K&B Halberstadt

josef scott · 22 September 2005, 09:22 PM

I recently received an old AURORA Halb CLII. I am intending to do Ehmann's & Huffzky's machine, so...

1. Does anyone have the old K&B boxtop to scan & post for the Amendola cover image and side profile? I realize this is highly conjectural, but other than the one photo in the datafile, what else is there to go on?

2. Has Dan-San Abbott (or anyone else) discovered any further info on this 'plane? I'm dubious about the red and white tailplane stripes as Schlasta 15 markings. I (and I'm sure many others) are anxiously awaiting the Shlachtstaffeln tome.

3. Is anyone familiar with the "Death In The Skies" book mentioned in the datafile?

Any help would be much appreciated.

Kitboy · 23 September 2005, 03:56 AM

I built the kit a few years ago (Auora version same box art), want me to look for it?

greetings, Nico

23 September 2005, 05:59 AM

I've always liked that version...fictional or not. A few years ago I built a stick and tissue version.

How's the Aurora kit?

john ernst

brian riedel · 23 September 2005, 07:14 AM

Howdy,

Got a scan of the K & B Halbie if you want it.
Let me know where to send.

Brian Riedel

josef scott · 23 September 2005, 09:40 AM

Brian & Nico: the Aurora Collector's Series is fine. Actually posting it here would be good, or my e-mail addy is josefscott@yahoo.ca. I am particularly interested in the profile art from the side of the box, as I've not even seen this aspect.

John:It's actually not too bad. Certainly closer than some of the old Aurora kits when comparing it to the datafile drawings. Fuse is a bit too deep, nose is a bit weak, needs a new empenage, but definitely workable. The previous owner had already removed the raised markings (& the bomb-rack and generator fairing!), but had not started gluing or painting. I recently also purchased a half-built Breguet 14 which I had to take apart using the brake fluid trick I got from this forum. Nice work on the stick & tissue. Did you get the wheel cover markings from the same source?

PeterL · 23 September 2005, 10:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by josef scott

..needs a new empenage..

Take care. A Granger drawing got the tail wrong twenty and more years ago. The error has been copied and repeated many times since.

josef scott · 23 September 2005, 11:40 AM

mmmm...
Peter, do the Stair drawings in Datafile #27 perpetuate this?

PeterL · 23 September 2005, 12:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by josef scott

mmmm...
Peter, do the Stair drawings in Datafile #27 perpetuate this?

If I am correct, and I make no claim for infallibility, yes they do. I reckon the Datafile tailplane drawing is approaching half an inch short on span in 1/48 scale. I can't quote chapter and verse, which I realize is a cardinal sin in these parts, so I just say check it out before you do anything drastic.

PS. Having had another look perhaps I can quote chapter and verse after all. The manufacturers GA in the back of the Datafile gives a tailplane 2706mm in span. The drawing is well short of that. One of the things I admire in Ray Rimmell is that he usually gives at least a glimpse of his sources so we can decide for ourselves whether or not he got it right.

josef scott · 24 September 2005, 01:15 AM

Wow! If I've done my math correct, that's about a 5mm shortfall! The chord seems to be too much as well - should be, what, about 26.5 mm as opposed to about 29mm? oh, my head....

Kitboy · 24 September 2005, 03:01 AM

Well,

Here are two pictures of mine. I built it quit some years ago. What I most remember was the size of the landing gear, far too high.. Shortened it. Furthermore it was mostly built straight OOB.

Building of mine improves I think, this is what I just finished yesterday:

Greetings from, Nico Teunissen

P.s. it look likes as if I don't have the box anymore,.... sorry.