Messerschmitt Bf110E-2 Trop ***FINISHED***

[PeterB]

When I first came across this GB I decided I had three aircraft that would be eligible, a Bf109E, Bf109G and a Bf110E. The first two are now lined up for the 109STGB later this year and I found a couple of other kits to build for this GB, but now I guess I might as well build the 110 as there is still a month or so left.

Actually, this will be I think my 8th 110 build - I first built the original Airfix Series 2 original mould (twice) when it first came out in I believe 1959, followed by 2 Frog 110G and 3 Fujimi C/D versions and I have another Fujimi one in my stash. I can remember my first sight of the old Airfix kit clearly - I had gone into Woolworths in Bradford and on entering the first floor the Airfix display was in front of me - some of you are probably old enough to remember the pegboard displays of built models up above the counter (usually falling apart) and piles of bagged kits below. My eye was caught by the latest release which from a distance appeared to be labelled "Messerschmitt Mello" -  back then as a 10 year old my only knowledge of German planes was that there were Messerschmitts, Dorniers, Junkers and Heinkels and I am not even sure I knew that this plane existed - no internet then and very few books available on my pocket money! So I paid my 3/- (3 weeks pocket money) and left the shop clutching my prize.

 

Anyway, the history of the Bf/Me 110 is pretty well known so just a brief recap seems appropriate.

 

The concept of what is variously known as a “heavy/escort/penetration” fighter was already in the minds of various designers by the end of WWI but it was in the 1930's that several airforces started issuing requests for them. The Bf or if you prefer Me 110 (the design was initiated whem Willi M was operating as Bayerische Flugzeugwerke A.G. but by the time it was built he was running Messerschmitt A.G.) was one of those that were actually built in numbers as it appears Herman Goering liked the idea of a plane that could escort his bombers and clear a way for them through defending fighters. It was actually a pretty good design though it was seriously delayed by problems producing enough Daimler Benz engines which it was intended to use, so the early versions were powered by the Junkers Jumos which were nowhere near powerful enough. However by the end of 1939 the C version was entering service with DB 601A engines which gave it a pretty reasonable top speed of about 330mph at 19000ft, about the same as the Hawker Hurricane and only 20mph or so less than the Bf 109E. It had a heavy armament, but for whatever reason the 1000 mile normal range quoted by Green in his Warplanes of the Third Reich for the Jumo engined B version fell to only around 600 miles in the C (or so he says) which was not really adequate for its role, and of course, like most of the other large twin engined machines in the same category it was nowhere near as manoeuvrable as the lighter and nimbler single seat fighters so it suffered badly in the Battle of Britain.

 

By that time it had been hoped that the replacement Me 210 would have been entering service, but as is well known, that design was a disaster and so the 110 had to soldier on. The addition of “proper” drop tanks instead of the dangerous “Dackelbauch” wooden conformal belly tank initially tried on the 110D extended the range and the E version introduced in 1941 had the more powerful DB 601N engines, and together with the slightly later F variant with yet another version of the DB 601 found considerable use as fast light bombers. Finally the G version was introduced with further changes, and whilst all versions from the C onwards were pressed into service as night fighters with some success, the G was designed with a third crew member to operate the radar which was being fitted, making them far more effective in that role - all of the above is of course a gross simplification but you will get the idea!

 

I will be building the E-2/Trop version used by 8/Zerstorergeschwader 26 in North Africa in 1941, hopefully pretty much OOB. This second moulding by Airfix was initially released as a 110C in 2010 and the E/E-2 version came a year later with 2 possible versions, the other being an E-2 of 7/ZG26 in Libya in 1942. Being one of the newer Airfix kits it should in theory go together fairly well, but we will see.

 

Cheers

 

Pete

 

 

Edited May 12, 2021 by PeterB

[Col.]

This one will make for an interesting companion to your pair of 109 Pete  

[FalkeEins]

 8./ZG 26 was the first German 'fighter' Staffel in North Africa, claiming two 3 Sq. Hurricanes on February 19, 1941 for the first Luftwaffe victories. On a Stuka-escort sortie over Tobruk in July, Ofw. Richard Heller (8./ZG 26) claimed four 'P-40s' . This feat was cited in the award of his Ritterkreuz. The Bf 110s operated in many roles; anti-shipping, transport escort, ground attack, long-range strike and recce.  The Zerstörer were also deployed as light bombers as per the Airfix box-art. Equipped with 900 ltr drop tanks they even brought in fuel. For a while Bf 110s from 1./NJG 3 also operated over North Africa - by day - in support of III./ZG 26 due to the shortage of Zerstörer aircraft.

[PeterB]

The cockpit detail is not bad though perhaps not up to the standard of the more modern Airfix kits and the same could be said of the instructions. There are one or two places during the build that the new “3D” type of instructions would have been a help as they show you a pic of the parts once they are in place shaded red as I recall – the undercarriage leg location looks like it would certainly benefit from that and I have had a bit of a fight to get the cockpit floor in as the positioning is very vague – at least to me, and I ended up cutting a couple of mil off in the end.

Essentially everything but the seat cushions, spare ammo drums for the rear mg (or are they for the nose cannon?) and stick is in RLM 66 Dark Grey or in the case of the IP RLM02. I can now close up the fuselage and look at the wings, and at that point I have to sort out which of the 2 versions I am going to build, which is not entirely straight forwards. Version “A” is said to be a Bf 110 E-2/Trop from 8/ZG 26 in “North Africa in 1941” whilst version “B” is supposedly a “Bf110 E” of 7/ZG26 based at Derna in Libya “in 1942”. I have been doing a bit of research and either Airfix's sources do not agree with mine or they have got it slightly wrong! Certainly III/ZG 26 moved to the Med in early 1941 and for the next 2 years both 7 and 8/ZG26 moved from Italy to Greece or Crete and to North Africa and back several times including Derna, but they seem to have had a mixed bag of Bf110 C, D and E models which may be where the confusion has come from. There was actually no such thing as a Bf110 E – after a short run of preproduction E-0 models, there were the E-1, E-2 fighter bomber and E-3 unarmed recce version. There certainly was an E-2/Trop and III/ZG 26 used them, but was intended for, amongst other things, long range convoy escort and so, like the D-3 variant, it had an extended rear fuselage with a dingy pack fitted.

 

Both the E-1 and E-2 could carry a centreline ETC 500 bomb rack for a pair of either SC250 or SC500 bombs and Airfix provide all of those, together with 2 types of wing mounted drop tanks – 198 Imp Gallon or 66 Imp Gallon, and holes have to be drilled in the lower wing to take them. However, when the large tanks were carried endurance exceeded the internal oil capacity so a small supplementary oil tank was carried under the fuselage just behind the wing. Again this needs holes drilling and according to Airfix the combination of large fuel tanks and extra oil tank were used on version “B”, as was the extended tail. My sources imply that this is wrong and that these features were found on the E-2/Trop ie version ”A” but the E-1 would have had the standard “short” tail so maybe that is what their “E” is and they have switched the two versions round in the instructions. I will be building an E-2/Trop anyway, but maybe with the smaller tanks, but it does raise a question about whether or not I should use the markings for their “A” or “B” versions There is a pic of the “A” plane 3U+KS (3U = ZG26, Red K = 9th aircraft, and S = 8th Staffel, part of III Gruppe) in Crowood's book on the Bf 110 and it confirms it is an E but unfortunately not which version (the rear end is not visible but they say it was on convoy escort so I will give it the dingy pack), and the text is the same – it describes the deployment and actions but makes no distinction between the various models of 110. Ok, it might not be completely accurate but it is the best I can do.

 

Cheers

 

Pete

Edited May 15, 2021 by PeterB

[PeterB]

The fit is generally good if at times a trifle tight - I had to file a bit off the wing stubs on the fuselage otherwise I would have ended up with anhedral (or as some prefer negative dihedral) instead of dihedral! I gather the terminology is a bit like the Centipetal/negative Centrifugal force arguement that I remember from my schooldays.

Although the instructions show a pic of the tailplane showing the correct angles, they do not show a head on view of the wings so I had to refer to my references to confirm the exact angle - as I mentioned previously the instructions are not quite as good as those for more recent kits. It is not quite as easy to build as the Ju 87B-1 I made last year, or the Martlet IV and Spitfire Ia, all of which are examples of what I might call the current generation of Airfix kits. Still, in spite of the slightly over deep panel lines it is far better than their original 110, but that should be expected I guess as the old one was produced over 60 years ago! I will leave it to dry and then do a little filling - it does not need much. Then I will start on the undercarriage.

 

Cheers

 

Pete

[PeterB]

Going together pretty quicly.

The camera angle makes it look a bit out of true but it is fine, and yes the wheels really are meant to be like that apparently - I checked. The actual angle does seem to vary a bit, presumably depending on load - Airfix might have overdone it a bit but it's the only way they will fit without modification!

 

Pete

Edited May 15, 2021 by PeterB

[PeterB]

I have made a start on the main painting.

Humbrol say to use Hu 89 Middle Blue and Hu 118 US Tan so presumably this predates their Hu 248/249 being produced as they are supposedly RLM 78 Hellblau and RLM 79 Sandgelb.

I have the later colours (at the top in the above pic) and also the Xtracolour version which is somewhat different, though the tins are old and the lids may not truly represent what is inside as you can see from the first pic. Of course modern opinion is that there were 2 versions of Sandgelb, and it has also been suggested that when the Luftwaffe first went to Africa they borrowed Italian paints until their own version became available. Anyway, I have use the Xtracrylic version of RLM 78 but for some reason I do not have the acrylic version of RLM 79 - I suspect it was out of stock at the time, so I will use the enamel.

 

The joint in front of the ETC bomb rack is not very good but it had had 2 doses of PPP and I may leave it as it is. I have painted the white fuselage band and wingtips, and also put some white on the rudders and lower engine cowlings as they will be painted yellow later and it might make it a bit easier knowing how problematic yellow can be coverage wise.

 

Cheers

 

Pete

[Graham Boak]

The use of  Italian paint was theorised by Ken Merrick, and seized on by other writers and treated as gospel.  Later research has demonstrated (not just opinion) that the Luftwaffe aircraft were painted in Germany before getting anywhere near Italy in their first version of 78/79.  It's not clear to me why they changed, but as the Italians changed from their yellow shades to a nut brown at about the same time presumably actual experience had an influence.

[PeterB]

Thanks Graham,

 

Yes, my first impression of Nocciola Chiaro was that it was a lot darker than the various Giallo Mimetico colours, but when I used it on my MC 202 a couple of year back it did not seem too bad a colour for the desert. Ullmann also seems to think that whilst later deliveries were indeed painted on the production line, the early arrivals may have had their existing camo overpainted with Italian colours, but interestingly he is not one of those who susbscribe to the "2 different shades of RLM 79 ie RLM 79 and the so called RLM 79a" theory and it seems Merrick agrees, so as always with paints it is a case of different authors having different views, or of course the old problem of "he said this was right so I will just repeat it". Maybe I was wrong to say it was generally accepted there were 2 versions but I have seen it quite a few times as for example on the IPMS Stockholm colour listings and some paint manufacturers do produce both variations.

 

Cheers

 

Pete

Edited May 16, 2021 by PeterB

[Graham Boak]

The last significant published work I have from Ullmann predated the work by Merrick in the Classic series, where he not only described the evidence for two different standards but actually produced paint chips for the earlier colours.  Has Ullmann has since contradicted this evidence, and if so on what grounds?  Or was he simply unaware of it at the time of whatever you are using as reference?  As indeed Merrick. in his description of blue Ju.88s in Italy, was unaware of Ullmann's later evidence for a dark blue as RLM 84?  Luftwaffe camouflage is a tangled web.

 

As some German aircraft are known to have flown into the desert in their standard European camouflage, and continued to operate like that without bothering to repaint, it remains possible that some of these may have been repainted locally on overhaul or repair.  Otherwise it does not seem to have been a priority.  This does bring up the question of just which Giallo Mimettico they might have used of the four different hues known to have been in use available.  Not a complication I've ever seen addressed....

 

I agree about the apparent darkness of Nocciola Chiaro, at least on the chip.  However isn't this another case of colours appearing darker on a paint chip, surrounded by white paper, then they ever do when applied to large areas of an aircraft reflecting much more light?  

[PeterB]

Hi Graham,

 

You are of course correct about the way colours change with their background. When surrounded by a dark colour they can look light and yet when the other camo colours are of a lighter hue they seem somewhat darker - just to add to the complications! My Hikoki book of Ullmann's is dated 2002 and only has one chip of RLM 79, well actually 2 because there is a supplement showing revised versions of some of the other colours in the top end of the range as it is an update of the original 1997 version I believe, but the 79 remains the same. I have just checked the text and there appears to be no mention of a second version of the colour so unless it is not in the section on "tropical schemes", maybe he changed his mind? He says in the preface this is the 4th version of his work on Luftwaffe colour schemes and mentions what I presume is the first one called "The Gordian Knot" in 1994 so I wonder if yours is either earlier or later than mine?

 

Not to worry, I will used the Xtracolour X209 and see what it looks like.

 

Cheers

 

Pete

[Graham Boak]

I have the 2002 edition of Ullmann too, but the Merrick work is 2004.  It also has colour chips prepared by the company who made the original paints, so is well worth getting.  If you can find one (two volumes) now.

 

 

[PeterB]

My copy of the Monogram book by Merrick and Hitchcock is dated 1980 and so rather elderly! Even assuming I could find more up to date copies by either of them I suspect they would be going for silly prices these days.

 

Pete

Edited May 16, 2021 by PeterB

[PeterB]

A fair bit of touching up still to do but getting there.

I will tone down the white a bit by using Xtracrylic 1141 which is more of an off white, and I have to paint the rudders and under the engines in yellow, but not long before I can start on the decs, and it has got quite a few so I hope they behave!

 

Pete

[PeterB]

Ready for decs.

I will of course have to provide my own swastikas.

 

Pete

[PeterB]

The main decs are now on.

That just leaves about 80 stencils - some of which may be missed out as they are too small to see, let alone handle. This could take a while!

 

Pete

[PeterB]

Whilst I am putting the final decs on, a word about the kit. Generally it is pretty good though I have mentioned a problem with the cockpit interior which could be either me or the slightly inadequate instructions. I have also just found that the main u/c doors have very weak attachment points as there are no tabs (unless I cut them off which I doubt) so they literally butt against the nacelle. I had assumed they could be glued against the horizontal strut Airfix tell you to mount on the wheel leg but it is too short and too far forward - again the latest style instructions would probably have made it clearer. Anyway they are on and I will have to be careful about handling them. Curiously there are several omissions compared with my 20+ year old Fujimi 110's, one of which is shown below.

After 20 or so years in my workroom it has weathered a lot, partly due to smoke from my pipe but I have highlighted certain items they included and Airfix seem to have missed -this one has the large drop tanks and the small auxilliary oil tank which Airfix do provide as an option but I have not used. Starting from the back there is a "double towel rail" aerial - something to do with Loran I believe, and I have added one from a scrap Ju 88 kit.  Moving forwards Airfix provide the D/F loop but not the crew access steps, though I guess they are retractable, and they have also missed out the aerial mounted under the Port wing root so I have added one. What you cannot see is that Fujimi also provide balance weights under the ailerons and a pitot tube under the wing, and/or sticking out the front of the wing - mine have come off so I can't be sure if the C and D versions had one, the other or perhaps both. Airfix provide none of these and, curiously, although they appear to have provided 3 spare reload drums of 20mm for the cannon there is no ammo for the MG 15 in the rear of the cockpit - I don't think it was belt fed so I have added a spare twin "saddle" type magazine. It is certainly an improvement on their first moulding and so it should be after all these years, but it could be better!

 

Cheers

 

Pete

[PeterB]

That did not take me as long as expected - some of the decs were apparently not for this boxing and a whole row of them were so tiny that even if I had managed to get them on, they would have been invisible from more than a foot away! Then there were the yellow lines to go on the end of the bomb tail fins - 8 for each optional bomb type! Airfix must have thought it was a good idea but the bombs in this kit have very thin fins for a change, and the decs were far too wide unless they were meant to wrap round. Anyway my chances of getting them on straight without tearing them  were negligible so I just painted them.

Everything is now on except for the radio mast on the canopy - still a little touching up to do and then I will give it a coat of varnish - nearly there!

 

Pete

[Col.]

Great progress Pete. I've every respect for your philosophy on this project and the extra research you've done to gain a more accurate result than which Airfix provide. Good work sir.

[PeterB]

The weather having become less humid, I have finally managed to get the finishing coat of varnish on.

I have enjoyed this GB as it gave me the chance for a bit of variety - one post war jet, a couple of wartime vehicles and now this. Thanks to the organisers, and thanks to you all for watching and commenting. I will not be entirely leaving "Africa" as there will be at least two planes in desert camo in my 109 STGB. Gallery entry before long and bye for now.

 

Pete

[Col.]

Another nice result Pete. You've certainly brought a variety of kits to life during this GB

[Grandboof]

Very Impressive . Great finish 

Martin H