SEARCH FINESCALE.COM

Enter keywords or a search phrase below:

The Official 1943 70th Anniversary Group Build

89083 views
650 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    February 2010
  • From: Berkeley CA/St. Paul MN
Posted by EBergerud on Thursday, April 18, 2013 5:59 AM

Good looking Jug and Corsair: two reasons 1943 was not a good year for the Axis.

Just a little tidying up and my latest crime against plastic modeling will be done. Had two 1/700 DDs that were the right class to stand in for US Maury and IJN Shigure - two of the most famous destroyers of the brawl that went on more or less non-stop from late 42-late 43 in the "Slot" between Rabaul and Guadalcanal. Didn't think two kits each about the size of a cigarette with a part count of under 100 between them would take much time. Wrong. I'll take some more pics tomorrow and pass on some lore about night torpedo actions in the Solomons.

Eric

 

A model boat is much cheaper than a real one and won't sink with you in it.

  • Member since
    March 2010
  • From: MN
Posted by Nathan T on Thursday, April 18, 2013 9:25 AM

Those look pretty cool Eric. Lots of nice detail in those tiny things.

 

 

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • From: AandF in the Badger State
Posted by checkmateking02 on Thursday, April 18, 2013 1:50 PM

Sharp-looking ships, Eric.  And nicely rigged, besides.  The naval battles around Guadalcanal make for fascinating and compelling reading.

 

 

 

 

  • Member since
    December 2002
  • From: Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk, England
Posted by Bish on Thursday, April 18, 2013 1:54 PM

Eric, those ships look great to me. Are they really that small,

I am a Norfolk man and i glory in being so

 

On the bench: Airfix 1/72nd Harrier GR.3/Fujimi 1/72nd Ju 87D-3

  • Member since
    August 2010
  • From: Beaverton, OR
Posted by Ghostrider114 on Thursday, April 18, 2013 2:20 PM

I just finished reading Robert Leckie's book Challenge for the Pacific, which was all about the Guadalcanal Campaign.  Those battles in the slot, between our boys and the Tokyo Express, were epic.  As are your tiny tin cans, Eric.

  • Member since
    September 2009
  • From: Guam
Posted by sub revolution on Saturday, April 20, 2013 5:36 AM

Ebergerud- I guess I somehow missed your initial build. Oops! It's on there now, along with your latest work. Your builds are taking over our little group! Not that I mind, they look great and you have covered a wide spectrum of the war. Nice looking destroyers! I have to hand it to you ship building guys, I just don't think it's my niche.

Greentracker- That is a very smart looking Jug! Simple and elegant, would look right at home on a grassy field.

DiGDoug- Welcome aboard! I don't know enough about German tanks to know what belongs in what year, so I will have to take your word for it! Give us a good story behind it, and we'll call it good!

Good work, gentlemen! Nice to see this group so active.

Budd

NEW SIG

  • Member since
    April 2013
Posted by Jeremy on Saturday, April 20, 2013 10:55 PM

Hello, really enjoyed reading through this thread over the last couple days and following the progress! Lots of inspiring work and interesting history; I love reading the history on build subjects.

I'd like to join the GB, though I don't have an eligible kit at the moment. I'll likely go with a Mitsubishi A6M5. Nathan kindly pointed out the most recent Tamiya kit to me and I'm dying to put it together. I've been looking through some aftermarket decals, hoping to find a set that fits the gb.

Depending on how brave I feel I really want to put together a B6N also. We'll see but I'll probably start with the A6M5, it's cheaper and less intimidating lol.

  • Member since
    February 2010
  • From: Berkeley CA/St. Paul MN
Posted by EBergerud on Sunday, April 21, 2013 1:17 AM

If the 1943 time frame means anything, you are under the wire with both the A6M5 and the B6N. Prototypes of both were flown in mid-43 and small numbers appeared in the fall. By 1944 they were front line aircraft (the A6M5 was the most produced Zero). I believe both were deployed to carriers in the fall of 43 where they saw no action but some must have made it down to Rabaul. That said, among Japan's many reasons for not being in WWII was an inability to rapidly produce new aircraft types that would fly reliably. So the Zero and Oscar (the planes they started the war with) remained in production until war's end and their second generation planes - so good on paper - had very poor operational reliability. Anyway, if you haven't bought your kits, the 1943 IJNAF warriors were the A6M3 Zero, B5N Kate and the Aichi Val. The failure of these aircraft to damage American ships in operations on Bougainville in November 43 and then the carrier raids on Rabaul in December was almost a death sentence for Japanese airpower in the Pacific War. All of the battles in 1944 were military muggings. In that context the Kamikaze makes a bizarre kind of sense. Anyway, I've got Tamiya's new 1/48 A6M3 "Zeke" and it's a thing of beauty. (The new A6M5 is equally good. Make sure you don't get one of the old ones - they're well shaped but very crude by today's standards. They remain great beginners kits at bargain prices. I've got an ancient A6M5 that I'm going to weather to death and give it to the Special Attack forces. When I'm done with it nobody will notice raised panel lines or the absence of a cockpit.)  Hasegawa makes a fine Kate, Jill and Val in 1/48: all of their Zeros from the 90s are top notch but just as expensive as the new Tamiya line.  

Eric

 

A model boat is much cheaper than a real one and won't sink with you in it.

  • Member since
    April 2013
Posted by Jeremy on Sunday, April 21, 2013 10:29 AM

Eric, thanks very much for the info. I did think that maybe the A6M5 and B6N would be cutting it close and technically just barely fit the time frame. After your response I will reconsider my options and probably choose one (or more :) of the models you mentioned.

As for the A6M5 and B6N Jill, there's always a 1944 70th Anniv. GB to look forward to, right?

Thanks again!

  • Member since
    September 2009
  • From: Guam
Posted by sub revolution on Monday, April 22, 2013 1:58 AM

Welcome aboard, Jeremy! You could also consider doing one of the ones you have as a prototype, if they both first flew in '43. I'm considering doing something like that myself for this one.

And of course, I'm sure there will be a '44 build in one form or another.

Budd

NEW SIG

  • Member since
    February 2010
  • From: Berkeley CA/St. Paul MN
Posted by EBergerud on Monday, April 22, 2013 2:52 AM

Ok: the destroyers are done. I've concentrated on the military angle of these two vessels here. If anyone wants details on the build, I have posted a photo build on the ship forum entitled “Two South Pacific Destroyers Refight Vella Gulf in 1/700.”

1/700 Midship Models USS Gridley (USS Maury)

1/700 Tamiya Shiratsuyu (IJN Shigure)

Maury materials: Vallejo Model Color paints, Iwata Com.Art paints, PE: generic WEM railings, some PE and several parts from DML 1/700 Livermore/Monssen.

Shigure materials: Tamiya paints, Iwata Com.Art paints, Tom's generic 1/700 IJN DD PE, extra fret of Tamiya “Waterline Series” parts included.

I spent six years of my life writing about the Pacific War in mid-1942 to early 1944 and the desire to put in styrene objects central to my story certainly greatly prompted my return to modeling three years back and influenced tremendously the “stash” developed. At the top of my list that meant representatives of all major ships and aircraft on both sides engaged in festivities in the South and Southwest Pacific. (Imagine my stunned amazement to find out there wasn't a single 1/350 Enterprise – I almost choked.) I'll grant that other areas of military history also grab my interest, but until now I didn't start a single SOPAC kit because these were models I didn't want to murder.

Tracking down kits to portray Shigure and Maury was good history no error. For an odd combination of geography and, after October 1942, the completion of a kind of suicide pact between the fleet carriers of USN and IJN (helped admirably by eagle-eyed I-boats), between August 1942-January 1944 there was a series of bitterly fought surface engagements that left both navies reeling. (Strategically, of course, this greatly aided the USN, as Admiral King knew from the start of the Guadalcanal campaign, because the “Two Navy” bill was going to create a huge new US fleet beginning in late 1943 and the IJN would be unable to follow.) Although battleships were engaged in one massive three day battle, this campaign was fought between cruisers and destroyers. By 1943 both sides cruiser losses (many damaged) transformed the campaign in the central Solomons into a slug-fest between destroyers, smaller warships with aircraft waiting in the wings to pounce on anyone unfortunate enough to be in range during the day. Both Shigure and Maury compiled superlative records. Between the two of them they were in every major battle from October 1942 – January 1944. (Maury was given 16 Battle Stars – the highest of any USN DD except for O-Bannon with 17. Enterprise topped the list with 18.) In 1944 both participated in the massive campaigns in the Central Pacific. Shigure, by this time known as a “lucky ship” was the only survivor from the Southern Force at Leyte Gulf. Her luck ran out in 1945 when torpedoed by a US submarine in January 1945. At the same time Maury, with weak flak, was retired from front line service when the Kamikaze threat became obvious.

The two vessels met once at the Battle of Vella Gulf in August 1943. Vella Gulf was one of those small engagements that had implications that far exceeded its size or result. Briefly, Shigure was one of four IJN DDs sent to evacuate the bypassed Japanese garrison located on the big island of Kolombangara. The US anticipated the move and moved six of their DDs in for an ambush. In the past (such as the US humiliation at Tassaforanga in November 1942) a similar apparent US advantage backfired and resulted in a draw or defeat at the hands of the devastating “Long Lance” torpedo. By August 1943, however, things were changing. US destroyers all had SG radar and had installed CICs behind the bridge. More importantly officers from Fletcher, Maury and others had convinced new American admirals, none hamstrung by obsolete doctrine that had allowed the Japanese to more than hold their own at night combat, that destroyers should attack independently, not be hampered by cruisers, and use torpedoes and not guns to kill. (This was Japanese doctrine by October 1942.) Perhaps most importantly, junior USN officers had finally made their case that the US torpedoes carried by both destroyers and submarines were seriously defective. The US force had Vella Gulf had torpedoes without magnetic exploders, improved fuses that would explode (odd – but true) when a direct hit was made, and set to run on the surface which put them at 10 feet under. The three attack destroyers, including Maury because of its large load of 12 “fish”, spotted the IJN force retreating from the big island of Kolumbangara loaded with troops. Fighting in tropic darkness and on the island side the US ships were invisible. They launched 36 torpedoes in two minutes before a shot was fired. Three Japanese destroyers exploded and Shigure was struck in the rudder by a dud torpedo. Shigure, alone of the Japanese ships, had seen the attackers launched a salvo of torpedoes, one exploding in a near miss. The US destroyer missed had “combed the wake” - another move out of the Japanese handbook – and thus avoided being hit. Without losing a man, the US had sunk three precious Japanese destroyers, damaged a fourth . About 1,000 Japanese troops also drowned – some after refusing rescue.

This engagement illustrated that Japan had lost equality, much less superiority, in a surface night engagement – the only tactical card held by the Japanese in 1943. From this point onward, as Arleigh Burke soon showed, the USN was superior in surface engagements. The American destroyer launched torpedo, a weapon that had failed completely during the battles at Iron Bottom Sound, devastated a Japanese task force in the Surigao Strait. Simultaneously its submarine and air launched cousins had gone from second rate to extremely effective. Add this in to the growing US quantitative and qualitative superiority of every naval and air weapon (and crew) in the Pacific War and it's easy to see why the battles of 1944 closely resembled military muggings. In this environment, Kamikaze tactics had a bizarre logic.

Shigure and Maury were also wonderfully chronicled. Japanese torpedo guru Tameichi Hara, and veteran of every major naval engagement in the Pacific War, used Shigure as his command ship for a Desron given him from mid-43 until early 1944. His memoir Japanese Destroyer Captain remains probably the best operational memoir written by an IJN officer. The Maury's exec at Vella Gulf was Russell Crenshaw who was likewise a veteran of many major battles in the Solomons and later. (He too was a survivor. His first command was caught in “Halsey's Typhoon” in July 1945 and nearly sank.) I was told by an American officer that Hara made flag rank in the JMSDF and I'd like to think it's true. Crenshaw had a fine record postwar that included command and high level stints doing weapons development. Crenshaw was a techie at heart and in 1970 published Naval Shiphandling which is still, I've been told, the best volume on the topic. In 1994 he wrote an excellent monograph on the humiliating US defeat at The Battle of Tassaforanga which is the best explanation and indictment of the early war failures of USN weapons and doctrine that I know of. He followed this with an excellent autobiography “South Pacific Destroyer” which chronicles his year with Maury in the “Slot.” And lastly, Crenshaw was kind enough to spend several hours with yours truly explaining why the USN, despite the seemingly incalculable advantage of surface search radar, struggled so badly in the first year and a half of the Pacific War. I recommend all of these books highly.

Neither kit was very good and both required a lot of tender loving care. Hence the long build time. Whether the effort was worth the candle, is difficult to judge.

Pics Below.

Eric

[URL=http://s971.photobucket.com/user/ebergerud/media/March13/16Mport_zpsd361a0ef.jpg.html]

 

A model boat is much cheaper than a real one and won't sink with you in it.

  • Member since
    March 2010
  • From: MN
Posted by Nathan T on Monday, April 22, 2013 8:15 AM

Nice weathering on those hulls! Looks very realistic.

 

 

  • Member since
    April 2013
  • From: Minnesota City, Minnesota, U.S.A.
Posted by FlyItLikeYouStoleIt on Monday, April 22, 2013 12:35 PM

Sounds like a lot of fun! I'm submitting a scratchbuilt, slightly kitbashed Dual .50 cal trailer mounted AA gun.

Bill.

On the bench:  Lindberg 1/32 scale 1934 Ford Coupe and a few rescue projects.

In queue:  Tamiya 1/35 Quad Tractor or a scratch build project.

  • Member since
    December 2002
  • From: Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk, England
Posted by Bish on Monday, April 22, 2013 12:36 PM

Bill, that sounds like an interesting subject. When are you planning on starting that.

I am a Norfolk man and i glory in being so

 

On the bench: Airfix 1/72nd Harrier GR.3/Fujimi 1/72nd Ju 87D-3

  • Member since
    September 2009
  • From: Guam
Posted by sub revolution on Tuesday, April 23, 2013 4:05 AM

He's actually almost done with it. He messaged on the side asking if he could still submit it, and I said ok as long as he includes WIP photos and a build review.

Welcome, Bill!

NEW SIG

  • Member since
    August 2010
  • From: Beaverton, OR
Posted by Ghostrider114 on Tuesday, April 23, 2013 2:01 PM

I've been reading Tommy Blackburn's autobiography, for research into the subject I'm building,   Oddly enough, he claims that the squadron switched to the -1A before they deployed to the Pacific.  That's fine, they still flew the birdcage in '43, just not in combat.  It does raise the question, however, as to why this livery has four Japanese kill marks, when it never deployed in combat.  Either I've missed something in the autobiography or Tamiya mixed up the models flown by this squadron.  Anyone want to weigh in on this, I know we've got a few WWII experts in here.

Edit:

I did some digging and answered my own question.  Evidently, the pilot of this particular aircraft, Lt. Halford, had 3.5 kills in the F4F Wildcat before he joined VF-17.  So the kill marks are correct.

This does effect how I was planning to distress this bird though, if she never flew in The Solomons, then I might not want to use as much weathering.

  • Member since
    August 2010
  • From: Beaverton, OR
Posted by Ghostrider114 on Wednesday, April 24, 2013 6:00 PM

I finally got the top deep sea blue airbrushed on, I have to say, all the fiddling I had to do to the airbrush to get it to work right last time paid off in spades, this coat was nearly perfect.  just a couple of spots where the masking tape wasn't on as well as I thought

  • Member since
    April 2013
Posted by DiGDouG on Wednesday, April 24, 2013 10:26 PM

Story time!!  This was taken from Tigers At The Front by Thomas Jentz.  A great book with some very good reference pictures.

    Tiger  Battalion 503 exhausted from continuous fight in January while attempting to halt the Russian advance from Stalingrad, pulled back into Rostow to rest and refit on January 22 1943.  Of the original twenty nine Tigers and 35 PzKpfw IIIs, only one Tiger and one PzKpfw III were still in fighting condition, although they hadn't lost a single Tiger and only lost siz PzKpfw IIIs.  Within three days the Abteilung managed to repair six Tigers and fifteen PzKpfw IIs which put them at a respectable strength.
    Bataisk fell to the Russian masses on February 6 1943.  The success was quickly followed by the Russians crossing Don southwest of Rostow during the night of February 7th and 8th in attempt of turning the right flank of the entire German army.  The Abteilung  was in constant action against this force for the next fifteen days, repulsing one attack after the other and counterattacking to regain lost positions.  These attacks and counterattacks wore down and demoralized the enemy to such a extent that a German motorized division was able to mount a limited offensive which wiped out the attacking enemy forces and stabilized the front for a month.
    The following is a translation of an after action report written by the Abeilung-Kommandeur, describing
a day of combat in the Eastern Front.

10 February 1943

Situation:  The enemy is quiet except for reconnaissance activity in Nishne.  He was observed pulling up additional infantry reinforcements.  Our forward battle line lies on the western edge of Rostow , running east around Nishne to Ssemernikowa.  During the night the infantry of Kampgruppe Winnig couldn't maintain their positions against an enemy flanking assault due to heavy losses and exhaustion following many days and nights in combat without relief.  They retire and took up new positions on the northern edge of Nishne.

Orders:

1) The Abteilung with the infantry mounted on the Panzers is to attack from the southwest edge of Rostow and close the gap between Rostow and Nishne.

2) After closing the gap , attack down the main street of Nishne as far as the rail line, providing fire cover for the infantry.

3) In combination with the infantry, roll up the from from east to west as far as the western edge of Nishne.

4) After reaching the western edge , leave the infantry behind, striking west to hook up with Kampgruppe Sander.

     At 0915, The Abteilung's six Tigers and ten Pzkpfw III's advance on a wide front toward the northeast corner of Nishne.  As soon as the first enemy opened fire , the infantry dismounted, assaulted the enemy and drove him back to the southwest.  The gap was closed , the attack penetrated as far as the railroad embankment between Rostow and Nishne.

     At 1020, the Albeilung commenced to fulfill the second segment of the orders.  A steep embankment along the south side of the main street and the railroad embankment prevented the  tanks from leaving the street to gain maneuvering room.  The Abteilung started down the 50meter-wide street continuously sliding on the ice and packed snow.  Three Tigers in wedge formation led the attack with the rest of the Tigers and PzKpfw IIIs following at 50meter intervals with their turrets pointed at 11 and 9 o'clock to provide the infantry with maximum firepower. In this formation the Abteilung penetrated as far as the train station in the middle of town, gaining possession of the main street.  Further advance was futile since the infantry only occupied the buildings on the north side of the street..  Two Tigers scouted ahead to the west discovering and anti-tank ditch which blocked further movement to the west.

     At 1500, the Abteilung broke off the attack due to nightfall.  After notifying the Kampfgruppe commander and the division, further attacks were called off.  The infantry retired under the protection of the tanks back to the southwest edge of Rostow where the Abteilung stayed for the night. 

     That same day, a platoon of two Tigers was attached to Kampfgruppe Sander to support an attack on a collective farm northwest of Ssemernikowa.  Upon reaching hill 66.9 a Tiger went into position of each side of the hilltop to shield the left flank of the attack planned along the railroad embankment.  Several anti-tank guns opened fire on the Tigers from the collective farm, starting the firefight.  The PzKpfw IIIs and the IVs didn't advance.  Both Tigers were then pulled back off the hill and ordered to lead the attack.  After crossing hill 44.6, two enemy tanks were spotted at 500 meters to the south and were rapidly destroyed by well laid fire.  One Tiger charged to the south over the rail line and crushed four anti-tank guns along with their towing vehicles. Both Tigers then attacked the collective farm with the PzKpfw IIs and IVs of Kompanie Wolf following, keeping their distance due to a shortage of ammunition.  

     The enemy fire steadily increased in intensity.  About 200 meters from the collective farm the engine of one of the Tigers caught fire.  It was successfully extinguished by the effort of the tank commander.  With the other Tiger providing covering fire, both Tigers managed to retire to safety although the enemy at times managed to get as close as 50 meters.

     At nightfall both of the Tigers and the PxKpfw IIIs and IVs again advanced of the collective farm.  A night battle ensued with the Panzers firing at the enemy anti-tank guns  revealed by their muzzle blast.  With the last of their ammunition exhausted Kampgruppe Sander returned to Sapadnyj.

     During the day the Abteilung accounted for three enemy tanks, five 7.62cm anti-tank guns, several mortars, many anti-tank rifles, several towing vehicles, and many infantry weapons.  The Abteilung's own losses amounted to two Tigers temporarily out of action due to mechanical breakdown.

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • From: AandF in the Badger State
Posted by checkmateking02 on Wednesday, April 24, 2013 11:01 PM

That three-tone scheme is pretty attractive, Ghostrider.  It's looking good.

 

 

 

 

  • Member since
    September 2009
  • From: Guam
Posted by sub revolution on Thursday, April 25, 2013 4:41 AM

Some great histories there Ebergerud and DiGDoug! We're having a lot more great stories this year than we did last year. Great job everybody!

And nice job on your homework, Ghostrider! Looking forward to seeing it completed.

Budd

NEW SIG

  • Member since
    April 2013
Posted by SchattenSpartan on Thursday, April 25, 2013 6:24 AM

Count me in on this one.

Its my first GB ever, so i might do something wrong (i hope not).

Ill build two planes at once: Eduard´s "Airacobra in the MTO"

As far as marking options go, I think I´ll just stick with the kit´s decals:

Clemens

Edit: I´m sorry for the big pictures.

Can someone please explain me how to get them to an appropriate size?

  • Member since
    August 2010
  • From: Beaverton, OR
Posted by Ghostrider114 on Thursday, April 25, 2013 1:20 PM

you can resize them after you load them into photobucket, just click the edit tab, select your picture and click resize

  • Member since
    April 2013
  • From: Minnesota City, Minnesota, U.S.A.
Posted by FlyItLikeYouStoleIt on Thursday, April 25, 2013 1:32 PM

sub revolution

He's actually almost done with it. He messaged on the side asking if he could still submit it, and I said ok as long as he includes WIP photos and a build review.

Welcome, Bill!

 

Thanks SUB,

Sorry about the lack of WIP pics. Camera issues and time constraints were befuddling my attempts to comply with GB rules. My contribution to the GB is a Dual .50 cal Trailer Mounted AA (Kitbash / Scratchbiuld). This .50 cal AA does not represent any actual trailer mounted units made for the military. It does, however, closely resemble one that I saw pictured which had been cobbled together by the soldiers that used it. I had purchased a damaged 1/32 scale New-Ray brand "model" Half-track, toy really, from Hobby Lobby's clearance shelf and gutted it for parts. It came with a quad .50 cal mounted in back so most of what you see is from there.

 Here's what little I have for WIP pics:

This 1st one is what remains of the Halftrack model / toy that started it all (after stripping it of all I needed). 

 
Next, I have a couple shots of the almost complete Trailer.
 I completely tore it all down and accurised that which I was familiar with. One gun was wrecked so I made it a dual. I stole the wheels off the front of the halftrack. The little gas motor with tank was scratch built using bits from various sources. The gunsight is the control stick and undercarriage part from a Zvezda 1/72 scale Russian IL II fighter. The sight mount is a piece of sprue complete with part # tag. Cut off cable ties with pieces of styrene glued on the ends made pretty convincing jack stands on the corners. I painted a base coat of Krylon Camouflage Ultra Flat olive green:
 
 
 
Alright, so far so good. I'll be posting pics of the completed trailer and accompanying story soon. Stay tuned........

Bill.

On the bench:  Lindberg 1/32 scale 1934 Ford Coupe and a few rescue projects.

In queue:  Tamiya 1/35 Quad Tractor or a scratch build project.

  • Member since
    March 2010
  • From: MN
Posted by Nathan T on Thursday, April 25, 2013 2:19 PM

Oooohhh, love me an Airacrobra. Nice start too Bill.

 

 

  • Member since
    December 2002
  • From: Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk, England
Posted by Bish on Thursday, April 25, 2013 2:30 PM

Welcome to the GB Clemens, be prepaired to get hooked. As long as you post progress piucs and meet the deadline, you can't go far wrong with GB's.

Nice work Bill.

I am a Norfolk man and i glory in being so

 

On the bench: Airfix 1/72nd Harrier GR.3/Fujimi 1/72nd Ju 87D-3

  • Member since
    April 2013
Posted by SchattenSpartan on Thursday, April 25, 2013 4:03 PM

Ok fellas,

I just opened the box for the first time and its content is pretty impressive!

The kit consists of 4 sprues for each cobra (3 in olive-green plastic and 1 with the clear parts)

As with all Profi Packs and Limited Edition kits from eduard, theres a lot of nice painted and unpainted PE already included in the kit Stick out tongue:

And the most unexpected thing for me: They even included a nose weight for each cobra to prevent tail-sitting!

I couldn't resisist it and cut the main parts for the wings and the fuselage out of the sprues and taped them together

The fit of the parts is not perfect, but its average, so no need for complaints here.

I haven't cleaned up the mold lines up at all, so the fit can (and will probably) get better.

Nuff said, here's a pic:

I know the quality of the pics isn't overwhelming, I'm taking all pictures at my desk atm (I have to find a better place with good light conditions)

Clemens signing out

  • Member since
    February 2010
  • From: Berkeley CA/St. Paul MN
Posted by EBergerud on Thursday, April 25, 2013 8:43 PM

If you're building two 39s, does Eduard provide markings for Lend Lease planes? The P39 had poor range and performance over 12,000 feet so was used mostly for ground support in the Med with Reverse Lend Lease Spitfire Vs, early P-38s (a problem child still) and P-40s playing the air superiority role. (P-47s were going to England and 8th AF at this time.) The Germans had pretty well lost the tactical air war by Sicily so everyone was doing a lot of ground attack and the 39 worked well for that mission. Anyway, the Free French received several hundred P-39s and when Italy switched sides the air units that fought for the allies adopted it too. That's a pity because if the parts had been available, the "good guy" Italians would have flown Macchi 205s - but only a handful were used. The "bad guy" Italian units used some but they were getting BF-109s, so one of the war's fine airplanes didn't see much action and thus is hard to model.

The Rooskies had a low altitude war and did extremely well with the 39 in 1943-44. German FWs had taken to using the head on pass against Russian fighters - that was a dangerous game against a 37mm canon. And the .303 MGs, which were a liability in a dog fight, were very good indeed for strafing. Anyway, might be neat to see a Free French plane. Heaven knows how many countries had air forces during WWII, but they rarely get modeled. I've got a P-36 Hawk and think it has 1940 French markings and I'll use if it does.

Eric  

 

A model boat is much cheaper than a real one and won't sink with you in it.

  • Member since
    February 2010
  • From: Berkeley CA/St. Paul MN
Posted by EBergerud on Thursday, April 25, 2013 9:03 PM

OH: I'd take issue with the tagline after hearing dozens of arguments between old pony and jug jockies a few years back. The P-47 was a fine plane, but as the RAF's top ace Johnny Johnson commented after the war the P-51 was unquestionably the best offensive fighter of the war because it could take it's formidable attributes to battlefields no other fighter could reach. The biggest fighter engagement in history was fought over Europe between January 1944 - September 1944 and the P-51s murdered the Luftwaffe. The scores put up by the elite 51 Fighter Groups in 8th AF are extremely impressive. It wasn't until the breakout from Normandy allowed advanced European bases that the RAF - with all those wonderful late mark Sptfires - was able to get back into fighting what was left of Germany's fighter arm. It's true the Wolfpack kept its Jugs and ended up finishing as the second highest scoring US FG of the war but that was due to its big score in 1943 before Mustangs arrived. One of the duties held by Gunther Rall, Luftwaffe uber-ace (who I think is still alive), was to manage the large German horde of captured allied aircraft of almost all types. He thought the P-51 was the best of the lot. I interviewed a Navy Corsair jockey who flew a P-51 in Korea and he admitted it was better than anything the Navy had. Whatever the Jugs attributes, there was a reason why Mustangs stayed in service throughout the Korean War when other piston planes of the Army were withdrawn - above all it's fantastic range. Although I think the longest serving WWII US combat plane was the Avenger which was doing anti-sub patrols for front line units until the early 60s.

 

A model boat is much cheaper than a real one and won't sink with you in it.

  • Member since
    April 2013
Posted by SchattenSpartan on Friday, April 26, 2013 4:21 AM

@EBergerud: Thanks for all  the information.

There are 6 different Marking options in the Eduard kit. 3 american Cobras, 2 french ones and 1 for the Italian air force.

But as they were all used in 1944 i wont use them for this GB

About my signature: I never said that the Mustang was a bad plane, I just like the Jug and its durability more than the P-51 (I love the sluggish, unelegant look of that plane). Btw, I just read that quote somewhere in the Interwebnet and iI liked it, because it sums up, why many pilots of the Jug liked it. So i just took it as my signature

And heres a link I found yesterday: http://www.chuckhawks.com/p47.htm

Clemens

In the lower half, a WWII fighter pilot who flew both planes (if I'm not mistaken) sums up in 12 short ponts, why he liked the Thunderbolt more than the Mustang.

  • Member since
    March 2010
  • From: MN
Posted by Nathan T on Friday, April 26, 2013 8:25 AM

One thing is for certain, the P-47 did alot of the heavy lifting in '43, despite its shorter range. And sadly, I believe Gunther Rall passed away a year or two ago.

 

 

JOIN OUR COMMUNITY!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

SEARCH FORUMS
FREE NEWSLETTER
By signing up you may also receive reader surveys and occasional special offers. We do not sell, rent or trade our email lists. View our Privacy Policy.