Author Topic: Bf 110 conversion (Read 521 times)

Lord ReDhAwK · « **on:** February 04, 2007, 01:07:34 PM »

Afternoon Gents,

Quick question (seeking opinion without having to call Skuzzy.) I picked up a book this weekend, Axis Aircraft of World War II by David Mondey. I have found a 110 profile in it that I would like to skin (attached.) However, it is a skin for a 110e-1, not a C or G. Do you feel it could be skinned as either model we have or am I barking up the wrong tree?

BF 110E-1 of a operational conversion unit (Erganzungszerstorer gruppe)Deblin Irena, Poland, summer of 1942

Appreciate any input.

ReDhAwK

Saxman · « **Reply #1 on:** February 04, 2007, 01:43:11 PM »

That's a good question, as I'd ALSO like to have a solid, definitive answer on aircraft substitution, as some seem to be allowed, others not.

rogerdee · « **Reply #2 on:** February 04, 2007, 01:46:46 PM »

id say yes to be able to skin it on a c version as that is proberly nearest to its spec.

the guide lines are very thin as to what can be substituted and what cant,i guess only thingwe can do is ask.

but it looks like a good skin to do

Krusty · « **Reply #3 on:** February 04, 2007, 04:49:28 PM »

I've done a D or an E as a C, myself. I'm sure they'll accept it.

Here's the thing about the Es, they had engines closer to C-4s than to Gs. Even the cowling shape is the same. They had the 4x 7.9mm MGs and 2x MG/FF in the nose (some early Gs had this, but most had 2x20mm and 2x30mm). The E had provisions for DTs under the outer wings, but not like the type you see on the G-2. It might have had the WGr and wing bombrack mounts as well.

The wing mounts are closer to the G, but the internal weaponry and the engine performance closer to the C. Do it as a C.

EDIT:

P.S. Good call. I thought about doing that one once, never got around to it.

Lord ReDhAwK · « **Reply #4 on:** February 04, 2007, 06:58:29 PM »

Thanks for the input gents. I appreciate your time.

Krusty, I have studied your 110c (the bitmap.) I noticed that neither of your 110s have rivet layouts on them. I know thats uncommon for most skinners as it's not the first of your's that I have studied

Did you omit them becuase they were flush (?) or no good references for placement? Just curious of course. Not a critique of work. I know the amount of research you put in (and others) is tremendous.

ReDhAwK

Krusty · « **Reply #5 on:** February 04, 2007, 07:06:53 PM »

On the 110s I omitted the rivets for a few reasons.

First, I had thought about omitting rivets on one of my 190 skins, and asked people for a poll. Folks liked the riveted version better. I still had an interest in doing a skin without rivets, though.

Second, after looking at high-detail photos I realized you honestly cannot see rivets on the 110 unless you've got a magnifying glass. I also had a high-quality 48th scale model kit that was devoid of all rivet detail and if one of the best 110 models out there (Pro Modeler 48th Bf110G-4) decided not to put rivets on, that was another argument not to skin it with rivets.

Third, I couldn't find any references, anywhere, as to how the rivets might have looked on the 110. Not even the default 110 skin was any help in this area.

Fourth, I wanted to see if folks objected. 1 or 2 asked about it at the time, but there hasn't been much criticism for the lack of rivets. Now I know I can do a skin (as long as it's done well) and it doesn't have to have rivets on it.

If you can find any resources feel free to add some. I'd be very interested in seeing what you come up with (if anything).

EDIT: P.S. I take it as a compliment that you checked out my 110 skins. Thanks!