Fw 190 A-2/3/4 wings without underwing MM FFM's bulges from Tamiya kit (1/48)

[Milos Gazdic]

Hello,

As I believe, probably more than half of the early Fw 190s came to frontline without "outer / mid-wing" v MG FF/Ms and associated bulges under the wings. There was lots of discussions about the fact when they were removed, though it seems that at least on earlier (A-1 to A-5) variants these were in fact - additions to the airframe, or at least to my understanding they were. Correct me please if I am wrong.

For A-2 to A-5 seems that outer guns were in fact a Rüstsatz (field modification kit). At least according to few discussions. Problem I am facing is that all Rüstsätze I know for Fw 190 As from R1 to R14 do not list outer MG FF or v MG FF/Ms as an optional Rüstsätz made by any factory. Am I missing something? 

 

Same practice continued even in later marks (A-6 to A-9) where outer MG 151/20s were removed (but it seems these were standard equipment).

 

Reason for not using the outer guns seems to be the handling (roll rate inc. climb rate too) more than the top speed (another reason was a different ballistic performance between MG 150/20s and v MG FF/Ms). Apparently, Germans did test the aircraft (A-4 variant) with & without the outer v MG FF/Ms and got 646km/h and 636km/h of a top speed in horizontal flight. Removal of the guns including the addition of fairings on the leading edge & removal of quite prominent budges helped achieve these 10km of extra speed but didn't seem to have a significant influence overall.
 

Additional reason could have been the fact that the outer MG FF/Ms were not protected (armored) & they would easily explode if hit by enemy fire tearing the whole wing apart. If I remember well we had a discussion on this subject over on Hyperscale few years ago with few of the movies being posted. 
 

When it comes to the weight here are things I have compiled so far:
[1] MG FF/M: Ikaria MG-FFM 20mm weighed 26 KG. 100 rounds weighed around 30kg (in the drum). The MG FF/M had a bit better performance than the MG FF and ability to fire Mine (explosive) ammunition. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MG_FF_cannon
[2] MG 151/20 Mauser 20mm weighed 42 kg and fired 630-720rounds/min. 100 rounds weighed 19.9kg
Removal of MG FFs would save about 120-125kg give or take for earlier versions and 135kg for A-5.

 

The manual for the A-1, A-2, A-3, A-4 gives the weight for a version with and without the outer guns. The magazine usually used is the T 60-FF with 60 rounds.
The manual for the A-5 gives one the version with the outer guns and the drum with 90 rounds but precise that removing those guns will save around 135 kg (98 for the weapons and 37 for the ammo), so it seems clear that this was still an option.
The manual for the A-1 to A-4 and the manual for A-5 clearly states that the T 60-FF (60 rounds) could be replaced with T 90-FF (90 rounds) without any modification.
The MG 151/20E in the outer wing position is mandatory equipment, according the plane’s production sheet anyway and the manuals do not mention any removal or Rüstsatz.

Anyhow, whatever the reasons for flying without the outer guns (personal, or unit orders...), we can notice that so many of these early machines flew with only two "inner" MG 151s in the wings. Unfortunately, Mr Tamiya didn't give us an option to portray A-3 kit (which I love for it's simplicity) without the outer guns, since he has molded them as part of the lower wing. These could have easily been molded as a separate plug giving us an option to choose if we wanna model ones without or with the bulges and additionally give us an option for all variations of the bulges (there were few of those in the early aircraft).
 

My main Question is:
I am wondering if any company makes such "flat" plugs that could easily replace the bulges which I could cut out along the panel lines? If you know any - please let me know.
Or if you have attempted the surgery - what would be your option for flattening these bulges? I would love to avoid sanding this area and filling it in from inside since knowing my not so great skills I would probably delete half of the details around this panel (hatch) and would not really be able to describe it well.

I know Eduard makes kits for these early variants with & without the bulges but I have quite a few of Tamiya kits in my storage & would love to portray few of aircraft without outer guns. 

 

Looking forward to your suggestions
Best,
Milos

[GiampieroSilvestri]

I am sorry but I can't help you with your question about the panels on the outer wings but on the Focke Wulf Fw 190 A-2/A-3/A-4 and A-5 the two MG FF M in the outer wings were indeed Rüstsätze installed on the field.

 

Saluti

 

Giampiero

[Milos Gazdic]

Hello Giampiero,
Thanks for the confirmation regarding Rüstsätze modification.
Would you by any chance know which Rüstsätze number this was?
Best,
Milos

[GiampieroSilvestri]

As far as I know the MG FF M field modification has no Rüstsatz number.At least it is not noted in the list of Rüstsätze for the Focke Wulf Fw 190.Below is a link to a german web page with the numbers of the Rüstsätze used on the Focke Wulf Fw 190.Maybe this is of some help.

 

https://de.wikibrief.org/wiki/Rüstsatz

 

Saluti

 

Giampiero

[Milos Gazdic]

Hello again,
For me it sounds strange that RLM would have codes for majority of them & for one that seems most widely spread none?
Isn't that strange?
Best,
Milos

[Milos Gazdic]

And, thanks for the link! I've checked it out.
It lists Rüstsätze as I know them.
Thing is that a list that combines all the known variations of Fw 190 A Rüstsätze into a single list. Maybe we are just missing some of the Rüstsätze codes and their definition for A-2 to A-5 when it comes to their MG FF/M. It is clear even from this list, that what was Rüstsätze #1 for A-2 might not have been the same for A-8 version.
Best,
Milos

Edited March 22, 2022 by Milos Gazdic
(correcting my self in explanations in regard to the list on the link)

[Graham Boak]

I'm sure that the R set designations where not necessarily the same from sub-variant to sub-variant.  This is also true for the Bf.109 so I suspect it to be standard practice with Luftwaffe types..

 

I would add that if your sanding and polished skills are not to your satisfaction, they will never improve if you don't practice them.  If you are worried about filling holes, glue a blanking piece over the inside before starting work.  Producing a flat smooth surface is certainly more straightforward than any other reshaping exercise.  If you fear spoiling a good kit, practice on an old/bad one.  Much the same principle as having a painting mule.

 

 

[Milos Gazdic]

Hello Graham,
Thanks for the confirmation about different nomenclature of Rüstsätze for different versions of Fw 190s.
I am sure we are simply missing some of the codes for early models.

I totally agree with you about what you said regarding improving the skills! Sadly enough I have so little time for modeling that I sometimes get depressed because of it & don't even use those random free moments that I could otherwise enjoy over models. Because of that - I prefer those easier, faster builds so I can more easily see some results rather than losing my interest in a model after 2 - 3 months of watching it stalling. My hope was that there would be some conversion kit containing this part that could help me address this issue & fix it swiftly on few builds I would like to do of these early Butchers. 

[Graham Boak]

Ah well.  Like they say about differences between modellers.  Some have enough time, some not.  Some enough money, some not.  Some enough talent, some not.  Some work in funny scales or odd areas or choose curious subjects.  We're all different.  However one lesson I understood but didn't act on when it would have been useful is that time spent on learning a skill will pay off in the long run.  

 

Perhaps more a message for younger modellers than older ones.  So should I buy a stock of acrylic paints and haul out my airbrush today?  Begin that Flyhawk HMS Legion?  Not likely.  I'll just stick an old Matchbox Kelly together with some guns from an Orwell and call it HMS Quality.  Not perhaps the most appropriate choice of name, but a really pretty camouflage scheme that has been decades waiting in the stash.  Placing immediate benefit before long-term investment comes too easy at every age!

[MDriskill]

Besides the weight, perhaps the MG FF's different ballistics and limited ammo capacity (especially the early 60-round drums) were also "disincentives" to carry it. Just speculation, but they generally seem more useful for ground attack or bomber interception, than fighter vs. fighter combat.

 

One issue with getting older is how often you think, "Hey, I've read that somewhere!"...but then, can't find the source. 🙁 

 

SO...reserving the right to be totally wrong...I have read that the MG FF installation was not only a "field mod," but also an extra-cost  "factory option." That is, RLM-specified for some production batches during production, but omitted (or deferred for later installation) for others.

Edited March 24, 2022 by MDriskill

[Milos Gazdic]

Hello sir!
How you've been? Thanks for joining the discussion!
And yes - price could easily have played the important role in the decision too Basically, it might happen that these outer guns were simply not available for some.
And yes, I have mentioned ballistics as important factor for a decision against them (by pilots or higher ranking officers).

My main issue is how to least painfully to replicate the flat panel. I am even thinking of buying one of those fancy cutters (so I can cut paint masks too) and get it to cut complex shapes like these. For me, it is very easy to draw such a shape in Adobe Illustrator or any other vector software. cutting it by hand, on other hand, would be something that my buddies here locally call "mafan".

Best,
Milos

[MDriskill]

On 3/21/2022 at 5:28 AM, Milos Gazdic said:

Or if you have attempted the surgery - what would be your option for flattening these bulges? I would love to avoid sanding this area and filling it in from inside since knowing my not so great skills I would probably delete half of the details around this panel (hatch) and would not really be able to describe it well.

Hi Milos!

 

I'd basically remove the bulges and start over, instead of trying to modify them. Drill closely-spaced holes all around the bulge, on the inner side of its edges. Then cut/punch them completely away; shave down and smooth out the remaining edges as best as I could; then cut a sheet of thin plastic to represent the flat panel and glue over the hole.

 

Edited March 24, 2022 by MDriskill

[Milos Gazdic]

yes! that is the idea. It' just that the shape is fairly complex & I know my skills. Maybe I should buy one kit (they are about 10US$ here new) and practice on it, seeing what I manage to do. I just feel bad for destroying a model On the other hand good beer in the bar costs close to that & I destroy quite a few of those whenever possible.

[MDriskill]

Yes, but the beer's remains are more easily dissipated, LOL!

 

Thin white plastic sheet is translucent enough that you could trace the panel's outline onto it, over a drawing. Then cut it out, and use as a template to draw and make identical copies.

Edited March 24, 2022 by MDriskill

[Milos Gazdic]

I think that Graham & you have made me give it a try

And yes - beer does bring job by destruction of it, while destruction of a good new kit brings pain & sorrow.

[Troy Smith]

On 21/03/2022 at 09:28, Milos Gazdic said:

what would be your option for flattening these bulges? I would love to avoid sanding this area and filling it in from inside since knowing my not so great skills I would probably delete half of the details around this panel (hatch) and would not really be able to describe it well.

I had a look for images, there are one of the bulges here

https://doogsmodels.com/2011/11/23/tamiya-148-fw-190a-3-build-log/

 

the plastic is probably thick enough you won't need to back it.

 

I'd suggest a some different grades of sandpaper glued to a flat surface, even just  a bit of wood,  and just sand the bulge flat,  you could put some tape on the wing around it for the main flattening,

EDIT then remove the tape, 

then use finer grade to finish. Done slowly, you won't destroy the panel lines as they are recessed and the part is basically flat. 

if easier, mouth the abrasive stick on the workbench, and sand the wing bulge against it.

If you look like making a hole, back the bulge.  I'd suggest something like superglue/talc mix. 

 

Does this make sense?  

 

HTH

[Milos Gazdic]

Hello Troy,
Very nice suggestions! I will get the new kit & play with the lower wing part before putting the model together (easier that way) and report soon.
Milos

[Milos Gazdic]

BIG BIG THANKS to @Graham Boak, @Troy Smith & @MDriskill for help on the subject & especially Graham for encouragement & push to try things out...

I just want to report that I have done it

From here:

to here:

I have puttied the inner are of the bulge with the putty since after sanding down it becomes transparent completely!
I've used Dremel for initial sanding & then moved to 240 grit stick for hard work & from there to 400 800 1500 2000 for final work.

I need to rescribe those little things there but it's almost done


Thanks!

M

PS I have posted the process over on HS:[LINK]

[Ingo Ritz]

That looks perfect!

[MDriskill]

Looks great! Very interesting that the plastic is thick enough to just take it straight down like that.

[Milos Gazdic]

Yes. I am happy this opens a possibility for so many other interesting schemes
And I think few more strokes with the sanding stick & it would go through. When I point to the light - it's completely transparent.