login   |    register
World War II
Discuss WWII and the era directly before and after the war from 1935-1949.
Hosted by Rowan Baylis
REVIEW
1:32 Bf 109E-3
Merlin
Staff MemberSenior Editor
AEROSCALE
#017
_VISITCOMMUNITY
United Kingdom
Joined: June 11, 2003
KitMaker: 17,263 posts
AeroScale: 12,639 posts
Posted: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 - 10:26 AM UTC


Bill Cross takes a first look at Trumpeter's hotly anticipated new largescale Emil.

Link to Item

If you have comments or questions please post them here.

Thanks!
Kornbeef
_VISITCOMMUNITY
England - South East, United Kingdom
Joined: November 06, 2005
KitMaker: 1,635 posts
AeroScale: 1,546 posts
Posted: Thursday, February 11, 2010 - 12:21 AM UTC
Hi guys,

I've bought this kit. I've noticed a few things, not that I'm a Bf 109 expert by any means. The engine detail is incredibly good but some areas seem awfully wrong. the fuselage cross section behind the wings is too square but quite easy to remedy and the rear fillet at the wingroot needs extending a little but neither are big head aches. Also the vents on the nose top need opening up, another simple task.

What is bad though is the thickness of the trailing edges, the fit of the flaps to the radiator housings. I am unsure about the exhausts as nice as they are I think the E3 were squarer in section than these. Now most infuriating and please correct me if I'm wrong but the cockpit is all wrong...not an E at all but that of a later mark, I checked it against other E's built on this site and its shot. no flat section behind the pilot before the bulkhead, a cannon housing on the floor which is a pity as the detail is good.

I'm sure better Emil experts can say more but this marrs what otherwise is a lovely kit.

Keith
Merlin
Staff MemberSenior Editor
AEROSCALE
#017
_VISITCOMMUNITY
United Kingdom
Joined: June 11, 2003
KitMaker: 17,263 posts
AeroScale: 12,639 posts
Posted: Thursday, February 11, 2010 - 12:43 AM UTC
Hi Keith

Thanks for the extra info. As Bill can confirm, I did something of a double take when I saw the illustration of the interior details in his shot of the instructions.

All the best

Rowan
bill_c
Staff MemberCampaigns Administrator
MODEL SHIPWRIGHTS
_VISITCOMMUNITY
New Jersey, United States
Joined: January 09, 2008
KitMaker: 10,351 posts
AeroScale: 1,163 posts
Posted: Thursday, February 11, 2010 - 04:50 AM UTC
Rowan and I have had some back & forth about the kit, and there are some internal details that may be suspect. I have checked those and other details against the "Walk Around" as I could, but I have found three things about these books:

1.) They never seem to take pictures of the areas I want to see, LOL!

2.) The photos they do have are usually limited to a surviving museum relic that may or may not be restored to perfect accuracy (the BF110 G-4 in the RAF Museum, for example, has the bomb pod on the belly as if it were still a Zerstoerer configuration).

3.) The photographers had limited access to the internal detailing, usually with some cowls popped open, but not really scouring the insides. That's not their fault, it's just what they were allowed access to.

I looked over this kit very carefully, but until I build it (and until it is compared to plans and schematics), I won't know what areas are suspect. But it looks pretty damn good. It's not perfect; few kits are.

Rowan wondered if the Swiss variant in the kit meant that Trumpeter used the aircraft in the Swiss Air Force Museum at Duebendorf. I looked at that version and the kit, and found that it did NOT, at least in the detailing, follow that variant. In fact, if you want to build the Swiss variant, you will need to modify the kit in some areas.

As for using other builds on this site, Keith, I mean no disrespect to those modelers, but the only reference we should use in evaluating this kit is historical photos, schematics or at the very least, surviving examples.

Kornbeef
_VISITCOMMUNITY
England - South East, United Kingdom
Joined: November 06, 2005
KitMaker: 1,635 posts
AeroScale: 1,546 posts
Posted: Thursday, February 11, 2010 - 05:41 AM UTC
I totally agree Bill with your comments, however since I bought this kit I also bought the Kagero Bf 109e pt 1, while I know theres always controversy about different publications there are some cockpit interior shots which show a different layout. Also the after market cockpit producers while not doing a one specific to the E3 do show the other configuration. Even the old Airfix 1:24th beast that loiters unloved in my loft does.

Still if everything was perfect, we'd all be bored and the aftermarket manufacturers would be starving, for the money this really is a good kit, just a shame its flawed in the first place most people peer.

K
bill_c
Staff MemberCampaigns Administrator
MODEL SHIPWRIGHTS
_VISITCOMMUNITY
New Jersey, United States
Joined: January 09, 2008
KitMaker: 10,351 posts
AeroScale: 1,163 posts
Posted: Thursday, February 11, 2010 - 05:53 AM UTC
Keith, I plan to compare the cockpit in more detail and see if there are major discrepancies. Frankly, I've seen so many different cockpits over the years, I don't know sometimes where the manufacturers and AM folks are getting their information, LOL!

UPDATE: I compared the cockpit as laid out in the kit instructions and some parts over lunch and checked them against the Walkaround book I reference in the review. It seems the areas of possible difference are mostly about what's along the cockpit walls. The starboard side of the cockpit looks pretty close, though there is a console with some nodes along the upper edge. This looks like a console in the actual plane, though the console is covered in the photos.

The port side of the cockpit has some modules that are not in the photos of either the E-3 in the Deutsches Museum in Munich nor the Swiss Air Force Museum in Duebendorf. I would like to see what other reviewers and experts will have to say about this.
Kornbeef
_VISITCOMMUNITY
England - South East, United Kingdom
Joined: November 06, 2005
KitMaker: 1,635 posts
AeroScale: 1,546 posts
Posted: Sunday, February 14, 2010 - 07:11 AM UTC
Is rather suprised none of the Axis builders have picked up this thread at all?
VonCuda
_VISITCOMMUNITY
North Carolina, United States
Joined: November 28, 2005
KitMaker: 2,216 posts
AeroScale: 1,080 posts
Posted: Sunday, February 14, 2010 - 11:51 AM UTC
I'm waiting to see you build this one Bill. Even with it's inaccuracies it looks like a great kit, and at $50.00 it's still priced below many comparable 1/48 scale kits.


Hermon
bill_c
Staff MemberCampaigns Administrator
MODEL SHIPWRIGHTS
_VISITCOMMUNITY
New Jersey, United States
Joined: January 09, 2008
KitMaker: 10,351 posts
AeroScale: 1,163 posts
Posted: Monday, February 15, 2010 - 03:28 AM UTC
Hermon, I think you've hit the nail on the head: it's a very good kit for the money. The Eduards are running $20+ more, and have been reamed out by the experts for inaccuracies. This one isn't perfect, either, but it looks to be very pleasurable. The Tamiya Spitfire, for example, is $112, 3x the price.

Is it 3x the kit? I don't know the answer to that question.
TedMamere
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Moselle, France
Joined: May 15, 2005
KitMaker: 5,653 posts
AeroScale: 4,347 posts
Posted: Monday, February 15, 2010 - 05:13 AM UTC

Quoted Text

Is it 3x the kit? I don't know the answer to that question.



Yes, it definitely is!

Jean-Luc
Kornbeef
_VISITCOMMUNITY
England - South East, United Kingdom
Joined: November 06, 2005
KitMaker: 1,635 posts
AeroScale: 1,546 posts
Posted: Monday, February 15, 2010 - 05:50 AM UTC
I'm 80% in agreeance with you Jean-Luc but for 100.00 I was somewhat surprised to find no weapons or gun bay detail under all that beautifully engineered work and I think personally the wheelwells could have been done better. Saying that it is a beautiful piece of work...I just hope my lack of ability doesnt hash it up too bad


And Bill, you know as well as I do, that us Modellers are a spoilt bunch and never happy with anything these days. It seems the more maufacturers improve, the more we expect. Sure maufacturers make some awful cockups but are they that critical sometimes. A kit being a mil to long or slightly different profile.....when so much is sketchy, shouldnt have it lambasted around the community like it had plague....comments on improving hoping the manufacturer may retool some parts for future releases are good and to point to the aftermarket community possible markets but not to flame those that give us the chance to build it in the first place. Lets think back a few years to what we used to do chopping changing reprofiling things to make a truly awful kit accurate without complaint, just thankfull we had something to save us scratching a whole aircraft. Oh how times change

This isnt pointed at anyone...or any manufacturer


Keith

bill_c
Staff MemberCampaigns Administrator
MODEL SHIPWRIGHTS
_VISITCOMMUNITY
New Jersey, United States
Joined: January 09, 2008
KitMaker: 10,351 posts
AeroScale: 1,163 posts
Posted: Monday, February 15, 2010 - 06:40 AM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text

Is it 3x the kit?


Yes, it definitely is!


Well, I'm def going to have to purchase it, then.