caiotfjr Posted November 15, 2012 Share Posted November 15, 2012 Product page is up: http://www.1999.co.jp/eng/10201807 I know just cowards need instructions, but someone should actually build the kit before drawing them... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
boom175 Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 I know just cowards need instructions, but someone should actually build the kit before drawing them... huh? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
caiotfjr Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 huh? I meant the designers from GWH. While the kit seems VERY, VERY, VERY nice, the assembly sequence seems awkward... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Vodnik Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 the assembly sequence seems awkward... Also half of the ejection seat drawings show early style headrest, while the other half show the late style headrest... Which one is included in this kit? And I don't quite like the intake parts - don't look like proper full length intakes... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ya-gabor Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 Also half of the ejection seat drawings show early style headrest, while the other half show the late style headrest... Which one is included in this kit? The very early series 9-12 and preproduction aircraft had an earlier verion of the K-36 seat which was similar to the K-36DM Series 1 seat with the "big headrest" (like the ones in the Su-24 and some Su-17 family aircraft). Since the kit represents both "early" and "production (late)" versions of the 9-12 family it has the early style headrest as an option. You dont have to use it. Yes, the CAD drawings a bit misleading where there is an "overlay" of both versions. But that is only a 3D drawing so dont be confused by it, its not the plastic. I had shown photos of this K-36 version to the Zvezda OKB people (the designers of the K-36 family) and they were surprised ot see that such a version existed! Most of the people in the company at the time when those seats were made for MiG OKG were long gone by now. So no surprise. . . Actually for authenticity if one wants to build the first prototypes of the MiG-29 they will have to use the KM-1M seat since these were instaled in the very first examples! (but then you will have to build a very different aicraft since the protos had lots of differences from the early 9-12's) Best regards Gabor Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Berkut Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 And I don't quite like the intake parts - don't look like proper full length intakes... I don't see any problem. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
John Thompson Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 While the kit seems VERY, VERY, VERY nice, the assembly sequence seems awkward... Also half of the ejection seat drawings show early style headrest, while the other half show the late style headrest... Which one is included in this kit? And I don't quite like the intake parts - don't look like proper full length intakes... Hah! The kit is rotten with Fatal Flaws! They should have done a Yak-9D instead. John Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Vodnik Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 I don't see any problem. I don't see the actual internal intake duct. Just the outer shell. Maybe I'm wrong, but shouldn't be some duct included to smoothly transition from the rectangular intake lip to the circular compressor fan?... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Vodnik Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 Yes, the CAD drawings a bit misleading where there is an "overlay" of both versions. But that is only a 3D drawing so dont be confused by it, its not the plastic I didn't mean the CAD image, but the first drawings in instructions. They show early headrest on the left side and late one on the right side. But only one set of part numbers is shown in assembly sequence - no options for early or late. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Berkut Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 I dont know if transition is smooth on the model, but it looks fine either way. Take a look at first page. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Vodnik Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 I dont know if transition is smooth on the model, but it looks fine either way. Take a look at first page. Check the instructions. Photos on the first page don't show anything really inside the intakes, but the kit instructions at 1999.co.jp show that there is no intake duct included. Not a big problem considering that main intakes are usually closed on the ground, but still a tiny bit disappointing. Just to make it clear: I plan to buy two of these kits, despite these fatal flaws ;) Quote Link to post Share on other sites
caiotfjr Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 Check the instructions. Photos on the first page don't show anything really inside the intakes, but the kit instructions at 1999.co.jp show that there is no intake duct included. Not a big problem considering that main intakes are usually closed on the ground, but still a tiny bit disappointing. Just to make it clear: I plan to buy two of these kits, despite these fatal flaws ;) I agree do disagree. I think it's one of the best efforts by any company marketed this year. I will not buy the kit in the near future, as I had bought almost a lot of AM upgrades to build a passable model of the Academy kit... :crying2: :crying2: Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Laurent Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 (edited) Photos on the first page don't show anything really inside the intakes, but the kit instructions at 1999.co.jp show that there is no intake duct included. Not a big problem considering that main intakes are usually closed on the ground, but still a tiny bit disappointing. Haneto said it in the thread. They already wanted to add parts (tray for the engines) but they couldn't because there was no more space left on the sprues. The situation would have been even worst with the trunking parts. Thing is that the people who don't know at all the MiG-29 may be disappointed too and some will say that loudly. Edited November 16, 2012 by Laurent Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ya-gabor Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 (edited) I didn't mean the CAD image, but the first drawings in instructions. They show early headrest on the left side and late one on the right side. But only one set of part numbers is shown in assembly sequence - no options for early or late. Yes the one on the left is the eary version and the one on the right is the K-36 DM Seria 2 "late" version headrest. Haneto did apologies for possible misprints on the instruction sheet if I remember right. Lets see the kit. Best regards Gabor Edited November 16, 2012 by ya-gabor Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Berkut Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 Check the instructions. Photos on the first page don't show anything really inside the intakes, but the kit instructions at 1999.co.jp show that there is no intake duct included. Not a big problem considering that main intakes are usually closed on the ground, but still a tiny bit disappointing. Just to make it clear: I plan to buy two of these kits, despite these fatal flaws ;) You did see i wrote "I don't see any problem" right? Because that means i did check instructions. Not only that, but i bothered to check first shots of the kit... ;) And no, it is not true that they are usually closed on the ground. Not unless the pilot is in and the engines are running. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
John Thompson Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 Hah! The kit is rotten with Fatal Flaws! They should have done a Yak-9D instead. John I really hope everyone realizes I was joking! I don't want haneto/Yufei to get the wrong idea - this is a gloriously beautiful kit, truly deserving to be the 2012 Kit of the Year, and I really mean that. I was just taking advantage of another opportunity to say "Yak-9D". Preferrably in 1/72 scale, by the way. John Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Vodnik Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 You did see i wrote "I don't see any problem" right? Because that means i did check instructions. Not only that, but i bothered to check first shots of the kit... ;) And no, it is not true that they are usually closed on the ground. Not unless the pilot is in and the engines are running. Now you lost me... So you say that intakes are typically open - OK, fine, I'm not an expert. But are you saying that you don't see a problem because kit parts are correct representation of the real intake ducts, or you just don't care for such things and that's why you don't consider it a problem?... I'm confused... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Berkut Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 (edited) But are you saying that you don't see a problem because kit parts are correct representation of the real intake ducts, or you just don't care for such things and that's why you don't consider it a problem?... I'm confused... No no, you *are* correct on that they are not correctly represented in the kit, it is a fair point. On the real plane it obviously does go from rectangular to overall round shape. I do care about shapes and accuracy. But with the engine so far in, i am just not sure how noticeable it would be in real life on the built kit. Hence why i am not convinced it is an actual problem. Edited November 16, 2012 by Berkut Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Vodnik Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 No no, you *are* correct on that they are not correctly represented in the kit, it is a fair point. On the real plane it obviously does go from rectangular to overall round shape. I do care about shapes and accuracy. But with the engine so far in, i am just not sure how noticeable it would be in real life on the built kit. Hence why i am not convinced it is an actual problem. Oh, OK, I see. Thanks for the explanation. I agree that in the real jet it's hard to see much inside intakes, but unfortunately if you paint the inside of model intakes white, everything inside becomes painfully visible... The light works differently in scale. Anyway, it's certainly not going to stop me from getting two kits - one to replace my Academy kit built as early Polish jet and the other to make 2012 version with Caracal decals :) Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Dave Williams Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 To be fair, few kits in 1/48 and smaller have any intake ducting at all. Most have an opening that either leads to a view blocking wall or to the big empty interior, where there may or may not be an intake face. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Vodnik Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 (edited) To be fair, few kits in 1/48 and smaller have any intake ducting at all. Most have an opening that either leads to a view blocking wall or to the big empty interior, where there may or may not be an intake face. In general, you're absolutely right. But how many 1/48 kits released in the last couple of years didn't have intake ducts? These days most of them do have them. This kit otherwise seems to be state of the art - that's why this omission is more noticeable. I guess i will build my first kit with intake covers and maybe some aftermarket ducts will appear before I start the second one (knowing my building pace it should be around 2045...) Edited November 16, 2012 by Vodnik Quote Link to post Share on other sites
RedStar Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 More importantly on the subject of MiG-29 intakes the FOD doors are always closed on the ground anyway, so outside of the initial lip of the intake, very little of the trunking is visible - UNLESS it's under service. Yes there are the three mesh vents on the door, but unless somebody is SUPER determined and wants to shine a light through the vents, the interior of the intake trunk just isn't going to matter on this kit AT ALL! Just my take! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Laurent Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 More importantly on the subject of MiG-29 intakes the FOD doors are always closed on the ground anyway, so outside of the initial lip of the intake, very little of the trunking is visible - UNLESS it's under service. Vodnik and Berkut are right AFAIK. http://hunavia.freeweb.hu/TYPE/MiG-29%20base/SERIAL/MiG29BIDNo09/photos/photo81.html http://hunavia.freeweb.hu/TYPE/MiG-29%20base/SERIAL/MiG29BIDNo06/photos/photo5.html The doors could be closed though. Fire-fighting drill: http://hunavia.freeweb.hu/TYPE/MiG-29%20base/SERIAL/MiG29BIDNo08/photos/photo7.html If the doors were usually closed, how come FOD blanks would be put during airshows like here ? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
caiotfjr Posted November 17, 2012 Share Posted November 17, 2012 Vodnik and Berkut are right AFAIK. http://hunavia.freeweb.hu/TYPE/MiG-29%20base/SERIAL/MiG29BIDNo09/photos/photo81.html http://hunavia.freeweb.hu/TYPE/MiG-29%20base/SERIAL/MiG29BIDNo06/photos/photo5.html The doors could be closed though. Fire-fighting drill: http://hunavia.freeweb.hu/TYPE/MiG-29%20base/SERIAL/MiG29BIDNo08/photos/photo7.html If the doors were usually closed, how come FOD blanks would be put during airshows like here ? Sorry, but what is the most comon? Closed or open doors? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Laurent Posted November 17, 2012 Share Posted November 17, 2012 Sorry, but what is the most comon? Closed or open doors? Open doors with or without FOD covers. Closed doors is when the aircraft is on the ground and that the engines are running usually. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
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.