RE: Fliteskin Ta-152 H1
 

OK, I have tons of docs on this aircraft after going through some of my other books. This aircraft is "GH+KT" A prototype which is heavily discussed in the Dietmer Harmon coffee table book. A side view of the real aircraft, clearly shows round wing tips. Still unclear on the cowling guns, I am leaning toward it not having them now. I will scan in my 5 views later today. I know nothing of those old Kookabura drawings. I am not using them. This particular aircraft that I have chosen has more real photographs than ony othe rmodel of the TA 152 that I have seen. Including any H1 version. If you would like to see any of the 7 actual photos I have of this aircraft, I will try to post them as well. I hope this puts your mind at ease, that I have not "cooked" this aircraft up.

RE: Fliteskin Ta-152 H1
 

No Vert, it's OK, I have the Harmann book too, though I wouldn't say it 'clearly' shows the rounded tips, but they do, on close inspection, look a little different to the tips on 'KS. Your 5 view looks much more like it, the only 'scale' drawings I have showing round tips is the old Kookaburra set, and they are severley lacking in many respects. I have, in the past, owned a couple of H's, both been sold on, both were exemplary flyers, though one of them did 'disappear' in flight once, most frightening even though it only lasted a couple of seconds. The grey camo really works. If I do another it will likely be 150168 (?), the unmarked hanger queen, I have, through several publications, the required 3 photos for our local and FAI type contests. So far as the gun troughs, again, there is nothing clearly shown for them on 'KT, and again, nothing clearly showing they were not. Since the A, B, and C versions were all schemed to have cowl weapons, it is possible that KT could have inherited an upper cowling originally destined one of them, the fuselages were all roughly the same. But without the certainty of a clear photo, if in doubt, leave it out?
Evan.

RE: Fliteskin Ta-152 H1
 

The GH+HT crashed after only 10 hours of testflight because of a enginefire in high altitude. This prototype also had a "Spike" at the top of the fin.

RE: Fliteskin Ta-152 H1
 

Well, my scanner keeps giving me black and white, but here is the 3 view of the colors. It has the RLM numbers for reference. When I can I will post a good color photo. I like this plane because it is a little different. Especially the colors. I have a feeling we will be seeing many TA 152 models soon and unfortunately to have scale colors, they will mostly look the same, except for this one. :)

RE: Fliteskin Ta-152 H1
 

I like the idea Vertical. Take a couple of minutes out one day and read the colour description for GH+KT. I like the bit where it says a 'natural metal' fuselage plug, and plainly shows a painted one in the colour profiles...you just can't trust the proof readers these days...Looking carefully at the KT photos, I don't see a 'double curve' where the tip intersects the aileron trailing edge, as shown in the drawings. I wonder if the tip should match the aileron curve? Perhaps the squared off tip and the rounded one are simply two variations of the one detachable tip...I'll go now, before I end up in more controversy...
Evan.

RE: Fliteskin Ta-152 H1
 

I'll put my foot in my mouth again, and counsel caution with 'natural metal fuselage plugs'. The picture of KT on page 77 of the Harmann publication shows what appears to be a very 'light' coloured plug, with the light coming almost nose on. You will see this phenomenon on various photos of both D's and 152's. Often the caption will claim a 'natural metal' plug. The photo of KS on page 78 shows, by comparison, a painted plug. The photo of 150168 on page 118 shows a darker coloured plug. I think that it is most likely that all these plugs are painted the same as the rest of the fuselages and the photos of KT on page 75 tend to bear this out. The culprit is the reflection of light from the different surface angles of the plug and the fuselage sides fore and aft. I tend to be a bit of a sceptic about the claims of the 'expert interpreters' of old B&W photos. I have one 'authoratative' publication here on late war German camo schemes claiming white painted nachtjaeger, when it is quite obviously faded 76 lit by low angle light reflecting off a puddle of water on the hardstand under the airplane. One needs to be careful.
Evan.

RE: Fliteskin Ta-152 H1
 

I have the fuse rough primed and the mock up wing to start with the wing fairings. The wing saddle is set at 2.5 degree incidence per full size. Also I looked at D. Andersons plans and he uses the same setting.
The fillet is pretty challenging so is a good idea to do it once and mold it, also the belly pan is challenging as it has to merge with the wing smoothly.
I've used fliteskin extensively to duplicate the panels.
JG

RE: Fliteskin Ta-152 H1
 

That looks much more than 2.5 deg, and it should be. I think the angle looks, and should be, much closer to 5 deg to the fuselage axis. The FW190 drawings by Bentley show an angle much closer to 5 than 2.5. The airplane in full size flys 'nose down', and there is a 3 degree washout on these long wings, ending at the inboard aileron cutout. The wing continues at -3 to the tip, resulting in the 'kinked' trailing edge that is so visible on the photos of the full size. Since the pilots of the original were very impressed with the wing, then the geometry should be reproduced for modellers to enjoy, too.
Evan, WB #12.

RE: Fliteskin Ta-152 H1
 

My Ta152C have 3 deg angle at the wing, an 2,5 deg at the stabilisator, and flies very well.

RE: Fliteskin Ta-152 H1
 

All the later 190's had 2.5 deg at the wing with an adjustable stab and those Bently drawings are 2.5 deg not 5. 2.5 deg is alot for a fighter where cargo planes are usually at 4 to 5 deg at the wing. If your worried about scale fadelity I would question his choice of airfoil the real one had a root foil of NACA 23015.3 and a tip of NACA 23009. I used a NACA 23015.6 root and the NACA 23012 for my tip as well on my 1/8 scale model as retracts would not fit otherwise, and has a root set at 2deg ant stab at 1 deg and flys nicely.

Vert I like your choice of colors mine is painted in RLM 74/75/76

JG rc, Nice work looking great and should fly nicely on Your choice of airfoils.

RE: Fliteskin Ta-152 H1
 

Be careful of that long tail! I have nothing in the tail of mine (no retract and built up surfaces its very light) and I still had to put 1/2 lb of nose weight in an 8 1/2 lb plane..

RE: Fliteskin Ta-152 H1
 

Yes, it looks like a huge angle of incidence but it's 2.5 angle (wiing cord to longitudinal line)
Everything will be triple checked before the wing fairings are built.
Thank s for all the pics guys.
Tdstaf, whos 152 is that? looks awesome.

JG

RE: Fliteskin Ta-152 H1
 

My design form many three views and the 200 plus pics I have from the one in Silver Hill. I design in a smaller 1/8 scale that way I can have more planes....:)

Tim

RE: Fliteskin Ta-152 H1
 

In that case JGrc, we were both wrong, the Bentley drawings show the root rigging incidence as +3 deg. Which would make sense, as it then puts the tip section at 0 deg. I was working from poor memory, but the drawing never forgets...tdstaf, I have the Monogram 'close-up' of the 152 with several pictures in colour taken 'late 1945'. Is the aircraft as 'grey' as the colour photos show? I know that most of the artists colours show a basically green/brown upper scheme but the photos seem very monochromatic. It might be just the negative fading over time, but the 4 on the fuselage side is definitly green in the photo, as is the grass at Wright Field, but the airplane seems very much grey compared to them.
Evan, WB #12.

RE: Fliteskin Ta-152 H1
 

I still think the entire wing center section (belly pan and inner gear doors) would be awesome to mold into the fuselage as well. It would eliminate a couple of extra molds and parts, and with a wing tube through the fuselage, it would make assembly super easy.

RE: Fliteskin Ta-152 H1
 

Remember an "Artist" has "Artist impression". Though there colors are close they are just a represintation of what was. Then you start getting in to the scale effect as models get smaller the colors need to be lightend apropriately so the exact color match to the Monogram colors and markings would be wrong. Look closely in the sun light and you can see the violets and greens of the gray colors as what they acctually are just different shades of gray. The tints seem to fade faster from the grays then they do from the more pure primary colors of red, yellow, and blue which make up all colors. My brother which went to school to study color theroy as well as friend and my neighbor which mix paint for auto use have explained this theroy to me. They do this on a daily basis with having to match paint to cars under many conditions and have to change tint from manufactures specs to match each one specificly. So if you use pictures for your referance why do you have to have a colors and marking guide when the picture clearly shows somthing different then the official color chips. So why do we need to show more then one picture? Wouldn't one be enough to show it exsisted? Then use the written data for color. It's really all about who plays the game the best, and the best unbiased judges would be those that new nothing of what we do and follow there instructions on judging to the rules. Remember we are representing not replicating (other wise we would bucking thousands of rivets into micro sheet metal).

Got off topic;
Yes they look gray but there respective shades of violet brown and green are in them. Also remember that your impression of gray is probably different then my impression of gray.

RE: Fliteskin Ta-152 H1
 

Here is an example, My plane same color taken with same camera 3 times, different day, different time, different location.

RE: Fliteskin Ta-152 H1
 

Yes, I get that. The Monogram colour photo was taken on a bright day, the shadow under the plane is dark, and sharp. I was more after your impression of the thing 'up close', as it were. You did take the 200 odd photos at Silver Hill? I realise that time will have taken its toll on the original colours, but it has been in storage for most of its life so there should still be enough of the original paint to form a reasonable impression...
The Monogram book also reproduces VG's set of photos of 'KT per the Harmann publication, but larger, with the full negative and much sharper. It is obvious that the tips fitted to KT do not look like his drawing, either from the front or from the back. Also, the photos of 'KS are reproduced. There is no visible evidence for gun troughs on 'KT, but guess what? 'KS has what appears to be a cover plate fitted over the gun troughs. It is also evident that the top cowling has been profiled to fit guns, it is not a smooth curve and it is seen on all the 152 photos, H-0 and H-1. I can only go by the photos I have, again, if you were up close enough, can you confirm the photographic evidence? (Yes, I'm trying to gather enough info to do a drawing)
Evan, WB #12.

RE: Fliteskin Ta-152 H1
 

let me know which photos with pages you are refering to in the harman book and I will take a look at them and compare them to my photos of Grun 4. You can see the colors in person and photos with flash make it worse. I also have the Hitchcock book and was disapointed as it did not have any good three views in it.

RE: Fliteskin Ta-152 H1
 

VG kindly posted the pics and drawing at the beginning of this page...The Monogram profile has them on pages 2, 3 and 4. I can try to upload them at work tomorrow...
Evan

RE: Fliteskin Ta-152 H1
 

Here is a colour-photo of a Ta152H "kraftei"

RE: Fliteskin Ta-152 H1
 

Iam just curious. Wouldn't the line between the wing panels be very noticeable as compared to the wing sitting against the saddle?

RE: Fliteskin Ta-152 H1
 

How interesting a warbird thread is really a scale thread now! Fine by me, you go where the info is.

RE: Fliteskin Ta-152 H1
 

If done right, it would be no larger or noticeable than a panel line.

RE: Fliteskin Ta-152 H1
 

That is beyond my skill set. http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/js/f.../msn/49_49.gif But, it would never hold me back from trying. The only kind of straight wing that I can build is a foam one.