Winnie Posted July 20, 2020 Share Posted July 20, 2020 I did see that, and also your videos, when the "winter season" starts again in September I'll get more bench time, but and can possibly pull the 52 from the stash, but until then... (you should look at modifying the seats by the way...) Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Nigelr32 Posted July 20, 2020 Share Posted July 20, 2020 1 minute ago, Winnie said: (you should look at modifying the seats by the way...) Yeah, you could be right. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Nigelr32 Posted July 22, 2020 Share Posted July 22, 2020 (edited) Hi all.. As we all know by now, one of the biggest issues with all the 1/72 B-52's currently available is the nose area. I am currently working on a reshaped nose for an early G/H model built on the AMT or Modelcollect kits. I have posted on the Radome thread a pic of my WIP on the AMT late G/H and am posting here my WIP for the Modelcollect kit. As you can see, there has been a lot of plastic removed from the kit parts as it is just too fat. Please let me know what you think before I work on perfecting the finish. Edited July 22, 2020 by Nigelr32 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Nigelr32 Posted July 22, 2020 Share Posted July 22, 2020 (edited) And another pic... C-5 Galaxy anyone?? I also made a video on the subject... Edited July 22, 2020 by Nigelr32 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ElectroSoldier Posted July 22, 2020 Share Posted July 22, 2020 Those seam lines are very fine but very noticeable on the real thing. ModelCollect seems to have discontinued the correction set for the G model so anybody who can come up with some much needed correction sets will have a lot of customers. There are so many problems with all their B-52 kits, wrong shape, wrong tail, poor quality. Its hard to believe there were so many people gushing over them when they were first released. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Nigelr32 Posted July 22, 2020 Share Posted July 22, 2020 Agree 100% @ElectroSoldier I’m not sure about quality issues though? There is a LOT wrong with the range, as is also true for the AMT kit. We need a well detailed Buff with Bombay, flaps, UC bays and a nice cockpit. If only MC had done more research and test shots we could have had that!! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
USAFsparkchaser Posted July 22, 2020 Share Posted July 22, 2020 We tried telling them, but they didn’t seem to listen. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Nigelr32 Posted July 22, 2020 Share Posted July 22, 2020 1 minute ago, USAFsparkchaser said: We tried telling them, but they didn’t seem to listen. I know!! They asked for help with the D kit.. I bet they don't listen. Strange because he is such a nice guy to deal with!! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Nigelr32 Posted July 22, 2020 Share Posted July 22, 2020 57 minutes ago, ElectroSoldier said: Those seam lines are very fine but very noticeable on the real thing. Sorry, I was referring to the panel lines on the fuselage sides. I will of course add the shut lines for the belly. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ElectroSoldier Posted July 22, 2020 Share Posted July 22, 2020 8 hours ago, Nigelr32 said: Agree 100% @ElectroSoldier I’m not sure about quality issues though? There is a LOT wrong with the range, as is also true for the AMT kit. We need a well detailed Buff with Bombay, flaps, UC bays and a nice cockpit. If only MC had done more research and test shots we could have had that!! The AMT kit is a dog, I know, Ive built several. Quality issues come in the packaging. Parts arriving broken. A local shop has the late G model for £86. I am not sure about it because I dont really know what i will actually get in the box, and in spite of my statutory rights here in the UK In not 100% on buying it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ElectroSoldier Posted July 22, 2020 Share Posted July 22, 2020 7 hours ago, Nigelr32 said: Sorry, I was referring to the panel lines on the fuselage sides. I will of course add the shut lines for the belly. Seam lines on the nose radome section Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Nigelr32 Posted July 23, 2020 Share Posted July 23, 2020 10 hours ago, ElectroSoldier said: Seam lines on the nose radome section If you are referring to what i call the anti static strips that are proud on the nose, then yes, they will be included. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ElectroSoldier Posted July 23, 2020 Share Posted July 23, 2020 Its dielectric... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Nigelr32 Posted July 23, 2020 Share Posted July 23, 2020 2 hours ago, ElectroSoldier said: Its dielectric... are they the “seams” you are referring to? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
B.Sin Posted July 23, 2020 Share Posted July 23, 2020 Nigel, I appreciate your efforts! And thank you for the unboxing of the B-52 video! Looking forward to seeing your more detailed review of the subject! Brad Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Nigelr32 Posted July 23, 2020 Share Posted July 23, 2020 33 minutes ago, B.Sin said: Nigel, I appreciate your efforts! And thank you for the unboxing of the B-52 video! Looking forward to seeing your more detailed review of the subject! Brad Thanks Brad, I am changing everything on the 1/72 parts all the time, hence I've been too busy for reviews.. I must get my fool in gear!! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ElectroSoldier Posted July 24, 2020 Share Posted July 24, 2020 On 7/23/2020 at 5:42 PM, Nigelr32 said: are they the “seams” you are referring to? I mean the chord wise seam lines that run down the nose. They are not to do with static, as its dielectric. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
serendip Posted July 25, 2020 Share Posted July 25, 2020 On 7/19/2020 at 5:17 PM, Winnie said: So I did the measurements from the station drawings, in 72nd the measurements in MM should be -NEW radome profile with EVS 22.40114mm -OLD radome profile without EVS 17.9917mm This is measured from the very front of the radome to the bulkhead below/in front of the window (Station Line 96, or 96 inches aft of datum) The datum is 32.5 inches forward of new nose, or 45 inches forward of old nose. Now I'm at work for another 17 days so can't check mine. the profiles on the other hand, I'm not sharp enough to do. Cheers Harald To my mind the change in profile (besides the difference in length) seems to take effect from the pressure bulkhead at station 345.5. The bottom curve seems to be a little leaner on the phase VI (6) jets. Also some cross sectional views would be very welcome. Marc. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Nigelr32 Posted July 25, 2020 Share Posted July 25, 2020 (edited) 6 hours ago, serendip said: To my mind the change in profile (besides the difference in length) seems to take effect from the pressure bulkhead at station 345.5. The bottom curve seems to be a little leaner on the phase VI (6) jets. Also some cross sectional views would be very welcome. Marc. The belly on the early nose is indeed steeper than the later long nose. Here's a pic of where I am now. Ignore the Flir on the belly, I haven't made the non flir belly yet.. just look at the MC stock nose in the background!! Edit: looking at this picture I am wondering if there was another radome, or if the profile of the early nose above on the station diagrams is incorrect? The nose I have roughly carved to shape here looks a little too sloped to me, but it perfectly matches the profile above.?? So.. could it be we have the long "EVS" nose, two interim G/H short noses and the shorty D nose? Edited July 25, 2020 by Nigelr32 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
SteveV22FE Posted July 25, 2020 Share Posted July 25, 2020 (edited) Looking at photos of early G/H noses, to my eye, it could probably a little less sloped. The data I presented earlier look like it comes from the B-52 Weight and Balance Technical Order. I'm not too sure about "interim" noses. I've never heard or read any mention of multiple nose configurations on the aircraft. That's not to say it didn't happened, I've not seen it documented anywhere. Edited July 25, 2020 by SteveV22FE Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Nigelr32 Posted July 25, 2020 Share Posted July 25, 2020 6 minutes ago, SteveV22FE said: Looking at photos of early G/H noses, to my eye, it could probably a little less sloped. Agree 100%. Thanks for your feedback Steve. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
SteveV22FE Posted July 25, 2020 Share Posted July 25, 2020 (edited) This may help...or not... (posted under "Fair Use" for educational purposes) It looks to me that the later nose has more of an up sweep as it approaches the end of the radome. The early seems to me more gradual. The later nose doeshave a more "pointy" appearance. The early nose is "pointy" but not at the same angle as the later nose. Edited July 25, 2020 by SteveV22FE Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Nigelr32 Posted July 25, 2020 Share Posted July 25, 2020 46 minutes ago, SteveV22FE said: This may help...or not... (posted under "Fair Use" for educational purposes) It looks to me that the Later nose has more of a up sweep and it approaches the end of the radome. The early seems to me more gradual. The later nose doe have a more "pointy" appearance. The early nose is "pointy" but not at the same angle as the later nose. Brilliant, thanks Steve.. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
serendip Posted July 26, 2020 Share Posted July 26, 2020 17 hours ago, Nigelr32 said: The belly on the early nose is indeed steeper than the later long nose. Here's a pic of where I am now. Ignore the Flir on the belly, I haven't made the non flir belly yet.. just look at the MC stock nose in the background!! Edit: looking at this picture I am wondering if there was another radome, or if the profile of the early nose above on the station diagrams is incorrect? The nose I have roughly carved to shape here looks a little too sloped to me, but it perfectly matches the profile above.?? So.. could it be we have the long "EVS" nose, two interim G/H short noses and the shorty D nose? If that's the pre- phase VI nose it looks good to me. Would it be possible that the fuselage, top to bottom is too large? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Nigelr32 Posted July 26, 2020 Share Posted July 26, 2020 2 hours ago, serendip said: Would it be possible that the fuselage, top to bottom is too large? If the scale on the drawings posted a couple of pages back in this thread are correct, then the MC fuselage is also correct. It also matches the AMT and Revell dimensions. 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.