Aftermarket slats for ME-262 a must?

I think it is a matter of personal preference. The Me-262 pics that I have seen do not show the slats extended (like Me-109). So I would build it without the resin slats.

Nothing is ever a MUST in this hobby Eric. To be honest the -262 has such clean lines I'd prefer to not see anything hanging out loose anyway.

I have the Tamiya kit in the stash too and dont' think I'll be springing for resin slats. From the reviews I've read, neither resin set fits well, and one or both the verlinden and Aires set the slats come very warped being so thin. Sounds like more work than its worth. Besides, like Borg said its not a given that all 262s on the ground had the slats and flaps extended.

I saw a docu. about the Luftwaffe on the history channel, that showed a lot of 262 footage. There were quite a few shown coming in...as the crew chief was approaching the plane, the first thing he did was push the slats back. Was the same deal for most of the planes I saw on the docu.

Don't get us wrong Eric, it would be a cool and still realistic conversion, but just by what reviews I read, the resin isnt' worth it IMO. But feel free to give it a try and post some results!

Yes and no...

Okay, get this. There's a gent named Steve Brauning who's a Me-262 fanatic and has a site dedicated to modelling the plane. http://scalemodels.webs.com/theme262in148scale.htm . He absolutely insists that the slats were out and gives long directions how to do surgery on all available kits. (He advocates cutting with thread. I'd never heard that but after having a finger with mono wrapped around when a striped bass hit giving me a nice cut I believed him. Tried using some 2lb mono as a saw last night and it worked great.) He does advise using the kit's plastic instead of resin - thinks the Tamiya is particularly easy. Come to think about it, one of the German weapons DVD's I have (about 50 minutes each: about 15 of them, all based on Goebbels' propaganda films and terrific resources) deals with the jets and the V-weapons. I'll check that out. I've been going through my tank videos again because my next armor project is going involve winter weathering two 70's Tamiya kits in radically different ways. Interesting factoid already clear: in winter fighting in 1941 (you can tell because infantry aren't in winter uniforms which they always are from later footage) many of the German AFVs had no white wash. Considering the fact that the Wehrmacht was undergoing a catastrophic break-down of logistics by early November that might have been one of the items that got left behind - like boots for the infantry. Again, in later campaigns AFVs all have some kind of winter camo. Rooskie stuff was winterized from the start.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=GBb1dkhw7wQ#t=107s

I've made my living writing and teaching military history for thirty years and have learned to have a healthy respect for history buffs especially people that can keep a nice website maintained. There's mega rubbish on the net but I doubt you'd find it in the realm of aviation factoids. And Steve's site is a nice one. Anyway, Ive done some checking myself this afternoon. First, it's pretty obvious that many photos taken from the front are not really clear evidence. If someone put a gun to my head, I'd say both of these below have slats deployed, but I'd hope the gun was empty.

When you can get a little better view, pictures like this are common. Each I think shows slats forward.

I don't doubt surgery on the Tamiya kit is optional, but I'd say that Steve is on to something and if one did walk the extra mile and cut the wings to shreds and get them back together, you'd have some good history in your corner.

Eric

To get your answer all you have to know is what the slats were designed for...they were designed to "deploy" at lower airspeeds...they were "automatic" in that the pilot did NOT control them----the air over the wing determined if they were "pushed in" or "deployed"...so common sense will tell you that when the plane is on the ground parked there is zero airflow over the wing, therefore they are in the "deployed" state...I have read that in many propaganda films (on the 262 and even the 109) the slats were sometimes manually "taped" to the "in" position to make for a sleeker looking profile...

Post pics...

Not sure if I should mention it, but Steve also claims that slats deployed was the norm for the BF-109. But I don't want to know about it even if true.

Slats deployed automatically on the 262? How about the 109? Very interesting factoid. Germans were clever with that kind of stuff. The Stuka had an auto pull-out. As I understand it, they were working on an early form of "fly by wire" at war's end. I've read they coordinated their controls to simplify flight earlier - hence criticism of captured LA-5s etc as being very hard to fly because the pilot had to tend to so many tasks. We and the Brits had an early "pipper" on an auto-gunsite late in the war. I've never seen a monograph on that kind of technology and it would be interesting. Analog computing devices of a sort I guess. Navies used them for years. I'll buy the book. But US pilots told me they had to drop their own flaps. (I never thought to ask a SBD pilot if there was any kind of auto-pull out. Never read about it.)

Someone else will have to post 262 WIP pics. I haven't got the model yet. I have the Eduard mask for it (sent by mistake) and thought  that was a good reason to buy the kit. The real reason I started the thread was to see if resin slats, available from several companies, were a good idea. If nothing else, I don't know much about using resin. Actually that part of the question has been answered. Neg on the resin - Steve said that careful work on the plastic, especially the Tamiya kit, will render better results because resin is tricky and won't necessarily fit the Tamiya kit properly. Guess that's an opinion shared by others. Someday I'll do a resin ship: or not. I'm properly sick of sight of USS Oregon. And when it's done, I have an unexplained need to construct a Fleet Air Arm Avenger and have an AM kit ready to open. But I'll order the jet in the meantime and pass on the resin.

Eric

The following is from Wikipedia entry on the BF 109. Sorry about the term "deployed." They also erroneously used it several times in their article "Leading Edge Slats." (Gotta love Wikipedia.) 

"A fighter was designed primarily for high-speed flight. A smaller wing area was optimal for achieving high speed, but low-speed flight would suffer, as the smaller wing would require more airflow to generate enough lift to maintain flight. To compensate for this, the Bf 109 included advanced high-lift devices on the wings, including automatically-opening leading edge slats, and fairly large camber-changing flaps on the trailing edge. The slats increased the lift of the wing considerably when deployed,^[24] greatly improving the horizontal maneuverability of the aircraft, as several Luftwaffe veterans, such as Erwin Leykauf, attest.^[25] Messerschmitt also included ailerons that "drooped" when the flaps were lowered, thereby increasing the effective flap area (and later radiator flaps as well). When deployed, these devices effectively increased the wings' coefficient of lift."

In the article on slats the author said the slats "popped out". Need more geek books explaining how stuff like this was done. I do like aviation factoids - absolutely loved researchng radial engines even though I can't change a spark plug. The 109 article also had an interesting discussion of a captured Gustav by a Russian pilot: he praised the aircraft and singled out it's intelligent design and the fewer items to monitor than found in Soviet fighters. The article on a captured LA-5 by a LW jockey flipped the picture wondering how Rooskie pilots could fly with all the tasks required. I've seen a lot of short pieces done on captured planes but that would make a neat monograph. I believe each combatant had essentially a small enemy air force: believe the LW had dozens of allied fighters. (The advantage of fighting over your own lines.) The anecodotes do drive home how much perceived flight performance was subjective. I've got a book reporting a US "fly off" in October 1944 that included every major US late war fighter including Bearcat. Not even the test pilots agreed which plane was "best." (Saw the History Channel mini-series on Gunter Rall. He was in charge in the LW's allied air force and concluded the P-51 was our top dog. Wasn't clear whether he was including his own mounts in the comparison. I'd guess familiarity would count for a lot.

  Here are 109 slats:

Eric

The default position for the German leading-edge slats in WW2 were "extended" or "out"...they were "dumb" slats controlled by gravity and air pressure...and called automatic only to describe that the pilot had no control over them except in controlling the airspeed of the a/c....

I tell my students to be careful with sources of any kind. I also caution them about the kind of issue that is prone to myth and polemic. (I'd doubt that the subject of 'leading edge slats" would bring out hordes of net loonies. Indeed, it's articles like that, which you would have never seen in a print encyclopedia, that are Wikipedia's strength.) I tell them that myth and polemic are very easy to find on the net because it's so much easier to "post" than manually write and distribute. I also tell them that Wikipedia, if correctly used, is a remarkable source and we are very lucky to have it. One might start to evaluate an article there the way one would evaluate an article in a peer-reviewed journal. See what sources are referenced and look at the bibliography. (For what it's worth, I've found most Wikipedia entries on the Pacific War and Vietnam, the subjects I wrote about and know best, to be pretty good and very rarely irresponsible - even the ones that don't reference my books.) 

I get the idea of auto-deployment. I just would like to know what sort of gizmo was required to make it work. Military factoids can actually lead to interesting generalizations and they interest me. We all have our weaknesses.

Eric