TF-102 correct measurements 1/48 scale?

[SouthViper]

I am building the TF-102A using the Monogram F-102A kit and the

C&H Aero Miniatures conversion kit http://www.candhaerominiatures.com/catalog/tf102.htm

The real F-102A was 68' 1,8" including Pitot which means 43,28 Centimeters in 1/48,

which is absolutely correct for the Monogram kit.

The real TF-102A was 63' 5,7" including Pitot which means 40,30 Centimeters in 1/48.

* The F-102 Detail & Scale book, By Bert Kinzey, page 41.

And here is my doubt, because adapting the resin C&H front to the rear Monogram fuselage my measurement goes for 41,7 Centimeters. (with Pitot)

So what am I doing wrong and most important how can I improve this ?

Thanks

Mario

[Jennings]

I wouldn't assume the C&H set is correct.

As Ronald Reagan famously said: "Doveryai na proveryai"

That being said, every USAF tech manual I've been able to reference gives an incorrect (by a couple of feet) wing span for the T-33A. They give dimensions for the wing with no tip tank fitted, even on drawings *with* the tip tanks fitted.

Edited August 3, 2014 by Jennings

[ikar]

Don't forget the vortex generators on the canopy. There are a lot of them and they go in a very specific pattern.

[peter burns]

The C&H conversion is not correct. I noticed the error after it was too late and contacted them to see if they had corrected the problem with a later release. They responded that they would be happy to send me some pictures and documents and I could correct it myself. No joke.

I later got a copy of the Maintrack conversion and it is equally screwed up. Same exact issues as C&H. Too bad, the 2 seater is an interesting subject.

[ikar]

What was the problem with the conversion set?

[Jennings]

the 2 seater is an interesting subject.

"Interesting" - I'd have used the word "fugly" ;)

[Jinxter13]

May I quote that oft used phrase..."Beauty is in the eye of the beholder". So the lines are changed on it, it still flies and looks a damned sight better than some others I would rather not mention.

[peter burns]

"Interesting" - I'd have used the word "fugly" ;)/>

That works too.

[SouthViper]

Thanks guys

I have received this topic to clear my questions :

http://www.aircraftresourcecenter.com/Gal3/2301-2400/Gal2336_TF-102_Hawkey/00.shtm

Mario