Bf 109 G-10 1/72 - What the new kit offers

When I submitted an article about the 72nd scale Mustang kit and its benefits to modelers, I was not reprimanded for it, and on the back of it I promised that if the opportunity arose and I was asked, I would write something else similar. Little did I know that the opportunity would arise the very next month and that I would be asked almost immediately. I understood right from the get go that it would not be so easy and that it would be better to stick to the spirit of a famous quote from an equally famous play. How can I write something that will differ from the previous article in more than just the name of the kit? I thought about it for three weeks, put together two Bf 109 G-10s in the meantime and one other Messerschmitt from a competitor to have some comparison and benchmark of quality, value and the like. The third in the party was the Japanese Bf 109 G-6, but that's okay. While building two G-10 kits, I found two minor errors, one on the molding and one in the instructions. The result of my efforts and thinking is the following writeup.

Bf 109 G-10 1/72

When I submitted an article about the 72nd

scale Mustang kit and its benefits to modelers,

I was not reprimanded for it, and on the back of

it I promised that if the opportunity arose and

I was asked, I would write something else similar.

Little did I know that the opportunity would arise

the very next month and that I would be asked

almost immediately. I understood right from the

get go that it would not be so easy and that it

would be better to stick to the spirit of a famous

quote from an equally famous play. How can

I write something that will differ from the

previous article in more than just the name of

the kit? I thought about it for three weeks, put

together two Bf 109 G-10s in the meantime and

one other Messerschmitt from a competitor to

have some comparison and benchmark of quality,

value and the like. The third in the party was

the Japanese Bf 109 G-6, but that's okay. While

building two G-10 kits, I found two minor errors,

one on the molding and one in the instructions.

The result of my efforts and thinking is the

following writeup.

There really isn't much to add to the kit and

its construction either compared to the Mustang

or compared to the previous ‘109s. In terms of

every aspect, it is very much an Eduard kit. The

plastic sprues are cleanly molded and the parts

fit together perfectly. The first kits from the

series of Bf 109 F/G/K in 1:72nd, the Bf 109 F and

G-2/G-4 had one questionable part from this

point of view in the gun troughs for the fuselage

machine guns, which were glued separately into

openings in the engine cowl on each fuselage

half. The designers stuck to this solution, already

used on the 1:48th scale kits. They had a pretty

good reason for that, keeping the engine cover

compact. But the problem is that this created

a complex parting line on the mold along the

contour line of the openings for the troughs in the

engine cover, which is also the contact plane for

gluing the parts together. Any imperfection in the

molding here causes a problem with the parts

fitting together. And, unfortunately, that’s what

happened, even though we played with the fine

tuning of the mold for a really long time, we even

redid the inserts for the Bf 109 F and adjusted

the technological process of mold production for

the G-2 and G-4. This helped, but many modelers

and reviewers continue to report a problem with

this aspect of the kit. For the Bf 109 G-6 and G-10,

the approach has been altered, with the upper

part of the nose with the gun troughs is glued as

a separate part into the hole in the upper part of

the fuselage.

The problem with the alignment of the gun

troughs is solved by using this method, but on the

other hand, it results in a visible joint between

the fuselage halves and panel that contains the

troughs. It was not a feature on the real plane, so

on the model the line needs to be lightly puttied

and sanded. It's no Grand Canyon, it's a line in

the order of a fraction of a millimeter that looks

just like an engraved line on the assembly. If you

don't cut into the plastic somewhere or damage

the part, you won't be able to putty much, unless

you really want to be absolutely historically and

technically accurate. In that case, on the Erla and

Messerschmitt models, you can putty the access

cover to the compressed air cylinder for the

MK 108 fuselage gun in front of the fifth fuselage

bulkhead on the right side of the fuselage, which

was only present on the Bf 109 G-10/U4, the

WNF machines. There is no need to putty the

joint between the fuselage and the vertical fin,

which is glued in the same way as the Bf 109 F

and G, as well as the Mustang...just inserting it

inbetween the fuselage halves before they are

glued together. In fact, this part does not even

need to be glued in place at all, just inserted

between the fuselage halves just before they

are cemented together. The fin pulls itself into

the correct position and locks in place. Similarly,

the undercarriage legs settle into their correct

position. These are again glued into a tunnel in

the wheel wells that creates a housing for the

pins located on the landing gear leg that seats

them in the correct position.

There is even no need to putty the joint

between the wing assembly and the fuselage.

At its trailing edge, the joint connects to the

engraving of the fuselage bulkhead and, after

installing the wing in the fuselage, creates a line

of width identical to the width of the panel line.

This is actually one of the innovations employed

since the 48th scale kit, where the joint between

the wing and fuselage was a constant target

of criticism. The same can be said of the older

solid position lights. In the 72nd scale kit, these

are transparent and separate items. By the way,

this is an element that we included in the kits at

the request of modelers and reviewers. We didn't

really want to get into the separate position lights.

I myself was against it for a long time, because

I considered it, and still do, a difficult element

that complicates the construction of the model,

and offers no major advantage when considering

the additional construction complexity. Even

separating the part from the frame and cleaning

the sprue gate is a demanding operation for me,

requiring strong nerves and a steady hand. I'm

nervous doing that, and at least one of those

slippery little buggers are guaranteed to escape

the grip of my tweezers and disappear into the

oblivion of the cosmos. Irreversible. I've never

found one of these after the fact. However, I'm not

lamenting and you shouldn't be lamenting either,

you got what you wanted. Most of you, anyway.

To make things a little easier for you, you have

spare lights on the clear sprue. Who else will do

that for you?

I consider the wing solution to be the highlight

of this kit, especially when it comes to its design.

It is completely separate, and allows the control

What the new kit offers

INFO Eduard6

September 2024