Tamiya/Italeri Stuka B: Good Build?

I just recently started on this kit and im really pleased,...... i just finished the tub and my results were great,,,  So far the fit has been spot  .... alot of the AM stuff for the hasegawa kit fit this one too....   like gun barrels etc.....  cheers

Very good deal - Scale Hobbyist, the cheapest place I know of online, has a Hasegawa B model for $32. Just because it's the kind of mistake I'd make I checked on eBay and found out Hasegawa didn't make a 1/72 Stuka (they've got a 1/32 though.) Sure do like Hasegawa box art.

Prices for the kit above on EvilBay go from $18 to $59/BO. There are some good deals there if you know how much stuff costs. But some items are offered for insane prices. I don't know who the morons are there - the buyers or sellers.

Herr von HammerMeister, if you're out there. Would the 155mm gun on the M-12 have little powder-smoke rings around all of the sections of the barrel? I've seen a lot of kits modeled that way, but judging from the photos, I'd guess grime and grease with some powder residue at the tip. It's going to look okay, but for once I wish I'd have bought a metal barrel.

Eric

Hell Yes and yes!!

Yes and yes...

Look at what I found at the LHS for $20...... should I?

Most importantly, can this version be built into a BoB era with proper decals?

Thats definitely the Dive Brake Manny. It's definitely funny how some people can mistake the Stuka with a Dauntless which had dive flaps.

Manstein's revenge

You can see the diving brakes at the top front of the underside of this Stuka wing...

You can see the diving brakes at the top front of the underside of this Stuka wing...

Hans those "triangles" are covers for the actuators and those "dive flaps" everyone keep refering to are just the regular flaps and the Aielerons. The Stuka's dive brake was on the foreward part of the wings and was a oval shaped fence. The JU-88 when equipped as a dive bomber had similar fences attached to its wing.

Hans von Hammer

The acuators are the part that actually moves the dive-flap, running from it to a servo inside the wing. They look like a piece of wire, and that's what they would be in 1/48... The "triangles" you refer to I think are dive-flap attachment points with the hinges..

I've been looking for pics of the dive-flaps, but haven't found much that shows just the flap itself, only parts of it..

Hans von Hammer

 

 

Do the 1/48 Revell Do217 and just tell everybody it's a BoB aircraft.. Outside of here, nobody will notice,..

LOL, Hans you crack me up!

Reasoned

I was impatient and went for the Airfix but could always pick that one up later, great looking build of an important aircraft.  As for the Do 17, if you can ever find this kit

 

it would be a great alternative to the HC kit.

Do the 1/48 Revell Do217 and just tell everybody it's a BoB aircraft.. Outside of here, nobody will notice,..

In my stash, that's much too large, I only have an A-20 and a B-25 in 1/48 - and those only because they were so important in the South/Southwest Pacific. (I spent a decade of my life writing about that dam war, so there's a serious interest. Only now do I think my skill sets are barely adequate to start building Pacific War planes. The Val was the first.) I do have a 1/72 Hasegawa Lancaster and Mossie, but that's it for bombers. If I wanted a BoB bomber I'd get a Ju-88 or a He-111. But I need a Betty before either. I figure a Stuka, 109E, SpitI and HurriI will make a happy group: I'll put them together where they glower at each other. Sure wouldn't touch another Classic Airframe anything. The first serious kit I made came from them and I almost quit the hobby.

I can certainly understand the opinion concerning the Stuka: it was indeed an aging plane in 1940 - nobody in the LW dreamed of having it in service in 1945. So a rough surface is almost true to the thing. But I've decided I don't like fighting kits. I've got a Monogram P-38 that I use for medical experiments: glad I don't have to build it - it's awful. I doubt anything fits. (And even if recessed panels are not necessarily "accurate" neither are rivet lines that would suit a WWI tank.)  The experience I had with the ICM Konig really left a mark. The thing looks pretty good on my shelf. But every step of the way required some kind of heroic modeling which is not my forte: I mean nothing fit. Nothing. I know many good modelers look at kits like that as problems awaiting a solution. I look at them as problems to be avoided. I want to do more scratch building but on my own terms: things that will add to the kit, not life-support surgery. So, yea, it's worth a few extra dollars to get a modern kit, even though I'm paying extra for a cockpit that nobody will ever see and detail only I will know about.  At least I won't be thinking pagan thoughts about the people that built the kit.

Eric

I was impatient and went for the Airfix but could always pick that one up later, great looking build of an important aircraft.  As for the Do 17, if you can ever find this kit

it would be a great alternative to the HC kit.

There is no good B0B Dornier 17Z...sadly...I almost bought this recon version a while back:

The DO217 is a good kit but was not a BoB a/c...

This is the Tamiya release of the Tamiys/Italeri Stuka B---it comes w/ the ground crew and bomb/dolley...very good kit and at a great price if you go for the Italeri boxing...

All great information to be had but if there is one a/c where having raised panel/rivets molded causes me no concern, it's a Stuka.  The additional engine/cockpit detail is a separate question.

Eric, I'm curious you state you were looking for BoB era planes (assuming 1/48), what did you find for the Do 17Z?  I was only able to find the Hobbycraft version (which I have read can be a real pain) and decided to add the BP Defiant (where the only version is an out of production CA).  Strange more companies don't mold entire BoB era craft, sure you can find Spits, 109's a plenty but..

I have the kit in question and as far as I'm concerned it is cherry (probably because of the fact that Tamiya issues the exact same sprues in a different boxing)...full engine w/ provisions to have the cowling left off---even comes w/ flexible tubing to replicate engine piping (some PE as well)...The interior is as good as it gets in injection molding...as far as the wing/flaps, its as well done as I've seen in this scale...Shouldn't be an issue if you want to super-detail it...

Can't wait for them to release a "D" version...

I checked over a year ago looking for a Battle of Britain set of planes and was advised that Airfix had some "classic" kits still out there including their Spit I and Stuka. Raised panels etc. Since then I know they've done some new aircraft including a 109E and a SpitXII - the later of which I have. (Someone has also put out a new Hurricane I which leaves me with some odd Eastern European think of uncertain origin. Looks like a Hurricane to me, so we'll give it a shot.) But unless I've got it wrong, the Stuka is Airfix's version of the Monogram Stuka.

As far as the complexity of the kits, two reviews in Hyperscale praise the Hasegawa kit (one by his Brett Greenship himself)  - if you do major surgery and add after-market stuff. Aeroscale has the only review that compares the two:

The quality of the moulding is very good with almost no traces of flash and no sink marks. Parts breakdown is rather conventional except for the forward fuselage which has been split in several pieces to allow the modeler to show the Jumo engine which is provided. The later is made of about 20 parts (firewall, engine bearers and vinyl hoses included) and with only the addition of some cables and wires will look fantastic for sure. This is of course one of the highlight of this kit and a real plus when compared to the Hasegawa one. The cockpit interior is also very well rendered with very busy sidewalls and additional details made of PE parts.

Italeri also scores some points over the Hasegawa kit in that the aileron and flaps actuators are not represented solid under the wings but are provided as separate pieces. The moveable surfaces and the underwing have been designed as one piece though but this is not a bad thing since it will make construction easier and also avoid these fragile parts to break while handling the model (Hasegawa did it the same way). Other improvement of the Italian kit over it's Japanese counterpart are the separate rudder and elevators." http://www.aeroscale.co.uk/modules.php?op=modload&name=Reviews&file=index&req=showcontent&id=5686

The best way of judging complexity outside of building each is to look at all the instructions on Hobby Search. I think you can see why Tamiya reboxed the thing under their own name (Italeri is clearly on the box though). It does have an engine, it has PE and it has separate rudders and elevators. The kit was also new tool in 2008 I believe - ten years after Hasegawa, and has Cartograph decals which have always been fine when I've used them on Eduard kits. I'm no enemy of Hasegawa: I've just built their Val and liked it so well I bought their Kate and two of their Zeros. The Stuka is simply one of the very last kits I want to buy for a couple of years (of course one never knows) and I assumed Hasegawa's would be it. From the information I've gathered answering my own question (amazing how much stuff is on page four of a google search) I think Italeri or the Tamiya co-production would be it. It's $10 more, but I've never made a kit with an open engine: be an interesting twist.

Eric

Has anyone built the Airfix B version?

all three kits will have ups N down. if your building for accuracy i would doubt that italeri is accurate in anyway. hasegawa? not sure. 

instructions clearly show that hasegawa is more detailed. 

I can at least show how Italeri and Hasegawa handle the Stuka wing. Below are pages from the kit instructions that come from Hobby Search Models http://www.1999.co.jp/eng/plamo/ that is kind enough to have copies of instructions for almost all of the kits they sell. The first is the Italeri, the second the Hasegawa. I think the reviewers that rebuilt the Hasegawa wing were right - they would look very different. As noted, I'm sure that I did a 72 scale Stuka a couple years back and the flaps were attached directly to the wings with big plastic triangles: guess that's not how the Germans did it. I couldn't find a picture of the Hasegawa kit unaltered so this will have to do. Even a lazy coward like moi would rebuild the Hasegawa wing.

Eric

Italeri

Hasegawa

The acuators are the part that actually moves the dive-flap, running from it to a servo inside the wing. They look like a piece of wire, and that's what they would be in 1/48... The "triangles" you refer to I think are dive-flap attachment points with the hinges..

I've been looking for pics of the dive-flaps, but haven't found much that shows just the flap itself, only parts of it..

I flunk the purist test myself. But I think this time around they're talking something real. The Hasegawa Stukas are well received, but they connect with dive flaps onto the wing with nice, strong triangular pieces. (I've seen something similar on a 1/72.) Easy on the modeler, but doesn't look a bit like the real airplane. Eduard sells PE that includes "actuator" bits (think that's what the gizmos that attach the flaps to the wings are called) but the guy that used them advised waiting until the last step because the flaps kept falling off. PE has its place in the world but I don't like it on a part that requires any actual load. You can scratch-build the attachment set-up with stock and wire: there are two pretty good guides. But we're looking at some serious modeling here because the number of attachment points is significant. As a modeler I should want to do that. And I might. But I found out that Italeri made the Tamiya plastic and a search for that revealed some very good reviews: a new tool about 2007 and well reviewed - that's why Tamiya grabbed it. Italeri uses styrene parts that are individually attached to the flaps. Which makes it sound like it might be pretty good. I think that's a detail that is worth pursuing. Unlike new exhausts, or colored PE instrument panel, I'll be able to see it. And those wings & flaps almost define the plane. That's worth getting right. I do have an old Revell near the bench though. It's a T-6 Texan - handsome plane really. Got an EZ Mask for it. Going to use it as a test bed for acrylic natural finishes (I'm sure Alclad is terrific stuff, but I don't have a booth and find lacquer paints terrible to work with.) If that doesn't work, we'll paint it gloss yellow. Can't lose.

Eric

Haven't either Hasegawa's or Italeri's version, prefering the Monogram D/G kits for a "Stuka-Fix", although I have a Ju87G from HobbyCraft that looks interesting in the box.. 

The only "B"  I've built is the 1967 1/32 Revell offering (which is still a great kit, although the rivet-detail is way over-done (but was the industry standard of the day)...

I don't know about reviewers that call for replacing kit parts with AM parts either... Generally though, I don't trust them, since it appears (to me) that they're either rivet-counters or can't fix or make a part fit/scratch-build a replacement due to an over-dependence on after-market parts as a part f their set of BMS (BAsic Modeling Skills).

I'd much rather see a release of a 1/48 B-model of the Ju87 from Revell... I'm almost 100%-sure that it would be far cheaper than either offering from Tamigawa or Italeri and quite accurate, given their release of the PV-1 as a basis for my hypothesis... Don't know how they do it, but Revell and Revell of Germany are the leaders of quality kits at low prices, IMNSHO..