REVELL 1:72 ALBATROS D.III

 

Reviewer: Steve Hedworth (contact via SMAKR webmaster)
Kit Review submitted:  25 October 2009

Aircraft History:

Just a brief summary. The Albatros series of fighters were the mainstay of the Central Powers fighter squadrons for most of the last two years of the war. Ordered into production in June 1916 the Albatros entered service with the German air service in September 1916 during the battle of the Somme. Organised into Jasta, true fighter squadrons, they regained air superiority, culminating in the heavy losses the RFC suffered in Bloody April of 1917. The D111 entered service in January 1917 and was followed by the DV in May and the DVa in October. There were several incidences of lower wing failure and remedial measures had to be taken. Later Allied machines such as the SE5A, Camel and Spads could more than hold their own with the Albatros which began to be replaced, along with the Pfalz D111, from the spring / early summer of 1918 by the Fokker DV11 and other later types. Over 3,000 machines were built in Germany and the type was still in service at the Armistice.

 addition to the German production the type was adopted by the Austro Hungarian airforce and built under licence by Oeffag, at Wiener-Neustadt. They were manufactured between January 1917 and October 1918 and about 540 aircraft were built. Additional strengthening was employed on the lower wings by the AH and these versions did not suffer the wing failures of the German models. AH versions used the domestic Austro Daimler engine, the first series using the 185hp, the second, introduced in July, the 200hp, and the last, in May 1918, the 225hp engine. They were used until the Armistice and continued in service with some of the new Eastern European states well into the twenties.

The Kit:

It must have been first released in the sixties. It was my first biplane, in red plastic, and built by my father as an overnight surprise. The box then had a D111 flying alongside a Zeppelin. This is my third purchase of this model and on each occasion the only change has been the colour of the plastic, red to white and now cream. Bought this year the date stamps inside the fuselage are for 1981. There are release marks on the wings which need removing and both the interplane struts and undercarriage carry similar marks. There is flash but nothing to be worried about. It is after all an old moulding. The ribs etc are perfectly acceptable to my eyes but the purist will probably consider the struts and undercarriage as slightly over scale and wish to replace. The machine guns could also be improved upon. The main problem with this kit is the fuselage.  It is lacking approximately 2mm of depth in front of the rudder and the fuselage sides aft of the cockpit are slightly ovoid instead of the slab sides of the original D111’s.

Instructions:

The usual multi lingual format comprising  8 pages of A4. About half are of use. A short history, a page of 8 exploded views, and two pages addressing the colour schemes.

Construction:

Since my return to the modelling fold I have discovered that the Eduard Albatri, followed by the Roden, are considered to be the best representations available. I have the Eduard DV in the stash but the Roden are looking pricey at the moment, particularly when postage has to be added on. My local model shop recently had a sale that included many of Revell’s WW1 range. Reduced to £2 I ended up with several D111’s, SE5A’s, DV11’s and SPAD X111’s. I was aware of the D111’s faults but many years ago there was a magazine called Wings. In issue 59 a gentleman called Ray Rimmel published an account of how he had improved the kit. I intended to use this article as my guide although I had decided to attempt an Austro Hungarian version.

The kit propellor spinner is too sharp and needs to be better rounded. This I did with a file and isn’t too tricky. The Revell pilot went into the spares box and a better replacement found. There is no cockpit detail of any sort. I cut a piece of plastic card to act as a floor. A seat from Eastern Express was positioned into a drill hole, pilot sat upon and a small piece of card used to present the bar/ instrument panel. A bit of fine rod represented the control stick. The sides of the fuselage were painted wood. Next, I modified the Mercedes engine. This must now represent an 185hp Austro Daimler. Using a Squadron publication as my guide the cylinder heads were filed flat. The long exhaust was cut off at the point where the pipe turned away from the fuselage. The short length remaining beyond the rearmost cylinder head was gently teased into a short bend with a pair of needle nosed pliers. Crude but it worked.  The most obvious difference between the AD engine and the Mercedes is the long cover which runs lengthwise over the cylinder heads. This I represented with a section of card that was filed to shape. The rounded front piece was a mille of rod glued in place and a short piece of thin rod was located under this roundel as another pipe. When dry it was painted metallic silver, black and copper, not forgetting the rusty exhaust and set aside with the cockpit section while I tackled the fuselage.

Ray Rimmel recommends that the rudder and tail skid are removed from the starboard half. I could see nothing wrong with either so I didn’t.  But I did saw a horizontal cut from the rudder post, that’s where the tail plane goes, to the rear of the cockpit. Wedges of 40 thou plastic card are then cut and shaped, described by RR as tapered like elongated diamonds. I tried to replicate these but gave up. Instead I found that smaller wedges, about a third of an inch long, or 7 – 8mm, and 2mm deep, sufficed to open up the fuselage to the required depth. The cut out beneath the rudder was flexible enough to be cemented back together with CA although it had to be held in place. I left the two halves to dry overnight, half expecting the glue to have given way by the next day but it hadn’t. I decided to hedge my bets by completing the fuselage and using CA on all the tail section joints. Cockpit was cemented to the right half and the parts were joined. Success. Happier now, I completed the fuselage conversion. The gaps along the saw cut received filler and then the sides were filed flat. The difference is quite marked when compared with an OOB kit. The machine guns are not needed as AH Albatros’ had the Schwarlose guns mounted under the forward decking. The hole needs filling and plastic card and filler filed to shape sufficed. RR states that the fuselage should be lengthened by 3/32 inches, about 2.5 mm. I measured mine, with the altered spinner, and decided this was too much. I added a piece of 60 thou card to the nose, half the recommended amount, and filed to shape. Lastly, I represented the rear streamlined aerofoils behind the lower wing with pieces of card and added a windscreen from the spares box.

Next the engine is fitted. The additions need the front of the hole to be slightly enlarged so to fit and a couple of fine pieces of rod are cemented under the exhausts and manifolds, one either side of the engine block, to represent the gun’s blast tubes.

There is one more modification to carry out. The upper wing radiator had a different header tank layout to the German models. I fixed some 10 thou card to the front section and filed it to a stream lined shape. Then a long thin triangle was cut and centred back from the header tank. I used photos from an inbox review from another site as my guide.

Now we just follow Revell’s instructions. The gap in the tail piece needed enlargement as I had filled the locating slot earlier.  The wings, struts and under carriage I used from the box.  RR recommends replacements. I checked them against an Eduard DV I have. The undercarriage wasn’t that bad and I always prefer strength against fragility. The wing struts are decidedly more robust and the interplane aren’t too bad. I think the main difference is that the more modern kit’s offerings are much better streamlined but I’m quite happy with the finished kit. My main reason for building it was to try out RR’s conversion method.

My decision to leave the tail skid intact was a mistake. A picture on the back of the Squadron publication was my down fall. It showed a shape very similar to the kit so I ignored RR. When I later had a proper look at the photos it was obvious that it should have had a more acute angle. C’est la vie.

The wings received their sworl pattern decals before construction and the under surfaces were painted before hand too. The fuselage was similarly treated, in fact almost everything was painted and had received the transfers before final assembly.  Rigging as usual, using invisible thread.

Colour Schemes:

The kit comes with two schemes. Both are German and are similar, sporting wood, no doubt clear varnish, fuselages, mauve and green upper wings and CDL under surfaces. Tails and spinners are the differences.

Decals:

Choice of two. A D111 flown by Werner Voss and another flown by Ltn von Budde, both from 1917. I only used the wing crosses and had no problems with them.

The rest of the AH markings I used came from an Eastern Express Hansa Brandenburg Starstrutter and an EE Sopwith Snipe provided the improvised personal markings of vertical white stripes. There is no serial number because the only number I could make up was 53.19 and unfortunately the D111 series started at 53.20.

When I first decided to build an Austro Hungarian version research quickly showed that many of their aircraft were CDL and clear varnish finished. I would have been happy to follow this line but a search on the Aerodrome website seemed to indicate that sworl pattern markings had been used on Albatros fighters. This design had been introduced into Flik 41 by the commander Godfried Brumowski. At first they were hand painted and the units HB D1’s were so treated. I thought it possible that the units Albatri had been so treated and looked at the EE transfers. I wasn’t going to use these on the starstrutter and was pleased when I discovered they could be cut to fit the Albatros wings. What is more, there were several strips left over to cover the rear top decking and the remainder could be used on the tail, hopefully looking hand painted. My theory proved correct when I received a copy of Osprey’s AH Aces of WW1 which showed several aircraft in a similar mode.

Accuracy:

The Revell fuselage is wrong. It is too shallow towards the tail and the sides are slightly oval, more DV than D111. As seen the correction is not rocket science or overly time consuming.  Ray Rimmel wrote that the spinner, fin, rudder, tail skid fairing, guns and engine need replacing or alteration. I don’t know what is wrong with the fin and rudder but he’s right about the rest. Struts etc I’ve already mentioned but RR also suggests that the wing elevators need to be reduced in span by one rib width. I compared the Revell wing with the Eduard kit and RR appeared to be right. However, when compared with a photo of an inbox review of a Roden Oeffag D111, the Revell version seemed to be a better match. Finally, I lined the wing up with the old Airfix kit and they matched. Faced with conflicting evidence I left the wing as it was. To me, a non sufferer of AMS, and someone who very quickly loses count of rivets, the kit has everything needed as the basis of a good model. Dimensions wing wise are spot on, just under five inches, height is correct, one and a half inches, and the length is spot on OOB but subject to the modifications.

Conclusions:

At these prices you can’t go wrong. Construction is straightforward, simpler than Roden, and the alterations required are simple. Recommended to anyone considering their first conversion. I initially bought mine hoping to be able to use it as the basis for a two seater.  However, if you want OOB go for Eduard or Roden.


© Steve Hedworth 2009

References:

 


© Steve Hedworth 2009

 

SMAKR Home  |  What's New  |  Submissions  | Information Requests |  News  |  Links  |  Reference Corner  |  Site Info 
1/72 Reviews  |  1/48 Reviews  |  INBOX Reviews