Tauro Macchi C.202

[modellius]

Now very nice build and excellent  informations gathered here, must follow gopic indeed !

[Second Air Force]

Thanks all!

Jicehem: I did some research and the left wing was actually the longer one, and Tauro accurately molded the model to this dimension. On the real airplane the left wing was 21 cm longer.

Here's a photo of the little machine getting close to beginning of painting. I've still got some rescribing to do and another light coat of primer first......

Tauro Macchi C.202

[draken35]

[Jicehem]

Jicehem: I did some research and the left wing was actually the longer one, and Tauro accurately molded the model to this dimension. On the real airplane the left wing was 21 cm longer.

Hi mate,

It's not logical. To counteract the natural tendancy of the plane to turn to the left with a engine (propeller) running to the right, the right wing should be longer than the left one... There is something that I don't understand 

Jicéhem

[Second Air Force]

Actually, as I think of it, the Macchi designers were attempting to counteract the torque of the propeller and engine which would tend to cause a left-wing heavy condition. Their solution, rather than offsetting the vertical fin like some others did, was to extend the left wing, giving it a little more lift. I don't suppose the designers (this was used on the MC 200 also) thought to change the camber of the left wing for added lift but rather just extended it. In essence, they were simply trying to "pick up" the left wing by adding lift. I'm guessing they used their slide rules to determine if adding wing span caused less drag than offsetting the vertical fin.

As to this model, I've begun painting and will get a photo or two posted soon!

[No.1]

Now I see what I miss ... I could send you 1/48 belts for Italian fighters, it would work nice with kit and it will result in nice review...

[Second Air Force]

Well.....sure, if you wish to send 'em over I'll do a review! I've not put belts in this one yet as a matter of fact. I thought I had an extra set of Italian harness here but I can't find them.

[No.1]

Well, I will send it... hope tomorrow

[Second Air Force]

No hurry, mate!!

[No.1]

Well, kit is progressing, you need to be inside Do you have any other kit of Italian plane?

[draken35]

Scott, I'seen that Italeri will release soon a Macchi c.205, with the "green mottles" furnished on the decal sheet...

[Second Air Force]

No.1, I've also got the M.C.200 to build now, and I can also still fit the belts on this 202 easily. I'm still trying to find a couple of "inexpensive" Re.2000/2001 kits also..... I have a strong urge to build either a Hungarian (maybe even a Heja conversion) or Italian Reggiane!

That M.C.205 sounds excellent, draken, and a Hasegawa 202 is also on my wish list.

[No.1]

Then we go

[Second Air Force]

I just wish I had been smart enough to purchase some of the Classic Airframes Regia Aeronautica kits back when they were reasonably priced! Our little hobby shop here had some but his prices surpassed my ability to pay several years ago........

[Jicehem]

Actually, as I think of it, the Macchi designers were attempting to counteract the torque of the propeller and engine which would tend to cause a left-wing heavy condition. Their solution, rather than offsetting the vertical fin like some others did, was to extend the left wing, giving it a little more lift. I don't suppose the designers (this was used on the MC 200 also) thought to change the camber of the left wing for added lift but rather just extended it. In essence, they were simply trying to "pick up" the left wing by adding lift. I'm guessing they used their slide rules to determine if adding wing span caused less drag than offsetting the vertical fin.

OK. But if it's really the case the uppersurface of the left wing must be more rounded (convex). This is the only effective factor that gives more lift.

Jicéhem