Janissary Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 Please make sure they are aware of the FUBARed radome cross section - it hasn't been discussed here, but photos posted at Zone 5 show it clearly... For me the radome shape problem is bigger than any other issue discussed here. +1. I just took a look at the pics at z5 > Jets, and yes, GWH radome looks distinctively mishaped. I first noticed this right away on the built model, and then confirmed this with the dissection/comparison pics. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Janissary Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 (edited) Does anybody have a side-view shot of the GW kit with the radome assembled to the fuselage that I can use for annotating/illustrating a point? What catches my eye is not so much the cross-section but the lack of bulge on the top of the radome + front of windshield. I have the comparisons done here on my computer but I cannot share them because the GW photo is not mine. From a side view, draw a line from the tip of the radome to the point where the hot air vent starts to emerge from the fuselage (right in front of the windshield). If you look at what is above this line on the real deal vs the GW, you should see a lack of 'bulge' above this line on the GW kit. It just comes down pretty flat from the windshield, especially on the radome. Just pointing out… Everyone decides for themselves if it is bothersome or not. Edited January 7, 2014 by Janissary Quote Link to post Share on other sites
gb_madcat_sl Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 Thanx for the info, could you share those pics on here, I am sure everyone would love to see them. The direct link seems to be working to here you go. http://www.zone-five.net/showpost.php?p=271529&postcount=140 Mark Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Check Six Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 The direct link seems to be working to here you go. http://www.zone-five...9&postcount=140 Mark Thanks for sharing the link. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Ken Middleton Posted January 8, 2014 Share Posted January 8, 2014 The direct link seems to be working to here you go. http://www.zone-five.net/showpost.php?p=271529&postcount=140 Mark thanks Mark Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Ken Middleton Posted January 8, 2014 Share Posted January 8, 2014 (edited) one thing I see, and suspected in some of the CAD drawings, were the 2 antennae bumps just aft of the radome, on the top and bottom of the fuselage. Maybe some D's have them, but I have never seen a D (and certainly not a B ) with them. Though, those can easily be removed. Here are some radome shots I took in October 2005, the behind shot is not directly behind it, so the shape is not 100% detectable. A couple from Sept 2013 And November 2011 Edited January 8, 2014 by Ken Middleton Quote Link to post Share on other sites
foxmulder_ms Posted January 8, 2014 Share Posted January 8, 2014 Brilliant pictures, thanks for sharing Ken. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Ol Crew Dog Posted January 8, 2014 Share Posted January 8, 2014 The direct link seems to be working to here you go. http://www.zone-five.net/showpost.php?p=271529&postcount=140 Mark Seems the circumference is larger on the GWH kit'a radomes at the attachment point. There is a big difference between the kits in this area making the GWH radomes look too large or bulged and not pointy enough.. I am looking at the pics on my cell, will have to look attempt on my computer later to make a good comparison.. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Vodnik Posted January 8, 2014 Share Posted January 8, 2014 (edited) Below are photos posted by Jens H. Brandal at Zone 5, reposted here with his permission. Revell kit part on the left, GWH on the right. The shape at the base of radome is off, but it is not the biggest problem in my opinion. Much bigger problem is badly misshapen nose of the radome in overhead view: And the result is caricature cross section near the tip (thin black line): The profile is not bad in my opinion, although the anti-ice vent at the windshield base is too pronounced: Edited January 8, 2014 by Vodnik Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Laurent Posted January 8, 2014 Share Posted January 8, 2014 Ouch. For me it's just another proof that an accurate CAD model cannot be done if the drawings used don't depict the cross sections. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
gb_madcat_sl Posted January 8, 2014 Share Posted January 8, 2014 If the tip is "squashed" this way, doesn't that throw off the shape of the width of the radome when looking from the top-down? Will sanding the sides to make the tip circular solve a majority of the problem? Mark Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Vodnik Posted January 8, 2014 Share Posted January 8, 2014 If the tip is "squashed" this way, doesn't that throw off the shape of the width of the radome when looking from the top-down? Yes, the second photo in my post shows the top-down view and it is clear that the tip is much too wide. Will sanding the sides to make the tip circular solve a majority of the problem? Sure, and it is certainly doable, but this is a $90 kit... I don't want to spend this amount of money and have to reshape the radome (I know it can be done - I'm not sure I'm able to do it right), replace wheels and exhaust nozzles etc... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
madcop Posted January 8, 2014 Share Posted January 8, 2014 If the tip is "squashed" this way, doesn't that throw off the shape of the width of the radome when looking from the top-down? Will sanding the sides to make the tip circular solve a majority of the problem? Mark So, where exactly begins the circular cross section of the fuselage, at the base of the windshield, a little bit further or at the base of the radome ? Could it be then that GWH has the cross section of the front fuselage wrong also ? Madcop Quote Link to post Share on other sites
gb_madcat_sl Posted January 8, 2014 Share Posted January 8, 2014 Sure, and it is certainly doable, but this is a $90 kit... I don't want to spend this amount of money and have to reshape the radome (I know it can be done - I'm not sure I'm able to do it right), replace wheels and exhaust nozzles etc... Unfortunately I have already purchased the kit. I'm trying to figure out the best way to correct the errors and make the best of what I have. Mark Quote Link to post Share on other sites
gb_madcat_sl Posted January 8, 2014 Share Posted January 8, 2014 (edited) Oops. Double post. Edited January 8, 2014 by gb_madcat_sl Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Vodnik Posted January 8, 2014 Share Posted January 8, 2014 (edited) So, where exactly begins the circular cross section of the fuselage, at the base of the windshield, a little bit further or at the base of the radome ? Could it be then that GWH has the cross section of the front fuselage wrong also ? The cross section of the front fuselage is wrong also, but not by as much as the tip of the radome. In the real plane the cross section at the radome base is not circular - it gets circular at around mid length of the radome. In the GWH kit the cross section at the radome base is too wide in the upper section and too narrow in the lower - it is too "triangular". The Revell part cross section looks much closer to reality. The below drawing (posted by viperbite at Zone 5) shows the cross sections - unfortunately the FS 130.50 section is cropped out of the picture, but it should be a circle at this post - as it is almost a perfect circle already at FS 174.00. Edited January 8, 2014 by Vodnik Quote Link to post Share on other sites
gb_madcat_sl Posted January 8, 2014 Share Posted January 8, 2014 Found the full diagram. Mark Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mingwin Posted January 8, 2014 Share Posted January 8, 2014 as previously stated... *ouch* that radome issue is a serious one... mostly because it is linked to a wrong shaped front fuselage... i really hope GWH does something to correct that in their next release (a single seater, please) ... i was not expecting to buy the twin seater anyway... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
foxmulder_ms Posted January 8, 2014 Share Posted January 8, 2014 The cross section of the front fuselage is wrong also, but not by as much as the tip of the radome. In the real plane the cross section at the radome base is not circular - it gets circular at around mid length of the radome. In the GWH kit the cross section at the radome base is too wide in the upper section and too narrow in the lower - it is too "triangular". The Revell part cross section looks much closer to reality. The below drawing (posted by viperbite at Zone 5) shows the cross sections - unfortunately the FS 130.50 section is cropped out of the picture, but it should be a circle at this post - as it is almost a perfect circle already at FS 174.00.lar I think, you are right about the radome base but not by much (0.5mm for both top and bottom half maybe - cone was not perfectly aligned to the camera). Quote Link to post Share on other sites
scvrobeson Posted January 8, 2014 Share Posted January 8, 2014 Do we know this problem will be across all of the kits? Could it be a warped part pulled from a mold early? I know with the MiG-29, there were problems with the early kits of them ending up weird shapes. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Berkut Posted January 8, 2014 Share Posted January 8, 2014 Do we know this problem will be across all of the kits? Could it be a warped part pulled from a mold early? I know with the MiG-29, there were problems with the early kits of them ending up weird shapes. It appears the nose fits just fine. Besides it is usually big parts that are exposed to warping. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
scvrobeson Posted January 8, 2014 Share Posted January 8, 2014 It appears the nose fits just fine. Besides it is usually big parts that are exposed to warping. Hadn't seen one built up yet to see how it fits. Just seemed like a big piece like the one-piece radome could be subjected to warpage, didn't know if that was the problem. Seems like the shape is pretty strange, so thought it might have been warped to cause the problems. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Ken Middleton Posted January 8, 2014 Share Posted January 8, 2014 Brilliant pictures, thanks for sharing Ken. thanks and you're welcome Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Check Six Posted January 8, 2014 Share Posted January 8, 2014 Yes, the second photo in my post shows the top-down view and it is clear that the tip is much too wide. Sure, and it is certainly doable, but this is a $90 kit... I don't want to spend this amount of money and have to reshape the radome (I know it can be done - I'm not sure I'm able to do it right), replace wheels and exhaust nozzles etc... Bingo! My thoughts exactly. If this were a $45 kit, I'd be much more forgiving. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Berkut Posted January 8, 2014 Share Posted January 8, 2014 Hadn't seen one built up yet to see how it fits. Just seemed like a big piece like the one-piece radome could be subjected to warpage, didn't know if that was the problem. Seems like the shape is pretty strange, so thought it might have been warped to cause the problems. I see where you are coming from, but there really doesn't appear to be any warp as the cause of the odd shape. Last two from here. 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.