Messerschmitt BF109F-2 'Friedrich' set

Thanks Rob, got em converted!:applause: Do you want me to send them back to you to put back in the package or just upload here?
 
Bravo/4 said:
It took a while Luca, but finally got them out there!:mixedsmi:

The Tropical versions will be released next, then I'll do more skins for ETO, and more MTO!

Big thanks to the guys who helped me sort this out, very much appreciated!

Here's a couple of MTO schemes to come, on the proper Trop version!


Click to expand...
When wiil these be available ?:jump:
 
Just seen this - yes, some very final production E-types did apparently have the cockpit in RLM 66 rather than 02. In order to stay historically correct all round though, you'd need to stick with 02. Don't go by survivors, which have certainly been repainted since they left the factory, either during an overhaul or by their new owners.
 
Great info Nigel! So by very late E model we're talking E-7 or E-9 (and not E-8 as I understand these were updated E-1 airframes)?
 
E-7, E-7/B and /N especially - you're right about the E-8 being modified from existing E-1 airframes - therefore completely overhauled though - and the E-9 was modified from E-7 aircraft. The problem is that the total mess that the Bf109 became began with the E-type... And reached its conclusion with the G-Type where by the end, it was difficult to find two aircraft which were exactly identical! Apparently, Arado and Fiesler-built 109Es had their cockpits painted in RLM 66 before those of other builders. More conjecture... And some apparently had both colours, using 66 for the rear deck and panel, and 02 for the rest.

But if you stay with the as-is RLM 02 cockpit for all E-Types, you can't go wrong. Early F-1 types will most probably have had the RLM 02 cockpit though, as they left the production lines in the autumn of 1940. RLM 66 was officialised in November 1941, but this was retroactive and simply authorised what had already been going on for some months already.

It's probably safe enough to say that if the aircraft left the factory in 74/75/76 rather than 70/71/65 or 71/02/65, then the cockpit would probably be in RLM 66.

Probably. Possibly. Assuming. And so on. But that is about all anyone can do!

Paradoxically, the Germans, with their reputation for being extremely disciplined and legalistic, tended to paint their aircraft comparatively freely, while the British, with our reputation for being flamboyant individualists, stuck pretty closely to the rulebook!
 
Ack...what a mess. I think it may be a part of why they lost the war - so many specializations, variations even down to not being able to decide what color to paint the cockpit - it doesn't lend itself to streamlined mass production especially when compared to US, Russian and for the most part British production. And of course Herr Hitler had to have his fingers mixed up in so much of it, usually for the worse.
 
Very true! And when you remember that the 109 was designed for easy, modular mass-production, compared to the Spitfire which was quite difficult to build, you can see how wrong it went. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that the modular design of the 109 was the root of its downfall, in that it was too easy to upgrade or partially upgrade or modify the airframe even in the field. For example, changing the entire tail assembly from the standard to the tall type was a matter of a couple of hours, if that. And the tailwheel could come with the new part, so by the end of the day, a standard G-6 has taken on some of the features of a G-14 lookalike with a non-standard G-10 tailwheel... While Rene and I were researching our series of G and K-type 109s, we came time and time again up against utterly intractable problems trying to define what constituted which sub-type. The G-series gets very complicated towards the end...
 
On the bright side though, you could probably find examples of each variant fitted out in a way that matches our stock G-10 and all them be more or less correct!:mixedsmi:
 
gecko said:
On the bright side though, you could probably find examples of each variant fitted out in a way that matches our stock G-10 and all them be more or less correct!:mixedsmi:
Click to expand...

Well, the stock model is so poorly done, with so little definition - cowling bumps, wing blisters, air vents, etc - are all so indistinct that you have to paint the details in or there won't be any. Which is quite useful for, say, the G-10 which could have two types of wing blisters and three types of cowling... If I remember correctly! Not to mention long or short tailwheels, second or third type (in the G series) main wheels (with the corresponding blisters) long, short or no radio masts, 20 or 30mm motor cannon, and so on and so forth... Total confusion.

Back to the F-Type.

I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm on the edge of my seat waiting for the Mediterranean and Channel Front ones...
 
ndicki said:
...Not to mention long or short tailwheels, second or third type (in the G series) main wheels (with the corresponding blisters) long, short or no radio masts, 20 or 30mm motor cannon, and so on and so forth... Total confusion...
Click to expand...

You're not kidding Nigel: I had a look at a book on 109s recently and it's quite head-spinning when you get to the Gustavs - not to mention the cockpits. :icon_eek: :isadizzy:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top