Dragon/ Trimaster 190D #FINISHED AT LAST#

Modeling Subjects Aircraft
1

Hi all, If you thought that you’d seen far too many 190D’s ,Sorry to dissapoint you, heres the start of another.

Ive just finished Tamiyas 1/48 version and really enjoyed it (Except for a few nightmares). I had this D/Tri version in my stash and heard it was the better of the 2 kits? One way to find out i spose. On opening the box, WOW, PE (Stainless stuff), White metal, copper pipes. This kit is loaded.

So where better place to start than the ‘Pit’

No probs here, it all went together like clockwork. The only thing i would say is be carefull with thier PE, this stuff doesnt like being re-bent. Make sure you bend it the right way 1st time.

Although the kit seems very thorough i may have to add a throttle level and a bit of wiring here and there. Painting is next up on the pit. Im looking forward to this kit.

Oh yeah, im building it with a torpedo Woo hoo. LOL

…Guy

2

Cool…a D with a torpedo…can’t go wrong with that!

Very nice start.

Andy

3

Nice looking kit…If you don’t mind how much did it cost??[?]

4

Great work so far, keep those pics coming! [:D]

5

Luftwoller that’s a nice kit in terms of accuracy and that’s its a most unusual luftwaffe 46 subject being a D-12 with a Ta 152 tail. That kit also gives you lot of nice parts right in the box to make a very well detailed D. Your work thus far is excellent.

I have 3 of these in a stash and as we speak I’m bashing a dragon D-9 with this dragon D-12 to make an accurate model of the D-13 prototype V63.

When you compare the tamiya D-9 to the dragon kit note the stance of the two. They should be the same on all D’s. The 190’s have a very pronounced and unique stance when sitting on the ground. Tamiya miss this bigtime. It comes down to the landing gears are just not right. Not only are they a scale foot+ short, but they also have too much foward pitch to them. To make matters worse tamiya combined details of a D-13 and a D-9 together. I have heard tails that they fixed the detail problem, but all the kits I have seen still have them. In the end If you want something that easy to build at looks vaugely like a D-9 when built the tamiya is the kit. But if you want a subject that actually looks the part and has alot of accurate details then the dragon kit is the best choice. I can tell you right now that kit you have is not bad fitting for a dragon kit, but it’s no tamiya in the construction dept. Most do not care, but some do. unless you look at alot of pics it’s hard to tell the faults of the to tamiya kit when it’s sit alone. Place it next to a dargon kit and it becomes very clear to anyone looking something not right.

6

“…seen far too many 190D’s”

BLASPHIMER!! If it were the 1400’s you could have your tongue cut out. The fact the 190 wouldn’t exist for 500 years is inconsequential.[:-^]

Great looking progress so far. I have not built this kit but have heard good thing about it. Phoenix is right about the LG, each kit has it problems. The 2 links below give some excellent info on the correct LG stance.

http://www.clubhyper.com/reference/fw190landinggear_1.htm

http://www.clubhyper.com/reference/fw190landinggear_2.htm

I hope you don’t mind me answering your PM question here. After seeing this I’ll bet here will be a few more late war 190’s hitting the forum.

That fuselage color has been was referred to as RLM 84 although that designation never existed. It is said to also have has several different variants as well being described as a blue/green and a wheat like color. The one I mixed on the 190 below was made with RLM 76 as the base adding RLM 02. Not sure the proportions any more. I added 1 tiny drop of yellow and then white to just lighten the whole mix up. The pic shows a nice comparison to the straight 76 on the rudder. RAF Sky is a very close match to what I mixed but needs to be lighted a bit.

The beautiful 190 at this link has a different “84” that is described in the text.

http://hsfeatures.com/features04/fw190d9bigtail32ir_1.htm

7

Thankyou Treadwingmarc something…Who are you now? [:-^] Your always welcome to my threads. Thx for the info. Wow. Theres a lot of it too. Very interesting. I wonder how the Eduard 190 compares to the others?

Anyhoo, heres todays installment. The D/Tri cockpit is fairly decent and doesnt really need a lot of improvements but here goes a few of my efforts.

1st up, there is a distinct lack of throttle lever. D/tri just gives us a uninteresting ‘Nub’. this is duely removed with my wonderous Mission models Chisel.

Then to make a new lever i scrounged through my old PE sets (I save em, you never use everything) Perfect for the job was a pice from a 1/35th KV2 tank [:-^]. Bit of stretched sprue and were laughing,

Next up, i wanted to add a little bit of wiring that i had seen poking from under the top side of the dash, in a walkaround pic ive got. This was easy, just find some thin enough wire and superglue it in place.

Also in that pic you can just see where i added another lever (Not sure for what) that i also have in references. To make this i just cut of a thin piece of waste from another old PE fret.

After glueing it in place, you need a knob NOONE SAY A WORD!!! This is easily produced with a drop of CA and some accelerator. Blob, accellerator, Blob accelerator, Blob, oh you get the gist. Till its big enough.

Thats me Blobbing.

Lastly but by no means leastly. A wire for the column is made. By just CA’ing a piece in the right position. Ta daaa, here are the completed bits.

Next up, leave it for a bit. Go have a cup of tea or something then on with the paint. I think it was Swanny who wrote. ‘Dont add loads of colour everywhere, Keep it subtle’ This was my attempt. Keep an eye on your refs and take it slowly.

Last up, i added a couple of drops of Future into the Instrument faces for shinyocity. Is that a word?

Sorry for whittering on. More soon.

…Guy

8

Lufty - first of all, “shinyocity” is NOT a word. Well, maybe in Britain…[(-D]

Second thing - HOLY CRAP! [:O] That pit looks awesome! Can’t believe that it’s a kit-supplied pit!

Speaking of the kit, do you happen to have a number? I’m looking at DML5534 at Greatmodels…is that the same one?

Wow. [bow]

9

Well JMHO here but I think a lot of the negative feedback on the Tamiya Dora is over stated. I’ll preface this by saying that I’ve never built Tamiya’s Dora in 1/48 but I have built the 1/72 version which is pretty much a carbon copy scaled down version of it’s larger sibling.

Let’s take a look at the real thing:

One of the biggest mistakes I see when I look at 190’s in plastic is the landing gear are too far aft, the wheels should sit noticably in front of the leading edge of the wing. This gives the aircraft a somewhat “spindly” stance when it was actually kind of squat. Where Tamiya did mess up is the wheels, the diameter is too small causing to sit a little shorter than they should but this is a cheap fix since there are plenty of after market resin wheels available.

They did use the D-13 in Boeing’s museum as their reference and they made the faux paus of including the single shell ejection port for the 30 mm cannon that wasn’t present on the D-9 but I believe that was corrected.

10

See what you did you got wing nut all work up, don’t you have a tank to build[:)].Thanks for posting that info about the landing gears. I didn’t think anyone else really took notice. I’m glad to know I’m not the only one.

Luftwaffle you got it. my tamiya D-9 kit # 41 (blue 15 on the box) still has the D-13 wing. But I also have the tamiya kit # 81 (jv44). I just opened this one up today just to see and the wing has been corrected in this offering. Either they still have older kits floating around or the number 41 still have the older wing. I got the blue 15 just this year. I’ve had the jv44 for at least a year or more.

dupes that kit numbers correct. I answered bescause I’m looking at the box.

Looks good. be carfull painting that photo etch. I have found it harder to paint than the plastic cockpit parts. it’s a little more fussy.

For those who are interested here’s what I found out when I first built the tamiya kit many moons ago. I compaired it to several other D’s I had built and then to actual focke-wulf plans. I thought I’d post it on here so you all could see the same thing I saw. Wing nut acticle is correct. I did have this info at the time and I hate to say it but I have found alot of info in some of those reviews to be worng so I usually don’t read them. I’d rather go right to the source in this case focke-wulf.

It’s not slightly off it’s way off.

you can see the wing on the tamiya fits easily under the dragon. also note the dragon wing is up to the canopy on the tamiya.

This is a killer. Look at the upward rake of the dragon nose compared to the tamiya. The difference is not minor. it changes the whole look to the aircraft still on the ground. Also note the tail wheel seems to be undersized as well.

here are a few pics of flight ready D’s in reich service (not US) as a comparsion. Note he prop clearance to the ground and nose angle.

Actual focke-wulf blue prints showing gear location.

One should also be aware that the struts on the 190’s are air over oil and can be adjusted for different take off weight and runway conditions. becasue US air crews either did not care or did not know many of the pics you see of 190’s in US hands the struts are completely pumped down.

11

WOW! I just learned a bunch of technical stuff today that I didn’t know! THANKS!!!

can’t wait to see your Dora finished!

12

That’s good stuff, Stan. Using my way out of cal Mk. 1 Mod. 0 eyeball it almost appears to me that the Trimaster sits just a little higher than the real thing and maybe the landing gear should be raked a little further forward. Maybe spilt the difference between the the Tamiya and the Trimaster? Or maybe not, sometimes I just go by what looks right to me! [%-)]

13

I would say your right on luftwaffle, I found the same thing. I think the dragon gears need slightly more foward rake and maybe slightly on the long side. The tamiya needs to be alot longer and if you lengthen them they would then protrude out further and thus need less rake. The big difference is you can’t really tell too much with the dragon kit. All the angles are close, and it’s got to correct look to it. The tamiya kit IMO just looks wrong. I have built 3 of them and have 2 more in my stash. What I do to fix it is basically what the artical wing nut added described. I added a piece in and remounted correctly to the wing. The smaller tires I did catch on to[D)] .

14

Wow, what a thread. Im learning new stuff about Doras everyday. I also get to build one as well. What a hobby. I have a questiano (Real word Dupes?, Possibly) In one of my many Luftwaffe books, i have a line drawing of a Dora 12 with a small tail, not a biggun. I thought all the late Doras had the big tail? Could the drawing be wrong?

Wont be able to add an update for a couple of days probably. Different shift tomorrow and our local model show on saturday. Im not entering anything but Bodge from here will probably mop up so theres no real point LOL. I may take a few photos and post em.

Thanks again for all the comments, glad you like the build so far.

…Guy

15

Sorry Marc almost forgot. The kit no that i can see is MAB 115:4000 ? Means nothing to me.

…Guy

16

Guy - I think the word you were looking for was “Shinyalicioustication”.

Very nice work man !

Chris

17

WHAT??? Using target parts for a winged-thingie? You should be ashamed of yourself!!! [swg]

[XX] Good thing you said something, cuz’ that one was just begging to be laughed at!

Stan, Marc, Mikester- WOW!!! You guys really know your '190s. A lot of great info presented here, thank you. Makes me want to pull that Trimaster TA-152C-0 outta the closet and build her. [:P]

18

Doras with what is commonly called the “wide tail” are very rare. The tail is actually from the TA-152C/H series. A few D-9’s about 2 total confirmed are known to have had this tail. They are 'borwn 4" of JG26 work # 500647, “black 6” of Jg2 # 500645 and some believe yellow 6 of KGJ 27 # 500648. No D-11,12,13 were ever fitted with the ta tail. There were plans for the D-12/13 to be fitted with ta tail from focke-wulf but non of the 3 D-12 or any of the D-13 prototypes to fly had it. The exact reason why ta tails were found on D-9’s in unknown. The most common line of thinking is these were mechines repaired in the field. if you look at the 2 examples the paint and camo on the tail do not match the rest of the airframe. Neither focke-wulf or the RLM has documentation of any D-9’s being fitted with this tail on record. Now this late in the war and FW’s being built in sub assemblies means anything could have happened.

focke-wulf tested every variant from a fw190A to the ta152C with the 502 aerial torpedo rack (option R-14) and found that the best aircraft to carry it was either the D-9 or the A/F-8. The high altitude jumo 213F and EB engines (D-12/13/152) could carry the load but used more fuel than the 213A or the BMW 801. thus a D-12/R14 was planed and tested but never went beyond that.

here’s a little info on the D-12 for you. One was fitted with the ta-152’s jumo 213Eb power plant. during testing it went 475 MPH at at just over 30K (not exact from memory but close). The test data on this mechine is jaw dropping. The bad thing this D-12 crashed before it could be fully tested. test pilots on both sides indcated that the late D’s and TA’s had performance well above the best allied fighter including the latest spitfire. Too bad they had so few. The D-14/15 would have also been great performers as these were to use a DB fuel injected engine…

19

More great info Stan! I have a resin TA tail for a 1/48 Tamiya DOra, and a High Flight (I think!) resin conversion for a Dragon Dora 9 into a Dora 15. Should make for some interesting birds! Thanks for the info. [tup]

Guy- Sorry, not trying to hijack your thread. [;)]

20

Daywalker you have a 1/48 TA152C and I have a 1/48 torpedo set from a D-12. You want to build something I can guarentee no one has, and I’m probably the only fool who knows about it.

Build this

Tell me that doesn’t tickle your luft ,46 bone. Also note the F-16 at the top has a radial engine and TA tail.