How does the VBP-133 “Octopus” PV-1 Ventura really looks like ?

[christian Boehm]

Hello modeler friends

 

I am currently building an PV-1 Venture , Academy Minicraft kit

 

 

I won’t talk about this kit which brought me considerable disappointment by its mediocrity. It would be too many things to tell and I really think it’s a renewal of the “oldy” FROG….

So OK I did my best, the major error being the catastrophically undersized wheelwells, without talking about  the total lack of internal development ( I needed to saw the open range about 3 mm larger !) If somebody likes to see my most important modifications I will post some pictures, no pb.

 

My question is about the decoration

The box , notice and decals provided propose a Pacific – Marshal Islands - 1944  stationed PV-1 of VPB-133 with the nice octopus tentacle motif around the top turret. I must admit this is an attractive look.

OK the cam seems classic with white undersides and Intermediate & Dark sea blue top ( quite faded)

But the plane’s number given is a “3”....

That seems wacky because I found only one (bad quality) picture of that plane (you can see the same on different sources , books & internet asf)

But .....I discover the number 895 on fin & nose on this picture  ; Just see:

 

 

What does the community think ?

Who knows another picture ?

Thanks a lot !

christian

[dov]

I was on the step to do it.

Decided an other way.

There is a Canadian company which creates excellent decals and stencils for this type and many others. 

Try this. The name is not present in my head. They also have many RAF types too.

Happy modelling 

[dov]

Aveology is it!

[Space Ranger]

I can't tell you about the octopus, but I can tell you that the Minicraft kit has no connection to the rare Frog kit. This was proved many years ago.

[Ed Russell]

It's likely the octopus was a nit marking and carried by more than one aircraft. I think I have some pictures somewhere.

I have never seen the Frog kit, only pictures, but I have read that it and the Minicraft kit are virtually identical. I would love to see an actual comparison of them.

I have an interest in Venturas and I must build a few more!

 

[christian Boehm]

1 hour ago, Space Ranger said:

I can't tell you about the octopus, but I can tell you that the Minicraft kit has no connection to the rare Frog kit. This was proved many years ago.

yes I read the same 

but anyway the academy version seems quite poor and  disappointing

 

let me a few time to post my shots on IMG and I will share

[christian Boehm]

15 minutes ago, Ed Russell said:

It's likely the octopus was a nit marking and carried by more than one aircraft. I think I have some pictures somewhere.

I have never seen the Frog kit, only pictures, but I have read that it and the Minicraft kit are virtually identical. I would love to see an actual comparison of them.

I have an interest in Venturas and I must build a few more!

 

thanks Ed 

I know tony O'Toole  well  ; he's a very good one

we shared interesting advices while buiding Skua & Roc some years ago

just a witness I haven't  enough time to visit forums 

I will watch ot with big interest 

[Ed Russell]

45 minutes ago, christian Boehm said:

the academy version seems quite poor and  disappointing

It's a lot better than the Tamiya or Eduard ones!

[Steve N]

I recall when the Academy/Minicraft Ventura was initially released around 1988, there was a magazine article featuring side-by-side comparisons with Frog kit.  The parts breakdown and even the shapes were very different, showing the two were completely unrelated.  That said, the Ventura was one of Academy's first releases, and is indeed quite basic by today's standards.  To me, the biggest shortcomings were the thick, ill-fitting cockpit canopy and the engine nacelles.  The cowls are a fairly straight taper, rather than the curved profile of the real ones.  Also, the carburetor intakes on top of the cowls are much too tall (a fairly easy fix) and the oil cooler intakes below are very crude and shaped nothing like the real ones.  When I built it back around 1991, I made my own vac-form canopy, and did my best to fix the intake issues.  I couldn't really do much about the shape of the engine cowls though.

 

 

[Ed Russell]

40 minutes ago, Steve N said:

do much about the shape of the engine cowls though.

For anyone building one now these are helpful.

https://www.plusmodel.cz/en/Motorove-kryty-pro-Venturu-

They are quite nice and fit well. However some viewers have failed to pick which of my builds have which cowling, although I did fix the intakes on the original Minicraft cowling pretty much as above.

 

40 minutes ago, Steve N said:

there was a magazine article featuring side-by-side comparisons with Frog kit.

I would love to see a copy of that.

[Graham Boak]

I recall something rather less detailed, but showing the two sprues as being completely different.  That it may nevertheless have owed something to the Frog kit is quite possible, as several other early Academy kits did - the Wildcat and Tomahawk come to mind.  However I didn't have the Frog kit to compare, and have never actually got around to making the Academy one.  I believe however that replacement cockpit canopies are probably available from Hudson kits/aftermarket - assuming that they aren't too different.  Replacement turrets should be common.

[72modeler]

I have all of the Academy Ventura boxings  and have seen the Frog kit that a modeling buddy managed to acquire, (Frog released a number of test shots, and they went for ridiculous money.) and there is no commonality between them except they both have poor cowlings, engines, nacelles, and props. The Aeroline cowlings and engines are a great improvement, and the props can be reworked. and Pavla makes a very comprehensive interior upgrade set, C72047. The wheel bays are probably the most difficult to correct. IIRC, Falcon did  a vacform canopy and nose transparency in FNCV3072.  A new-tool Ventura would be right up Valom's or Special Hobby's alley!

Mike

 

https://www.oldmodelkits.com/index.php?detail=18720&scale=1/72

[Space Ranger]

The Rareplanes vacform kit is undoubtedly the best of the bunch.

[christian Boehm]

19 hours ago, Ed Russell said:

For anyone building one now these are helpful.

https://www.plusmodel.cz/en/Motorove-kryty-pro-Venturu-

 

Yes Ed 

you're right and I got these cowlings because Academy's cowlings are very false shapped

But I introduced them as well  with Quick Boost PW- R2800 engines , because the engines were as bad as the rest

And finally I had  as well the  Ph-Edge Eduard ED-202 plate and the Pavla resin box 72047

 

About the last, the tail replacement  parts and bomb doors are nice and thin but really if you own some docs (specially Naval Fighters 86) you'll realize internal details are 50% imagination-worth

(no mention about much will not be seen anyhow on final kit)

It's not the 1st time , I discover such things on Pavla interiors....

 

Finally , I found a big interest to buy 1/48 SBD ( Dauntless)  RS resin wheels ; as replacement, they fit perfecly in shape and dimensions with Pv-1's ones and have nice sculpted tyres

[KRK4m]

Years ago (in 2007, maybe 2008), at a modeling competition held at the Polish Aviation Museum, certain 1/72 Ventura appeared, built of cross-kiting of two Special Hobby sets - engines, propellers, undercarriage, the whole nose and all the armament bits were taken from the PV-2 Harpoon, while the donor of the wings, tail and most of the fuselage was the C-60 Lodestar. The result was light years ahead of the Academy kit, and to this day I still don't understand why the SH boys didn't go that way. There is certainly a much larger market for the 1/72 Ventura kit than for the Harpoon and Lodestar kits combined.

Cheers

Michael

[theplasticsurgeon]

Here's an Academy Ventura that I built for the Pacific GB in 2018.

Frog decals, but nothing else. I didn't think Frog got their Ventura kit to the market.

Other than that, the build was OOB.  Having never seen a Ventura - I just don't know about its accuracy.

[Graham Boak]

Frog just missed with the Ventura - for a little while you could get them in Frog boxes, and the transfer set for them was included in a set that came available - I might even have one.  The Wellington was slightly further behind, as with the four little Russian types.

[Hornet133]

While the Frog Ventura was not sold in retail stores in England (some test mouldings did surface later) it appears to they had already shipped some to overseas markets before they went under.

 

A local major Hobby shop in Sydney, Australia where I was living at the time received 1 carton of them (likely about 24) and had them on the shelves for sale. 2-3 days later they were all gone (no I did not get one, not knowing there would be no more later).  I have also read that they were available in Germany and no doubt others.

 

These were genuine Frog products, not Russian produced 'Frogspawn' that appeared later. Have not got one of those either as by then I had several Academy boxings of their kit which owes absolutely nothing to the Frog product (completely different kit).

[christian Boehm]

16 hours ago, christian Boehm said:

 

About the last, the tail replacement  parts and bomb doors are nice and thin but really if you own some docs (specially Naval Fighters 86) you'll realize internal details are 50% imagination-worth

(no mention about much will not be seen anyhow on final kit)

Correction :  the PAVLA tail parts which look very fine ( as vertical as horizontal parts) are NOT in 72047

It's a different set : Pavla U72-65

[christian Boehm]

As it's an US-brit plane , I asked Hyperscale (many US modelers) as well

 

Interesting answers as well

 

see

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/hyperscale/how-does-the-vbp-133-octopus-pv-1-ventura-really-l-t529826.html

 

What is clear is that several planes bear the octopus (thanks to the "known" Modeldad)

 

And thanks to everybody on both forums for these interesting exchanges

[JWM]

Here is mine Ventura with hand painted octopus

more photos here

So it is with individual number "1" - so third already different number. Apparently the octopus was a kind of the squadron emblem. 

Regards

J-W

[KRK4m]

On 3/10/2022 at 9:04 PM, Ed Russell said:

It's likely the octopus was a unit marking and carried by more than one aircraft. I think I have some pictures somewhere.

I have never seen the Frog kit, only pictures, but I have read that it and the Minicraft kit are virtually identical. I would love to see an actual comparison of them.

 

The octopus was certainly the emblem of the VPB-150, carried over to the VPB-133 when several PV-1 planes were transferred from the former to the latter. Frankly speaking, the creature should be referred to as "hexapus" on some planes (although there is no such entity) because it is only painted with six limbs 😀

When it comes to comparing the FROG and Academy Ventura kits, that's what @Graham Boak said - although no parts are interchangeable, the kits are "essentially similar". Even when it comes to the sprues layout.

In the late 1980s there was an article comparing the two kits either in Scale Aircraft Modelling or in Maltese Modelaid International. I remember reading this, but now (COVID brain fog?) I can't find this magazine. Here are pictures of both tools (ex-FROG on darker background) in exactly the same scale.

 

 

The FROG (or actually NOVO here) lower wings have neither control surfaces nor wingtips, the Academy fuselage has a separate (transparent) nose piece.

But the number and shape of most minor parts are exactly the same.

Cheers

Michael

[JWM]

I remember that when I was constructing mine Ventura from Academy kit I had also the Frog (or rather a Soviet copy of Frog) kit  that I noticed a big difference in main canopy angle between two windscreens. I think it is visible on photos provided by @KRK4m

J-W 

[christian Boehm]

20 hours ago, JWM said:

Here is mine Ventura with hand painted octopus

 

 

Woaw JWM , nice done this pattern and quite discrete weathering

I"m not a fan of exaggerated weathering (with , ok, some exceptions , photographically documented)

 

And really congratulations for hand painted octopus ; I minded but thought the spikes will be hard to do

 

Ok as I see many are interested I will send some  building shots

[christian Boehm]

Here the Academy  wings (may be I reduced photo too much , sorry)

I don't own perfection but I studied plans, but not only plans.... because you know ...; so always photo confirmations !

 

 

And I think the aileron’s chord is too narrow of about 3 mm. But fortunately a wrong structure line exists just in front of them

So I engraved this one deeper as a new junction between aileron and wing. It’s then quite 1 mm too large but very more close to reality.

The early junction was filled with putty

 

You’ll see as well

> the resin replacement nacelles ( fitted) and cowlings with the original one 

> the fitted QB PW engines

> the starting work on wheelwells

 

 

Close to the wing the furnished catastrophic double wheelwell doors ( to cut in 2) ; who can imagine the landing gear could find its place in such a tight space ?!

( Lateral photos of the up-part of wells confirm that)

It’s obvious that the width is far too narrow, so I cut the open range about 2 x 2mm larger. ( actually , as here, too much (2 x 3) but afterwards I corrected that with strip)

Then I did my best to realize as close as possible the inside accommodations (source / Naval Fighters 86) ; the big oiltank is quite visible ( I remind , the wells of the kit are full plain ! as are the turrett and astrodom holes )

 

On this photo you see better the new aileron shape

 

 

Here the wing's nearly final look

Now another challenge was new wheelwell doors !

But I have before to take other pictures