Thanks for digging into this, Pj. That’s actually encouraging.
The gun difference doesn’t bother me much because I’d probably replace or improve what’s in the kit anyway, so I can deal with that.
That cowling difference is so subtle that I doubt I’d ever notice it if I hadn’t already gone down this rabbit hole. Of course, now that I KNOW it’s there, some rivet counter will probably point it out if I build it.
I think I’m going to kick this one over to our Group Build master. @fjs3, what’s the ruling? Is my allegedly SBD-3-enough SBD-3 acceptable for Midway?
If Freddie gives it his blessing, I may pull this thing back out of the Bucket of Doom and build the kit I bought for this Group Build in the first place.
I think ‘if I am remembering right’ that my Hasagewa SBD is a -3 and I got the green light on it and decided that’s the one I’m building or its a -2. either way build and enjoy the journey… Then I’m doing a C-47 for your group build. IF and I mean if I have time I may try to tackel the PBY-5 build later…
Since PJ already has done an excellent job in describing the differences between the sub-types, I don’t need to address that. Thanks for ‘Heads Up’ PJ.
As long as you’re not building a -1, you’re good to go. I have a bunch of parts left over from a build my buddy was doing of a -3. Unfortunately, he got really sick and wasn’t able to continue with the build. Anyway, I was given a bunch of his models to find good homes for, to help his wife raise money. Most were sold off, but there are always a couple that did not go, “half-builts” and started kits, which nobody wants and I was given as a thank you.
I think I have the part’s you’ll need; fuselage halves, wings, cowling, (All three sections), pretty much everything you may need to make one of those -1 kits into a -3. I have a -1 in my stash. I am going to compare these spare parts with it, and see if there are fit issues.
When you get a chance, PM me with where you live and I can get these out to you, if need be. The only thing I do not have is the duel mount .30 rear weapons. However, I do know that there are several 3D printed replacements out there that are a drop in to the AM kit.
I’ll investigate on my end and let you know if these will work.
I’m fairly confident that the plastic in my SBD-3 box is actually the SBD-1 configuration, despite what it says on the box. From what we’ve been able to find, this is a known issue with some of the Accurate Miniatures SBD kits. The -1 used a different cowling configuration, including the deeper intake/scoop, while the -2/-3 used the later configuration. Apparently some of the SBD-3 boxings ended up with the earlier parts.
I know I need at least one different cowling part to make mine a proper -3, and possibly more of the cowling. I’ll send you some pictures from the instructions and the parts I have so you can compare them with your spares.
I’d be happy to help support your friend’s wife and pay for any parts I can use.
Thanks very much for offering to look. I really appreciate it.
Unfortunately I do not have a 3D printer, nor the knowledge on how to use it if I did! LOL!
I do remember seeing stuff form this kit, LIKE that listed on Scale Mates as aftermarket improvements. These are more geared for the AM kit than the Hasegawa, as one is much older than the other.
Really only thing I may need is the .50s for the front, the rear stayed .30 cal. the whole time . The -3 had twin .30’s in back and two .50’s in front.
If you’re building a Marine -2, the single weapon in the rear will work. the -3’s all had switched over to the twin .30’s. I think all SBD’s had .50 up front, but don’t quote me on that. At least the -2 and and newer marks had them.
Do need the two weapons for up front? I have a couple spares from that kit I mentioned earlier to Sam.
Freddie, I did a little more digging after reading your post, and it looks like I’m going to need the twin .30s in the back as well.
The Smithsonian’s information on the SBD says the SBD-3 initially had a single rear .30, but the twin .30 installation became standard during SBD-3 production, and earlier SBD-3s were retrofitted in the field. Apparently combat experience at Coral Sea drove that change just before Midway.
My kit, of course, only gives me the single rear .30. And calling the kit gun a “machine gun” may be giving it more credit than it deserves. It’s basically a little plastic blob with a tube sticking out of it.
So I may be looking for a decent aftermarket twin .30 setup anyway. Between that and the missing SBD-3 cowling parts, this supposedly Midway SBD-3 boxing is becoming quite the adventure.
I would like to count myself as “interested,” though I must caveat that with, “I don’t have ANYTHING to build at this point.” The Battle of Midway was one of my most ‘gripping’ historical accounts that I’ve read – and I’ve read a LOT of WWI, WWII, Korea and Vietnam era accounts of military encounters.
If I can, I will most likely get a B-26 Marauder and create a diorama of a crashlanded unit back to Midway. That way I can work to my strengths in diorama scenery. Otherwise, I may be fine with getting some 1/700 scale waterline craft and do some sort of Japan/USA display. I just don’t know how much I can do at this point beyond expressing interest.
I have been out of the hobby for a very good while at this point. I AM interested, though.
you will have a lot of work to do and I suggest to do a little research as there were only 4 B-26"s two were lost at the engagement and two made it back to the island of which only one succefully landed.
@Pj_s_thunderbolt All of the B-26s at MIdway were the short-wing version. The longer wings did not appear until August of 1942.
In 1942, aviation pioneer and company founder Glenn L. Martin was called before the Senate Special Committee to Investigate the National Defense Program, (or also known as the “Truman Committee”), which was investigating defense contracting abuses. Senator Harry S Truman of Missouri, the committee chairman (and future Vice President and 33rd President of the United States in 1945–1953), asked Martin why the B-26 had problems. Martin responded that the wings were too short. Senator Truman curtly asked why the wings had not been changed. When Martin replied that the plans were too close to completion, and his company already had the contract, Truman’s testy response was quick and to the point: In that case, the contract would be cancelled. Martin corrected the wings.[51] (By February 1943, the newest model aircraft, the B-26B-10, had an additional 6 feet (1.8 m) of wingspan, plus uprated engines, more armor, and larger guns.)[52]
The Martin B-26C Marauder was the designation given to those B-26s built at Martin’s factory in Omaha, Nebraska. These aircraft were similar to the B-26B, although production began at different times meaning that the block numbers didn’t match up. A total of 1,210 B-26Cs were completed at Omaha, starting in late 1942 and ending when the factory moved over to production of the Boeing B-29 Superfortress.
All B-26Cs had the long wings and tall tail fin and rudder introduced on the B-26B-10. Production began with the B-26C-5, of which three were accepted in August 1942, becoming the first long-winged Marauders to reach the Air Force.
Of course, now that I KNOW it’s there, some rivet counter will probably point it out if I build it.
