Looks very nice, but no company has ever correctly portrayed the shape of the lower wing cannon bulge, including Dragon here.
The shape is like a flat bell-shaped curve, with the sides moving in towards the middle before dropping to form the main shape.
1 reply
Perhaps but photographs do not show shapes accurately and the further away from the centre of the lens, the worse the distortion. Then there is the distortion caused by perspective. The actual bulge is not shaoed like those photographs unless whomever took them used an expensive lens, ensured minimal distirtion when takjng the shots and then adjusted them using sotfware.
I agree that what you say is generally true except that an expensive lenses and manipulative software are not required to get good, reasonably accurate shots of airframe shapes and details. The primary requirement is that the photographer properly position themselves for the shot of the subject, with the awareness that likely no photograph will be absolutely 100% but certainly can be accurate enough for scale modeling purposes, being that no model is an absolutely 100% depiction of the real thing. In the case of these photos, while they aren’t absolutely perfect for the subject at hand, they’re close enough to demonstrate the generally smooth aerodynamic – not abrupt – lines of the bulge.
I stand by my original statement that no manufacturer has yet to accurately portray the shapes of the Bf 109E underwing cannon bulge, although I’ll add that most kits I’m aware of have fairly good approximations, just without the subtle (inverted) bell curve shape. Presently I’m working (off-and-on) at reshaping Tamiya items to add to planned future Wingsy Kits builds (will be making a mold for resin copies for the multiple I intend to build).
I’ve added three more photos for reference. The photo of the crashed aircraft is useful in its display of the contours of the access door aft panel line, which definitely shows the bell curve shape.
And to be sure, my bringing-up this issue of a minor shape problem with the current crop of Bf 109E kits is by no means intended as a can’t-be-built slam against any of them. I’m just pointing-out a perennially over-looked detail item.
Best regards to all,
Mike
I really do like the idea of a one-piece fuselage. At first I was like wait! I don’t get to put ll the pieces together, but getting rid of the fuselage lines is a good thing.
Yes, it’s a very nice piece of engineering. But, ironically, the '109s did have a seam right down the middle of both the top and bottom of the rear fuselage! But I think I see the upper seam faintly on the spine, so hopefully the bottom has one also.
Ahh,who needs another 109 what we really need is !!!
Seriously,this is cool I’ll give it a shot.
Wonder whats coming next?
This looks like an awesome kit. A one piece fuselage, ingenious. I will not knock it although this gets into the debate of simplifying a model verse authenticity and accuracy. Removing the seam line from the top and bottom of the fuselage is an inaccuracy as the airframe was designed to be assembled in sections, and each section had a left and right half. Those seams are visible on the real aircraft if one looks hard enough.
1 reply
I believe Dragon did capture the centerline seam. It appears to be faintly visible in one of the exploded view images in the article. Please see the attached capture.
Great catch - thank you. This looks like an awesome + kit.
I have to correct myself…
Instead of saying “the sides moving in towards the middle before dropping to form the main shape”, I should’ve just said the “outboard side”, not “sides.”
The inboard side of the bulge is just a gentle, flattening curve moving out to the middle.
My apologies!