point balanced ailerons (with "ears"), to give you an idea of the variations and complexity of the field.

But I digress...

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...