Jump to content
ARC Discussion Forums
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
HomeBe

1/48 - North American FJ-2 & FJ-3 Fury by KittyHawk - FJ-2 released

Recommended Posts

The box art incorrectly shows the Marine Fury with the gray over white scheme. It should be natural metal.

Edited by jpk
spelling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JPK, they did use the wrong boxart, but, only because of the rarity of the scheme, not because it is the wrong color.

 

For some reason, they chose to use one of the very few airframes actually painted in Light Gull Gray over White, by one of the few FJ-2 units that had them when the metal scheme was cancelled. (photos exist in print media, see Ginter FJ-2 book, and the squadron history, and timeline of paint specs)

 

Many possible buyers are going to automatically think that the box art is wrong, so think "what else is wrong with the kit?",,,,,that could affect sales.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Ben Brown said:

D'oh! I was reading "FJ-2" and thinking "FJ-3," as if they were interchangeable. My caffeine level was still too low. 😄

 

Beautiful models, BTW! Love the blue one.

 

Ben 

Here's hoping that Kittyhawk doesn't think they're interchangable (like Esci did - or thought that a Fury was just a blue Sabre)!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Paul Boyer said:

Here's hoping that Kittyhawk doesn't think they're interchangable (like Esci did - or thought that a Fury was just a blue Sabre)!

 

Yes!

 

Ben

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Rex said:

JPK, they did use the wrong boxart, but, only because of the rarity of the scheme, not because it is the wrong color.

 

For some reason, they chose to use one of the very few airframes actually painted in Light Gull Gray over White, by one of the few FJ-2 units that had them when the metal scheme was cancelled. (photos exist in print media, see Ginter FJ-2 book, and the squadron history, and timeline of paint specs)

 

Many possible buyers are going to automatically think that the box art is wrong, so think "what else is wrong with the kit?",,,,,that could affect sales.

Rex, I have Ginter's book. I'll take a peek. It's been a while since I looked at it. 

 

Took a look at the photos of VMF-312 as well as the other VMF's in the Ginter book. I don't see a gray over white USMC -2 Fury except for the reserve birds at the end. Doing a Google search I found two photos of gray over white USMC Fury's however they were FJ-3M's. I may be mistaken but by the time the gray over white scheme began the -2's were moving to the reserves. 

 

While I'm not enthused they are releasing the -2 first I certainly will buy one if the reviews are good. If they lifted the lines off of the CA -3 Fury then both kits should be ok. No doubt the decal guys have art work ready to send to the printers and even if the paint scheme on the box is correct or not, the squadron markings are still accurate for a VMF-312 Marine Fury. I can't believe anyone that knows anything about Fury's would not buy the kit because the box art is a little off. Look at the KH Banshee. The box art was incorrect for the version they made, it still sold well regardless of the later issues.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Monogram and ESCI...wrong finish..but it looks good in my display case. 

 

Fury-2 three quarter.jpg

FJ-2.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, I didn't look around enough.

 

The WR-5 scheme on the boxart should be a Metal finished FJ-2, just like the front cover of the FJ-2 book.

 

The unit that operated FJ-2s past the advance letter date, and changeover scheme date was VMF-232, page 28. WT-1 and WT-8 (BuNo 131999) had NS Light Gull Gray over G White schemes before the FS standard came out. WT-17 already has a replacement aileron painted in White on it for that group shot. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Rex said:

Okay, I didn't look around enough.

 

The WR-5 scheme on the boxart should be a Metal finished FJ-2, just like the front cover of the FJ-2 book.

 

The unit that operated FJ-2s past the advance letter date, and changeover scheme date was VMF-232, page 28. WT-1 and WT-8 (BuNo 131999) had NS Light Gull Gray over G White schemes before the FS standard came out. WT-17 already has a replacement aileron painted in White on it for that group shot. 

I was looking specifically at photos of VMF-312 Fury's. In revisiting Ginter's book, yes on page 28 there's a photo of four VMF-232  -2 Fury's in formation with two in the gray/white scheme and two in natural metal. Very subtle but there. It is noted in the photo caption as well. Their -2's were right on the cusp of the change over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, at first glance the main issue is that the intakes on the fuselage sides are not flush-type NACA intakes, indicative of the FJ-2. Note that KH themselves are also saying this is supposed to be the FJ-2 version. The drawings for the decal variations appear to correctly show the flush intakes. The nose intake looks to be the smaller version correct for the -2. Anyone see anything else  of concern?

 

Jim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, jimm33 said:

Well, at first glance the main issue is that the intakes on the fuselage sides are not flush-type NACA intakes, indicative of the FJ-2. Note that KH themselves are also saying this is supposed to be the FJ-2 version. The drawings for the decal variations appear to correctly show the flush intakes. The nose intake looks to be the smaller version correct for the -2. Anyone see anything else  of concern?

 

Jim

The NACA intakes and then there's the ribbed horizontal elevators. Those were fitted to some reserve -2' and -3's. Until we see the sprue shots, maybe they have both as an option. I'm still curious as to how they resolve the differences between the -2 and -3 fuselages. Without creating two completely different fuselage molds, they would need to do inserts to accommodate both versions. I guess we'll see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi JPK,

 

That would be the sensible thing to do to have main differences applied as inserts (e.g the side air scoops). Staring at the test build photos, I can't discern if the scoops are inserts or not. KH may just have erred in using these test shots as the FJ-2 vs the early FJ-3's. The ribbed surfaces are just going to be plain wrong for any Fury except the late Reserve birds. Until the sprue shots are available, we'll just have to wait and see!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, jimm33 said:

Hi JPK,

 

That would be the sensible thing to do to have main differences applied as inserts (e.g the side air scoops). Staring at the test build photos, I can't discern if the scoops are inserts or not. KH may just have erred in using these test shots as the FJ-2 vs the early FJ-3's. The ribbed surfaces are just going to be plain wrong for any Fury except the late Reserve birds. Until the sprue shots are available, we'll just have to wait and see!

Like you I don't see any seams that might indicate an insert, not only for the fuselage scoops but also for the lower forward fuselage. I also looked to see if there was a seam at the fuselage break, if they may have molded two complete forward fuselages which would have been another option. Don't see that either. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ben Brown said:

No slats. So much for an early, Gloss Sea Blue jet. 😞

 

Ben

See the last picture in the announcement (if you start with the box art): https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=2235848820007064&set=pcb.2235848980007048&type=3&theater&ifg=1

 

Of course, that model has Sidewinders which I'm pretty sure weren't backfitted to the slatted airplanes but I doubt that the person that built had neither the instructions for the kit nor in-depth knowledge of the FJ-2/3 configurations.

Edited by Tailspin Turtle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks! I saw that pic, but thought it was a shot of the -2, because the intake looked kind of small. 

 

Ben

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

KH's posted pictures have been a mish mash of versions. They have shown test shots with slatted wings as well as cambered wings. They've shown fuselages with the correct engine intake but with incorrect fuselage intakes for the version. The latest photo set has the cambered -3 wing with a -2 fuselage. I suspect the recent photos were mainly to show the figure/s they will have in the kit. I wouldn't get too worked up about the rest of the model shown. In past photos they have shown that they've done the correct parts for the different versions but they have they mixed them up in the different photos of the test shots. Overall I think it looks like they've done a pretty good job with the kit from what I have seen. The proof will be when it hits the market but I'm satisfied with what they have done. 

 

And yes, the slat wing Fury's, both -2 and -3 as well as the early cambered wing Fury's were not Sidewinder capable. Only the -3M was Sidewinder equipped.

 

Thanks Tommy!

Edited by jpk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it's decent,  all we need are some decals for a VF-121 Pacemakers FJ-3M and Alex Vraciu's bird from VF-51 (good companion model for his Hellcat!).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/12/2018 at 10:10 AM, Rex said:

JPK, they did use the wrong boxart, but, only because of the rarity of the scheme, not because it is the wrong color.

 

For some reason, they chose to use one of the very few airframes actually painted in Light Gull Gray over White, by one of the few FJ-2 units that had them when the metal scheme was cancelled. (photos exist in print media, see Ginter FJ-2 book, and the squadron history, and timeline of paint specs)

 

Many possible buyers are going to automatically think that the box art is wrong, so think "what else is wrong with the kit?",,,,,that could affect sales.

I miss Rex...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, John B said:

I miss Rex...

Yes, he was another great source of USN information.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When will this be out? Can't wait.

Share this post


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...