Jump to content

Trumpeters 1/48th C-47A SkyTrain


Johnny Red

Recommended Posts

  • 2 months later...

They will be criticised if they don't change the cowlings - they look like nothing ever on a C-47.

I believe that the amount the engine gearbox sticks out of the cowling varies between the WW2 aircraft -not very much- and the later (e.g. Vietnam) examples -rather more. I've no idea which is correct in this case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You got that right Graham. Bloody awful nacelles, cowl and engine. And what is with the intakes? Cannot remember it extending on to the cowl. About that added piping. Russian influence? Not going to be able to do a WW-2 bird. Looks like they did copy a later model C-47. Probably something the Chi-Coms bagged in Viet Nam. Then there are the little pits all over the model. On the C-47 they are just wrong. Should look more like the 1/48 Tamiya Wildcat

All things considered the Monogram is still a great kit. You even get, or use to get, paratroopers.

But it is from Trumpeter and so we will sing its praises regardless of cost or general appearance.

_c47.jpg

C-47bw.jpg

c-47-skytrains.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It does look to be a winner, refined over the Monogram offering. What'll it go for 50-60 quid??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if we could go back to the old system of waiting for a kit to appear before saying it is the greatest thing since sliced bread, sex, pubs you could still smoke in, the internet, Margaret Thatcher, Airfix, Princess Diana, and so on and so forth.

England swings like a pendulum do, and so do observations on new kits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, but given that good clear photographs have been shown of the parts and even made-up example(s), it is possible to pass some comments. And it certainly does look good, bar some details. As for being the greatest thing since, well, anything, in the end it is just another plastic kit. That kind of over-exaggeration is going to happen before and after release. Some people just think that way. I blamez the meedeea, meself.......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They will be criticised if they don't change the cowlings - they look like nothing ever on a C-47.

I believe that the amount the engine gearbox sticks out of the cowling varies between the WW2 aircraft -not very much- and the later (e.g. Vietnam) examples -rather more. I've no idea which is correct in this case.

I just had a look through my DC3 / C-47 refs and only the early prewar DC 3s and DSTs had cylindrical cowlings but they were never fitted with a long intake. None of the C-47s had the front of the crankcase sticking out beyond the front face of the cowling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just had a look through my DC3 / C-47 refs and only the early prewar DC 3s and DSTs had cylindrical cowlings but they were never fitted with a long intake. None of the C-47s had the front of the crankcase sticking out beyond the front face of the cowling.

All aircraft with the Wright Cyclone had cylindrical cowlings, but they were larger in diameter. I can never remember which were DC-3s and which DC-3As. Li 2s had them, too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

For some answers, check out this link.

http://www.richard-seaman.com/Aircraft/Air...tWw2/index.html

There is a photo of a late C-47, (actually an AC-47) which quite clearly shows the long intake and the propellor gearboxes extending ahead of the cowlings. However, it doesn't have the cylindrical cowlings, but the more bulged ones more typical of the later, larger engined versions, most of which were C-47's.

There are a huge number of variations in the engine installations and intakes across an enormous production run. There are as many different configurations of aerials and there are differences in the termination of the tailcone, with almost all DC3 builds tapering to a point, whilst C-47's are truncated. It seems to me that Trumpeter's test shots shows that they have been confused by the sheer variety of combinations and created something of a hybrid, but certainly nothing that a competent modeller can't fix.

With regard to rivets, many early DC3's were built using semi-raised type visible in the photo's above. This was carried over to the early C-47, as they are easier to set than countersunk, or flush, rivets. This speeds up production.

Some late pre-war DC3's were flush rivetted mainly for cosmetic reasons. After the war, the final production types were a mixture, as flush rivetting was phased back in. Very similar to Spitfire production, really. The vast majority, however, had raised rivets.

For my money, this is a welcome addition to what's available and, after all, if it looks like a C-47...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

The Trumpy C-47A is due in the states in July at $149.95/Approx £75 (on Cybermodeler's news) Link http://www.cybermodeler.com/news/news080311a.shtml

A bit too pricey for me.

Paul Harrison

Edited by GreenDragon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're right there Gary, we always get stiffed on prices in Britain. I'll probably get the Revell-Monogram Spooky instead.

I was going to get the Minicraft C-130 kit until I saw the UK price was only a couple of quid cheaper than a 1/72nd one!

Paul Harrison

Edited by GreenDragon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well done everyone, another much-requested kit written off before it's even in the shops.

Bravo!

True :rofl:

I'm more concerned about the big bald patches on the main wheel of the real aircraft back on page 1 of the thread - very 1st pic!!! I'd have had my bottom kicked for that, should've been changed days ago!!!!

Eng

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well done everyone, another much-requested kit written off before it's even in the shops.

:clap2: :clap2: :clap2: :clap2: :clap2:

Bravo!

Oh you 'aint seen nothing yet, its daring to trump (sic) the Monogram kit, that's like mugging grandma and stealing her pies - the torches will be primed before it reaches the shops!

:analintruder:

My first impression from the photos are that it looks superb - as for the rivets, ok, some of them should be raised rather than recessed, but then most aircraft don't have recessed panel lines either, I think its all about giving an impression of the real thing and those rivets, wrong or not, do add to the feel of the thing.

Edited by Jonathan Mock
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope it's just the image distortion brought on by the camera but the landing gear does look a bit 'squat'. The real one I have had the chance to climb in/under didn't seem to sit that low?? But we can only wait and see what the final product will look like when it hits the street. Lots of nice detail in the interior from all of those images at the start of the thread. But alas I still have a monogram kit in the Stash to do a RAAF ARDU aircraft or maybe even try an RAN version with a long nose. Plus it would be hard to explain to my wife.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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...