Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

This will probably be the slowest WIP but here we go. My favorite all time aircraft is the F4U Corsair. My favorite subtype is the F4U-4. IMO it hasn't been  properly kitted yet in 48th scale. The closest thing we have to a modern kit of it is the Hobbyboss. This kit like many HB kits has a few glaringly wrong inaccuracies. I'm gonna try to improve them as I build my first HB kit. 

 

The most obvious and heinous inaccuracy for me is the shape of the cowling. Some months ago I started to work on improving it. Note I didn't say correcting it. There's too many dimensional and shape issues that would need to be fixed with the fuselage before one could think about making a "correct" cowling. Here's what I've done and where I'm at with my cowling.

20240304_075942

 

20240304_090554

20240304_100549

53573660630_c5e49819a8_b.jpg

54035111967_5179fb5737_b.jpg

54036423775_b03861e60a_b.jpg

The kit cowling is on the right, my cowling is on the left. It would have been much easier if you graft a Hasegawa cowling on but the Hobbyboss is too round and shallow. The Hasegawa has a better overall shape and maybe by a tad tall since the rest of the fuselage is too deep. I'm just letting you know I looked at that possibility. 

 

Right now my cowling is only a rough shape master. I'll have to make a two piece mold of it and cast a resin copy to scribe the surface detail into. I'll make mold of that detailed master and cast another one for this project. I haven't created resin molds in some time so it'll involve some considerable financial and time investments. I decided i didn't want to do all that until the rest of the model was completed satisfactorily to the point the cowling is needed. I bin way too many kits and this is my first go at this particular kit.

 

I'll stop here because this is rehashing old work that some people have already seen plus you're probably sleeping if you haven't jumped ship already. When I come back I'll be concentrating on building the rest of the kit. 

 

Be well 

Ron 

 

 

 

Edited by Mycapt65
  • Like 5
Posted

Now I'm working on the major parts that may be problematic. This way I don't spend more time on the cowling if I bin the kit.

 

This is my first Hobbyboss kit so I'd like to share my impressions and you let me know if it matches yours. The first thing I noticed was a very pebbly surface on some of the parts. The second thing I noticed is how soft the plastic is. It reminds of old AMT kits. I kinda like it. 

 

Next is the parts fit and engineering. I'm mostly impresses at how the fit is in typically terrible spots like gun hatches and the oil cooler inlets. The fit was excellent. The wheel wells boxed in perfectly. Making contact with top and bottom. It made it solid as a rock.

 

Now what I don't understand is in critical areas larger like the wing join the outer wing bulkhead holds the wing halves from closing to the right width. You'll see the gap at the rear of both outer wings is the same as the difference between the inner and outer wing thickness.

20241004_135329 20241004_135322

 

 

I blame me not enough test fitting. Everything else fit so well I more or less trusted the wings would fit as per directions. 

20241004_135355

 

If you build this kit I'd probably recommend gluing the outer wing halves together first.  Then add the outer wing bulkheads with adjustments to them. The outer wings glue to a lug attched to the inner wing. The lugs needed a lot of fettling to close the gap between the wings.

20241004_134648

I couldn't close the gap on the starboard underside. I filled it with black CA and sprinkled Talc on it. I'll have to rescribe the seam. With the difference in wing thickness it'll never be pretty. The upper wing fold creases aren't great either. Gloss sea blue wont hide much so I'm not real happy about the fit of the wings. I could blend the upper wing fit better with more aggressive sanding but I already lost a lot detail depth from sanding the pebbles down.

20241004_171445

In hindsight at the very least, I'd consider scrapping the inner wing bulkhead and lug. They caused nothing but problems. I might even look into attaching the outer and inner wings to each other before mating tops to bottoms.

 

If you're considering this kit just know that the wing folds at total wrong angles. Yes plural. Its pretty obvious to Corsair fans. Speaking of glaring inaccuracies the front gear doors and their opening are completely wrong shaped. Its a pretty simple fix to trace some doors from the spares box into the lower wing and open them to a correct size and shape. Then use those doors later.

 

I also noticed sink marks in the inner wing uppers. I'm too lazy to replace the details lost to fill them in.

 

I'll close in saying as a modeler this kit confuses me emotionally. The tough fitting stuff they get amazingly right. The bigger easier stuff needs normal patience and modeling skills to fit right. Then the big let down of a list of horribly inaccurate obvious features and shapes. It's like they more important something is the more they got it wrong. 

 

Until next time 

  • Like 3
Posted
4 minutes ago, Mycapt65 said:

I'll close in saying as a modeler this kit confuses me emotionally. The tough fitting stuff they get amazingly right. The bigger easier stuff needs normal patience and modeling skills to fit right. Then the big let down of a list of horribly inaccurate obvious features and shapes. It's like they more important something is the more they got it wrong. 

Interesting work going on Ron.

 

Re Hobby Boss and Trumpeter,  they share the same factory building and umbrella company (who also have I Love Kit) and you frequently see one a kit by one company done by the other in a different scale. (eg Trumpeter do a 1/16th T-34 with a full interior, and HB do a 1/48 th T-34 with a full interior...) 

They are usually well engineered kits,  but the accuracy is hit and miss, if they get the right info, you get an accurate kit,  but who does the research varies, and they don't ask (well, in 2010 a Trumpeter employee posted on here asking for input,  which they got and never used...)  

 

With the right info, you get decent kits, their 1/48th  Fw-190D and Me 262 families are well thought of, I've not seen any major complaints about them.

 

They have a very poor track record on British subjects in 1/48th (Vampire, Spiteful, DH Hornet, Defiant, Firefly etc) are usually struck with some major shape issues and fantasy detailing. And worthless decals.

 

Some Corsair comedy, the first issues of their F4U-4 kits came with the FAA clipped wing tips, and they have a Corsair III kit, which is their F4U-4 with markings for FAA Mk.III Corsairs...

 

When I compared the HB F4U-4 with a Tamiya F4U-1 (which I have assumed to be basically accurate as I have never seen anyone moan about it) I didn't spot any glaring differences,  but but this was a while back.

 

I got interested in F4U-4 when I had a go at trying to fix the Academy kit, and when  got the Hasegawa -4 was surprised to find that Academy had only added a too wide upper spine to the problems.

 

Sadly at present probably the most accurate way is to add a new nose onto the Tamiya F4U-1 kit.    My Corsair bits box is buried at present, I ended up with a Tamiya kit with trashed lower wing centre section,  (someone had tried fitting resin wheel wells and made a mess) and also a entire fuselage from someone who used the wings in "what if", and I have the CMK resin conversion as well as a couple of Academy.... 

I think it's possible to fix the Academy, but requires a load of careful cutting,  though IIRC from a comparison pic posted up on Hyperscale by Al Grimm years ago, Academy had made the best go at the front cowling shape.

33 minutes ago, Mycapt65 said:

I might even look into attaching the outer and inner wings to each other before mating tops to bottoms.

Probably the best solution, as you can work on both sides, so ensuring that the outer parts line up.

34 minutes ago, Mycapt65 said:

Speaking of glaring inaccuracies the front gear doors and their opening are completely wrong shaped. Its a pretty simple fix to trace some doors from the spares box into the lower wing and open them to a correct size and shape. Then use those doors later.

I think Quickboost do resin items for the Tamiya kit which would work for those not want tin scratch build new ones.

 

I don't know if this is of any interest, 

49996357017_72c738d91d_b.jpg50620055 by losethekibble, on Flickr

Top blue wing Academy

Middle - Hasegawa F4U-7 (their Fu_5/AU-1/-7 kit have the same wing) Hobby Boss , CMK resin conversion

lower Tamiya F4U-1 , Hasegawa F4U-4

 

I was trying to work out who had the best lower contours,  its not seen on photos, this does the show shapes pretty well

 

49979158071_7cf75648b1_b.jpg

 

perhaps of use? 

 

On 01/10/2024 at 21:47, Mycapt65 said:

It would have been much easier if you graft a Hasegawa cowling on but the Hobbyboss is too round and shallow. The Hasegawa has a better overall shape and maybe by a tad tall since the rest of the fuselage is too deep.

 

for those interested,  as I mentioned above, the Academy -4 kit is basically a clone of the Hasegawa -4 kit,  this is the Academy kit fuselage, the balc section is the part that needs to be removed, and if you look down from that line on the rear fuselage you can see stress marks, this is from scoring the fuselage internally and then bending to correct the shape, the rear seat bulkhead has a egg shape at the lower part, there is an image in Details anjd Scale of a production line without the rear fuselage attached which shows the shape really well, the Tamiya -1 has the right shape.

50069172858_a3e95cca25_b.jpgIMG_0603 by losethekibble, on Flickr

 

What took me ages to work out was I needed to take a similar slice out of the cowling flap adjacent to the that black line and then the wing sat in the right place.

 

Reminds me,  True Details did a replacement cowl for the HB kit?  Or is that now unavailable, or not good enough?

 

One last point, if you have a Tamiya P-47, they have several propeller types in all boxings, the late D model type is AFAIK the same as used on the F4U-4

 

I hope this is not too much clutter, can edit if so,  but I may help readers to see the problems with the other 'better' -4 kits available.

 

I was also surprised to find out a large number of F4U-4's were used late WW2 in the Pacific,  though photos are quite rare (or rarely published) and they color schemes are basically overall Gloss Sea Blue with carrier markings and aircraft numbers.

 

cheers

T

 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Love 1
Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, Troy Smith said:

Interesting work going on Ron.

 

Re Hobby Boss and Trumpeter,  they share the same factory building and umbrella company (who also have I Love Kit) and you frequently see one a kit by one company done by the other in a different scale. (eg Trumpeter do a 1/16th T-34 with a full interior, and HB do a 1/48 th T-34 with a full interior...) 

They are usually well engineered kits,  but the accuracy is hit and miss, if they get the right info, you get an accurate kit,  but who does the research varies, and they don't ask (well, in 2010 a Trumpeter employee posted on here asking for input,  which they got and never used...)  

 

With the right info, you get decent kits, their 1/48th  Fw-190D and Me 262 families are well thought of, I've not seen any major complaints about them.

 

They have a very poor track record on British subjects in 1/48th (Vampire, Spiteful, DH Hornet, Defiant, Firefly etc) are usually struck with some major shape issues and fantasy detailing. And worthless decals.

 

Some Corsair comedy, the first issues of their F4U-4 kits came with the FAA clipped wing tips, and they have a Corsair III kit, which is their F4U-4 with markings for FAA Mk.III Corsairs...

 

When I compared the HB F4U-4 with a Tamiya F4U-1 (which I have assumed to be basically accurate as I have never seen anyone moan about it) I didn't spot any glaring differences,  but but this was a while back.

 

I got interested in F4U-4 when I had a go at trying to fix the Academy kit, and when  got the Hasegawa -4 was surprised to find that Academy had only added a too wide upper spine to the problems.

 

Sadly at present probably the most accurate way is to add a new nose onto the Tamiya F4U-1 kit.    My Corsair bits box is buried at present, I ended up with a Tamiya kit with trashed lower wing centre section,  (someone had tried fitting resin wheel wells and made a mess) and also a entire fuselage from someone who used the wings in "what if", and I have the CMK resin conversion as well as a couple of Academy.... 

I think it's possible to fix the Academy, but requires a load of careful cutting,  though IIRC from a comparison pic posted up on Hyperscale by Al Grimm years ago, Academy had made the best go at the front cowling shape.

Probably the best solution, as you can work on both sides, so ensuring that the outer parts line up.

I think Quickboost do resin items for the Tamiya kit which would work for those not want tin scratch build new ones.

 

I don't know if this is of any interest, 

49996357017_72c738d91d_b.jpg50620055 by losethekibble, on Flickr

Top blue wing Academy

Middle - Hasegawa F4U-7 (their Fu_5/AU-1/-7 kit have the same wing) Hobby Boss , CMK resin conversion

lower Tamiya F4U-1 , Hasegawa F4U-4

 

I was trying to work out who had the best lower contours,  its not seen on photos, this does the show shapes pretty well

 

49979158071_7cf75648b1_b.jpg

 

perhaps of use? 

 

 

for those interested,  as I mentioned above, the Academy -4 kit is basically a clone of the Hasegawa -4 kit,  this is the Academy kit fuselage, the balc section is the part that needs to be removed, and if you look down from that line on the rear fuselage you can see stress marks, this is from scoring the fuselage internally and then bending to correct the shape, the rear seat bulkhead has a egg shape at the lower part, there is an image in Details anjd Scale of a production line without the rear fuselage attached which shows the shape really well, the Tamiya -1 has the right shape.

50069172858_a3e95cca25_b.jpgIMG_0603 by losethekibble, on Flickr

 

What took me ages to work out was I needed to take a similar slice out of the cowling flap adjacent to the that black line and then the wing sat in the right place.

 

Reminds me,  True Details did a replacement cowl for the HB kit?  Or is that now unavailable, or not good enough?

 

One last point, if you have a Tamiya P-47, they have several propeller types in all boxings, the late D model type is AFAIK the same as used on the F4U-4

 

I hope this is not too much clutter, can edit if so,  but I may help readers to see the problems with the other 'better' -4 kits available.

 

I was also surprised to find out a large number of F4U-4's were used late WW2 in the Pacific,  though photos are quite rare (or rarely published) and they color schemes are basically overall Gloss Sea Blue with carrier markings and aircraft numbers.

 

cheers

T

 

 

 

Thanks Troy, 

All good information. 

We've discussed kit bashing a -4 some time ago. I've tired it a few ways. Failed miserably and that's left me a pile of partial different corsair kits. 

 

I need to learn how to section out quotes like you do to respond things properly. But bottom line Tamiya has the early corsairs done well, Hasegawa does the later corsairs fairly well.  The -4 is the cross over model between the generations. It has some features of both early and late plus distinctive features entirely of its own. Thus it's hard to incorporate into a line of kits. I'm not sure we'll ever see a good one done for those reasons. 

 

IMO the HB kit is a travesty. Shape wise. I'd sooner live with Hasegawa's deep fuselage than HB's hose nose -4. I was hoping i could improve the cowling and make a half decent -4. I've already sunk a lot of work in improving the cowling for this kit but it still won't look right as the cross section is entirely too round. The real -4 has a taller more oblong shape to house the ducting. The opening of my cowling is more accurate than anything out there but that's where it stops. I suspect this kit will be binned shortly along with my cowling work. 

 

I'll probably go back to my last kitbash someday. I rescribed and added fabric to a Hasegawa -5 wing and have it fitted to a Hasegawa -4 fuselage to make a better -4B

53469847622_0193992cac_b.jpg

 

I just boned rescribing the fuselage. Man I hate scribing. If it's get it right I'll still have to live with the deep fuselage. 

53471171055_df6fdc4ddd_b.jpg

 

 

53469847632_309b948222_b.jpg

 

FWIW I also tried using the aft fuselage section of the Hasegswa -5 to correct the depth but couldn't lower the -5 cockpit. Because of unforgiven clear parts fit.

2023-02-06_01-23-56 20230211_114339

 

 

These involved projects quickly become unenjoyable to me. They  burn me out and send me screaming back to easier kits. I do enjoy our conversations about them though. It's good to know someone has similar interest and I'm not the only weirdo out there. Maybe I should take a break from this and slam that Hurricane together? 

 

Have a great day 

Ron 

 

Edited by Mycapt65
  • Like 1
Posted
On 10/4/2024 at 5:09 PM, Troy Smith said:

Interesting work going on Ron.

 

Re Hobby Boss and Trumpeter,  they share the same factory building and umbrella company (who also have I Love Kit) and you frequently see one a kit by one company done by the other in a different scale. (eg Trumpeter do a 1/16th T-34 with a full interior, and HB do a 1/48 th T-34 with a full interior...) 

They are usually well engineered kits,  but the accuracy is hit and miss, if they get the right info, you get an accurate kit,  but who does the research varies, and they don't ask (well, in 2010 a Trumpeter employee posted on here asking for input,  which they got and never used...)  

 

With the right info, you get decent kits, their 1/48th  Fw-190D and Me 262 families are well thought of, I've not seen any major complaints about them.

 

They have a very poor track record on British subjects in 1/48th (Vampire, Spiteful, DH Hornet, Defiant, Firefly etc) are usually struck with some major shape issues and fantasy detailing. And worthless decals.

 

Some Corsair comedy, the first issues of their F4U-4 kits came with the FAA clipped wing tips, and they have a Corsair III kit, which is their F4U-4 with markings for FAA Mk.III Corsairs...

 

When I compared the HB F4U-4 with a Tamiya F4U-1 (which I have assumed to be basically accurate as I have never seen anyone moan about it) I didn't spot any glaring differences,  but but this was a while back.

 

I got interested in F4U-4 when I had a go at trying to fix the Academy kit, and when  got the Hasegawa -4 was surprised to find that Academy had only added a too wide upper spine to the problems.

 

Sadly at present probably the most accurate way is to add a new nose onto the Tamiya F4U-1 kit.    My Corsair bits box is buried at present, I ended up with a Tamiya kit with trashed lower wing centre section,  (someone had tried fitting resin wheel wells and made a mess) and also a entire fuselage from someone who used the wings in "what if", and I have the CMK resin conversion as well as a couple of Academy.... 

I think it's possible to fix the Academy, but requires a load of careful cutting,  though IIRC from a comparison pic posted up on Hyperscale by Al Grimm years ago, Academy had made the best go at the front cowling shape.

Probably the best solution, as you can work on both sides, so ensuring that the outer parts line up.

I think Quickboost do resin items for the Tamiya kit which would work for those not want tin scratch build new ones.

 

I don't know if this is of any interest, 

49996357017_72c738d91d_b.jpg50620055 by losethekibble, on Flickr

Top blue wing Academy

Middle - Hasegawa F4U-7 (their Fu_5/AU-1/-7 kit have the same wing) Hobby Boss , CMK resin conversion

lower Tamiya F4U-1 , Hasegawa F4U-4

 

I was trying to work out who had the best lower contours,  its not seen on photos, this does the show shapes pretty well

 

49979158071_7cf75648b1_b.jpg

 

perhaps of use? 

 

 

for those interested,  as I mentioned above, the Academy -4 kit is basically a clone of the Hasegawa -4 kit,  this is the Academy kit fuselage, the balc section is the part that needs to be removed, and if you look down from that line on the rear fuselage you can see stress marks, this is from scoring the fuselage internally and then bending to correct the shape, the rear seat bulkhead has a egg shape at the lower part, there is an image in Details anjd Scale of a production line without the rear fuselage attached which shows the shape really well, the Tamiya -1 has the right shape.

50069172858_a3e95cca25_b.jpgIMG_0603 by losethekibble, on Flickr

 

What took me ages to work out was I needed to take a similar slice out of the cowling flap adjacent to the that black line and then the wing sat in the right place.

 

Reminds me,  True Details did a replacement cowl for the HB kit?  Or is that now unavailable, or not good enough?

 

One last point, if you have a Tamiya P-47, they have several propeller types in all boxings, the late D model type is AFAIK the same as used on the F4U-4

 

I hope this is not too much clutter, can edit if so,  but I may help readers to see the problems with the other 'better' -4 kits available.

 

I was also surprised to find out a large number of F4U-4's were used late WW2 in the Pacific,  though photos are quite rare (or rarely published) and they color schemes are basically overall Gloss Sea Blue with carrier markings and aircraft numbers.

 

cheers

T

 

 

 

Interestingly, there were several Navy Air Groups working up stateside, still sporting the rather nice "G-Symbols" on their -4s. As for the Marine -4s seen on Okinawa...rather boring, to be honest.

Posted
On 05/10/2024 at 11:49, Mycapt65 said:

I need to learn how to section out quotes like you do to respond things properly.

either use the 'quote'  button, or highlight text, you should get a 'quote selection' 

to break blocks of text,  use the enter key,  and the if you go up a line, and then enter again, it should break the quote box into two

On 05/10/2024 at 11:49, Mycapt65 said:

But bottom line Tamiya has the early corsairs done well, Hasegawa does the later corsairs fairly well.  The -4 is the cross over model between the generations. It has some features of both early and late plus distinctive features entirely of its own. Thus it's hard to incorporate into a line of kits. I'm not sure we'll ever see a good one done for those reasons. 

Hmm, we have had a new F4U-1 from Magic Factory,  it's possible someone else will look at a Corsair family, or just spot the gap in market.

On 05/10/2024 at 11:49, Mycapt65 said:

I just boned rescribing the fuselage. Man I hate scribing. If it's get it right I'll still have to live with the deep fuselage. 

This is why I started with the Academy,  well, I started with the Academy as it so vilified I was curious to see if it could be improved,  and I started with the spine which seemed to be the major problem,  I took out about 1 mm from each side,  but was careful to work in the fin offset, by taking material from one fin side, but not the other.

This was fairly easy,  but when I tried fitting the Tamiya seat bulkhead, I found the fuselage too deep and square.

At this stage I thought it was another Academy goof, and got a Hase F4U-4,  as I'd read overa and over it was basic but well shaped, and that's when I found out that the Hase was the same except for the overwide spine which was a bit of a surprise.

 

I found fixing the fuselage once I could see the problem was not that hard, as it was about removing plastic and some bending to reshape, the bit that foxed me was the nose, until I worked out the cowl flap by the wing root was also too deep.

What I can't clearly recall is how this affected the cowl ring.

I was also picked up the CMK set

https://modelingmadness.com/others/conversions/petersoncmk4064.htm

 

which having a Tamiya F4U-1 with ruined lower wing centre section was a possible, though they miss the need for a new engine front..... 

 

Now where is that Corsair box?

indy1.jpg

 

 

On 05/10/2024 at 11:49, Mycapt65 said:

I do enjoy our conversations about them though.

Excellent.   I do as well,

On 05/10/2024 at 11:49, Mycapt65 said:

 

It's good to know someone has similar interest and I'm not the only weirdo out there.

Ah hahahaha....   That's why I'm here, place is full of them! 

 

I'd need to find my Corsair box to add more useful information about specific kit ideas and combinations,  but looking through previous threads on this, it reminded me their is no decent 72nd F4U-4 either,  so it maybe the sort of project that Miniart or Clear Prop may find worthwhile as could be done it two scales.

 

DavidH posting made me dig out some previous threads which have some interesting bits in them.

 

8 hours ago, David H said:

Interestingly, there were several Navy Air Groups working up stateside, still sporting the rather nice "G-Symbols" on their -4s. As for the Marine -4s seen on Okinawa...rather boring, to be honest.

 

https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/234987880-f4u-4-corsair-use-in-ww2-are-photos-that-rare/

 

 

 

This from @EwenS  is worth adding

 

 

My notes indicate that the 3 USMC squadrons in MAG14 (VMF-212, 222, 223) traded in their well worn F4U-1 for brand new F4U-4 aircraft while on Samar in the Philippines on 15 May 1945. They then moved to Okinawa at the beginning of June 1945, flying their first CAP operation on 10 June and claiming their first kill there the next day.

 

The USN squadrons began receiving them in Feb 1945 initially as odd aircraft in squadrons working up. The first fully equipped squadron seems to be VBF89 on Antietam. By 4 Aug 1945 there were 5 squadrons with them on board 4 Essex class carriers in the Pacific Fleet which had all seen combat. Data is from official USN squadron aircraft returns accurate to with 7-10 days allowing for compiling the data.

 

Hancock VBF6 (on board from July 1945)

Intrepid VF10 & VBF 10 (on board from June 1945)

Wasp VBF86 (on board from July 1945)

Lexington VBF94 (on board from May 1945)

 

Plus another two carriers in the final stages of working up

 

Antietam VBF89 (possibly the first USN unit to receive them swapping F4U-1 for F4U-4 late Feb/Early March 1945 while still working up in the Atlantic)

Boxer VBF93

 

Plus VBF14, VBF19 (destined for Hornet in Sept), VBF80, VBF84, VBF95 all working up with a mix of F4U-1 & -4 aircraft.

 

Over in the Atlantic VBF3, VBF20, VF-75A & B (destined for the FD Roosevelt), VBF150, VBF152, VBF153 were fully equipped and working up while VF74B & VBF74B (destined for the Midway) had a mix of F4U-1 & -4.

 

It seems units were originally equipped with F4U-1 aircraft and then switched to the new model before embarking in carriers bound for the front line. Each USN squadron would have had approx 36 aircraft.

 

https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235022592-f4u-4-use-in-wwii/

 

https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235013262-ken-walsh-f4u-4markings/

 

Walsh's Corsair should have the round windscreen according to my references.  BuNos 81759 to 81778 and then any -4 after 81829 had the flat windscreens.  Walsh's -4 in Okinawa was 80879, therefore round windscreen and canopy as late -1D

 

Of note as if on a kit bash, it maybe easier to find a F4U-1D canopy.

 

and

https://tailspintopics.blogspot.com/2014/03/f4u-4-modelers-notes.html

 

some wartime pics 

5e93e1ccafb1b7ce9c5be41316811275.jpg

 

  F4U-4 of VBF-86 on US Wasp summer 1945.  

 

this is said to be VF-89,  working up in the US from the background.

Vought-F4U-4-Corsair-VF-89-White-41-01.j

 

these are listed as AU-1, which does not make sense

Vought-AU-1-Corsair-VBF-93-White-38-52-4

 

"Vought AU 1 Corsair VBF 93 White 38 52 40-and 41-over Marpi Point Airfield late 1945"  but VBF93 is listed as being on Boxer with  F4U-4's 

 

useful guide to 1945 USN markings

http://www.pmcn.de/English/USN Markings III/USN Markings III.htm

 

http://www.pmcn.de/ABC/CVE-Markings/CVE-Markings.htm

though the English page link does not work.

 

HTH

  • Love 1

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...