Petlyakov Pe-2 - Zvezda 1:72

[hal bregg]

Hello!

The model was purchased a few years ago.
Pe-2, projected by Vladimir Petlyakov (in jail) as a heavy fighter, then changed into diver, perhaps mostly used as horizontal bomber.
Quite modern (for Soviet conditions), and useful construction - over 11 000 produced (!).

Model:
Pe-2 FT, airplane of the Baltic Fleet 12th Guards regiment commander Lt. Col. Vasilly Rakov, 1944/45.
Painted freehand, open nacelle bomb bays added.

 

[Wurger]

 

[Snautzer01]

That a beauty.

 

[Gnomey]

Good work!

 

[Vic Balshaw]

Very nice and I do like the soft lines on the camo colours.

 

[Warbirdnutball]

Hello!

The model was purchased a few years ago.
Pe-2, projected by Vladimir Petlyakov (in jail) as a heavy fighter, then changed into diver, perhaps mostly used as horizontal bomber.
Quite modern (for Soviet conditions), and useful construction - over 11 000 produced (!).

Model:
Pe-2 FT, airplane of the Baltic Fleet 12th Guards regiment commander Lt. Col. Vasilly Rakov, 1944/45.
Painted freehand, open nacelle bomb bays added.



View attachment 794832View attachment 794833View attachment 794834View attachment 794871View attachment 794835View attachment 794836View attachment 794837View attachment 794838


View attachment 794874View attachment 794840View attachment 794841

Looks great! I have an Italieri to build myself, but I seriously doubt I'll be able to pull off this level of quality. You have done a really incredible job.

 

[hal bregg]

I have an Italieri to build myself, but I seriously doubt I'll be able to pull off this level of quality.

"You won't know, if you won't try" - Italeri kit seems quite plausible.
Pe-2 model, because untypical, could be an interesting item on WW2 shelf.

Thanks for nice comments, overall I like my model too, but: why while making a "maximum opened" model I didn't open the dive brakes?.
Sh-t!, I must make another one....

 

[YakMan]

Hi!
I am interested in the Pe-2 because it is very similar to the Tu-2 which holds particular interest for me. The Tu-2 too was directed by Stalin to be a dive bomber but late in design the directive for it to be a dive bomber was lifted but too late to change the super-strong airframe so that was retained and just the underwing dive brakes deleted. So the whole aircraft was a lot heavier than it needed to be on account of the extra strength built-in but that did mean it stayed in service a long time because it was so resilient, the Chinese-operated Tu-2s were still flying in the 80s!

The Pe-2, unlike the Tu-2, was a very difficult aeroplane to get off the ground and to land. There were a great many Pe-2 aircraft lost whilst landing because its stall characteristics were violent and gave little warning. It was also difficult to heave off the ground and it was in the pilots notes that if a female pilot was flying the aircraft, the bomb aimer/navigator had to stand behind the pilots seat and help haul the stick back to take off! I have always thought it odd that two very similar-looking aircraft could be so different in handling characteristics.

Still, both are pretty aircraft and saw a lot of action. Your Pe-2 is very beautiful also!

 

[hal bregg]

Thx, Yakman.
I would also like to make a Tu-2 model. Another interesting construction.
There are two (?) plausible in '72:
Not very promising ICM, and Hobby Boss strange thing. Both judged just by internet sprue photos.
Anybody know more/have one/seen one ?

 

[jrs]

Obviously, you must use an airbrush with the fine melding of the camouflage colors!

What gauge wire do you use on the radio antenna wire and then how do you attach the wire to the antenna posts and then attach radio wire maintaining and attaining tautness?

Do you ever place pilots crew figures in your models? If so, where do you find them? And I'm not referring to the Russians when they used female pilots crews in their PE 2s.

The aircraft is on the ground with extended landing gear. The air brakes would not be extended anyway right?

 

[hal bregg]

The air brakes could be extended on ground for check/maintenance purposes.
I do not place figures, even if added in kit. Just my way of display style.
Wires are taken from nylon stockings. Yes. Those stockings. Fitted by cyano acrylic glue.

 

[jrs]

The air brakes could be extended on ground for check/maintenance purposes.
I do not place figures, even if added in kit. Just my way of display style.
Wires are taken from nylon stockings. Yes. Those stockings. Fitted by cyano acrylic glue.

Thank you for sharing your knowledge and expertise in reference to the Radio in town Turner wire material and what you used to fix it to the radio antenna post.

 

[bf109xxl]

Hi!
I am interested in the Pe-2 because it is very similar to the Tu-2 which holds particular interest for me. The Tu-2 too was directed by Stalin to be a dive bomber

Initially Tupolev had to develop a four-engine dive bomber. The task was changed after a technical council with participation of the OTB NKVD (Prison Design Bureau) stuff and AF representatives. The curator of the project was Beria, Stalin did not directly interfere in the task assignment and project development.

but late in design the directive for it to be a dive bomber was lifted but too late to change the super-strong airframe so that was retained and just the underwing dive brakes deleted. So the whole aircraft was a lot heavier than it needed to be on account of the extra strength built-in but that did mean it stayed in service a long time because it was so resilient, the Chinese-operated Tu-2s were still flying in the 80s!

Indeed the Pe-2 was used mainly as a level bomber - just with a smaller bomb load and maximum speed.

The Pe-2, unlike the Tu-2, was a very difficult aeroplane to get off the ground and to land. There were a great many Pe-2 aircraft lost whilst landing because its stall characteristics were violent and gave little warning. It was also difficult to heave off the ground and it was in the pilots notes that if a female pilot was flying the aircraft, the bomb aimer/navigator had to stand behind the pilots seat and help haul the stick back to take off! I have always thought it odd that two very similar-looking aircraft could be so different in handling characteristics.

There is no mystery here. Tu-2 (ANT-58, "103") was originally designed as a bomber, its fuselage was drawn around a large caliber bomb and appropriate airfoils were chosen. In contrast, the Pe-2 was originally a high-altitude fighter, the "100", whose airfoil was chosen extremely unsuccessfully for a bomber. It could only carry large-caliber bombs on external mounts. Its airframe designed for large "fighter" g-loads was too heavy for the bomb load that it could lift - standard 600 kg, more experienced crews could up to 1000 kg (very rarely up to 1200 kg), but the average bomb load was in the range of 700-900 kg.
The Tu-2 could not bomb from dive primarily because of the propeller overspeeding, another reason was the worse visibility for the bombardier and pilot, but as a front-line bomber it was much better than the Pe-2, which was used mainly as a level bomber.