Jump to content
ARC Discussion Forums
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
AlCZ

1/48 B-17 series from Hk

Recommended Posts

 

The panel lines on he HK model seem really wide and deep. As I recall, the actual plane does not have pronounced panel lines. I think that the panels on the actual plane overlapped at the panel joints.

 

Yes, the B-17 has overlapping panel joints in most places.  However, to render that effect in 1/48 scale, and at a scale thickness, you would be at 0.0008" (8/10,000 of an inch).  That's probably so small that most of us couldn't even feel it with our fingers.  Just as a point of reference, a piece of regular 25 lb. copy paper is 0.003" (3/1000 of an inch).  Even with an out of scale effort, it would be extremely hard to render the overlapping joints and would no doubt raise the cost of the tooling so that the kit would be much more expensive than it already is; and a few swipes with some rough sandpaper along seams will eliminate that effect totally making it look like an old beater car that someone put 15 lbs of Bondo along the door and sanded it by hand with a sanding block (and then painted it).  You know the type... it's that car that waves at you when it drives by.  While the recessed panel lines are out of scale, I am of the opinion that finishing will subdue a lot of that depth and in the end, what is there looks pretty damn good to my eye.

Edited by timc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A little too much caffeine tonight 😀

Edited by Johnny_K

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The HK 1/48 downscale fuselage will look like this ... . Same issues as 1/32 model, comparing real plane and old Monogram kit. I have 32 scale and measured it far and wide, using original Boeing plans and figures. We discussed 32nd issues in detail here if you interested. In 1/48 release HK corrected nose shape before pilot's windshield, but the rest obviously left "as is". So the fuselage is quite thick all length and tail section have wrong angle regarding datum line of original.
48775101433_db145b761e_b.jpg
48775638192_7e37de2829_b.jpg
48775638552_502a5150e6_b.jpg
48775638857_a08f26875c_b.jpg
48775639182_7d20656ca3_b.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for that pic, Andreas.


Wow, that outboard engine position looks WAY off...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just looked at my Revellogram B-17 and the prop hubs appear to be below the centerline of the wing's leading edge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

dAwKbEP.jpg?1

Here is a side photo (excuse the crappy nacelle joint) showing how the centerline of the prop hub relates to the centerline of the wing of my Revellogram B-17.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am no expert whatsoever, but it looks like Monogram is pretty close to the real thing based on the pic above ^^^ and this pic below:

B-17-Shoo-Shoo-Baby-USAF-Museum.jpg

Which makes that HK outer engine look quite a ways off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Andreas Beck said:

DSC_1442.JPG

photo from Telford. Engine (prop) axis should meet center of wing leading edge in all positions.

Are those engines upside down?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The wing is correct, the outboard engine appears to be located above the wing instead of below the wing. However, I have never seen a real B-17, so I shouldn't be making comments. Who knows if the engine locations on my Revellogram B-17 is correct?  I don't.

Edited by Johnny_K

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

59VKvWS.jpg?1

 

Now, this is an interesting picture. It looks like the hubs of the outboard engines of the B-17 are located at the wing's centerline. I like this picture. It shows the different locations of the main wings on the B-17 (bottom), B-24  (top) and B-29 (middle).

Edited by Johnny_K

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, B-17 guy said:

Are those engines upside down?

I think your right. Looking at the approximate centerline of the wing verses the spinner tip, and things don't add up. Plus you have two conflicting angles in the one photo. I'll wait and see what's in the box before trashing the kit

Gary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish the model companies was spend some time on this forum and TAKE the ADVICE given here before finalizing molds

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, DarkKnight said:

so after all these years the solution is to buy the monogram again

 

Glad I still have a bunch with a good amount of spare bits and pieces. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Based on those diagrams ^^^ I'd say Monograms are pretty darn close to accurate. I'll wait and see for when more info comes available on the HK B-17 but right now their engines certainly look wonky in that picture a few posts above.

 

Happy modeling!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, so looking at those engines, I can’t tell if they are upside or not. Honestly they don’t look right when compared to the real thing. I don’t have a small enough picture of one to post. But to me the kit engines look like generic radial engines instead of wright cyclone radials. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And I’m not looking at the angle of where it’s mounted to centerline of the wing because that pic is a bad angle to judge that from

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, in that picture of the kit with the wing mounted, the wing looks like it's drooping instead of an upward dihedral. I don't know if that's the fuse sitting at an outward angle or if the wing is actually hanging, but that's another odd looking thing in that photo. I hope this isn't too big of an issue as the kit looks to have a lot or promise.

 

Edited by niart17

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Had a look around for a couple B17 books, and found one I forgot I owned. The one by Jablonski. Looking at the photo, the outboard engine looks to be mounted upside down. Also the outboard engine will appear to sit higher due to the four and a half degree wing dihedral. Oddly the one drawing I found to show this best also has the outboard engine slightly below wing center on the pilots side. I'm sure that is an illusion! Photos seem to align with sketches produced by Jablonski. 

       As I said before; I'll simply wait

Gary's

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The more I look at that pic of the kit wing above, I wonder if it's just a case of the cowling not being situated correctly? It looks like MAYBE the cowling is angle down slightly towards the nose, which would make the engine look low. I hope that's the extent of what's going on. Would be good to see another pic maybe without the cowling or with it confirmed to be in the correct placement.

Edited by niart17

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, niart17 said:

The more I look at that pic of the kit wing above, I wonder if it's just a case of the cowling not being situated correctly? It looks like MAYBE the cowling is angle down slightly towards the nose, which would make the engine look low. I hope that's the extent of what's going on. Would be good to see another pic maybe without the cowling or with it confirmed to be in the correct placement.

Looked at a second book after I made the above post. It pretty much went along with my thoughts. Never realized how much wing dihedral was built into the airframe! 

Glt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...