Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]

CLICK HERE to see new posts in last 24 hours
Mark all forums read
Welcome to 72nd Aircraft. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Brengun Allison Mustang at Nuremberg Show
Topic Started: Feb 3 2017, 12:41 PM (1,999 Views)
MDriskill
Hero
[ * ]
OK, I really don't wanna be one of THOSE people...but, I was looking at the sprues with a Mustang enthusiast friend yesterday, and we found ourselves wondering if the fuselage halves don't look a bit too tall. This glitch noticeably disfigures the Italeri kit, which incorrectly assumed the A and B series had the same basic geometry (fuselage of Merlin-engined Mustangs was about 3 inches taller at the firewall than the Allison-powered variants).

IMHO, the drawings in the recent books by SAM and Valiant have the same fault.

I hope I'm wrong on this one, though. It's hard to tell too much from early test shot pics, and the molds are not finished, after all.

FWIW, the amazing Japanese modeler Jumpei Temma is currently working on an A-36, in Another Scale, but as usual is developing a rather amazing set of drawings as he goes. Worth a look:

http://www.geocities.jp/yoyuso/p51a/p51a-1.html

Goto Top
 
John Thompson
Member Avatar
Hero
[ * ]
I had the same concern regarding fuselage depth, although only because (as you identify) it's an error that's happened before. At this point, I'm willing to believe that 3" in 1/72 scale is almost impossible to discern in a not-well-focussed on-line image that could also be subject to distortion, either optical or digital.

Thanks for the link - JT's (hey - same initials as me, but that's as far as it goes) is always inspiring!

John (with fingers crossed!)
i cant brain today - i have the dumb
Goto Top
 
Graham Boak
Hero
[ * ]
You can also look at the position of the tail, and how much the rear fuselage is raised above the bottom of the nose. I have to add my concerns to those above - it doesn't look right. To those of us who have had similar incorrect kits (Modelnews?) (or indeed P-51B kits) in the past, it looks awfully familiar. Whilst agreeing that photos can distort, are there other signs of distortion in the view that would support this?

Bear in mind that you are not looking for 3 inches in some long distance - you are looking at the gap between the top of the wing and the canopy. This is a fairly small distance, and 3 inches is a fairly large percentage change.

I'd love a good A-36, and I like the Brengun approach to the treatment of the airbrakes. But I need more.
Lancashire, UK
Goto Top
 
John Thompson
Member Avatar
Hero
[ * ]
Hmmm - my joy is crushed. In fact, I'll go further and say that the cowling side panels appear to be slightly bulged instead of completely flat, the way they should be. See Temma's build of the AM 1/48 kit previously linked - there's an image there showing a correct template being held against the fuselage. I have at least one example of every 1/72 Allison Mustang kit ever made and, while it's been several years since I've checked, my recollection is that none of them gets this detail correct, not even the Academy one. Yes, you can sand the sides flat, but this not only eliminates panel line detail, it also makes the nose, which is already narrow, even worse in plan view.

Well, ignoring that flaw in the Academy kit, maybe the Brengun wings can be used to convert it to an A-36A, since Academy shows no sign of producing variants other than the P-51*!

Reduce my order to one, until further notice... <_<

John

*Edit - corrected for type - was P-51A, not P-51 (no suffix)
i cant brain today - i have the dumb
Goto Top
 
Paul Boyer
Member Avatar
Hero
[ * ]
Academy's kit out of the box is the P-51 (no suffix), not the P-51A.

I have converted Academy kits into the Mustang Mk.I and the P-51A with judicious surgery. So far, it is the best Allison Mustang plastic kit in the scale. That said, the Czech resin kit of the A-36 was even better, rivaling the Accurate Miniatures kit in detail and (to my eye) accuracy. Good luck finding one now. Perhaps Bren Gun had one to examine.
Goto Top
 
John Thompson
Member Avatar
Hero
[ * ]
Oops - my bad! Talk about poor research - I didn't even go and check, I just did a quick search and went with a summary Google pulled up from Scalemates that said "P-51A". Previous post duly corrected - thanks!

FWIW, Scalemates does say:

1:72 P-51A Mustang (Academy 12401)
P-51A Mustang "North Africa"
Academy 1:72
12401

John
i cant brain today - i have the dumb
Goto Top
 
InchHigh
Member Avatar
It's a good day to build.
[ * ]
Is there something which makes the P-51 family particularly hard to get right, or is the P-51 just so well documented that it's aficionados are particularly hard to satisfy?
Jeff

Time spent modeling is not deducted from your lifespan.

I spent most of my money on beer and women. The rest of it I just wasted.
Goto Top
 
John Thompson
Member Avatar
Hero
[ * ]
I think it's like any specific aircraft for which you have enthusiasm - spend enough time staring at photos and drawings and kit parts, and you become overly sensitized to even minor shape issues which don't (and shouldn't necessarily) bother those happy souls whose reaction is, "It looks like a Mustang to me!". That being said, it does seem that the fuselage depth and shape differences between Allison- and Merlin-engined versions are somewhat obscure, in the minds of most kit manufacturers. So, it's a little of both!

John
i cant brain today - i have the dumb
Goto Top
 
Graham Boak
Hero
[ * ]
I think it is just that many do not realise quite how significant the differences are between the Allison and Merlin-engined versions. The comparative obscurity of the Allison variants also makes people fail to realise the differences between members of even this sub-family.

Bear in mind that there is not such thing as a simple aircraft, which is particularly true of ones produced in large numbers and different variants in a time of rapid change, but it is much easier to make drawings and models as though there are. Largely this is simply because people do not understand this and thus feel no need to look for differences.

If you think P-51s are difficult, look at the family stemming from the NA-16: BT-9/BC-1/BT-14/SNJ/T-6/Harvard/Wirraway/Yale/Oak/Boomerang etc etc.
Lancashire, UK
Goto Top
 
Greenshirt
Member Avatar
Tim Holland, Southern MD - USA
[ * ]
Same story, different aircraft:

Bf-109
Fw-190
Spitfire
Hurricane
Thunderbolt
Mustang
...the list goes on...we don't yet have THE perfect kit.

I dream of the days when I was ignorant of the differences, and just built models as fast as I could. Still possible to build quickly, but now I fuss over size of intake, rake of windshield, or length of nose. I can and do sometimes live with slight (won't call them minor) errors, such as the Tamiya Spitfires, but they do look a bit off to me.

If the difference is significant (those Merlins on the Revell Halifax...) I just cannot go there. Will the Brengun Mustangs be that far off? I'm anxiously awaiting the plastic, and hope it's close enough that I can overlook it. I WANT a family of Allison Mustangs.
Tim Holland

I'm a "green shirt" because I work on the carrier's flight deck and maintain US Navy aircraft. Safe sorties are my life so we can be anywhere, anytime -- from the Sea.

http://greenshirt-modeler.blogspot.com/
Goto Top
 
woody
Hero
[ * ]
I have seen, somewhere out there on the internet a photo of a P-51B next to a P-51. The difference in depth of the fuselage, although only 4 inches, is quite surprising. And noticeable. The Allison Mustang has been quite neglected because it didn't get the glory that the Merlin versions got. There are many differences between the Allison/Merlin versions, equipment, dimensions and systems operations. There are also differences between the Allison versions. And don't forget that the US and RAF Allison versions had differences between similar versions as well. The Allison Mustang is a very complicated subject, possibly more so than the rest of the Mustang family put together. As far as I know the definitive reference has yet to be written on the Allison variants, although there are some people on the P-51sig claiming they're working on it, I doubt it will ever see the light of day. As Paul says, so far the Academy kit is our best available choice. Hopefully the Brengun kit will be better, but we won't know for sure until we can get our hands on it. I know I'll be picking one up to see where it stands.
Cheers,
Woody
Goto Top
 
J.C. Bahr
Member Avatar
Hero
[ * ]
Greenshirt,Feb 8 2017
10:26 AM
I WANT a family of Allison Mustangs.

Amen brother! Was SO hoping that Accurate Miniatures first foray into our scale was going to be their Mustangs and then it came out they were going to do IL-2's... which ultimately took Academy to FINALLY release one... :rolleyes:

The Tamiya and Academy IL-2's are nice, but I wanted Allison Mustangs far more! This should have been catered to by a mainstream manufacturer long ago... not all these limited run companies that just never quite get there.
J.C. Bahr

"A life is like a garden. Perfect moments can be had, but not preserved, except in memory. LLAP" - Leonard Nimoy
Goto Top
 
Graham Boak
Hero
[ * ]
woody,Feb 8 2017
09:08 PM
I have seen, somewhere out there on the internet a photo of a P-51B next to a P-51. The difference in depth of the fuselage, although only 4 inches, is quite surprising. And noticeable. ...........As Paul says, so far the Academy kit is our best available choice. Hopefully the Brengun kit will be better, but we won't know for sure until we can get our hands on it. I know I'll be picking one up to see where it stands.
Cheers,
Woody

Not just the difference in depth, but the shape of the underside. The entire rear fuselage is higher on the Merlin-engined variants and the curve up from the radiator is much more distinct. As on the Brengun model.

As to knowing for sure: we have been shown the shape of the Brengun kit, and it isn't right. We do know - now - that it isn't going to be better than the Academy one. It is always possible, I suppose, that they will cancel their production and retool it, but it seems less than a likely outcome. I rather doubt that such small companies have the finances to cope with that. Perhaps they could do just replacement fuselages? That still leave the wingroot, but I've fudged that before.

I think it sad, the company has produced some very promising kits so far and I was looking forward to a decent A-36.
Lancashire, UK
Goto Top
 
dixieflyer
Member Avatar
Hero
[ * ]
We haven't even seen the kit yet. It may BE a decent A-36.

Center yourself grasshopper. B)

Warren
"History is the lie we all agree upon."
Goto Top
 
Graham Boak
Hero
[ * ]
Look at the photos of the example on show. We may not have held the kit yet, but we have seen it, or enough of it. This isn't particularly subtle, only detectable by the illuminati.
Lancashire, UK
Goto Top
 
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Kits, Aftermarket, etc. What's New? · Next Topic »