Gene K Posted March 11, 2008 Share Posted March 11, 2008 I haven’t seen much recently on ARC regarding the new Academy legacy Hornet, so I thought I’d share a few observations and maybe get some feedback from others – as was had at 72ndscaleUSmilair@yahoogroups.com The kit is excellent as concerns molding, engineering, and fit. Fuselage assembly is a little tricky because of the multi-part nose, but I found that assembling the entire bottom and then mating to the one-piece top was the way to go to make it easier to work the seams. The intakes are blanked off, but by opening them up, backing them with a wad of Apoxi Sculpt (US Milliput), and then twisting a wet cotton swap down the openings to form an intake works great. If you paint the kit part after opening it up (before applying the Apoxi Sculpt), you’ll find that the demarcation between the painted intake and the white Apoxi Sculpt is near perfect demarcation as on the 1:1 jet. On my next post, I’ll comment on some minor potential “correctionsâ€. Gene K Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Gene K Posted March 11, 2008 Author Share Posted March 11, 2008 A couple of small points: First, the shape of the fins is slightly different than in he Hasegawa kit. Here are the Has A model and Academy C tails overlaid on the Daco drawings (apologies to those who abhor drawings, but they serve a definite purpose): Not a big deal for me, but decals that are designed for the Hasegawa kit may have to be modified slightly - or the fin “corrected†by some surgery (probably only to shave off some of the leading edge. Noted Hornet modeler Norm Filer recommends this approach). Note that I tried to establish a common reference using the rudder hinge line and the bottom of the fin cap. Second, there is some minor scribing to be done on the wing as shown in the attached photo (no, I wasn’t anally (sp?) checking panel lines, I just noted the missing line as I was in the process of dropping the flaps). And talk about flaps, Wolfpack has two sets (dropped flaps with and without folded wings) for the Academy kit, and judging by the Super Hornet set that I got from Sprue Brothers (plug), they are nice. Gene K Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Murph Posted March 11, 2008 Share Posted March 11, 2008 (edited) Just got mine today, that's a lot of pieces for that lower, forward fuselage. It sounds like it goes together well though from what's been said. EDIT: Couple of things that caught my attention with the decals; they include placards for the headrest on the ejection seat and full details for the missiles, including TDD's (aka fuze windows) for the AIM-7M's and safe/arm placards for both the AIM-7 and AIM-9. Neat stuff! Regards, Murph Edited March 12, 2008 by Murph Quote Link to post Share on other sites
otis252 Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 J Chuck Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Brian P: Fightertown Decals Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 Interesting stuff. Thanks for sharing. I'm not sure I follow how you are doing the intakes. Are you hollowing out a hole in the miliput or...? Any chance of some straight on shots of your intake? thanks, brian Quote Link to post Share on other sites
volzj Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 Anxiously awaiting mine to arrive from Roll Models along with some other stuff. C'mon brown truck... Keep posting info those that have it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Murph Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 Keep posting info those that have it. Well, just to tie the threads together. Regards, Murph Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ChernayaAkula Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 Interesting stuff, Gene! While drawings may be off, they do allow for an easier comparison of the kits. While they may not be the last word on accuracy, they make it a whole lot easier to see where parts differ from kit to kit. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Gene K Posted March 12, 2008 Author Share Posted March 12, 2008 (edited) Just don't state your 'findings' or make corrections on the kit based on the drawings in the DACO book (or any book for that matter). Yes sir! But I'll continue to state my opinions ("findings"). Notice, please, that I didn't (repeat - DID NOT) make any conclusions based on the DACO drawings. They served as a point of reference and highlighted the differences between the Acad and Has items that I also illustrated with an overlay of one over the other - again with no conclusions as to which was more correct. Norm Filer did a nice overlay using a photo, and maybe he'll join in. I'll respectfully say this one more time - I understand your adamant stand about drawings/books, and got the message from previous threads; but as I said, some of us don't have the resources, references and personal experience to be able to formulate opinions without relying (at least somewhat) on others' research. In my case, I give credit that whoever published the drawings has invested more time than I could. Further, I doubt anyone into modeling to the extent that they are on these forums would rely exclusively on one set of drawings without considering other drawings, photos, and measurements (all of which also have limitations, of course). As for your measurements - very impressive, and hopefully you've provided them to someone who will make up a set of "definitive" drawings for those of us who give guarded credence to them. As I also said before, Dave, I appreciate your expertise and all that you've shared on the various boards! Trust, but verify. Gene K Edited March 12, 2008 by Gene K Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Dmanton300 Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 Here's my first one. The kit is head, shoulders and any other part of the anatomy above any other offering in 72nd. I'll be building more in the very near future. But for now, back to my regularly scheduled SLUF production line! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Gene K Posted March 12, 2008 Author Share Posted March 12, 2008 (edited) I'm not sure I follow how you are doing the intakes. Are you hollowing out a hole in the miliput or...? Brian, Yes, as concerns the hole. After the Apoxi Sculpt was mixed (kneaded together 1:1), I just wadded it up behind the opened intake, and then pushed/twisted a moist cotton swab through the opening into the pliable putty to form a tunnel. The Apoxi Sculpt is easily formed and you have plenty of working time (at least an hour, but you'll only need five minutes) to push from the outside and smooth from the inside. Of course you can't get the subtle inside curves of the 1:1 trunks because you can't maneuver the swab that well (and the thickness of the wheel well top limits how the Apoxi Sculpt path "flows"). Finally having the intake "end" in a pocket (like the inside of a dome) gives the illusion of a longer intake. It obviously won't stand the scrutiny of a flashlight and mirror since there's no engine face - but it sure is much better than the flat wall Academy gives you. Gene K Edited March 12, 2008 by Gene K Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Matt Shropshire Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 You know as much as I want to stay out of this I can't. Comparing the 1:72 Hasegawa kit to the Academy kit is unfair. The Hase kit is some 20 years old, the Academy is brand new. In my personal opinion the Academy kit is top of the line in comparison, but the Hase kit is still a great kit. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Murph Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 Here's my first one. Drewe, What took you so long? Regards, Murph Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Trojan Thunder Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 ;) Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Johnopfor Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 Here's my uptake. If I may, using the previous photo of the model, clearly it represents an F-18. This does not. Though it may be hard to see the difference....I shall point them out. You will note, that even the addition of silly green lines does not make this look like an F-18. I could have added red lines and lots of explanation about it...but just the same, one model looks like an F-18 and one does not. It does, however, represent a rock and a bloody good one at that. Is there an aftermarket resin set to correct the inaccuracies of the rock?? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
GreyGhost Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 Hey Rusty, is that one of the "Charlie Brown" rocks ? Gregg Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Matt Shropshire Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 Is there an aftermarket resin set to correct the inaccuracies of the rock?? Yes, but it was going to be released by Metor Productions. So it was cancelled. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ChernayaAkula Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 Drewe, a great Hornet you've got there! Would you have a pic from the side? The pic on the Academy site looks kinda odd. People suggested that was down to the pic not being level. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Dmanton300 Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 Drewe, What took you so long? Regards, Murph SLUFs and prisoners. So, modelling on one hand, and being a cop on the other. Too many hands on my time. I'll try to correct it in due course! I'm off to build a rock now, I have a decent set of drawings to work from so I reckon I could get it pretty accurate. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Gene K Posted March 12, 2008 Author Share Posted March 12, 2008 I'm off to build a rock now, I have a decent set of drawings to work from so I reckon I could get it pretty accurate. Drewe, And I know it will be a beautiful rock, as all your models are (saying that in all sincerity). Matt, My comparing the tails was only to highlight a potential decal problem. The Has kit is good, but the Academy kit is excellent, particularly the engineering. Dave, Since the Academy kit includes an alternate part with A model nose grills, what else needs to be added/changed besides the tail bumps and stiffeners to make an accurate A model? Gene K Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Gene K Posted March 12, 2008 Author Share Posted March 12, 2008 Don't waste your time. Academy is releasing the kit as an F/A-18A/A+ next. Thanks. Any idea how far down the road the two seater is? Gene K Quote Link to post Share on other sites
SSgtd6152 Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 Here's my uptake. If I may, using the previous photo of the model, clearly it represents an F-18. This does not. Though it may be hard to see the difference....I shall point them out. You will note, that even the addition of silly green lines does not make this look like an F-18. I could have added red lines and lots of explanation about it...but just the same, one model looks like an F-18 and one does not. It does, however, represent a rock and a bloody good one at that. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
dews Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 Wow, those bird slicers on the nose sure are sexy. I wish someone would do something in 48th (I know wolfpack has one but I only want the bird slicers and can't justify the cost) so that my CF-18's would look as good. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
nfiler Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 I am glad to see this thread staying somewhat on track and civil. In my opinion the rock thing was an insult to Gene's efforts to illustrate what he was trying to say. Since I probably am the guy that started this whole Academy tail thing, here is my take on it. Decals drawn from Photos and then placed on exact scans of both Hasegawa and Academy tails do not fit the Academy tail leading edge. VFA-83s Rams head with the circle of "tulip leaves" around the head is an excellent example. Photos show exactly where the tulip leaves (yeah, I know that is a lousy title, but it is the best I could come up with) intersect the leading edge. If you monkey with the decal to make it fit the leading edge, the Ram's head is crooked. Is this a big deal? Maybe not for many markings, but it sure is for some. How to fix it? It is easy. Just shave a bit off the top of the leading edge of the Academy fin. Dave. You and I share the same opinion about using drawings as fact. It has always amazed me that many of us use one person's drawings to say that a model is "wrong". But Gene was attempting to show why he (we) thought the tail was wrong. May I suggest a simple solution to this? I know what I think, but perhaps an experts opinion supported by actual measurements would resolve this. Go photograph one of your birds tails as near as dead on as you can, then post it. I can take it from there. Norm Quote Link to post Share on other sites
volzj Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 Drewe, a great Hornet you've got there! Would you have a pic from the side? The pic on the Academy site looks kinda odd. People suggested that was down to the pic not being level. The picture is crocked. Check the link Murph posted to the other thread. Someone straightened it in PS and it looks fine. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
.thumb.jpg.93bec6792d8c24df3038f789b80940d5.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.