Ta 154 "Moskito" V7 prototype***FINISHED***

[PeterB]

Just thought of something else I might have time to do.

Probably not the Mistel itself as I suspect it would not be eligible (any thoughts @col?) though I believe 6 were built but never used in action, but if not the Ta-154 as a prototype has some appeal. The kit was originally issued in the 1980's as Pioneer 2, later PM, then Revell/Matchbox and finally it looks like the moulds were used by Airfix though that is not entirely certain on Scalemates. Anyhow, they issued the above in 2008. I can always build the 190 in the STGB next year.

 

The kit itself is a bit of a dog judging by a build I saw earlier this year but without having to fiddle around with Flensburg aerials it might not be too bad. Anyway I already have a Pioneer original in my stash so plenty of scope there. The box art suggests that rather than the normal guided bomb version as in the normal Mistel with a Ju 88 lower component this might be a variation on the proposed "Pulk-Zerstorer" intended to explode amongst the USAAF formations over Germany. I will have to do a bit of research and see what I can come up with.

 

More as and when.

 

Pete

Edited November 26, 2022 by PeterB

[Corsairfoxfouruncle]

Hmmm a Ta 154, Id very much like to see one get built. I would think there were pre-production versions that would qualify ? 

[Col.]

Interesting project Pete. Given only six were produced there's an argument they were very much an experimental type.

[PeterB]

According to Manfred Griehl's book on the 154 something like 52 were built or building by the end of the war of which about 30 are confirmed to have actually been partly or wholly completed and perhaps only 26 definitely made at least one flight. Between July 1943 and July 1944 about a dozen prototypes were build so plenty of scope there for this GB. There were also around 20 pre-production and a similar number of production models but again very few are confirmed to have actually been completed. The early versions were able to use Goldmann Tego-Film glue to bond the wooden structure as designed but after the RAF destroyed the factory making it, like the He 162 it was found that the replacement glue did not work properly causing the crash of the second production plane when the wooden structure of the wing failed. There was a row about inadequate testing by both the glue manufacture and Fw which caused friction between Kurt Tank (the designer) and Goering apparently. Coupled with slightly less performance than expected, perhaps due to the delays with the Jumo 213 engines the project was  quietly dropped. Tank did want to change to DB 603 engines as the Ta 254 but that never happened.

 

Green says that 6 pre-production A-0 models (Griehl says 5 one of which was destroyed by enemy bombing) were tried in A-0/U-2 " Pulk Zerstorer" combination but there were problems with separation of the Fw 190A, apparently due to two halves of the combination not having enough size difference - must have been an aerodynamic problem not experienced with the more normal Ju 88 Misteln which even with the basic Ju 88A4 was 6ft longer and had 12ft wider span than the Ta 154. Consideration was therefore being given to a single seat manned version which was to be flown into bomber formations with the pilot bailing out after setting the times for the charge.

 

Considering there are 2 kits in the box there is not a lot of plastic.

The label on the bag seems to confirm that the 154 is ex PM but the one on the 190 is meaningless to me. It seems to be to Airfix Fw 190A-8/F-8 and the intro on the instruction sheet describes it as an A-8 though the painting instructions actually say F-8 - Green actually says A-4 and Griehl A-8 so take your pick! Normally the planes were chosen to have the same fuel octane rating for their engines but as this would be used for relatively short range missions maybe that did not matter.

 

As I do have 2 kits of the 154 I might make this up as a Mistel if nobody objects, though being lazy I don't fancy drilling the locating holes for the support struts knowing how inaccurate I usually am - I am still thinking about it!

 

Pete

Edited November 27, 2022 by PeterB

[Graham Boak]

The problem with the He162 was much more deeply rooted in the design, which could not be explained by the knowledge of the time but became known as inertia coupling.  Basically, if you try rapidly manoeuvring an aircraft with such a large offset mass as the engine, then it acts like a heavy dumbbell and twists the flight axis around until the plane comes apart.  The wing may have failed first but everything was going to, it wasn't the glue to blame here.  The accident was finally explained correctly by H. Pinsker from the RAE Farnborough in the late 50s, but before then the F-100A had come apart in the air in a way that was also described as inertia coupling, although rather more subtle in that the fix was just a taller fin.  IIRC Pinsker had been part of the original German team that tried but failed to understand the original He162 flight path, so presumably his paper on inertia coupling using the He162 as an example was something of a personal triumph.  

[JOCKNEY]

Hi Pete

Definitely do the Mistel if it's allowed. 

The bad news is I had a go at the PM 154 years ago and it's a shocker, I have no idea where I put it unfinished, so the therapy must be working ! 

Best of luck mate. 

Cheers Pat 

[PeterB]

20 minutes ago, JOCKNEY said:

Hi Pete

Definitely do the Mistel if it's allowed. 

The bad news is I had a go at the PM 154 years ago and it's a shocker, I have no idea where I put it unfinished, so the therapy must be working ! 

Best of luck mate. 

Cheers Pat 

Thanks Pat,

 

As you say 'if it's allowed' - the 154 was a pre-production A-0/U-2, the 190 was a bog standard production machine, and the whole thing was certainly "experimental" to my mind but I am not clear if @Col. has made his mind up as he just said ' there's an argument they were very much an experimental type'

 

The old PM kit I have is certainly "challenging" but when I bought this I did not realise Airfix had just re-boxed it. The mouldings look clean enough so maybe the mould had been re-furbished - I will no doubt see before too long! I may just building it as one of the various Ta 154 prototypes.

 

Pete

Edited November 28, 2022 by PeterB

[Marklo]

I built the revell boxing of the matchbox kit last year which I suspect might be the s as me kit. It was pretty much the right shape but virtually no interior, wrong shaped canopy and very hard to weight the nose down, I ended up putting weights into the engine nacelles to get it to sit right. It did build into a fairly good model but was a lot of work.

 

Edited November 28, 2022 by Marklo

[PeterB]

Whilst I am still considering whether or not to risk the Mistel I have made a start on the Ta 154 part. The fuselage fit is not too bad but the shoulder mounted wing is another story.

For a start the two halves have different chords, or in other words one overhangs the other. Not too difficult to cope with though as the above pic shows I missed a bit on the right trailing edge! However the fit into the cut-out at the top of the fuselage is terrible so I have had to indulge in some heavy duty filing and now it is about right, though the part that "fairs" the front into the fuselage is too wide so I have had to reduce that, perhaps a little too much. With luck and time I may be able to get smooth lines with filler and sanding. I rather suspect that the engine nacelles will also need a lot of work.

 

I have ordered Squadron replacement canopies and an Airwaves etched set which should sort out the cockpit. I think/suspect that when used as the lower part of a Mistel/Pulk Zerstorer a lot of the cockpit equipment would have been taken out so I will probably just build this one as a prototype once I have decided which one, or maybe a pre-production version. Then, depending on how it goes, I might make up the original PM kit in a more basic form to use as the Mistel, but I will see how I feel and how much time I have left. Otherwise the Fw 190 will be a straight build in the Fw 190 GB next year!

 

The Airfix instruction say 5g of weight should go in the nose which does not sound enough to me. I have two or three sources for this build, a Monogram Close Up originally published in 1983, and a Luftwaffe Profile book by Manfred Griehl published by Schiffer in 1999 and of course my old William Green "Warplanes of the Third Reich" from 1970, and whilst in general agreement there are differences particularly about numbers built, designations etc.

 

Pete

[Col.]

On 11/28/2022 at 7:30 PM, PeterB said:

As you say 'if it's allowed' - the 154 was a pre-production A-0/U-2, the 190 was a bog standard production machine, and the whole thing was certainly "experimental" to my mind but I am not clear if @Col. has made his mind up as he just said ' there's an argument they were very much an experimental type'

My apologies Pete, didn't mean to be vague about this, if you wish to tackle the Mistle combination by all means please do.

[PeterB]

Thanks Col,

 

As you may have gathered, when I bought this I thought that the 154 was a new Airfix kit, hopefully better than the PM one I already had, and I had no intention of building it as a Mistel, but this GB offers a chance to build both versions. I will start with the 154 alone and see how it comes out, and maybe use the PM kit to build the Mistel as well. My research has come up with another variant on the theme of Pulk Zerstorer - still involving both a 190 and a 154 but more like the US Aphrodite experiments. The stripped 154 was a single seater loaded with explosives and the pilot had a modified seat which allowed him to tilt it backwards and exit head first through a chute in the underside of the cockpit once he had got the plane lined up on a bomber formation and engaged the autopilot to hold it on course. The accompanying 190 would then detonate the charge by radio once the plane was inside the formation, but the autopilot also contained a timer, ostensibly to blow the plane up before it could crash on German soil, but maybe to get round the pilot of the 190 chickening out if for some reason the pilot of the 154 failed to bail out! 

 

This may or may not be fun!😆

 

Pete

[PeterB]

Whilst waiting for Hannants and Royal Mail to deliver the bits I ordered I have made a start on the engine cowlings/undercarriage, but first I scratched a couple of replacements seats as suggested in the Airwaves instructions - not very good but a considerable improvement on the kit offering.

The instructions would have you trap the u/c legs when joining up the nacelles but given the amount of work I will have to do on the latter this did not seem a good idea so I have cut out the bottom of the locating socket and can clip the u/c in later.

 

During its life the 154 design went through many changes -for example the first 2 prototypes had a smaller vertical tail/rudder but the kit one seems to be the larger version. Then there was a version (V4) with an extended cockpit with a bulge at the rear to allow the mounting an MG 81Z twin machine guns, a version with extended wingtips which angled upwards, and there seem to have been at least 3 variations on the rear end of the nacelles including one which was rather longer. In fact I think the kit one may be a little short, and the part over the wing is too narrow so I will be getting my Milliput out. There are very few panel lines, which is not as bad as it sounds as a lot of it was made of wood, but the nacelles and cowlings will need a fair bit of re-scribing - there are some very faint cowling flaps there if you use a magnifying glass but they need enhancing, I was going to box in the main wheel wells but as only the small front doors are open nothing will be seen. The nose bay is far too shallow but the cockpit floor is so low that it may not be worth bothering with, and anyway I will need the space for ballast I think. Speaking of which I have added strips of lead inside the cowlings and can put more in if needed later.

 

All in all not a very good kit but something to work on. I am surprised Airfix decided to risk using this as it hardly enhances their reputation and is not well known or very significant so was unlikely to sell very well. A far better idea would perhaps be using their own old Ju 88 for the lower component and it would not have involved much if any more work as they would still have had to provide the support struts as in this pairing. If they had intended it as a training version that would have been about it, though they could have also provided a replacement "operational" nose as well.

 

Oh well, I suppose I like a challenge every once in a while.

 

Pete

 

 

[Col.]

You've certainly picked a challenge with this one Pete but you're proving to be capable of it and you certainly know the subject well.

You make an interesting point about Airfix' strange choice of kit combination when their own Ju 88 was, while not a great kit, most likely more readily available. Perhaps they'll get around to combining their new tooled kits in the future with a few extra parts

[PeterB]

Thanks Col.

 

If I were thinking of producing a kit of a Mistel I would go for the basic Mistel 1 with the Bf 109F/Ju 88A or maybe the Mistel 2 with the Fw 190A/Ju 88G as they were built in some numbers and used operationally. If I wanted a real "eye-catcher" I would go for the Mistel 3B (or maybe 3C depending on which book you read) with the 190 and the greatly lengthened Ju 88H - the last thing I would make is this! I guess Airfix had the problem that they had neither a Bf 109F or a Ju 88G in their range and presumably the Ta 154 could be acquired cheaply to go with their existing Fw 190. Apparently the combination of upper and lower components was to a large extent dictated by the engines or rather the octane rating of the fuel they used as, except for one training version (S 3A) and maybe the long range recce versions  (3B/3C) where the "escort fighter" Fw 190 had their own doppelreiter overwing tanks, the upper component was intended to draw fuel from the lower one. 

 

Anyway I have made a start on the rear of the nacelles.

It can be a bit messy and tedious, but I find using Milliput almost therapeutic at times - sad individual that I am😆. Basic shaping done so now the long process of finishing it off with progressively finer grades. Then I will have to look at scribing which is not something I am very good at.

 

Pete

Edited December 4, 2022 by PeterB

[Corsairfoxfouruncle]

Nice addition with the nacelles, I really should get some of this Milliput. Sadly it cost $20 locally which is why I keep pushing it iff. 

[PeterB]

54 minutes ago, Corsairfoxfouruncle said:

Nice addition with the nacelles, I really should get some of this Milliput. Sadly it cost $20 locally which is why I keep pushing it iff. 

That is rather high - on Amazon over here the Superfine white I am using sells for the equivalent of anything between $6 and $12 whilst the normal rather coarser stuff is a dollar or two cheaper. Of course it is made over here so it will inevitably be dearer in the States I suppose, but a pack makes an awful lot of epoxy putty and has a decent shelf life. I dare say there are other brands you could perhaps get which are similar?

 

Pete

[Corsairfoxfouruncle]

5 minutes ago, PeterB said:

That is rather high - on Amazon over here the Superfine white I am using sells for the equivalent of anything between $6 and $12 whilst the normal rather coarser stuff is a dollar or two cheaper. Of course it is made over here so it will inevitably be dearer in the States I suppose, but a pack makes an awful lot of epoxy putty and has a decent shelf life. I dare say there are other brands you could perhaps get which are similar?

 

Pete

I never thought to try Amazon and online ? Thank you for that moment of clarity. Ive jusr seen it at a couple local spits that sell supplies. 

[PeterB]

If you do get some the trick is to work the two halves into each other really well and if you use a damp finger you can smooth it into shape and save a lot of the sanding - I always find I have made far too much as it goes a long way!

 

Pete

[PeterB]

As I probably mentioned earlier the nacelles and cowlings are featureless. I was going to scribe some cowling flaps but decided to go for a more "3D" effect and stuck on some thin card.

I think I need to rub down the leading edges a bit more but not too bad. I will have to scribe the panel lines and the rear set of main doors. which given my past form could be fun - not! The joints are also going to need a bit more work once I have finished sanding down the rear of the nacelles.

 

The instructions call for 5g of ballast though I suppose that might be taking the weight of the Fw 190 into consideration as well. Anyway I have got 10g in the nose and a bit more can go in the engine cowlings if needed, but I think it may be ok now.

Of course, if I had tried to correct the nose bay I would have been unable to get anything like as much in, but there are limits to just how far I am prepared to go with this rather crude kit.

 

Pete

Edited December 5, 2022 by PeterB

[PeterB]

The parcel from Hannants arrived and I have used the Airwaves set to improve the cockpit - 2 x IP, 2 side consoles and a couple of panels/boxes. I will drop the seats in later once I have decided whether or not I am going to try the seatbelts - I never seem to have much luck with PE ones but I will try annealing them this time before I paint them.

And guess what - time for more Milliput!

The rear and sideways view from the cockpit would be hopeless for a day fighter/bomber but not too bad at night I guess! The shoulder mounted wing means that the engines are far higher than on say a Ju 88G whilst the canopy is a bit reminiscent of that on the Fw 187, though the engines were much lower in that case. In both the 187 and the 154 Tank seems to have sacrificed view for the sake of aerodynamic efficiency and yet on the 190 he provided a good all round vision canopy.

 

And, yes I am going to have to add more weight - when the fuselage is horizontal it is slightly nose heavy but the very long nose leg  throws it out of balance - close but no coconut!

 

 

Pete

Edited December 6, 2022 by PeterB

[Col.]

Nice progress again Pete. Perhaps the extra components still to be added will shift the balance in your favour?

[PeterB]

7 hours ago, Col. said:

Nice progress again Pete. Perhaps the extra components still to be added will shift the balance in your favour?

The canopy, seat, cowling fronts, props, nose leg and doors, and exhaust shrouds will no doubt help a little but there is plenty of room in the front of the nacelles anyway. I am afraid Airfix's suggested 5g is way out unless, as I said before, that was with the 190 on top which on reflection does seem likely! The original PM instructions just said add weight but no amount. Of course the Milliput at the back of the nacelles does not help either.

 

Pete

Edited December 7, 2022 by PeterB

[PeterB]

Getting there slowly.

The rear wing/fuselage join is pretty much finished but the front one needs some work, depending on which canopy I actually use. The kit one is not bad and fits well but the Squadron Vacform one looks a little better. However it is both taller and wider and the instructions say that the wing/fuselage needs building up. Getting close but a bit more work needed.

 

I have seen pics of Ta 154 with at least 2 types of flame dampers on the exhausts – straight tubular ones as provided in the kit, and ones with a more streamlined front, but I have used the kit ones after drilling them out.

 

With regards to radar some prototypes flew with either a single or quadruple Fug 202/212 type array, whilst later ones had the normal Fug 220 Lichtenstein SN2. However the handful that entered service with Stab III/NJG3 were it seems Ta 154A-4/U2 (or maybe not as the designation varies with source) which had an unusual arrangement where the aerials for the Fug 218 Neptun radar were mounted in the wing centre section resulting in a sort of four-poster bed arrangement both above and presumably below the wings. The kit provides some SN2 aerials which are not the worst I have seen but a bit thick, whilst the Airwaves etch comes with some replacements which are thin, fragile, and too 2-dimensional to my mind. I had considered using one of the sets of Master brass aerials I bought years ago, but these days my hands are too shaky to contemplate either soldering or more likely gluing the hair thin dipoles onto the supports tidily, so I am building this as the V7 prototype without aerials instead of the third A-0 preproduction version which Pioneer/PM intended. I don't think I will bother with the Mistel combination after all.

 

Cheers,

 

Pete

 

Edited December 8, 2022 by PeterB

[PeterB]

With luck that is the main filling and sanding just about done.

The canopy is just dropped on for the moment but seems to fit quite well now. Once the RLM 76 is dry I will fit the undercarriage and sort out the weight in the nacelles, before putting the fronts on. Far from perfect but it was never going to be given the nature of the kit.

 

As to accuracy, the span and length match pretty well with Griehl's figures, though Green shows the dimensions to be 1 ft bigger in both cases. The only minor problem I have noticed is that the outer wings bend down slightly when they are supposed to be horizontal but I will have to live with that - if I ever get round to building the original PM kit I will maybe do something about that by sawing through the lower wing and putting a sliver of card in as my efforts at bending it have not worked. As I found with my PM Mirage/Dagger kit in the Falklands War GB a while back, they do need quite a bit of "proper old fashioned modelling" involving scratch building, filler and bits from the spares box, which can actually be quite enjoyable every once in a while.

 

Pete

[Corsairfoxfouruncle]

Cant wait to see the paint on this. Ive always liked the design too bad they were never given a chance vs the Heinkel.