brewerjerry Posted October 10, 2010 Share Posted October 10, 2010 (edited) Hi All, I have one to many italeri 217K kits and suddenly thought do the wings of the 217N kit, fit the fuselage of the 217K, to give a 217M If so are any other modifications needed, to make it an 217M. And would the parts I have left over give a 217J ? Thought it best to ask those who know, before I buy a 217N kit Cheers Jerry Edited October 10, 2010 by brewerjerry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Test Graham Posted October 10, 2010 Share Posted October 10, 2010 I've had these set up to go for some time. IIRC, the kits are identical up to the firewall. All you need to exchange are the engines. Like in all things, it may pay to investigate details such as the aerial fit, but the basic facts are as you state. However, remember that the fuselage tail is anorexic, and you really need to bulk it out/deepen it. This is more significant than the more minor variant changes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heraldcoupe Posted October 10, 2010 Share Posted October 10, 2010 I cross ktted a few of these when I was in my teens. I can't claim the results were great, but the parts swap between kits was absolutely fine. From memory, I produced a 217J and 217M using the K and N kits as a starting point - a pretty waste free pair of conversions. But that was 25+ years ago, and I can't remember much of the detail, Cheers, Bill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brewerjerry Posted October 10, 2010 Author Share Posted October 10, 2010 Hi All, Many thanks for the replies, I will source a 217N kit and then see what I have to do. cheers Jerry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Test Graham Posted October 10, 2010 Share Posted October 10, 2010 Italeri are producing an M this year. Of course, that wouldn't get rid of any unwanted K, but I'm sure I could provide you with enough extras for an extended wing K-2, having the original Zepplin Aircraft and Guano Works bits now redundant after italeri did the K-2.. If what you really want is a J .....I think they do that as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
expositor Posted October 10, 2010 Share Posted October 10, 2010 i've had the same mix and match planned for some time, but i can't get past italeri's too narrow fuselage (from the cockpit back). i did excise the turret fairings on one kit so i could widen the fuselage and still retain the nice turret and canopy, but that's as far as i got. i guess one could use the airfix fuselage, but the detail on the italeri kit is so much nicer. let us know how yours turns out! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Test Graham Posted October 10, 2010 Share Posted October 10, 2010 (edited) What I've seen stated it's only a problem aft of the bombbay. A wedge in the bottom to widen and deepen the belly as it goes aft, with a 40thou (or whatever) insert to widen and deepen the tail. I certainly wouldn't use the flat-bellied Airfix fuselage, but the tail fairing could be used as a guide to the width and depth required. Edited October 10, 2010 by Graham Boak Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
expositor Posted October 10, 2010 Share Posted October 10, 2010 hi gb, are you sure? i tried checking against some plans i have in a couple of books, one of which is a warpaint, and it seems to me (and i don't pretend any expertise other than mechanical drawing and drafting in high school) that the upper fuselage is where italeri's problem is. i had planned to stick a 2mm (?, can't recall exact size) strip from the cockpit opening narrowing towards the horizontal tail. i thought the lower fuselage of the italeri looks fine, but what do i know? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Test Graham Posted October 11, 2010 Share Posted October 11, 2010 I'm basing my comments on the advice given in the modification kits I have, the Airwaves being simply an updating with resin of the earlier kit, and eyeballing the thing. The fuselage tail is definitely too tiny, and the fuselage too shallow around the tailwheel bay. You may well be right about the upperfuselage width at the top. I wouldn't personally place much credibility on Warpaint plans, but if they point you to other views that back up their interpretation, so be it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Touvdal Posted October 11, 2010 Share Posted October 11, 2010 I have taken the time to compare the kit to the drawing, mine is by G.A. Niezgoda, and according to these the kit is quite accurate. As pictures show, I have also measured G, F, E, and the and they are spot on. I have build several of the planes, and the only thing that i change is the enginefront of BMW engine that are quite wrong, I use AIMS replacement. But any how is anybody able to make a accurate drawing of a DO 217, as none exsist, unless there are some originals blueprints in a archive somewhere. cheers Jes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Test Graham Posted October 11, 2010 Share Posted October 11, 2010 Even those plans show shallowness under the tail, despite being somewhat undersize on length (top view) and significantly so on span (lower view). The undersize on the tail would be more noticeably if the kit was placed to line up the tailplane, and more so again if the scale matched the model. I don't know how accurate available plans are of the aircraft. That is why paying attention attention to photographs is essential: that the kit's tail is undersized is visible to the eye but the exact correction is up to the modeller. I'm happy with the correction provided with the K-2 conversion sets, which (IIRC) is fairly compatible with the cross-section provided in the Airfix kit (although the part itself is too simple). You are quite right about the engines fronts, although as the thread started by dealing with the M, it is perhaps understandable that we missed it until now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Touvdal Posted October 11, 2010 Share Posted October 11, 2010 I can not see any undersizing cheers Jes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
popeye Posted October 11, 2010 Share Posted October 11, 2010 (edited) Regarding the fuselage of the Italeri 217's I have studied plans and modelling articles for years and would not recommend relaying too much on drawings. Maybe you will not agree, but the plans in Warpaint # 27 by H. Cance for me seem to best do the portly aircraft justice. By widening and heightening the tail from midwing position to the rear, replacing the engine fronts, spinners and the "bumps" on the sides of the BMW's a decent representation is possible. Maybe you would like to check here: http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.p...mp;#entry586763 A full build article can be found on www.flugzeugforum.de in German - the pics may suffice but you will have to register to be able to see the pics. And except for a 217 N-2 (almost) all variants can be built by just switching wings. Good modelling, popeye Edited October 11, 2010 by popeye Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Test Graham Posted October 11, 2010 Share Posted October 11, 2010 I can not see any undersizingcheers Jes Go back to your first picture. Look at the fuselage at the leading edge of the tailplane. There is a clear difference in depth between the kit and the plan - and the plan is undersized, as you can see if you look at the overall length. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
expositor Posted October 11, 2010 Share Posted October 11, 2010 hello gb, touvdal, and popeye, nice discussion! gb, you're right about warpaint, just look how far off their beaufighter plans are; the only 1/72 scale drawings in there are at the end of the book with those two fuselage cut-aways; however, i think, like popeye, that the do-217 plans are spot on. i thought about surgery for the rear fuselage, but left it at possibly widening the tail empenage and forgetting about the rear shallowness. i also thought, short of replacements, the engines were good enough for a would-be, wanna-be kit basher like me, who does a lot of cutting, and very little gluing.... touvdal, i originally did as you, eyeing the wing-fuselage section over the plans; but after taking a scale rule and measuring the plans from one wing attachment point to the other, which matches the kit fuselage, you'll see that it is 6 scale inches, or two actual mm's narrow, carried as gb mentioned, most of the way to the tail. as a matter of fact, i have that polish book you have with the plans you mentioned; look in the modeler's section, they have a drawing with a 2mm strip in the italeri fuselage section, which is what i intend to emulate. it's up to you whether you accept the kit as is, noone here, i'm sure, would say you're wrong. who knows, maybe i'm all wet putting stock in the warpaint plans. anyway, the kit turns out nice as is. one of the great modelers in the luftwaffe experten forum did a very nice torpedo bomber version of the 217 with a nicely detailed cockpit and without any surgery. it really is a nicely done model, you might like taking a look there. thanks gents, cheerio! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brewerjerry Posted October 12, 2010 Author Share Posted October 12, 2010 Hi All, Thanks for the info/comments. I often wonder how people draw plans when no aircraft still exists, and in this case also where all the drawings etc, were destroyed when the dornier factory was bombed. I know some D)-217 manuals have surfaced recently. cheers Jerry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Test Graham Posted October 12, 2010 Share Posted October 12, 2010 Quite often people draw plans where none exist, otherwise the stock of subjects available would be greatly diminished. We in the hobby owe a great deal to those who have laboured on our behalf: which is not the same thing as taking any plan for granted, even the great A.L. Bentley has been known to blink. I have a particular interest in the Ar240, which has suffered badly from "speculative" plans in the past, and the details of all variants are even now not clear - but they do provide starting points for discussions! I second (third? whatever) the comments about the Italeri Dorniers being good basic kits and a fine source for variants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
popeye Posted October 12, 2010 Share Posted October 12, 2010 (edited) If I'm not wrong there is a British adage: Beauty ( and proportions ) is in the eyes of the beholder. Nice models can be realised from those "ancient" Italeri kits just out of the box with some attention to detail. But if you want a model looking "like the real thing" in pictures, you will have to improve the skinny tail. In fact, this is not as complicated as it may seem, only a bit time consuming. Increase the width of the fuselage with plasticard, starting with 0.4 mm at the nose (for K & M's behind the clear parts) to 2mm at the tail, at the same time increase the top of the fuselage also progressively 2 mm at the tail, tapering out behind the cockpit, set the empennage 2 mm higher, build up the top of the fuselage with plasticard or putty accordingly, sand to shape, keeping the geometry of the cross section tapering out to the rear and reshape the tail cone to its characteristic profile. For 217 with BMW's - the kit parts are lacking 1 mm in diameter but not much can be done as the LG gondolas are also a bit undersize. AIMS engine fronts and spinners are a big improvement, and the bulges on the sides should also be enlarged. Wheels need a shim of some 0.5 mm - makes a visible difference. Internal and other detail to your taste and you arrive at a 217 that looks pretty realistic. popeye Edited October 12, 2010 by popeye Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Touvdal Posted October 12, 2010 Share Posted October 12, 2010 I have checket against the Warpaint drawing and according to that the fuselage is to thin. But who notices that on the model, here is mine recent build 217 straight from the box only new enginefronts, and the heaviely modifed, notice the difference if you did not know ?? I acknowlegde the great effort that popeye has put info this model, and done an exelent job. I think very well illustrates the different approces we have to modelling, but all though different still gives 2 nice results. cheers Jes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
popeye Posted October 12, 2010 Share Posted October 12, 2010 Jes - that's a mighty fine example of another 217 E - congrats and you are absolutely right - especially from above there is no big difference visible. It's from the side and at eye level that I was not content with the look of an unmodified Italeri OOB build. And - I was wondering if I was able to rise to the challenge of improving that impression and it was fun cutting, glueing, filling and sanding ..... regards, Rolf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
expositor Posted October 12, 2010 Share Posted October 12, 2010 beautiful models guys!!! i just hope mine turns out half that good; but since i've yet to finish anything.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
popeye Posted October 12, 2010 Share Posted October 12, 2010 i've had the same mix and match planned for some time, but i can't get past italeri's too narrow fuselage (from the cockpit back). i did excise the turret fairings on one kit so i could widen the fuselage and still retain the nice turret and canopy, but that's as far as i got. i guess one could use the airfix fuselage, but the detail on the italeri kit is so much nicer. let us know how yours turns out! "Expositor" you need not "excise" the turret fairing even if you start with 0.4 mm plastic strips from the nose - there will only be a little bit more room for the "cupola". just progressively add more and/or thicker sheet from there to the tail to obtain a wedge 2mm wide at the tail. What's more - those 0.4 mm will aid in a better fit of the canopy - just fair in the turret fairing sides. good luck, popeye Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Touvdal Posted October 14, 2010 Share Posted October 14, 2010 I got inspired by this, had these 2 laying started some time ago on the engine swaap deal. So I will finish them of as a N-2 and M-1 cheers Jes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brewerjerry Posted October 15, 2010 Author Share Posted October 15, 2010 Hi All, Curiosity geting to me again... italeri made a 217E..... would this mated to the 217 N give me the 217 H ? cheers Jerry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Touvdal Posted October 15, 2010 Share Posted October 15, 2010 It is the same basic kit, so fully enterchangeable cheers Jes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now