Jump to content
ARC Discussion Forums
sda1976

1/48 - Sukhoi Su-35 "Flanker-E" by Great Wall Hobby

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, mingwin said:

insulting fellow members just because they discuss/argue about a new kit on a Scale Modeling Forum is not very respectuous. and bring absolutely nothing new to the discussion. as a Grown-up, you should have known that!

if it makes you feel unhappy (to read arguments over details, rivet counting or nit-picking...) maybe it's just because  you don't belong here... the universe is infinite! you should find your place! :wave:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Word.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey people, let's all chill a little bit. I know, we all take this stuff very seriously, it's our hobby and we're all very much into it. I love the excitement that a new highly detailed kit brings. The anticipation. Sometimes everything is not exactly perfect, but such is the nature of the beast. Remember, they are plastic model kits. One way or another, we'll all find a way to have fun at our hobby.

 

Mark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/5/2018 at 7:03 AM, ya-gabor said:

If we need comparisons of panel lines and surface detailing then here is another recent kit. I would not really like to comment it.

 g4fZBU0.jpg

 

On 2/5/2018 at 8:00 AM, ya-gabor said:

For me the issue with the Su-33 kit is more the surface! All the shrink marks. Yes it is possible to fill them but then all the panel lines, rivets will go too! I still have it on hold and don’t know when will get around to build due to all the extra work needed with those shrink marks.

 

On 2/5/2018 at 8:07 AM, Raymond Chung said:

Yes the shrink is about the injection. Do not fill it email us we got a new one for you.

as learned from su-33 project we finally invest to the expensive injection system 

 

As Raymond mentioned, the sink mark issue has been fixed.

Kinetic_new_vstab_zpsqorqm0pd.jpg

There are still some slight sinks on the thickest areas, but they are subtle enough that they likely wouldn't show once painted so could be ignored.

 

On 2/5/2018 at 11:12 PM, habu2 said:

I'm not calling out any specific person here, but just how many of you have actually been up close with any variant of a real live Flanker (or a Fulcrum for that matter). Not just photos on the internet or in books, but close enough to actually, physically touch them?

 

Nope, never been near a Flanker larger than 1/32! :hmmm:

 

:cheers:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Zactoman said:

As Raymond mentioned, the sink mark issue has been fixed.

 

There are still some slight sinks on the thickest areas, but they are subtle enough that they likely wouldn't show once painted so could be ignored.

 

On 2/5/2018 at 10:07 AM, Raymond Chung said:

Yes the shrink is about the injection. Do not fill it email us we got a new one for you.

 

as learned from su-33 project we finally invest to the expensive injection system 

 

Seeing the Kinetic Su-33 sink mark problem was mentioned here and replied to, I would like to also mention that the sink marks are not only on the base of the vertical stabs, they are also on the top of the main wings and slats.

 

Raymond, who do I email to request replacement parts?

 

Images of my kit. Both tails, both upper wings and both slats have the sink marks.

OO2RPdg.jpg

fxU11ST.jpg

tIm59ZP.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Mfezi said:

 

Scooby, just out of interest, when were these visits?

 

The reason I ask is due to my own experience: The first time I saw a Su-27 and a MiG-29 in person up close was in 1995. I didn't personally see the roller and paint brush touch-up, but I certainly saw everything else that you mentioned. However, I have subsequently seen more modern Russian aircraft up close, including the Su-30SM and Su-35S at recent MAKS airshows, and the thing that actually stood out for me personally was the improved (in my opinion) build quality and general state of the aircraft when you got really close up. Yes, the ones at MAKS were airshow aircraft, but they were not simply cleaner or newer - it really appeared to me that they were more accurately built in the first place. It might have been just an impression, but in 95 the rough state - not all of which was due to bad maintenance - of the aircraft really jumped out at me; this was definitely not the case at my more recent visits in the last few years.

 

The first time was May 1992, two Ukraine Mig-29s were flown into CFB Edmonton inside an Antonov 124. They flew here for a North American airshow tour. I was onboard when they were off-loaded and I documented the entire build of the jets. They were assembled and test flown. I documented it well. Later the jets were flown to Edmonton International Airport to have North American transponders installed for their tour around Canada and the US. L3 did the installation. The jets were later flown back to our base. After they completed their tour of North America they departed from Edmonton, on the Antonov 225. This entire experience was something I will never forget, we hosted the Ukraine crews (given that our community has a very large Ukrainian population).  They had no change of clothes, military uniform only, and no money. A trip to the grocery store was a new experience for the Ukrainians. Some had never seen bananas, strawberries, or other foods. A local Ford dealership provided them with vans for the duration of their stay, again, power steering, cruise control, power windows, and air conditioning were all novelties for them.

 

The second time was in 2002 or 2003 (?) at Maple Flag in Cold Lake. This time it was a squadron of Luftwaffe Mig-29s. The day they arrived I was in a truck at the end of the runway where we de-armed our jets on return from missions, a Mig-29 was taxiing in and it suddenly veered off the taxi-way into the grass. It was raining lightly and the pilot had decided to close his canopy, which was only up a few inches. The problem being he was resting his hand on the front canopy screen. He chopped off some fingers.      

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/6/2018 at 8:23 PM, habu2 said:

With Anatoly Kvochur in Dayton

 

With Viktor Pugachev in Oklahoma City

 

rOJABXZ.jpg

 

edit: that's not actually me "with Viktor", that's a local TV personality who got a ride in the Flanker with Viktor.  I just took the photo...

 

In 1992 the Ukrainian MIG-29 group that visited Edmonton drew names for a media ride. They drew a female reporters name and absolutely refused to allow her to fly. Times were different then, they said there was no way a female was going to fly in their jet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Breaking News!

HobbyEasy has moved the release date from Feb 9th to Feb 10th. Let the speculation begin :whistle:

 

Edit: Had the wrong vendor :-(

Edited by Mstor
correction

Share this post


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

The first time was May 1992, two Ukraine Mig-29s were flown into CFB Edmonton inside an Antonov 124....

 

The second time was in 2002 or 2003 (?) at Maple Flag in Cold Lake. This time it was a squadron of Luftwaffe Mig-29s...

 

Yes, that corresponds with our experience in 1995, which fits in between these two dates of yours. In our case, the Russians visited South Africa with Su-27, Su-30 and Su-35 (the old prototype versions), as well as two MiG-29s, if I remember correctly. They participated in a big airshow but also did some "training" with our operational squadrons, some flight experience exchanges and a bit of ACM... In our case it was the Russian Air Force specifically, not Ukrainian or Luftwaffe - but I think the equipment of all those countries were in a very similar state at that time and all of them were seriously battling with budgets. Actually, even if you look at the equipment today in Russian museums that I have visited over the years, including Monino - they are nicely preserved, clean, often re-painted, but it doesn't hide the very rough finish of the sheet metal underneath some of the exhibits, although there are some notable exceptions.

 

I'm not sure you can pull that through automatically to today. As I said, my recent MAKS visits and other Russian visits showed a pretty dramatic improvement, especially when referring to new-built Russian aircraft. While studying abroad in the US, I ended up marrying a fellow student who happened to be from Russia and for the last 20 or so subsequent years I've been back there (Russia, not the US) at least once a year. In some ways, things don't change, but in many other areas things today have become almost unrecognizable when compared to the late 90's and even early 2000's. I don't think it is just my imagination that the quality of recent Russian military equipment - not just performance but from a simple accuracy/manufacturing quality perspective - is one of those things that have improved quite remarkably. Maybe other members here can also relate?

 

Anyway, the reason I bring this up, is that I have indeed touched Russian equipment - now and then. I'm not sure I completely agree with Habu's remark a page or so ago:

Quote

I have, and the panel fit, rivets, etc look like they are old beat up farm equipment.

 

I would say, that depends... And since the Su-35S is a newly built aircraft, in its particular case (the topic of this thread), I think this description is a little exaggerated.

Edited by Mfezi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Scooby said:

 

In 1992 the Ukrainian MIG-29 group that visited Edmonton drew names for a media ride. They drew a female reporters name and absolutely refused to allow her to fly. Times were different then, they said there was no way a female was going to fly in their jet.

 

The Mig-29s I saw were at the Dayton Air Show in either '89 or '91, can't remember. I was working for Hughes and we had a booth there with a flight simulator. Kvotchur came by and flew the sim, shooting down the target aircraft (another Mig lol) several times. Afterwards he took us out to look at the two -29s (an A and a UB) and I was able to crawl all over them.  Took quite a few pics but it was pre-digital so not as many as I would have liked.  I do remember there was no radar installed, instead there was a big red lead ballast plate bolted in its place on the bulkhead.  The support aircraft was an IL-76.

 

The Su-27s were in Oklahoma City in 1990.  I was there with Jay Miller and Katsu Tokunaga. We arrived mid-week and were given full access to both -27s (again an A and a UB) as well as the support aircraft, the An-225. (the cockpit had blue-green shag carpet on the floor!).  Both Katsu and the girl in the pic got rides in the UB with Viktor, and he did the Cobra maneuver with both of them.  Katsu's flight included an air to air session with the -225.  IIRC the photos were published in KokuFan.  The girl (don't recall her name) was a TV personality and the wife of Tom Jones, an aerobatic pilot and the organizer of the air show.  We left the show on Saturday afternoon.

 

On Sunday Tom was doing his aerobatic routine in his Su-26.  He failed to recover from a stall and died in the crash in front of 75,000 people, including his wife and kids.  I'm glad I wasn't there to see that.

 

http://www.tulsaworld.com/archives/oc-air-show-director-killed-in-fiery-crash/article_b93e9c01-3eeb-59c7-94cf-376e20a56e3e.html

 

http://newsok.com/article/2321139

 

IV2r0MN.jpg

 

S5QLXqJ.jpg

 

Edited by habu2
added pics

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Mfezi said:

 

Yes, that corresponds with our experience in 1995, which fits in between these two dates of yours. In our case, the Russians visited South Africa with Su-27, Su-30 and Su-35 (the old prototype versions), as well as two MiG-29s, if I remember correctly. They participated in a big airshow but also did some "training" with our operational squadrons, some flight experience exchanges and a bit of ACM... In our case it was the Russian Air Force specifically, not Ukrainian or Luftwaffe - but I think the equipment of all those countries were in a very similar state at that time and all of them were seriously battling with budgets. Actually, even if you look at the equipment today in Russian museums that I have visited over the years, including Monino - they are nicely preserved, clean, often re-painted, but it doesn't hide the very rough finish of the sheet metal underneath some of the exhibits, although there are some notable exceptions.

 

I'm not sure you can pull that through automatically to today. As I said, my recent MAKS visits and other Russian visits showed a pretty dramatic improvement, especially when referring to new-built Russian aircraft. While studying abroad in the US, I ended up marrying a fellow student who happened to be from Russia and for the last 20 or so subsequent years I've been back there (Russia, not the US) at least once a year. In some ways, things don't change, but in many other areas things today have become almost unrecognizable when compared to the late 90's and even early 2000's. I don't think it is just my imagination that the quality of recent Russian military equipment - not just performance but from a simple accuracy/manufacturing quality perspective - is one of those things that have improved quite remarkably. Maybe other members here can also relate?

 

Anyway, the reason I bring this up, is that I have indeed touched Russian equipment - now and then. I'm not sure I completely agree with Habu's remark a page or so ago:

 

I would say, that depends... And since the Su-35S is a newly built aircraft, in its particular case (the topic of this thread), I think this description is a little exaggerated.

 

By building them with lower QA standards they were able to purchase more airframes at a much lower cost. For Russia it was all about quantity rather than quality.

 

You’ve probably seen Russia’s abandoned Space Shuttles before.

 

http://www.businessinsider.com/photos-of-russian-abandoned-space-shuttles-by-ralph-mirebs-2015-6/#rebs-took-this-epic-shot-of-both-shuttles-from-a-viewing-platform-at-one-end-of-the-hangar-7

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Scooby said:

By building them with lower QA standards they were able to purchase more airframes at a much lower cost. For Russia it was all about quantity rather than quality.

 

You’ve probably seen Russia’s abandoned Space Shuttles before.

 

Scooby, thanks. Yes, I have seen the pictures before, but I think my post was perhaps not clear or my point was a little hidden towards the end of my post. My experience with the Russians in the mid-90's was exactly in line with those of you and Habu2 and the abandoned space shuttles and everything else from those final days of the Soviet era and the early years following its collapse. However, this thread is about a kit of a modern Russian aircraft - this specific iteration will have the 10 year anniversary of its first test flight later this month on 19 February and the first production aircraft was completed less than 8 years ago. My natural question was therefore whether what we saw in the 90's and early 2000's translated to the build quality of these modern Russian aircraft. As I said, I have seen those from both eras up close and literally got to touch them. I also got to see how they were maintained in the 90's (at least on deployment), but not so much in the modern era. Nevertheless, my personal opinion is that there was a dramatic improvement as far as those things that you can easily see and touch are concerned, such as surface sheet metal work, finishing of composite components, quality of repairs (fewer scars and bumps), quality of paint, finish quality of large metal components such as landing gear, etc. I was hoping that someone else with this "dual experience" - Soviet vs very recent modern Russian - could also relate his or her experience, as I openly admit my experience is still limited: I may have seen them up close and touched them, but I do not work in the Russian aerospace industry or armed forces. I would love to hear the impressions of someone who does and especially of someone who has done so long enough to have experienced some of the change, or perhaps lack thereof in some areas.

 

As I said, no need to convince me of the quality/lack of quality of those late Soviet era equipment nor of the reasons why it was the way it was - myself, you and Habu2 clearly agree completely on what we saw and it is, frankly, fascinating how similar our impressions were.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ouch! that shipping charge isn't cheap... but it's "On Stock"

on my side, HobbyEasy still list it "pre-order"...but since they requested me the payment of my pre-ordered kit this morning, my guess is that they have it in stock...but waited to see if all pre-ordered items are taken. mine is taken:thumbsup2:

Edited by mingwin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HobbyEasy now shows it in stock. My order status there is now "Confirmed and ready to ship"!  Hobbysearch still shows it as preorder status.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mstor said:

HobbyEasy now shows it in stock. My order status there is now "Confirmed and ready to ship"!  Hobbysearch still shows it as preorder status.

It is like tracking Santa:woo:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, mingwin said:

ouch! that shipping charge isn't cheap... but it's "On Stock"

on my side, HobbyEasy still list it "pre-order"...but since they requested me the payment of my pre-ordered kit this morning, my guess is that they have it in stock...but waited to see if all pre-ordered items are taken. mine is taken:thumbsup2:

 

Hobbyeasy still has the kit cheaper by $20 than anywhere else. Mine is showing as packaged and ready to ship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Mfezi said:

 

Scooby, thanks. Yes, I have seen the pictures before, but I think my post was perhaps not clear or my point was a little hidden towards the end of my post. My experience with the Russians in the mid-90's was exactly in line with those of you and Habu2 and the abandoned space shuttles and everything else from those final days of the Soviet era and the early years following its collapse. However, this thread is about a kit of a modern Russian aircraft - this specific iteration will have the 10 year anniversary of its first test flight later this month on 19 February and the first production aircraft was completed less than 8 years ago. My natural question was therefore whether what we saw in the 90's and early 2000's translated to the build quality of these modern Russian aircraft. As I said, I have seen those from both eras up close and literally got to touch them. I also got to see how they were maintained in the 90's (at least on deployment), but not so much in the modern era. Nevertheless, my personal opinion is that there was a dramatic improvement as far as those things that you can easily see and touch are concerned, such as surface sheet metal work, finishing of composite components, quality of repairs (fewer scars and bumps), quality of paint, finish quality of large metal components such as landing gear, etc. I was hoping that someone else with this "dual experience" - Soviet vs very recent modern Russian - could also relate his or her experience, as I openly admit my experience is still limited: I may have seen them up close and touched them, but I do not work in the Russian aerospace industry or armed forces. I would love to hear the impressions of someone who does and especially of someone who has done so long enough to have experienced some of the change, or perhaps lack thereof in some areas.

 

As I said, no need to convince me of the quality/lack of quality of those late Soviet era equipment nor of the reasons why it was the way it was - myself, you and Habu2 clearly agree completely on what we saw and it is, frankly, fascinating how similar our impressions were.

 

I honestly don’t think anything has changed. I’ve been on Russian transports recently, you’d see it in their industry if things had changed. I don’t feel they have a quality system in place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Scooby said:

 

I honestly don’t think anything has changed. I’ve been on Russian transports recently, you’d see it in their industry if things had changed. I don’t feel they have a quality system in place.

 

I'm sorry, Scooby, but that is a ridiculous claim - nothing changed in their industry between the late 90's and 2018? Come on, have you even been there in the last few years? As I said, I don't know people working in the aerospace industry there, which was part of my question, but I do know many people working in other industries there. For example, my mother in law is an accountant in a large machine factory. They certainly have a "quality system in place" in the form of ISO9001 which they have to comply with as about half their customers are European. Their machines have all been replaced by modern CNC equipment in the last 15 years or so - walking through there looks exactly the same as walking through a modern German machine shop, except for the language spoken on the floor. Without a "quality system in place" the Sukhoi Superjet would not have received its EASA type certificate and I am aware that at least some of their aerospace companies utilize AS9100, although I don't know if that is a basic requirement for the companies that are only doing defence work - once again, I would be interested to hear from anyone who works in such a company.

 

My question wasn't whether there was change in their industry, that is obvious: It was specifically about the surface finish of the modern, recently produced Sukhois, which is what this thread is about and, specifically, whether others had similar observations to what I had. Russian transports: unless you are referring to those Il-76s coming off the new Ulyanovsk production line over the last few years, I fail to see the relevance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Mfezi said:

 

I'm sorry, Scooby, but that is a ridiculous claim - nothing changed in their industry between the late 90's and 2018? Come on, have you even been there in the last few years? As I said, I don't know people working in the aerospace industry there, which was part of my question, but I do know many people working in other industries there. For example, my mother in law is an accountant in a large machine factory. They certainly have a "quality system in place" in the form of ISO9001 which they have to comply with as about half their customers are European. Their machines have all been replaced by modern CNC equipment in the last 15 years or so - walking through there looks exactly the same as walking through a modern German machine shop, except for the language spoken on the floor. Without a "quality system in place" the Sukhoi Superjet would not have received its EASA type certificate and I am aware that at least some of their aerospace companies utilize AS9100, although I don't know if that is a basic requirement for the companies that are only doing defence work - once again, I would be interested to hear from anyone who works in such a company.

 

My question wasn't whether there was change in their industry, that is obvious: It was specifically about the surface finish of the modern, recently produced Sukhois, which is what this thread is about and, specifically, whether others had similar observations to what I had. Russian transports: unless you are referring to those Il-76s coming off the new Ulyanovsk production line over the last few years, I fail to see the relevance.

 

I have seen new build il-76s, due to noise restrictions at our airport we only permit the newer models to land here now.

 

You’d see a change in their exports if they had made drastic changes in their industry. You don’t see automobiles and aircraft being exported in large numbers from Russia.

 

Share this post


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

 

I have seen new build il-76s, due to noise restrictions at our airport we only permit the newer models to land here now.

 

Cool. I've seen the ones from Volga-Dnepr here occasionally, which also use the modern, quieter, PS-90 engines, but these are mostly Il-76TD airframes from the old Voronezh plant and the re-engening dates back to around 2003/2005, so not new production. I haven't seen any of the new build ones here yet since the ones from the new Ulyanovsk plant have all gone to the Russian Air Force and we haven't been blessed by a visit from them yet. I wonder what they were doing in your neck of the woods?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Mfezi said:

 

Cool. I've seen the ones from Volga-Dnepr here occasionally, which also use the modern, quieter, PS-90 engines, but these are mostly Il-76TD airframes from the old Voronezh plant and the re-engening dates back to around 2003/2005, so not new production. I haven't seen any of the new build ones here yet since the ones from the new Ulyanovsk plant have all gone to the Russian Air Force and we haven't been blessed by a visit from them yet. I wonder what they were doing in your neck of the woods?

 

Moving oil field equipment. I also see 124s and the 225 often. Occasionally a cargo 747.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just got an email, Lucky is offering $2 flat fee for surface mail plus 10% off orders over $80

 

Quote

Double Savings!

10% OFF on order US$80+ (Coupon code: DS2018)

Enter Coupon Code to your online order form when checking out and to press "GO" button to receive the extra savings. This promotion expires February 28, 2018.


Term and Conditions: 
1. The coupon discount can only be used for purchasing goods, but not for paying the shipping & handling charges. 
2. This coupon cannot be used in conjunction with other promotional offers, except $2 surfacemail shipping.
3. Luckymodel.com reserves the right for the final decision in case of dispute.

 

Quote

US$2 Flat International surfacemail shipping worldwide

* A flat, US$2 shipping charges for orders over US$120.
* It is trackable shipping. Track it out with us or at: http://app3.hongkongpost.hk/CGI/mt/enquiry.jsp
* Delivery Time: 30 to 120 business days. 
* Valid till February 28, 2018.
The shopping cart page will display the flat rate US$2 of your selected items, when you select the surface mail option and place order with US$120 or over. Act Now!

Term and Conditions: 
We reserve the right to accept or refuse the flat surfacemail shipping orders in our discretion
.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've got more than $122 in my cart and it's still showing $56 shipping.  Never mind. "Surface shipping." Check. 

Edited by Space Tiger Hobbes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×