Stukas…and other things (3 Viewers)

Thanks for the photos Terry. The wooden version seems closer to the real thing than the polystone.

I notice that the TG 190 doesn't have the lines as pronounced while the Jenkins and the K & C forthcoming Me 109 do.
 
Interesting observations. TG has none of the lines painted on them at all and, look better for it IMO. Nothing wrong with the aircraft, just the lines that are painted in. Its actually, the painting that is the problem for me not the manufacturing process. I like the fact that the definition of detail is there (you would expect it) its just painting them black or brown makes it look a little less better than it would without. I have spoken quite a lot on and off the forum about the black lines right through the squadron number and roundels.

I know it won't stop in the future just from having a chat about it but, the painters should be allowed just to paint the aircraft and, allow collectors to look at the detail of the mould and the paintwork

The only aircraft I have seen in this scale where it sits well was the TG repaint by Wraith. For me, if this is to continue please don't run them through the decals
Mitch
 
I agree. Let the mould define the panel lines. Painting them should not be necessary. The panel lines are barely visible on the photos of actual aircraft except where it is a panel that opens. The panel lines on the rear part of the fuselage may be rib lines from the airframe and are not panel lines anyway.

This topic has been debated on model aircraft forums and my impression is that most model aircraft collectors do not like the panel lines painted in.

Terry
 
Phantom Warrior said:
I agree. Let the mould define the panel lines. Painting them should not be necessary. The panel lines are barely visible on the photos of actual aircraft except where it is a panel that opens. The panel lines on the rear part of the fuselage may be rib lines from the airframe and are not panel lines anyway.

This topic has been debated on model aircraft forums and my impression is that most model aircraft collectors do not like the panel lines painted in.

Terry
Click to expand...

I think what you say is spot on Terry and for me put me of the plane and was the same with the Me 262 ,just think it a way of adding detail for the sake of it .
 
I agree further but I don't know that we'll see changes unfortunately.
 
lancer said:
Interesting observation, Mitch. I do not find the highlight lines bothersome on the Tiffie (which I didn't purchase), or the FW190 (which I did), but, I find the highlighted rivets on the Bf-109E to be extremely distracting. IMO, all those rivets make the paint job way too busy. The rivets engage the eyes away from the plane itself. I don't think I will be getting the new 109. -- Al
Click to expand...

Think your right no need for the big rivets on the plane and was the reason why I sold the typhoon.
 
jazzeum said:
I'm not sure why the lines are pronounced, perhaps it is a function of polystone. I'm not really sure.

The wooden Typhoon has the lines but less pronounced and it's definitely more pleasing to the eye. Again, maybe it's a function of the materials. It could also be a function that the wooden warbirds are artistic creations where the polystones are more assembly line creations. Andy is the one who can best probably answer this question.

View attachment 79793
Click to expand...
Wooden one look very nice
 
Terry..

Could not agree more. When K&C started with the polystone warbirds the hurricane was just standard camo pattern for RAF aircraft and, looked very nice and classy. The spitfire my personal favourite aircraft was black lined all over the place and, that spoilt it. It would be easier as you say to let the definition speak for itself
Mitch


Phantom Warrior said:
I agree. Let the mould define the panel lines. Painting them should not be necessary. The panel lines are barely visible on the photos of actual aircraft except where it is a panel that opens. The panel lines on the rear part of the fuselage may be rib lines from the airframe and are not panel lines anyway.

This topic has been debated on model aircraft forums and my impression is that most model aircraft collectors do not like the panel lines painted in.

Terry
Click to expand...
 
I liked the Rivets on the 262,im just grateful someone is doing planes that are affordable no complaints here......:)
 
Mitch said:
Terry..

Could not agree more. When K&C started with the polystone warbirds the hurricane was just standard camo pattern for RAF aircraft and, looked very nice and classy. The spitfire my personal favourite aircraft was black lined all over the place and, that spoilt it. It would be easier as you say to let the definition speak for itself
Mitch
Click to expand...

Not painting in the panel lines may even save a little on cost - they probably take some time to paint in. Mitch - how long would it take you to paint the panel lines on a 1:30 aircraft?

Terry
 
Terry...

I have never done this but, did I speak with wraith about this the other day. I don't think I could do it as quick as he did. I would say, that if I had to do it maybe an hour and a half tops but, less after I had done one and got the hang of it. I would venture that it would probably take a factory painter probably ten minutes work. I once spoke with a chap who worked for a factory in China before ending up at Uni over here and, was rather surprised at the speed they used to say they could paint things like figures etc.
Mitch

Phantom Warrior said:
Not painting in the panel lines may even save a little on cost - they probably take some time to paint in. Mitch - how long would it take you to paint the panel lines on a 1:30 aircraft?

Terry
Click to expand...
 
Not sure if I would describe the price of the typhoon as "affordable"
 
I think when people talk of the affordability of the polystone aircraft especially, in terms of K&C they compare with the wooden aircraft. This makes them think they are affordable as they are within more collectors budgets.
Mitch

damian said:
Not sure if I would describe the price of the typhoon as "affordable"
Click to expand...
 
I would like to a Stuka in RAF markings , just love captured warbird^&cool
 
Interesting thought Neil! That would look very unusual wouldn't it. Sure as hell wouldn't want to face
anything in one though, they were flying death traps for their crew.

Rob
 
Rob said:
Interesting thought Neil! That would look very unusual wouldn't it. Sure as hell wouldn't want to face
anything in one though, they were flying death traps for their crew.

Rob
Click to expand...

Your right about them being flying coffin {eek3}, after the RAF gave them a kicking at the start of the Battle of Britain they had to be taken out of the battle they were losing that many .Big turning point in the war
 
uksubs said:
Your right about them being flying coffin {eek3}, after the RAF gave them a kicking at the start of the Battle of Britain they had to be taken out of the battle they were losing that many .Big turning point in the war
Click to expand...

Yes I've read several accounts from RAF pilots in which they were shocked at how easily the Stuka would be blown to pieces when bullet struck one of those bombs. The Stuka was fine against static targets and fleeing civvies but stood little chance against spits and Hurricanes. At least the ME111 had better armour and guns so their crews had a better chance.

Rob
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 4 (members: 0, guests: 4)
Community platform by XenForo® © 2010-2024 XenForo Ltd.
Back
Top