jabow Posted July 15, 2017 Share Posted July 15, 2017 Does it need nose weight to keep all wheels on ground?? Would 300 grain lead in Nose Cone work?? Bo Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Ben Brown Posted July 15, 2017 Share Posted July 15, 2017 It doesn't need nose weight, but I would suggest adding a little, just to be sure. On my last one, I used 3-4 small (3/0) fishing sinkers. Ben Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jabow Posted July 15, 2017 Author Share Posted July 15, 2017 Better safe than sorry!! Thanks, Ben. Bo Quote Link to post Share on other sites
BillS Posted July 15, 2017 Share Posted July 15, 2017 Like Ben says, no weight but I'd replace the struts with metal ones. The mains are very stalky and flimsy. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Kurt H. Posted July 16, 2017 Share Posted July 16, 2017 1 hour ago, BillS said: Like Ben says, no weight but I'd replace the struts with metal ones. The mains are very stalky and flimsy. I agree, with the plastic legs it is really wobbly. Other than that minor issue it is a fun kit to build. Now you got me thinking about it and I want to go build one... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Paul Boyer Posted July 16, 2017 Share Posted July 16, 2017 Very few jet fighter models need weight to hold down the nose. In my collection, the F-80, F-94 (1/72) are exceptions. I'm trying to think of any type of current-service jet fighter would need weight in my scale. Possibly F-14 with the wings swept back . . . . nah. Most of the modern jet fighters have the main gear well aft of the c/g and so it stands with the models, too. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jabow Posted July 17, 2017 Author Share Posted July 17, 2017 On 7/16/2017 at 10:14 AM, Paul Boyer said: Very few jet fighter models need weight to hold down the nose. In my collection, the F-80, F-94 (1/72) are exceptions. I'm trying to think of any type of current-service jet fighter would need weight in my scale. Possibly F-14 with the wings swept back . . . . nah. Most of the modern jet fighters have the main gear well aft of the c/g and so it stands with the models, too. Thanks, Paul. Did add some weight just to be on safe side. Bo Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jabow Posted July 17, 2017 Author Share Posted July 17, 2017 On 7/15/2017 at 7:44 PM, Kurt H. said: I agree, with the plastic legs it is really wobbly. Other than that minor issue it is a fun kit to build. Now you got me thinking about it and I want to go build one... ??? SAC metal nose gear seems to be missing that U shaped aft nose gear part???? I'm going with plastic ones and if they fail, can always add the metal ones later, ....... I hope?? Bo Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Ben Brown Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 The plastic struts on my first Thud listed ~20 years, until I dropped it. The plastic ones are okay, just a little wobbly. Ben Quote Link to post Share on other sites
dnl42 Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 I believe SAC intends you to use some of the kit's plastic bits to embellish their "structural" parts. I have the SAC gear; PM if you're interested. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
habu2 Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 4 hours ago, jabow said: ??? SAC metal nose gear seems to be missing that U shaped aft nose gear part???? I'm going with plastic ones and if they fail, can always add the metal ones later, ....... I hope?? Bo Amelia Earhart approves.... :) Quote Link to post Share on other sites
dehowie Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 On the bright side by the time you use enough resin to fix the completely hosed Monogran F-105 nose then you will have plenty of weight to keep its nose down.. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Ben Brown Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 I say this every time the nose issue comes up, but I'm not entirely convinced the Monogram nose is that far off. Years ago, during a visit to Seymour Johnson AFB with our local club, we had the chance to compare a built Monogram Thud with a real one. Monogram did a pretty good job of capturing how the nose has a slight curvature as it goes toward the radome, and then the forward 1/3 or 1/4 becomes a true cone. Monogram's problem is a combination of the radome not blending well with the rest of the nose and the pitot tube part, which is off-center and too thick. If you put a spacer between the nose and the radome, and replace the pitot tube with one from Master Models, it completely changes the look of the model. You just have to blend the pitot into the radome, because the pitot was meant for the Hobby Boss kit, which does have issues with the shape of its nose, among other things. Just my opinion, of course. Ben Quote Link to post Share on other sites
SinisterVampire319 Posted July 25, 2017 Share Posted July 25, 2017 On 7/18/2017 at 3:48 PM, Ben Brown said: I say this every time the nose issue comes up, but I'm not entirely convinced the Monogram nose is that far off. Years ago, during a visit to Seymour Johnson AFB with our local club, we had the chance to compare a built Monogram Thud with a real one. Monogram did a pretty good job of capturing how the nose has a slight curvature as it goes toward the radome, and then the forward 1/3 or 1/4 becomes a true cone. Monogram's problem is a combination of the radome not blending well with the rest of the nose and the pitot tube part, which is off-center and too thick. If you put a spacer between the nose and the radome, and replace the pitot tube with one from Master Models, it completely changes the look of the model. You just have to blend the pitot into the radome, because the pitot was meant for the Hobby Boss kit, which does have issues with the shape of its nose, among other things. Just my opinion, of course. Ben Agreed. I have a D and G in Sacramento and a F model down the street from me to crawl around on. 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.