Jump to content

Improving the Italeri 1/72 Do 217 K-1 and K-2


Madalo

Recommended Posts

Does anyone have any suggestions or experiences on how to improve the Italeri 1/72 Dornier 217 K-1 and K-2 (is it in fact a K-3?) kit? I have got some resin replacement wheels and the Airwaves PE set and replacement machine guns but would like to do something more for the interior and perhaps it is also possible to improve other areas.

Edited by Madalo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The main outline problem with the Italeri Dorniers is that the rear fuselage is somewhat shrunken.  It helps add a spacer between the tailplanes, perhaps 60 thou from memory, perhaps 1 or 2mm deeper tapering to nothing behind the bombbay.  (Apologies for the mixed units.)  There should be more of a keel appearance to the bottom.. Both the Zeppelin and Guano Works and the Airwaves conversions produced extra pieces to help modify this, so if you and find one of them it would be a great help.  Hannants are rereleasing the Airwaves sets but not I think this one, yet.  I believe that more can be done to the engine cowlings but don't know what, sorry  There are a few differences between this cowling on different subjects (engine fit?) but I'm not up to speed on it.

 

Remember that the Dornier did not carry two Fritz X, or indeed normally two Henschels.  The same or similar applies to the Revell He.177.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm nearing the end of my Italeri Do217E build which is taking for ever due to fit issues with the kit but there are a few things I've done in order to try and improve it which may be of some help.

 

I've used the Airwaves PE set but also added some cabling using fine lead wire, done in a random sort of way but just running from one instrument panel to another and around the fuselage interior. With the various instrument panels in the PE set I glued them onto thin plastic card as this makes them stand out a wee bit more and also makes them easier to handle/place. I also used a punch and die set to makes some small plastic discs that I then glued to the reverse of the pilots instrument panel to make it look a bit more realistic given that it can be viewed from the nose. You could really go to town with this by also adding cabling from lead wire but I just added the discs to represent the back of the instruments and left it at that.

 

I also added a scratch built bomb sight, just a 'thing' to represent it without reference to the actual sight but in this scale it does the job. The seat will need a wheel on the back plus some extra side armour to make it look more realistic although thinking about it the K model had a different shape as shown in the Airwaves set so you may wish to use a replacement resin seat. The set for a Ju88 such as the CMK/Czech Master Kits CMQ72154 will do the job and this will also give you some seat belts plus a better quality navigators seat as well. I didn't bother with replacement wheels even though I bought a resin replacement set as in the end the kit wheels actually looked better IMHO.

 

I have a magazine article on an Italeri Do217 build where the modeler installed a complete bomb bay but that is way beyond my capability so I quickly moved on but if you are up to doing the same then let me know and I'll scan the article and send. This article was kindly sent to me by Graham and has proved to be both informative and inspirational.

 

Another headache was finding the correct decals for my chosen subject as the Do217 is not well catered for by after market companies so you may wish to have a look at Fantasy Printshop as they do an extensive range of Luftwaffe code numbers and letters. Peddinhaus Decals also do sheets for Luftwaffe bomber insignia/badges which are quite good even though in my experience the badges with a red background tend to get distorted by the underlying paint colour of he model.

 

That's about all I can think of so apologies for the ramble and hopefully my Do217E will see the light of day in the not too distant future.

 

Regards

Colin.

 

Ps. I was aware of the fuselage 'skinny' issue but what with all the other fit issues with the kit I decided to leave it as is

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

I also vaguely recall that the fins on the Do-21`7's were slotted and these need to be added right behind the leading edge of each fin, using some narrow strips of plasticard, as they are only hinted at on the kit..  Wasn't aware of the rear fuselage issue, @Graham Boak- thanks for that info!

Mike

 

Taken from the History of War website:

Despite the apparent similarities to the successful Do 17, the first design for the Do 217 was flawed. The first prototype, powered by two 1,075 hp DB 601A engines, flew in August 1938, but in the following month it crashed, killing the two man crew. Tests before the crash indicated that the new aircraft had sluggish controls and poor directional stability, a bad combination.

 

Further tests revealed other nasty characteristics, most worryingly a tendency to stall when flying at low speed on one engine, a common occurrence for a twin engined war plane. This was solved by adding a fixed slot to the leading edge of each tail fin.

 

I wasn't able to  find a decent photo that showed what the slotted fin looked like during a brief search, but if I can recall where I saw a closeup photo, I will re-post. My modeling mentor and close friend of 50 years pointed this out to me when  he built the Italeri kit and added the slots to the fins.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure what is meant by the slotted fins so wonder if I've missed something? The fins on the kit have vertical slots on their outer side leading edge which seem to match with the references and scale plans I have so I'm a wee bit confused about this.

 

By the way my references are the Warpaint book (24) and the old Aircraft Profile publication (261).

 

Regards

Colin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@fishplanebeer

Colin,

 

See if this video helps. There is a good closeup of the slot on the fin at 4:02. On the kit, IIRC, the slots are simplified,. The fix is kinda hard to describe, but the video shows what they should look like. I think my friend cut a strip of plasticard so it would sit proud of the inner surface of the fin, and curved around to meet the LE of the fin. (He's a retired dentist and he can see minute errors in shape and size that I am oblivious to. I was impressed by how his fix improved the look of the slots and made a mental note to do the same when I got around to doing a 217.) Does this help?

Mike

 

https://youtu.be/P_FZZFU8LHI

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks guys! Some useful suggestions there. I had actually already bought that CMK set with Ju 88 seats. I think I will leave the fuselage as it is. 
 

Graham can you elaborate what you meant about the Fritz-X and Hs 293? My impression was that the Do 217 carried two Fritz-X or one Hs 293 (and that the He 177 also carried two).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Payload/range limitations.  These are heavy draggy weapons, particularly the Fritz-X and the Dornier was underpowered to start with.  The Dornier might be able to lift two Hs 293 but how far could it go with them?  The usual load of the E-5 was one Henschel and one fuel tank - a fuel tank was also carried for balance purposes with a single Fritz X.  Two Fritz X would be an excessive weight with any fuel at all.  I don't think I've seen any suggestion that this was even tried let alone operated.  The Heinkel could certainly operate with two of even three of the lighter weapons, but two Fritz X would be a heavy load even for it.  Note that photos on operational units show a single store under the centreline.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re' the fin slots I think I see what you mean in that the leading edges have a raised edge/lip to them where as the kit parts are smooth with no edge. However I think I'll leave as is as I've gone past the stage where I can make the change and unless, like your friend, you are eagle eyed the lack of a lip or edge would not be that obvious (hopefully). My build has a number of flaws already so I suspect this will be the least obvious!

 

To be honest I'll be glad when it's done and I can go back to a kit that fits well, the instructions are not pure guess work and it has recessed detail all of which are missing from this rather aged kit. Since returning to the hobby I've been spoiled by making really nice, modern kits although this kit has helped me develop long lost skills and highlighted those I do not have in equal measure. Plus my vocabulary of swear words has also expanded.

 

Roll on my SH Bf109E-1 and Tamiya F4U-1A Corsair.

 

Regards

Colin.

Edited by fishplanebeer
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

a fuel tank was also carried for balance purposes with a single Fritz X. 

Graham, with very great respect you might want to re-think this one (a myth that's been peddled for a great length of time) as I suspect there was more to this. The missile/tank combination would barely be "in balance" even in the take-off case where the tank was full. A 900l drop tank weighs in at around 1440 lbs while the Hs 293 missile was 1000lbs heavier, hence my use of the word "barely". Presumably then the fuel from the drop tank was used during the mission so the weight balance situation would worsen.  I suspect the idea behind this was to also provide symmetrical drag, again to overcome the take off case where low airspeeds would result in reduced control authority.

Edited by Rod Blievers
re-worded!
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, fishplanebeer said:

Plus my vocabulary of swear words has also expanded.

 

Save those expletives- you do realize that shortly after you finish your Do-217, ICM will release several variants! We will have you to thank for this, so I will be sure to credit you when that takes place! :giggle:

Mike

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

11 hours ago, Rod Blievers said:

Graham, with very great respect you might want to re-think this one (a myth that's been peddled for a great length of time) as I suspect there was more to this. The missile/tank combination would barely be "in balance" even in the take-off case where the tank was full. A 900l drop tank weighs in at around 1440 lbs while the Hs 293 missile was 1000lbs heavier, hence my use of the word "barely". Presumably then the fuel from the drop tank was used during the mission so the weight balance situation would worsen.  I suspect the idea behind this was to also provide symmetrical drag, again to overcome the take off case where low airspeeds would result in reduced control authority.

Interesting point.  However a full fuel tank would certainly go a long way to reducing the imbalance on take-off, and once in the cruise the trim control would be powerful enough, and probably sufficient to balance any fuel reduction.  It may also have been possible for fuel management to retain fuel in the tank and cruise out on the internal fuel.  This then would reverse the trim at bomb release, but again fuel usage could be being managed to avoid any worst possible case.  I don't know enough about the Dornier's fuel system to confirm this is possible, but it is just what was used on other types such as the P-51.  In this case it was a matter of using up the fuel in the aft fuselage tank to bring forward the cg and reduce the dangerous instability with it full.

 

Aerodynamic drag during most of the take-off run is negligible, and any asymmetric drag could be used to counter the normal swing anyway.  You certainly wouldn't want to carry the extra drag of a tank in the cruise just to balance that of the bomb, but the extra fuel really was necessary.  I see the prime purpose of the tank was to be just that, a fuel carrier, and the trim benefit perhaps secondary.  Again such details as the trim power are not readily available, and I certainly don't know how to estimate them.  (I might understand them once they'd been explained to me carefully enough...)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When Eric 'Winkle' Brown test flew a Do217M he commented on its lack of power generally and that undertaking a take-off, or a landing in poor weather, on just one engine was 'a knife edge sensation' off set to some degree by its relatively benign handling characteristics. Bearing in mind his test flights were carried out 'clean' and with only a modest fuel load the notion that it could have carried two Fritx X or Henschel Hs293 missiles is fanciful as well as being downright dangerous. I've no idea what the weight would have been of the fuel in the external tank but it would have made sense to use this up early on in the flight in order to improve the power to weight ratio.

 

Regards

Colin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/30/2021 at 11:37 PM, 72modeler said:

Save those expletives- you do realize that shortly after you finish your Do-217, ICM will release several variants! We will have you to thank for this, so I will be sure to credit you when that takes place! :giggle:

Mike

...and that's why I haven't quite finished my Italeri Do-217. It hasn't worked so far so I guess I need to start putting paint on it to induce ICM.

 

Duncan B

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you can find the very rare Wings and Tracks resin correction set or even the engine sets, it would go a long way to correcting what is wrong with the Italeri 217 family of kits.  The BMW engines are undersized.  If you have the Hasegawa Ju.88G-6 kit, you could use the extra BMW engines from it to help improve you 217K.

 

The 217M kit is the 217K reissued with some improvements - cockpit, wheel well detail.  If you can find one of these kits, all you would need to do is swap out the engines from you K kit and you will them have a K with the improvements that Italeri made to the original kit.  Pity that Italeri did not keep their M in production or offer those improvements to the K or J versions.

 

I am keeping my fingers crossed that ICM will scale down their 1/48 217 kit to 1/72.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Wm Blecky said:

If you can find the very rare Wings and Tracks resin correction set or even the engine sets, it would go a long way to correcting what is wrong with the Italeri 217 family of kits.  The BMW engines are undersized.  If you have the Hasegawa Ju.88G-6 kit, you could use the extra BMW engines from it to help improve you 217K.

 

The 217M kit is the 217K reissued with some improvements - cockpit, wheel well detail.  If you can find one of these kits, all you would need to do is swap out the engines from you K kit and you will them have a K with the improvements that Italeri made to the original kit.  Pity that Italeri did not keep their M in production or offer those improvements to the K or J versions.

 

I am keeping my fingers crossed that ICM will scale down their 1/48 217 kit to 1/72.

 

Hi

    So cowlings are correct but engines to small if i read this right ?

 

   cheers 

      jerry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/31/2021 at 11:22 AM, fishplanebeer said:

When Eric 'Winkle' Brown test flew a Do217M he commented on its lack of power generally and that undertaking a take-off, or a landing in poor weather, on just one engine was 'a knife edge sensation' off set to some degree by its relatively benign handling characteristics. Bearing in mind his test flights were carried out 'clean' and with only a modest fuel load the notion that it could have carried two Fritx X or Henschel Hs293 missiles is fanciful as well as being downright dangerous. I've no idea what the weight would have been of the fuel in the external tank but it would have made sense to use this up early on in the flight in order to improve the power to weight ratio.

 

Regards

Colin.

 

Hi

     217 M was apparently under powered due to the DB engines being used, due to the non availability of BMW engines 

     cheers

        jerry

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, brewerjerry said:

 

Hi

    So cowlings are correct but engines to small if i read this right ?

 

   cheers 

      jerry

Hi Jerry,

 

Apologies for not being more clear.  By engines, I should have said cowlings (with would also include the engines).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

AIMS do a seat for the Ju=88/188 which I think is applicable to the Do217 ? http://www.aimsmodels.co.uk/Resin/1-72/1-72-resin/1-72-resin_13.html

 

They also do engine fronts for the Italeri Do217E, don't know if they would help the K ?

 

Print Scale do a set of decals https://www.hannants.co.uk/product/PSL72329

 

and there is a vacform canopy in one of the Falcon Luftwaffe sets, the Squadron version also seems to be still available from Hannants.

 

Sadly the Eduard canopy mask is OOP

 

Aside from the Profile and Warpaint already mentioned there is a book by Manfred Griehl https://www.amazon.co.uk/Dornier-Do-217-317-417-operational-Record/dp/1853100722

but I found it a bit lacking in detail for K and M variants.

 

and for background reading on Hs293 and FritzX there's this https://www.amazon.co.uk/Warriors-Wizards-Development-Defeat-Radio-Controlled/dp/1591140676/ref=sr_1_14?dchild=1&keywords=wizards+and+warriors&qid=1627922440&s=books&sr=1-14

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm approaching the final stages of my Do217E build, the part where everything has the capacity to get broken off or go pear shaped given my unsteady hands and imperfect eye sight, so the replacement engine fronts will have to wait for my next build although they do look quite good. That said the kit parts look quite good too, the only thing missing being a back plate for the spinners.

 

One thing also missing from the resin replacement set is the small holes in the centre of each spinner which from very recent experience is a real pain and very hard to achieve as it took me repeated attempts, repairing with fine Milliput and then re-drilling, to obtain something close to being centred. As I say I found this to be a real pain so is there a fool proof method I wonder?

 

Regards

Colin.

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...