Most popular models

[John]

I was talking to a mate the other day and he asked me what was the most popular models, and going by the posts on here and the kits and paints I sell I would have to say German vehicles are the most popular. After watching the programs on tv over the past few weeks about the 70th anniversary of the battle of Britian and seeing how out numbered we were why the German forces more popular in modelling.

[Guest]

it sure aint motorcycles thats for sure:laughing:

[Ian M]

I cant figure that one out either. Ok Admittedly some of the designs of German tanks and aircraft where rather good and visually pleasing but I still cant figure out why there are so many Gerry and US kits, and so few British kits. Look in the Tamiya range. This is ONE webshop 1/35 tamiya

German 82

Russian 11

USA 31

GB 14

All the rest; japan Italy france. 12

I dare say that the image is not much different if you looked at the aircraft....I spose it could be suply and demand, but what ever happend to the good old demand and suply. Come on Airfix/tamiya/italeri/revell, give us some players from the winning team (ouch).

[John]

I've just finished watching something else on BOB and the Spirfire pilots said the ME109 was a superior aircraft but everything I have watched seems to have said the Germans had great technology but didn't know how to use it.

I still think the Spit is the best looking aircraft ever.

[Guest]

It is odd how the German armour is at the top of the model lists. Makes you wonder if it it some Japanese ploy to honour their old Axis Allie (In the old days, Airfix produced more British/American than German as far as I remember) Having said that, the Germans produced some really impressive and forward thinking stuff. Apparently, but I am sure someone will correct me, they had more types of aircraft and armour than we did. Although there were a few other aircraft in service at the time of the BoB, the germans had quite a few different types in action.

As for the 109 being superior, I have no doubt it was in some circumstances and the Spitfire superior in others. I agree that the Spitfire is one of the most iconic aircraft but (stands behind reinforced glass to protect against bricks and bottles) I find it over rated. Not that anything is wrong with it but whenever you hear about the BoB, there is a Spitfire. A bit like the Red Arrows, superb but how many times do you have to see them before you want something else.

At the Duxford BoB Airshow this year, yes the spitfires were amazing. However, one of the huge highlights for me was the four Hurricanes. Maybe not as impressive as sixteen Spitfires but, for me, it was a special moment.

I suppose we all have our favourites and in some respects, that has governed the market. It is sad, but understandable, that some aircraft and armour/vehicles are very expensive limited run vac form or resin models. Hats off to Airfix for doing a few oddball kits at last. It has to be said though that if it goes on looks alone, do we want a White Half track or a Hanomag, doe we want the stylish look of the Bren carrier? or would you prefer a Tiger tank, looks a tad better than a Sherman or a Grant (not many kits of the Lee and grant either) and certainly better looking than a Churchill. On that basis, I do want (and have in the stash) a Bren Carrier, they are amazing. I wish Tamiya would do a 1:48 Lee or Grant (or even a Kangaroo) but they don't even do a White Half Track in 1:48 and lets face it, there were a few of them about.

Thankfully the most amazing tank, most innovative, thanks to the US Army telling Mr Christie they were not interested, and possibly, certainly in my eyes, most beautiful WWII tank is well represented. The stunningly gorgeous T34

[Guest]

what about the Typhoon or tempest? I've not seen these much in kit form but they did there part as design allowed

[Guest]

I think as far as the Spitfire V 109 argument goes it was swinging about from one side to the other throughout the war. It all depends on which variant of each you are comparing and at what point in the war but comparing a Mk I Spit with a Gustav would be very one sided as would comparing an Emil with a Mk IX. Before anyone says they didn't meet it was just an example to demonstrate the point!! I am sure though that at some point the 109 would have had the edge and at others the Spit would depending on the specific conflict in question.

To me the greatest attraction with German models is always the technology. Of all the ships afloat during the war to me nothing looks as superb as either the Scharnhorst/Gneisenau or the Bismarck/Tirpitz. They really were stunning looking ships with a grace and beauty that the Rodneys and Nelsons never came any where near. I can see what Graham means about the T 34, which to me is just another tank, as I actually think the Bismarck is a beautiful looking ship.

It's strange why some things should become popular such as the Spit V Hurricane scenario when there were far more Hurricanes and they shot down far more Germans than the Spits ever did. There is still something stunningly beautiful about the shape of a Spitfire that no other aircraft in history has been able to match and the view from underside as it banks away from you still brings a lump to my throat.

[Guest]

I am one of the guilty ones here, I just build German, from my point its more the look, the varients, and the colour schemes. Then the whole range of uniforms and ranks for figures.I never look at it as the Bf109 was better than the spit or vice versa, I look at it as like alot of technologies it isnt always the aircraft thats better, but the pilot who flies the machine, a bit like a 18 year old in a Ferrari, got the power, but not got the skill the car commands.

[AlanG]

To me the German aircraft were cutting edge for their day. Just look how revolutionary the FW190 was when it came into service. The Mk.V Spit was built to combat it. Then they had the He219. The ultimate nightfighter and the first with ejection seats. And lastly the Me262. What an aircraft that was and totally dominated the air when in combat. To me the Germans built aircraft to do the job i.e. kill with the most firepower available

[Guest]

You're absolutely spot on there. I use Il-2 Sturmovik and when I feel the need to be very destructive I get in a 262 and take on 16 Fortresses. You can't beat it for feeling better and it certainly makes you realise just how devastating the 262 was.

An another parallel subject I also play Silent Hunter and again when I'm in a destructive mood I get in a Mk XXIII and take on a fleet. If that submarine had been allowed to get into the war any earlier it could have been a completely different story. The technology was years ahead of its time. Mind you I still prefer the looks of a Type VII!!

[Guest]

I've just finished watching something else on BOB and the Spirfire pilots said the ME109 was a superior aircraft but everything I have watched seems to have said the Germans had great technology but didn't know how to use it. I still think the Spit is the best looking aircraft ever.

Strange, I guess it's grass is always greener syndrome, apparently the BF109 suffered from an incredibly cramped cockpit which the German pilots weren't awfully fond of and Adolf Galland in his book is quoted as having an unusual request in discussion with Goering, one squadron commander asked for heavier armament for the 109's and when he asked Galland what he wanted he said 'that's easy, a squadron of Spitfires', apparently Goering was less than amused, I imagine that was a 'bugger, did I just say that out loud?' moment.

Have to say, in all honesty, I really prefer the angular lines of the BF109 and even the ugly stockiness of the FW190 over the sleek spit, I do have a thing for the Hawler Hurricane though, (my absolute favourite brit warplane) and the Typhoon and Tempest.

[Guest]

what about the Typhoon or tempest? I've not seen these much in kit form but they did there part as design allowed

Almost there with my (very heavily weathered) Academy Typhoon, I love them, I think it's the kid in me still loks at the big air intake as see it as a mouth going 'OOOOOOOOOH'

[stona]

The Spitfire MkI and Bf109E had VERY similar performance. Only the British were honest about this. Luftwaffe assessment reports on the Spitfire,sent to Luftwaffe Gruppen simply sum up by saying that the Bf109 is "superior in every respect to the Spitfire". This patent bollocks was not particularly helpful to Luftwaffe pilots who,if they believed this,were in for a very nasty surprise. The R.A.E. reports on the various Bf109s are pretty honest and balanced assessments,allowing allied pilots to know where their advantage lay and how to go about beating the 109. Most importantly it allowed them to know what sort of fight to avoid!

German cockpits are very cramped but at the time the pilots don't seem to have been bothered. I've sat in the cockpit of a Bf109 in the States. I'm 5'8" tall and of medium build yet my shoulders were wedged against the sides of the cockpit. When the hood was closed my head very nearly touched it and it is so close on either side that it almost feels like a helmet! Not for the claustrophobic. It's a case of what you are used to. Luftwaffe test pilots critcise the large cockpits in,particularly U.S. aircraft, saying for example that things are hard to reach. Allied test pilots criticise the smaller german cockpits saying they can't move in them or,critically,turn to look behind which I can confirm.

The Fw190 was a vastly superior airplane compared to the early Spitfire marks,and advanced Luftwaffe air superiority back to the channel where it had been in 1940. It evolved in paralell to the Spitfire and as someone said it was swings and roundabouts. For every 100 SpitfireIXs lost 104 Fw190A?s were lost. Given the superiority of allied pilots by this time that says a lot for the Focke-Wulf.It's rate of roll,critical in combat manouevres,was never equalled.

Galland's "Spitfire" comment was clarified by the old fella himself. It wasn't the airplane or it's armament he envied,he believed the Bf109 to have been a slightly superior airplane and certainly better armed, it was their tactical freedom of manouevre.

I remember seeing an old TV program in which Bader and Stanford Tuck were waxing lyrical about the Bf109s armament on or close to the centre line and particularly the centre cannon.

As far as modelling goes I started on the Luftwaffe not because I think their aircraft are more attractive than the allied ones. I've never seen a more beautiful airplane than the Spitfire, though the fastest,cleanest Bf109F gives it a run for it's money. It was the variety and non standard nature of their camouflage and finishes that got me going. Soon this will all pass from living memory which makes the research done by relatively few people around the world all the more important.For example Lorant and Goyat's definitive volumes on JG300 would be impossible to write in a few years time since all the veterans they tracked down and interviewed will sadly but realistically no longer be with us. Then we will just have their flugbuchs and some patchy official records to go on.

Cheers

Steve

[Guest]

Almost there with my (very heavily weathered) Academy Typhoon, I love them, I think it's the kid in me still loks at the big air intake as see it as a mouth going 'OOOOOOOOOH'

cool looking forward to seeing it! Yea what is it about the big air intakes or a shark mouth painted on 'em lol? Makes you want to grunt like Tim Allen

[stona]

A bit off topic but I was looking for some information on Werner Molders' aircraft when I found his assessment of both the Spitfire and the Hurricane. He's a bit more balanced than the official reports but his attitude reflects that of his contemporaries. They thought they had the best aircraft.

"It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. The Hurricane is good-natured and turns well, but its performance is decidedly inferior to that of the Bf 109. It has strong stick forces and is "lazy" on the ailerons.

The Spitfire is one class better. It handles well, is light on the controls, faultless in the turn and has a performance approaching that of the Bf 109. As a fighting aircraft, however, it is miserable. A sudden push forward on the stick will cause the motor to cut and because the propeller has only two pitch settings (take-off and cruise), in a rapidly changing air combat situation the motor is either overspeeding or else is not being used to the full."

His comment about the lack of a CSU on early Spitfires is valid and yet allied test pilots found the rocker switch arrangement that a Luftwaffe pilot could use to continually alter his propeller's pitch unusable in a combat situation! Once again it's what they were used to. The negative G engine cut out was a serious problem only partially solved much later.

The Rechlin summary of the Bf109 v allied aircraft has an even bolder summation than I remembered.

"In summary, it can be said that all three enemy planes types are inferior to the German

planes regarding the flying qualities. Especially the Spitfire has bad rudder and elevator

stability on the target approach. In addition the wing-mounted weapons have the known

shooting-technique disadvantages.

The Bf 109 E type clearly outperforms all foreign planes"

Really....?

Cheers

Steve