Vince Maddux Posted August 13, 2014 Share Posted August 13, 2014 Kittyhawk. Jut saw it on Facebook. Let the festivities begin. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jennings Posted August 13, 2014 Share Posted August 13, 2014 Oh lord. Another one that will poison the well for whoever might have wanted to do it right. I'll lay you $50 right now that their wing shares the same incorrect sweep angle as the RM kit. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Neo Posted August 13, 2014 Share Posted August 13, 2014 (edited) Cool news. I dont agree jennings look at zm made a p-51d and tamiya followed suit Edited August 13, 2014 by Neo Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Brian 1 Posted August 14, 2014 Share Posted August 14, 2014 Kittyhawk if you are listening...If you need measurements PM me. I can put my hands on one...no excuse to get this one wrong!!! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Bob Moore Posted August 14, 2014 Share Posted August 14, 2014 I hope it's correct but even if it's not it's a 32nd F-86D and I want one! I'm pretty sure once it's built it'll look like one also!!!! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tomcatfreak Posted August 14, 2014 Share Posted August 14, 2014 Kittyhawk. Jut saw it on Facebook. Let the festivities begin. Do you have a link? I can´t find it on Facebook Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jenshb Posted August 14, 2014 Share Posted August 14, 2014 Awesome! They're splitting front and rear so they can use a smaller box and guarantee that you will have to fill and sand the fuselage in preparation for a polished metal finish! While you're at it - why not open some panels on the nose just to make it a bit more difficult to have a smooth, level finish and a full engine with etched compressor blades just to bump the price up a bit? If I was less cynical, then I might argue that this breakdown allows a potential F-86K by making a new forward fuselage with longer chord wingroots and of course longer span wings... Jens Quote Link to post Share on other sites
fulcrum1 Posted August 14, 2014 Share Posted August 14, 2014 I hate Kitty Hawk, giving me the subjects I want but screwing up the shape. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Vince Maddux Posted August 14, 2014 Author Share Posted August 14, 2014 (edited) I'm starting to think that the way Kittyhawk makes money is from the negative press they get. Think about it, You have three groups of people that buy their kits. 1. The people that don't care or know about the shape and fit issues. 2. The people that have skills and wants to build the impossible kit 3. So people will buy the kit just to see how bad it is. Either way, as long as the kits are sold and out of the company hands,what do they care? But to be fair, I knw that they are trying to do better and I hope that they do improve. Edited August 14, 2014 by Vince Maddux Quote Link to post Share on other sites
dehowie Posted August 15, 2014 Share Posted August 15, 2014 I would amend that list to. 1 People who cant build kits and just want to make a name ripping into a manufacturer and showing us how bad there skills are with examples of poor construction..zero thinking and claiming the kits cant be built when not only can they numerous people have done so and well at that. 2 People who are seriously interested in getting an accurate kit but have never built anything other than Tamiya and expect every kit to be Tamiya standard. 3 People who enjoy modeling for what it is and dont expect perfection nor demand it and can build kits and are enjoying the new aircraft never tooled before. I think Kittyhawk really attracts lots of 1's and 2's but the guys in bracket 3 have made some lovely looking models from them. http://www.themodellingnews.com/2013/12/as-present-gary-gifts-us-early-gallery.html http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-zILBN5b4tc8/UxV2nyysZ2I/AAAAAAAA0PI/6LwGAZk199g/s1600/k.jpg http://www.arcforums.com/forums/air/index.php?showtopic=276566&st=80 http://www.aircraftresourcecenter.com/Gal13/12801-12900/gal12880-Jaguar-Spreckley/00.shtm Quote Link to post Share on other sites
gb_madcat_sl Posted August 15, 2014 Share Posted August 15, 2014 I hate Kitty Hawk, giving me the subjects I want but screwing up the shape. Where? Mark Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Laurent Posted August 15, 2014 Share Posted August 15, 2014 But to be fair, I knw that they are trying to do better and I hope that they do improve. They do improve but I'm not sure that they thought about hiring CAD checkers for the F-86D. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ThePhantomTwo Posted September 30, 2014 Share Posted September 30, 2014 It wouldn't be too hard to kick out a F-86L it looks like,take the wings from the K and add to the D,add a SAGE antenna and there you go. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jennings Posted September 30, 2014 Share Posted September 30, 2014 Kitty Hawk: Please, please, please, please DO NOT COPY THE MONOGRAM F-86D KIT!!! Not only is the rudder a one-off test configuration, but the wing sweep is incorrect. http://www.clubhyper.com/reference/sabrewingsjh_1.htm Quote Link to post Share on other sites
scvrobeson Posted September 30, 2014 Share Posted September 30, 2014 Nothing like damnation without evidence. The Bronco kit seems to be much better than the early ones, and they have delayed the later Cougars to tweak the tooling and make it correct. Are we assuming now that they'll backstep and not continue improving their kits? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jennings Posted September 30, 2014 Share Posted September 30, 2014 I'm not damning anything. But KH has a record of very shoddy research and (as in the case of the F-101) copying other kits, errors and all. I'd like to see them not do that on this one. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Vince Maddux Posted October 1, 2014 Author Share Posted October 1, 2014 (edited) If the wing sweep is a couple of degrees off, I won't complain. Now if they made it a straight wing and a two seater and called a F-86D, then I might have a issue Edited October 1, 2014 by Vince Maddux Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jgrease Posted October 1, 2014 Share Posted October 1, 2014 Not one sprue has hit the air yet and the usual suspects are slamming the kit already. SMH. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
niart17 Posted October 1, 2014 Share Posted October 1, 2014 (edited) Maybe no sprues have hit the air yet BUT if those cad drawings are actually what's going to be cut, to my untrained eye the intake looks waaay too squatty, closed and flat across the bottom comparing to photos of the real thing. I'm sure they could fix that with a little tweak. Also, it's hard to say for sure from the angles posed here, but the nose MIGHT be a little short? That or the intake might be a tad to far forward? Again, hard to say from the angles but worth checking out. Bill Edited October 1, 2014 by niart17 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jennings Posted October 1, 2014 Share Posted October 1, 2014 If the wing sweep is a couple of degrees off, I won't complain. Now if they made it a straight wing and a two seater and called a F-86D, then I might have a issue Why would they not want to get it right? Mediocrity begets mediocrity. When you sit a RM F-86D next to a Hasegawa or Academy F-86F the difference is noticeable. Are you glad your surgeon doesn't practice "close enough for jazz"? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jennings Posted October 1, 2014 Share Posted October 1, 2014 If the wing sweep is a couple of degrees off, I won't complain. Now if they made it a straight wing and a two seater and called a F-86D, then I might have a issue Why would they not want to get it right? Mediocrity begets mediocrity. When you sit a RM F-86D next to a Hasegawa or Academy F-86F the difference is noticeable. Are you glad your surgeon doesn't practice "close enough for jazz"? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Vince Maddux Posted October 1, 2014 Author Share Posted October 1, 2014 Why would they not want to get it right? Mediocrity begets mediocrity. When you sit a RM F-86D next to a Hasegawa or Academy F-86F the difference is noticeable. Are you glad your surgeon doesn't practice "close enough for jazz"? Comparing having surgery to model building is not the greatest analogy. I would expect higher standards from one then the other. But before I get called out on, when I draw I put 100% into it to make sure I put out the best work I possible can. I understand wanting the best for your money. And its your right to not buy it if you don't feel it meets your standards and you have the right to voice your option. I meant to be funny in my comment nothing more. I do not wish to get into a fight nitpicking over details. Now if they did the mighty Tweet and messed up,I'll be on my soap box! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
niart17 Posted October 1, 2014 Share Posted October 1, 2014 Now if they did the mighty Tweet and messed up,I'll be on my soap box! :soapbox:/> They have to earn the right to make a Tweet model! And if said model were messed up....well then that would be certain doom! Bill Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jgrease Posted October 1, 2014 Share Posted October 1, 2014 I agree with looking over the CADs and pointing out corrections to be made. My comment was made in regard to folks on here starting with the hand-wringing rather than offering informed observations. Happens every time. 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.