 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups General ModelsRailroadsRocketsRadio Controlled Air ModelsHelicoptersLand ModelsWater ModelsModelGeeks.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Model Forum / General / Models / March 2004qhestion-Air
I see a new version of the Hasegawa Bf-109F on the shelves at my local plastic emporium. It is labeled as a Bf-109F-6/U "Galland". What makes it different besides Dolpho's markings on the decal sheet? Anybody had a look in the box? Bill Shuey > I see a new version of the Hasegawa Bf-109F on the shelves at my local > plastic emporium. It is labeled as a Bf-109F-6/U "Galland". What makes > it different besides Dolpho's markings on the decal sheet? Anybody had > a look in the box? > > Bill Shuey Um...1/32?..  Signature- Rufus >> I see a new version of the Hasegawa Bf-109F on the shelves at my local >> plastic emporium. It is labeled as a Bf-109F-6/U "Galland". What makes [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >Um...1/32?.. one of them armored dohickeys on the back of the seat? IIRC extra wing cannon and the windscreen telescope. > I see a new version of the Hasegawa Bf-109F on the shelves at my local > plastic emporium. It is labeled as a Bf-109F-6/U "Galland". What makes > it different besides Dolpho's markings on the decal sheet? Anybody had > a look in the box? > > Bill Shuey Galland felt that the reduction to only one 20 cannon in the F model was a retrograde step, so he had a special aircraft built that restored the two 20mm wing cannon as in the E model. The new Hasegawa kit has extra parts for the wing cannon http://www.hlj.com/scripts/hljpage.cgi?HSG09521 Dave > I see a new version of the Hasegawa Bf-109F on the shelves at my local > plastic emporium. It is labeled as a Bf-109F-6/U "Galland". What makes > it different besides Dolpho's markings on the decal sheet? Anybody had > a look in the box? > > Bill Shuey Ok...there's my answer...excitement dampened... Signature- Rufus > Galland felt that the reduction to only one 20 cannon in the F model was a > retrograde step, so he had a special aircraft built that restored the two [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >> >>Bill Shuey >It is labeled as a Bf-109F-6/U "Galland" Anybody remember the all metal F in Fine Scale Modeler years back? I'd love to know if anyone ever finally found out if Galland flew an all metal F or not. tia Keeper (of too much crap) >Galland felt that the reduction to only one 20 cannon in the F model was a >retrograde step, He wasnt the only one, there were pleanty who thought that was an extremely bad idea. Regardless of the fact that the centerline cannon was easier to aim at greater distances, it was a retrograde step. Dont believe it, for fun, fly both models in UBI Softs, IL 2 Forgotten Battles flight simultion. I definately preffer the E4/7 model over the F's almost any day. Though the flight performance is better in the F, you put out fewer high power rounds in those fleeting seconds of firing time. Against russian IL 2's, you need all the firepower you can get ! And against a B 17, it's almost a pathetic joke... (and neither one stands up to a .50 cal puonding) This is definately the best WW II flight simulation to come out, and they now have added a western front setup as well. Lots of addon's, and online play :) American F4F pilots felt the same way when they went from a six gun wing to a four gun wing. Many pilots were very unhappy about that. "Only a Gentleman can insult me, and a true Gentleman never will..." > >Galland felt that the reduction to only one 20 cannon in the F model was a > >retrograde step, > > American F4F pilots felt the same way when they went > from a six gun wing to a four gun wing. Many pilots were > very unhappy about that. Actually, you have it backwards. The F4F-3 fixed wing Wildcat had 4 X .50 Cal. brownings and carried 450 rounds per gun. The U.S. pilots in the Pacific were less than ecstatic about the -4 Wildcat because the 6 guns only carried 250 rounds per gun, which almost halved their firing time. They felt this was a definite problem in a long sustained fight against the Japanese Navy's air units. They also didn't like the increased weight of the folding wing and it's negative effect on the F4Fs all ready slow climb rate vs. a vs. the Zero. Many pilots would go into action with only the four inner guns armed so they would have the two outer .50s to fall back on when the inner guns went dry. Most U.S. Navy Pilots pitched so many bitches about the -4's wing that when GM took over Wildcat Production, the Navy specified that the FM-1 and FM-2 should revert to the 4 gun armament with increased ammunition. It was the British who wanted the 6 gun wing. In the Atlantic they were dealing with Focke-Wolf Condors and BV-138s and such and felt the increased firepower was needed. But these were single targets, albeit heavily armed & armored. It was a different situation from the multi bogey scenarios that the U.S. Navy pilots were facing at Guadalcanal. Get a copy of "The First Team", Vol. 1, by John B. Lundstrom or Eric Hammel's "Aces Against Japan", Vol. 1. Both authors allude to these problems, Lundstrom more so. Bill Shuey |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.