1:32 Hasegawa BF 109 G-14

[al49]

Hi Johann and , first of all, welcome to the forum as, if I understood well, you just joined today.

Besides the above, many thanks for your comments and for the link to the videos.
Al painting, including insignia has been done by airbrush.
I know, at least in theory, the pre-shading technique but I never tried it.
I will probably do it one day but, so far, I prefer the post shading done with Promodeller stuff. The reason is mainly one: if I'm unhappy on the result, I can wipe everything away and start again.
I'm currently applying decals and I will post some pictures soon.
Cheers
Alberto

 

[III/JG53_Johann]

i'm looking forward for the result.. and thanks for the welkome.

I like to use the preshading technique. And i'm trying to master it.. (not that i'm good at it) but i think its a effective methode.

If my hassegawa kit gets ready i wil try to post some foto's. but it wil take some time. i'm working on more than 1 project. recently restarted modeling after 12 years modeling sabbath

 

[Wurger]

Interesting.... why don't you want to show us what you have made so far ? The sub-section is just for the purpose. Also the thread "What on the workbench" in the "Model Kit Reviews" sub-one.

 

[III/JG53_Johann]

i wil try.. my digital camera has urgend needs to be replaced.. quality is bad and often fails to take foto's.. very frustrating. il see what i can do.

greetings.

 

[Wurger]

That's a pity but I see.

 

[III/JG53_Johann]

i'm trying to use the camera of my cellphone.. i wil try to upload where i quit the last time of my modeling.

cheers.

 

[Wurger]

OK.

 

[al49]

Hi,
it's time to show that I did some progress on decals.

Next steps will be a mat coat and some weathering (exhaust stains, oil leaks, gun smoke, chipped varnish etc.)
Any comment/suggestion is more then welcome.
Cheers
Alberto

 

[Airframes]

Looks great Alberto. Is that a control lock on the rudder?

 

[Wurger]

 

[al49]

Looks great Alberto. Is that a control lock on the rudder?

Many thanks Terry for your comment.
Yes, that should be the rudder balance control.
It appares on the original photo of the aircraft

and on pictures shown on Aero Detail no.5

Hase supplied a plastic piece but I preferred to scratch-build in order to get it thinner and possibly more correct in shape.
Alberto

 

[Airframes]

Ah, I see! It's for the rudder trim tab. I hadn't realised it was so large on that model of '109, that's why I thought it was an external control lock, for ground use, to prevent the rudder flapping about.

 

[Aaron Brooks Wolters]

Very nice work Alberto!! That looks fantastic!!

 

[Wayne Little]

Nice work Alberto.....got any definite confirmation of the W.Nr. of this bird ? It's actual number should be 464444 or does it have the error of the '3' as434444? which has been quoted in some sources...??

 

[al49]

Nice work Alberto.....got any definite confirmation of the W.Nr. of this bird ? It's actual number should be 464444 or does it have the error of the '3' as434444? which has been quoted in some sources...??

Yes, according to the best source I know, the book on ANR written Ferdinando D'amico and Gabriele Valentini

the correct W.Nr. should be 464444.
A note on page 167 of the above book states the following:
"A close-up of the tail clearly reveals, however, that the number applied read 434444. As several researches have confirmed that this does not belong to any known Bf109 batch, this could be an error in that a "3" was applied instead of a "6".
I personally decide not to put any W.Nr.
Alberto

 

[Wayne Little]

Thanks Alberto, we have the same books...personally I think it IS 464444 and that the blow up of the image is showing us a bit of an illusion with the angle and camo mottle.

I know of 3 other instances where W.Nr's are different to what they appear to be when images are blown up in an attempt to confirm detail or camo prevents it from being seen clearly.

In this case I just can't see that a number would be applied in error.....just my 2 cents worth ...

 

[Airframes]

Very doubtful that a Werke Nr would be applied in error. Apart from the known 'precision' of all things undertaken by Germany, especially formal records, still prevalent today, the number was the identity of the aircraft from the works order drawings, through the whole process of manufacture of each and every part, to final assembly and the remainder of it's 'life'.
It is highly unlikely that an error in applying the number on the fin, whether painted or by decal, would pass the final works inspection. Even if, at some time in 'the field', some overpainting, for example by mottle, or damage had occured, this would almost certainly have been rectified to show the number correctly. Afterall, any work needed on the airframe would be logged on the service records by the Werke Nr., and the only way of a 'mechanic' ensuring the correct aircraft was being worked on would be by seeing this number on the airframe, and on the data plate fixed to the port, front, main fuselage section, each being checked against the other.
Other markings on airframes might at some time be obliterated or partly obscured, but the W.Nr was, AFAIK, always kept visible.

 

[al49]

Well, I'm not an expert at all, but I tried to find a confirmation to the above on other books.
On this one, printed in 1995,

at page 144 it's stated that there were no G14 with W.Nr. 43XXXX buit by Erla, WNF or Regensburg.
The same is stated by Claude Mermet on this one

issued in 2008.
The book on ANR camouflage was printed in 2005 so it's possible both the second and third used the first as a reference, but this is only my personal opinion.
Cheers
Alberto

 

[Wayne Little]

The primary experten such as Prien and Rodeike and others... on the 109 would have most likely gotten their info from original sources.

Some simply use secondary references and make errors which seem to continue on and on and on....so it certainly pays to cross check many sources!

 

[Airframes]

Certainly does! The research for my 136 Sqn Spitfire has just proved that !