Jump to content

building the KH 1/48 F-101A/C Voodoo


Recommended Posts

From what I know of other KH kits and can read from comments in this thread, I would have no problems believeing that the photos are carefully chosen for that purpose:( If this kit isn't MrSonged, then I may actually buy my first KH kit.

Jens

:bandhead2::bandhead2::bandhead2:

I hope not, but I'm afraid it is

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been following these voodoo threads closely. Check out these pix of the derelict at Edwards AFB. If you look at the some of the last pix in the group you can see a fairing was removed showing the leading edge of the wing and the intake. Looks to me like this was one of the early version intakes with the extra kink in the wing. It also looks like you could easily mod to the later version. Interesting at the very least!

F-101 Voodoo at Edwards AFB

Also I have read that the inner wing fence is not actually a fence but a stiffening piece of metal over the wheel well. As far as i can tell, these were only on the B-models later in life,my 1974 version of the IPB T.O. doesn't show that part.

Edited by AlanM
Link to post
Share on other sites

Received my kits today and I'm pretty excited! Be sure to inventory your sprues though, I was missing the clear parts in one kit and was given two G1's (lower wing halves) but no G sprue (upper wing half!). My other initial impression is that it's going to be a pain to close the refueling probe doors. The way they designed the doors open is annoying. I wish they had molded them closed but provided open doors to use if desired.

Corey in Colorado

Edited by Corey
Link to post
Share on other sites

Received my kits today and I'm pretty excited! Be sure to inventory your sprues though, I was missing the clear parts in one kit and was given two G1's (lower wing halves) but no G sprue (upper wing half!). My other initial impression is that it's going to be a pain to close the refueling probe doors. The way they designed the doors open is annoying. I wish they had molded them closed but provided open doors to use if desired.

Corey in Colorado

Great, shows how much they care about QC... :rolleyes:/>

Link to post
Share on other sites

The instructions:

http://www.1999.co.jp/eng/10270888

Jari

Why did they go to the trouble of making a separate part for the clear nav light cover on the tail, then not mold it in clear plastic? :doh:/> And a 10-yard penalty for unnecessary use of photo-etch (instrument panel & consoles). They need to buy an Academy F-4B to see how those parts should be done.

I see a couple of these in my future, since it looks like they're going to do an RF-101G/H as well. They have the camera windows for it on the clear sprue. I was afraid I was going to have to do a DIY conversion for that one.

Ben

Edited by Ben Brown
Link to post
Share on other sites

another thing, if you look at the paint/ decal options, they give "slime lights", IIRC, there were none during it's service..

The fuselage parts with the inaccurate raised slime lights will also be used for the upcoming B, and the cartoonist who designed the decals just assumed the A had slime light, too. Disclaimer: Note that I am not referring to artists like Jennings, Jake, et al., who design well-researched, generally accurate decals, as cartoonists. ;)

Ben

Link to post
Share on other sites

The fuselage parts with the inaccurate raised slime lights will also be used for the upcoming B, and the cartoonist who designed the decals just assumed the A had slime light, too. Disclaimer: Note that I am not referring to artists like Jennings, Jake, et al., who design well-researched, generally accurate decals, as cartoonists. ;)/>

Ben

I'm really not getting the critique.

The kit is or isn't worth to be built? It's better or worse than Monogram's? The sole problem is an easily filled and sanded slime lights?

Link to post
Share on other sites

As previously discussed, the biggie is the F-101B intakes and splitter plates. The single-seaters had a different style (see page 3 of this thread). These aren't easy to fix. I've had a go at it several times while converting Monogram kits using the Koster and C&H conversions. KH is being rightly slammed, because they posted CAD images early in the development of the kit, then ignored many, many emails and forum posts offering help and pointing out the errors, such as the intakes. There are a lot of little things, too, but most can be fixed relatively easily.

Ben

Edited by Ben Brown
Link to post
Share on other sites

KH is being rightly slammed, because they posted CAD images early in the development of the kit, then ignored many, many emails and forum posts offering help and pointing out the errors, such as the intakes. There are a lot of little things, too, but most can be fixed relatively easily.

Ben

Same thing happened with the KH 1/32 T-6G. Total silence after KAGNEW posted CAD drawings. Questions were asked here and other boards concerning many things including the L/G mounting and canopy choices. After it's release, we saw that the decal cartoonist had given eight choices, but only two could be built out of the box contents.

Tony

Link to post
Share on other sites

As previously discussed, the biggie is the F-101B intakes and splitter plates. The single-seaters had a different style (see page 3 of this thread). These aren't easy to fix. I've had a go at it several times while converting Monogram kits using the Koster and C&H conversions. KH is being rightly slammed, because they posted CAD images early in the development of the kit, then ignored many, many emails and forum posts offering help and pointing out the errors, such as the intakes. There are a lot of little things, too, but most can be fixed relatively easily.

Ben

So, the intakes from a F-101B are in a A version. The question remains, is the kit worthless and shouldn't be build.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, its not worthless and it can be built. After all:

mCpx1My.png

:D/>

I've been reading elsewhere that fit is very good, so you can fix the intakes and all of the other minor ills, if you're into that, or just build it as-is and have fun, your choice. It will definitely be easier than converting a Monogram kit.

My plan is to fix the intakes, close the inflight refueling door, throw out the decals, and maybe throw a True Details seat in it. I've got far too many other projects I want to build to get bogged down in yet another modeling tar pit.

Ben (still burning from the Trumpeter F-100D :bandhead2:/> )

Link to post
Share on other sites

Still can't understand why make an incorrect kit having available research help with knowledgeable people?

Why does Mr. Song care to show CAD images if he will do whatever he likes with the finish product?

It still baffles me to say the least.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just keep wondering how long, and with how much of their money, people are willing to keep supporting and encouraging such spectacular mediocrity in plastic model kits?

"It looks like an XYZ to me" only means one of two things: either you're a shill for the mediocre manufacturer or you're utterly ignorant about the subject. There's nothing wrong with being ignorant and enjoying building a plastic toy airplane. But far too often that becomes "everyone else is just a rivet counter", which implies there is something negative about that, and that the "It looks okay to me" 'crowd has the only correct view.

The more people defend absolutely, demonstrably, repeatedly mediocre (at best) products from a manufacturer and keep spending their money on them, the more mediocre products we're going to get. Aren't we glad surgeons don't practice like that? If you got a botched appendectomy, would you say "Well, it feels like an appendectomy to me!" and go on and pay the guy? Mediocre manufacturers poison the well for others who want to do a good job. We're never likely to see a decent, accurate 1/48 MiG-25 in our lifetimes thanks to KH. And I could name a couple of dozen others that fall into the same category.

I don't know Mr. Song from Adam, but I do know that while he may be a fine CAD draftsman, he clearly knows next to nothing about real aircraft, he has little or no eye for 3D shapes (translating them from the real world into his CAD), and very little understanding of how to design model assembly kits cleverly and with the builder in mind.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So wait, if I decide to buy a KH F-101 and build it because it meets my standards for quality and interest, regardless of the errors I know are there, that makes me ignorant or a shill?

I think someone said it up thread: People are losing perspective. We aren't launching a rocket or doing brain surgery here (Revell Visible Man exempted, of course).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems to me the only thing that's really objectionable are the intake lips and the splitter plates, and up to this point the interest in the plane was such that people hadn't really bothered to compare intake layouts.

I mean, seriously- you wouldn't mistake this plane for a Javelin, or an F-101B for that matter. Yeah the slime lights shouldn't be there but thats not hard to fix. And its not like i saw Monogram or Hasegawa hinting they were gonna do an other -101.

Its unfortunate that they got this wrong but i think it is fixable. KH worked with Detail & Scale in the development of this kit so they're not working in a vacuum and they did reach out for assistance.

Tom Cleaver seems to have run into problems with his build over on imodeller, which is surprising since he indicated initially that the fit was good. Some difficulties might be attributable to operator error, but i want to see more data points come in from people building the kit.

david

Edited by Falcon50EX
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...