Jump to content

Review and Build for 1/72 Avro Arrow


Recommended Posts

So moving on with the build. Things slowed down a little bit because now I'm getting into parts that need painting.

Landing Gear

The landing gear in the new kit is made up of more parts than that previous kits, however they're still not accurately done, and not only that, the main landing gear in the new kit is actually less accurate.

Dsc_0610.jpg

Starting with the wheels.

The main wheels of the new kit are overall better shape and style. They have the correct main hub design and the wheels come as two halves you need to assemble. There are no guide pins or edges for assembly so you have to line everything up by eye. Also you have to core out the attachment pin hole on the inner part before you glue the to halves together. This hole is not already in the part.

The new kit landing gear strut is more or less the same as the older kits, just with a newly scaled height. This means it has completely the wrong details and shape to it.

The rotating bogie beams that the wheels actually attach to are not only in no way similar to that of the real aircraft, but you get two of the same side. On the real aircraft, the hydraulic tie-rod that rotated/aligned the wheels was on the forward edge of both landing gear struts. This new tooled kit has one of them backwards. Strangely enough, the old kits actually got that correct. The shape and attachment point of this tie-rod is also incorrect.

Some scratch building is going to be needed here if you want to have accurate main landing gear. This is my effort to add some of the minor corrections.

Dsc_0614.jpg

While not the finest work in the world, it at least puts the tie-rod on the correct side of the leg and corrects the general shape. I also relocated the torque link to the correct location. These should also face forward on both legs.

The main landing gear strut is better than the earlier kit parts but is still inaccurate. It's missing both the torque link connector.

I've also started correcting the main canopy. I'll post some photos of that in a bit.

Thanks for your interest

David

Link to post
Share on other sites

I had some time to spare today so I finally saw the new kit at Imperial hobbies. The funny thing is that side of the box advertising those 1/48's and 1/144's that may or may not be avaliable are the same as those on the 1/48 HC1659 box. YVR aviation world has a sale today but too bad they don't carry model kits anymore, I would have picked one up because their's was the lowest price as per the Toronto store. Nice to see you return back to the build David. Looking foward to more info on it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So I have today off so figured I'd post a quick update...and an announcement of sorts.

So the model is now painted and trimmed. I'm doing RL-201 in the all white scheme as I don't have any of the proper day glow orange laying about. That's okay, incentive to build another.

Dsc_0627.jpg

With a few tweaks, the model does really look like the Arrow. The forward canopy windows have been cut out of the plastic canopy part and will be redone with either .05mm clear plastic or krystal-klear. The krystal-klear works well enough so might do that. Because the recessed window outline is the wrong size and shape, I had to fill it in and cut out a new, properly shaped window.

You'll also notice it's rather naked. And here we get to the announcement bit.

Over the past few nights I've finished up my decal set for this model. It went quick because I had originally started this set for the 1:48 kit but as that kit went out of production I put it on the back burner. So I brought the files back, adjusted the scale and cleaned some things up. This set should be available in a few weeks.

cover.jpgsheet.jpg

I might still have a few little tweaks on the sheet yet but they're more or less ready to go to print now.

When I get the set done, and the model with some cloths on, I'll post an update.

As for the kit itself well;

Summary

Pros.

  • Really is a 100% new tooled kit. No parts of the previous 1:72 editions remain on the sprues.
  • Far more accurate in general outline than the previous kits. Not perfect, but so very close that most people won't notice without placing it on drawings.
  • Quick build. Took me less than a week and I made corrections as I went.
  • The cockpit isn't actually too bad considering how little of it you see with a closed canopy.
  • With a little work, it builds up into a passable Arrow. Certainly far better than earlier tooling kits.

Cons.

  • Overly Expensive. The Academy 1:72 CF-18 kit is far more detailed and accurate and is about the same price. This kit should be about $20 retail, but because it's the Arrow, it's going for as high as $35 in some shops.
  • If you're doing RL*203, you're going to need to source proper ensign flags. The ones on the decal sheet are useless.
  • Generally poor decals. Missing many stencils and accuracy problems with ones that are there.
  • Inake profile is much better but could be improved as it's still not correct out of the box.
  • No intake trunking.
  • Many issues with the landing gear. Accuracy problems mostly.
  • Canopy Window lines are wrong.
  • Wing control panel actuator covers are molded in the wrong place. They don't line up with the control panel line. This is strange because they had it right in the previous edition (although horribly wrong in their first edition).
  • Very poor instructions. Some listed parts don't exist. Some parts have different numbers. Some parts are molded differently than shown.
  • Horrible Box Art. I mean.. it's bad. And the worst part about it is that there are actually rendering errors on the 'schematic' views. That's going to hinder sales.

This kit sort of came out of no where. I think it's safe to say that nobody saw this one coming. It arrived on the scene with no fan fair and pretty much no advanced warning. When Hobbycraft folded a couple of years ago, most in the hobby probably felt that was the end of Canadian content. So we should commend them for sticking with it. Clearly they've decided to reboot their model division following the path laid out when they first got started. With the release of the CF-105 Arrow as their flagship. This time though, they may just have a winner on their hands. That is, if they can convince people that this isn't simply a reboxing.

That all said, it is a shame though that they didn't go that extra 10% and ensure that the details were covered. Like getting a quality decal graphics maker involved, or allowing people to see test shots so that corrections could be made.

Thanks for reading

David

Edited by RiderFan
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi David,

I've read this topic with interest even though I doubt I'll ever build an Arrow. I'm sure that the comparisons that you've drawn between boxings will be invaluable for Arrow modellers.

I can easily see why you enjoy your passion for the design. It's been a fascinating read, thanks for taking the time to share your findings.

Cheers.

:cheers:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Awesome! I've been eagerly waiting for an update on this review build. This new Arrow looks good and I will get one or more in the near future. I will also get your decals to go along with it.

Quick question about the decals. Why not include RL 206, especially considering that is the only surviving forward fuselage at the Canadian Aviation & Space Museum in Ottawa? That also brings up the point that Hobbycraft could have done a better job on that portion of thier Arrow models since there is a perfect example to work from.

-Denis

Link to post
Share on other sites

Awesome! I've been eagerly waiting for an update on this review build. This new Arrow looks good and I will get one or more in the near future. I will also get your decals to go along with it.

Quick question about the decals. Why not include RL 206, especially considering that is the only surviving forward fuselage at the Canadian Aviation & Space Museum in Ottawa? That also brings up the point that Hobbycraft could have done a better job on that portion of thier Arrow models since there is a perfect example to work from.

-Denis

Thanks Denis.

I'd considered 206 however the kit is a Mk1 air frame and 206 was a Mk2. 206 had a more rounded (less conical) radome, slightly different shape around the air-conditioner vent behind the cockpits, different stinger and exhaust cans, and a few other subtle differences. I've stood in front of the 206 remains myself and have many dozens of photos of it. There are enough differences that I think it would stand out on a sheet that is focused on the 5 aircraft that actually flew.

That all said, if people think adding 206 makes sense, there's lots of room to add it. It just wouldn't be accurate to a Mk1 air frame.

David

Edited by RiderFan
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Denis.

I'd considered 206 however the kit is a Mk1 air frame and 206 was a Mk2. 206 had a more rounded (less conical) radome, slightly different shape around the air-conditioner vent behind the cockpits, different stinger and exhaust cans, and a few other subtle differences. I've stood in front of the 206 remains myself and have many dozens of photos of it. There are enough differences that I think it would stand out on a sheet that is focused on the 5 aircraft that actually flew.

That all said, if people think adding 206 makes sense, there's lots of room to add it. It just wouldn't be accurate to a Mk1 air frame.

David

David,

I say stick to the 5 until someone makes a conversion kit to make HC1393 into a Mark 2.

Link to post
Share on other sites

David,

You are naturally biased, but how accurate (or inaccurate) are the FlightDec 1/72 decals intended for the previous Hobbycraft Arrow kit? (Yes, I have that sheet.)

Hi Sten.

I can't say I've ever seen the sheet to know. I can't find any images of it on the web either.

But, I guess it depends on whether or not the decals were really 1:72 scale or 1:78(ish) scale to be in proper proportion to the early hobby craft kit. But again I've never seen it to know.

thanks

David

Edited by RiderFan
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...

Just to add to this, I pulled out my copy of the new kit and did some dryfitting and because they have corrected the length, the Mastercasters' 1/72 set will not fit as it clearly is desighned for the second edition and is too short to fit the new one. That being said I may still use parts of it such as the open canopies and such since they seem to be the same size at first glance. RiderFan, what did you think of the bang seats in the kit as they are certainly iarger than the resin set in the Mastercasters set, The Mastercasters set seem to be in line with the size of other 1/72 seats and these new issue ones look a little overscale but they fit the cockpit so I'm thinking the side consoles should be wider and the seats smaller but I don't have great references as I (for shame) haven't built up as much info on the Arrow as I have on Cdn aircraft in general.

Has anyone looked to see if the part numbers on the instructions match the 1/48 kit cause they are certainly out to lunch as to this kit as Dave points out.

Thanks for the review Dave and from my time with the kit last night I concur with your findings. Certainly a much better starting point. By the way I found that it actually helps to cut off a number of the fitting pins to get stuff to fit better so others may want to keep this in mind.

Cheers

Bruce

P.S.

While I certainly have a vast collection of aftermarket Cdn decals and would have no problem decalling the kit, a new sheet actually for the kit would be great so keep us informed of your progress.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Bruce.

Thanks for your comments.

I can't really comment on the Master Caster's 1/72 set as I've never seen it. But I wasn't all that impressed with the 1:48 set.

The HC seats in the new kit seem to be pretty close to the drawings you can find in the book 'The Arrow' by Boston Mills Press. The general dimensions of the cockpit also seems pretty good (considering the scale). My personal opinion is that the Master Casters stuff wouldn't bring that much to the new kit. Even with the clamshell canopy open, there's so little to see inside that minuscule dimensional errors are not really going to be noticed. But that's just my opinion. YMMV.

The instruction on the 1:48 kit seem correct as far as number layout is concerned. Poor artwork in those instructions but that's beside the point.

The decal sheets for the Arrow (and the CP-140 for those that are waiting on that set too), are at the printers but they can take 4 to 6 weeks to finish production. I expect to have them for sale in August assuming there are no problems with the run.

thanks

David

Link to post
Share on other sites

I want to thank 'Rider Fan' for his constructive comments on the latest version of the Hobby Craft Arrow. They are very helpful.

I agree that the shape of the canopy/windscreen on this latest release is incorrect and am thinking about using the (Victoria Products) VP Canada 2 piece vac form windscreen as found on their vac form kit that I purchased in early 1992.

I have found in my stash an unidentifiable injection kit (that's what I get for collecting versions for over twenty-five years) that has the correctly spaced lower wing actuators and plan on replacing the incorrect kit outer wings with these.

I do have a question concerning the exhaust cans for this latest release. What Arrows can be built using the kit provided exhausts? I take it that RL*201 did not use the type of exhausts provided in the Hobby Craft re-release, or was that airframe modified later in the test program?

Are the kit provided double layer exhaust cans accurate and again, can they be used on any of the later airframes?

Any insight or comments would be appreciated. I've gotta get an Arrow built before I'm sent to the old folks home!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Brian.

The exhaust cans provided with the kit are the 'late type' but would be applicable to all airframes. The caveat to that is that is that it prevents you from building accurate early versions of 201. The kit parts don't allow for an accurate build of the "roll-out" day RL-201. But, at some point during the program, all airframes had this type of exhaust cans fitted.

Ideally, HC would have provided the option for either type. Ideally, HC would have done a number of things.

The interior cans are in no way accurate to the burner can of an actual J75. I wouldn't even say they're representative. That said, there's nothing much to see anyway. The exterior details of the J75 are covered up by the airframe exhaust, and the interior of the 'tube' is so small, and so far back inside, that you don't see anything anyway*.

The VP canopy should fit on the kit pretty well I think. Be aware that the outer wing shape of the earlier edition Arrow kits are off scale.

*For the record, I'm not really a 72 scale guy. I pretty much do 1:32 and 48 if need be. My 72 scale builds are few and far between. So when I say "there's nothing much to see" that could be driven by my bias towards larger scales. Those folks that live and breath 72 scale may completely disagree with my opinion of "nothing to see".

thanks

David

Edited by RiderFan
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Dave for the quick reponse. When I mentioned the use of those more accurate lower outer wing surfaces, I meant just using the ailerons. They should fit. On the question of "outer wing shape" being off scale, what exactly do you mean?

While I build kits in all scales except 1/144th, I agree with your point on the inner exhausts. I will always remember a comment made by an old friend, Dave 'Bo' Bosanski years ago about model building. He said that it's all about fooling the eye or drawing the eye to other aspects of the model. An outstanding paint job will always draw the eye away from a minor shape discrepency or detail error. I know when I walk by a shelf of my build-ups and take a quick glance and think, damn, they look neat, forgetting the wing tip light or whatever that I never corrected. At some point during the building we all have to say that this is a far as I'm going with this project, it'll never be perfect!

On the topic of those exhausts, I started a vac form Arrow years ago...been on the back burner so long my interest in completing it has gone cold. I used brass tubing and the after burner face from a F-4 Phantom. Seemed to do the job...and fool the eye. My mother and wife never seemed to notice the difference!

The only real challenge with the kit that I find is trying to do an adequate job on the intake trunking. On that vac form version I just mentioned I built up the interior with apoxy putty and Tamiya putty but they are too small to fit the updated Hobby Craft version. Looks like I'll be starting from scratch on those!

Thanks again for your comments.

Brian

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Thanks Denis.I'd considered 206 however the kit is a Mk1 air frame and 206 was a Mk2. 206 had a more rounded (less conical) radome, slightly different shape around the air-conditioner vent behind the cockpits, different stinger and exhaust cans, and a few other subtle differences. I've stood in front of the 206 remains myself and have many dozens of photos of it. There are enough differences that I think it would stand out on a sheet that is focused on the 5 aircraft that actually flew.That all said, if people think adding 206 makes sense, there's lots of room to add it. It just wouldn't be accurate to a Mk1 air frame.David

Come on...everyone knows that the nose section in Ottawa is actually 205 repainted to 206 and not actually 206, because of course......it got away! :jaw-dropping: :jaw-dropping:

Just got these in stock if anyone is interested.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey folks. I found this site after digging around for details on the MkII as I'm doing a project to convert the Hobbycraft MkI to a II. I don't suppose anyone can point me in the direction of where I can obtain drawings similar to the Stroomenberg MkI?

From what I've read, the profile (side) of the stinger on RL202 is sharper than the other aircraft?

Link to post
Share on other sites

"The Arrow" - Boston Mills Press.

That's your single best source for all things Avro CF-105 Arrow. The back, inside cover, of the book has MKII drawings. You'll have to scan and rescale them, but they're legit blueprints so as accurate as you're going to get.

The stinger changed size and shape along with the exhaust cans at various times during flight testing.

thanks

David

Edited by RiderFan
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

I got the kit a few weeks ago and then "The Arrow" book. Great reference -Thanks David! I noticed a couple of things about the drawings in regards to the Mk.2 but that would take it off-topic. I may be PMing you about some stuff, if you don't mind?

Staying on topic:

There was mention that there are inaccuracies in the canopy - for those who are planning on making corrections, maybe this will help some:

CanopyCorrections01.jpg

1) The problem here is mainly the shape of the rounded side of the window

2) Not only does the flat surface area extend too deep but possibly the fissure/cut does as well. I haven't taken measurements yet for ratio and such but you can eyeball it and tell it's not right based on references.

3) The angle here needs to be adjusted. See line drawings.

4) Again, the angles are incorrect. See line drawings.

The shape of the scalloping might be a little shallow in parts but it's not a glaring problem.

Edited by KuRiPi
Link to post
Share on other sites

The general shape of the canopy part seems 'okay' to me. It's at least as close to the drawings as the rest of the kit is. And yes I agree, the most glaring problem for me, and something I couldn't leave without fixing, was the shape of the window outline. It's not as rounded along the top as it should be. As the canopy frame is white anyway, I filled in the lines, sanded everything smooth, then cut out the properly shaped window. The window 'glass' was then created with Microscale Krystal Klear.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi everyone.

As promised earlier in the thread, here are a few images of the kit now dressed up with Canuck Models decals.

Dsc_0735.jpg

Dsc_0733.jpg

Dsc_0732.jpg

Yes, even after modification, the pilots canopy window still isn't quite the right shape. Still not round enough. Will have to work on that.

Thanks

David

Edited by RiderFan
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 8 months later...

Dave, thats a very nice looking build. It definitely captures to "Look" of the Arrow, at least from what i can recall.

i still have the 72nd scale Astra vacform kit in my stash. Is it still worth building? I built the original Hobbycraft kit, then i was out to lunch during the release of the second edition and re-vamp of the 48th scale version.

Thanks,

david

Edited by Falcon50EX
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi David

The Astra kit is fantastic! I wish I had one myself. If you're comfortable with the extra work of vacuformed kits, definitely the Astra kit is the better option.

thanks

David

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...