Jump to content

1/48 Kinetic Sea Harrier FA.2


Recommended Posts

G'day people,

 

I cracked the bags on this one today,

 

DSCN4771_zpsj3lirkva.jpg

 

DSCN4772_zpsu4ug9ups.jpg

 

I enjoyed building my Kinetic FRS.1

 

 

So it will be interesting to see how this one goes together as this was the first release in Kinetics's Harrier 'family' of kits. Also, having already built one, I should be able to avoid the pitfalls inherent in the kit. I tend to jump around and build in sub-assemblies rather than strictly follow the suggested assembly sequence  and this build will be no exception. For this reason I began with the main wheel well which received some PE

 

DSCN4778_zpsycbqzkt0.jpg

 

I have left off one of eh side walls to aid in painting. Next up, the cockpit.

 

DSCN4781_zpstwotxvyh.jpg

 

I have decided to keep the raised console details rather than replace them with pre-painted PE as it is a little too flat for my liking in 1/48. I did scrape off the details on the quarter panels and will use the corresponding PE sections here.

 

The cockpit side walls are completely featureless OOB, so I decided to add a few details loosely based on references

 

DSCN4805_zpsdwwxdyno.jpg

 

DSCN4806_zpsfqbsc27x.jpg

 

The canopy frame did not miss out either

 

DSCN4808_zpsmzejdxyz.jpg
 

The PE set supplies a MDC control box cover for the aft canopy frame bulkhead but I think it is a little too big so I decided to make my own instead. A quick blast of paint and a wash and drybrush later and the cockpit sides were done!

 

DSCN4828_zpsngd5fwhb.jpg

 

DSCN4827_zpsf4narz1b.jpg

 

Likewise the tub

 

DSCN4798_zps87ysc6iq.jpg

 

DSCN4799_zpsbwfihrbt.jpg

 

Meanwhile the wing assembly has been completed

 

DSCN4775_zpsmh0f0hrq.jpg

 

The APU inlet (r/h side) is a fair representation but the exhaust is greatly simplified and far too shallow, correcting this will be tomorrow's job. One difference I have noticed already is that the fit of the underwing inserts at the wingtips is far better in the FA.2 release than teh FRS.1 boxing. Here is the FA.2 wingtip:

 

DSCN4777_zpsfkh2jcvi.jpg

 

Now compare this to the the FRS.1 equivalent:

 

DSCN4821_zpswdzwsyjh.jpg

 

The FRS.1 wing also has another error as  section of the inboard underside 'dogtooth' is not the correct shape. These mistakes have been carried over to the new two seat 'T-Harrier' boxing.

 

DSCN4822_zpsgw7sz1ko.jpg

 

Well, that is all for now,

 

cheers,

 

Pappy

Edited by Pappy121
Link to post
Share on other sites

Pappy,

  I'll be pulling up my chair and following your build for sure. My modeling hat is off to anyone that tackles a Kinetic kit as they  just seem to be a model construction nightmare. I've wanted to buy and build all their Grumman offerings but so far have only gotten on Tracker, and it's still in the box. 

 

  Your cockpit detailing is superb. From what you've done and said, you certainly have an expertise in the Harrier.

Joel

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

Pappy,

  I'll be pulling up my chair and following your build for sure. My modeling hat is off to anyone that tackles a Kinetic kit as they  just seem to be a model construction nightmare. I've wanted to buy and build all their Grumman offerings but so far have only gotten on Tracker, and it's still in the box. 

 

  Your cockpit detailing is superb. From what you've done and said, you certainly have an expertise in the Harrier.

Joel

 

Rubbish!

 

Kinetic attempt to get a lot out of their molds and this means that sometimes additional panels need to be added in order to make different versions from within the same kit release. Whilst this may mean some test fitting and adjustment is required (in other word modelling skills) it is not significantly removed from a manufacturer like Hasegawa for example. Kinetic do make detail mistakes as I have already mentioned and they are far from perfect but I don't agree that in general they are a 'construction nightmare',

 

G'day Joel and welcome aboard, hopefully I can dispel some of the preconceptions that you have in regards to Kinetic kits,

 

cheers,

 

Pappy

Link to post
Share on other sites

G'day people,

 

Well, I started the day by painting up the seat and adding some PE loveliness

 

DSCN4833_zpsfnu7kxrs.jpg

 

DSCN4834_zps0itql6vu.jpg

 

Pavla offers a resin seat however unaltered, it is far too tall to sit in the cockpit.  You would have to reduce the raised plinth that the kit seat rests on which could be tricky. In any case the kit supplied seat is very nice and really only lacks the seats straps to look convincing. The kit decal sheet even includes a pair of data plate decals for the seat headbox (not mentioned in the instructions) and the PE set also supplies pre-painted stencil placards but I think the kit decals look better so that is what I used. I also repainted the pre-painted seat PE belts because I did not like the colours.

 

A quick test fit to make sure that there will not be any surprises come installation time

 

DSCN4837_zpsko3ffgl8.jpg

 

DSCN4835_zpsybqchjgv.jpg

 

Satisfied I moved on to the main wing assembly.

 

As already mentioned, as supplied the APU exhaust is simplified and far too shallow to be realistic

 

The kit opening was opened up by chain drilling and then cleaned up with files. Once satisfied, a representation of the exhaust duct was scratchbuilt using plastic sheet

 

DSCN4804_zpszghpbv8p.jpg

Once dry, this was trimmed back. The rectangular lip that surrounds the APU inlet is a little soft in definition and a PE replacement is supplied so the extant detail was sanded off in preparation

 

DSCN4803_zpsn1mhrrrf.jpg

 

Once I was happy that everything was neat, the PE parts were then added

 

DSCN4807_zpstluvgu8g.jpg

 

The final task was to sand off the molded wing vortex generators  and clean up the wing seams as I will be replacing these with PE items later. I chickened out on doing this with my FRS.1 build but I want to have a crack with this one to see if it is worthwhile.

 

DSCN4830_zpstgdw1nqd.jpg

 

I consider myself a reasonably good detail painter but I could not compete with the pre-painted instrument panel PE parts

 

DSCN4802_zpsl40h8x5a.jpg

 

The PE instrument panel was installed into the tub. The main gear bay has also been painted and weathered.

 

DSCN4843_zpssli9bnnr.jpg

 

DSCN4842_zpsn7ekp4hq.jpg

 

There was no point getting carried away here as the main gear doors are typically closed on the ground unless opened for maintenance. Additionally, when hydraulic power is removed, the doors droop slightly leaving a noticeable gap, which is how my doors will be depicted when they are finally installed.

 

The cockpit tub, nose gear bay, main wheel bay and airbrake assembly were now offered up to the fuselage and this was then glued together and is currently drying,

 

cheers,

 

Pappy

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Pappy121
Link to post
Share on other sites

Pappy,

    Most impressive detailing for sure. I'm old school, basically a prop man at heart so even on the few jets I manage to build, I really don't know what all the parts are for and do. The kit seat is really impressive and your detail painting has brought it to the next level. The harness assembly repaint is just plain perfect.

 

Joel

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Joel_W said:

Pappy,

    Most impressive detailing for sure. I'm old school, basically a prop man at heart so even on the few jets I manage to build, I really don't know what all the parts are for and do. The kit seat is really impressive and your detail painting has brought it to the next level. The harness assembly repaint is just plain perfect.

 

Joel

 

7 hours ago, Mr Matt Foley said:

Pappy,

Nice start on the Harrier and great work with the etch and plasticard. One question for you and the others: Is the Kinetic FA2 better than the Hasegawa AV8+ ?

 

 

 

Thanks Joel,

 

I am no means an expert, but I do find that I get better results when I have pics of the subject in front of me. The 'net has been  a real boon for modellers and many subjects which may have previously only been found in expensive reference books are readily available and for nix! The PE does make me look better than I am though I do not like the pre-painted colours.

 

G'day Matt,

 

Thanks but I am not sure what you are asking, better in what regard? I will need some more context before I can answer your question

 

cheers,

 

Pappy

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Pappy121 said:

 

 

Thanks Joel,

 

I am no means an expert, but I do find that I get better results when I have pics of the subject in front of me. The 'net has been  a real boon for modellers and many subjects which may have previously only been found in expensive reference books are readily available and for nix! The PE does make me look better than I am though I do not like the pre-painted colours.

 

G'day Matt,

 

Thanks but I am not sure what you are asking, better in what regard? I will need some more context before I can answer your question

 

cheers,

 

Pappy

 

 

 

Accuracy foremost Pappy. Is it more accurate? I would surmise that being an FA2 it may be. I have only seen the Hasegawa AV8B+ in the box. If you have built the Hasegawa B+ I would be interested in a comparison in regards to the two builds.

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, CaptainObvious said:

Impressive work Pappy.
The cockpit and the wheel well weathering is top notch!

 

Thanks CO

 

7 hours ago, Mr Matt Foley said:

 

Accuracy foremost Pappy. Is it more accurate? I would surmise that being an FA2 it may be. I have only seen the Hasegawa AV8B+ in the box. If you have built the Hasegawa B+ I would be interested in a comparison in regards to the two builds.

 

G'day Matt.

 

I haven't built the Has AV-8B, but I do have the GR.7/9 boxing and I assume that a lot of the fuselage is common between them, but not sure how valid a comparison between the FA.2 and the Harrier II series jets would be.  It would be more useful to compare the Kinetic and Airfix FA.2 kits as that would be comparing apples with apples.

 

The Kinetic kit costs about twice the asking price of the Has kit. Both have recessed panel lines and both are pretty accurate shape wise from what I have seen.

 

Both kits also have their fit issues however. The Kinetic fuselage  goes together very well and each half incorporates the forward fuselage section. The Has kit fuselage also fits well but the forward section is a separate assembly which will require greater care. Both kits feature a one piece upper wing but the Has kit is more complicated due to the separate wingtips and a separate upper fuselage section that incorporates the engine access doors and  LEX. The fit of the underside around this part is also terrible, the stuff of nightmares. I also know that there has been a LOT of traffic w.r.t the GR.7/9 wing 'kink' accuracy at the leading edge and I assume that the wing is common to the AV-8B family as well so this issue may also be relevant. By comparison, the FA.2 wing fits relatively well, and appears accurate in shape. It will need some filling and sanding around the forward section that incorporates the engine access doors but not anywhere near as much as the Has kit.

 

The Kinetic kit fares much better as far as stores go and there is a lot to choose from, however the Has kit is rather meager, comprising a pair of droop tanks, a pair of AIM-9Ls and the 30mm gun pod system. The Has kit marking options are also limited to a couple of all grey choices. The Kinetic kit in contrast has several more choices, some of which are quite colourful in additional to all grey workhorses.

 

So is it twice as good or twice as accurate?

 

That is for the buyer to decide, but it is at least twice as good as the Airfix kit which it well and truly leaves in the dust.  The Airfix kit is quite accurate in shape and can be had quite cheaply (especially 2nd hand at swap meets and model shows etc.) and can be  built into a very fine model -  I have seen plenty of examples of this, however, it took a not insignificant amount of hard work and modelling skill, not to mention some generous additions of aftermarket accessories. The kinetic kit makes building an accurate FA.2  a LOT easier without recourse to tons of accessories and hard work, and after all the hobby should be enjoyable right?

 

cheers,

 

Pappy

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I like your work mate,and I like that you repainted some PE,I also don't like too much prepainted sets.Born as a figure painter ,I love to spend time with my brush,especially in areas like pit and wheel bays.

And about the IP,if you will added some decals in the gauges,I think your version will be a lot more precious that one produced in series like the PE ones.

 

 

Gianni

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Pappy121 said:

 

Thanks CO

 

 

G'day Matt.

 

I haven't built the Has AV-8B, but I do have the GR.7/9 boxing and I assume that a lot of the fuselage is common between them, but not sure how valid a comparison between the FA.2 and the Harrier II series jets would be.  It would be more useful to compare the Kinetic and Airfix FA.2 kits as that would be comparing apples with apples.

 

The Kinetic kit costs about twice the asking price of the Has kit. Both have recessed panel lines and both are pretty accurate shape wise from what I have seen.

 

Both kits also have their fit issues however. The Kinetic fuselage  goes together very well and each half incorporates the forward fuselage section. The Has kit fuselage also fits well but the forward section is a separate assembly which will require greater care. Both kits feature a one piece upper wing but the Has kit is more complicated due to the separate wingtips and a separate upper fuselage section that incorporates the engine access doors and  LEX. The fit of the underside around this part is also terrible, the stuff of nightmares. I also know that there has been a LOT of traffic w.r.t the GR.7/9 wing 'kink' accuracy at the leading edge and I assume that the wing is common to the AV-8B family as well so this issue may also be relevant. By comparison, the FA.2 wing fits relatively well, and appears accurate in shape. It will need some filling and sanding around the forward section that incorporates the engine access doors but not anywhere near as much as the Has kit.

 

The Kinetic kit fares much better as far as stores go and there is a lot to choose from, however the Has kit is rather meager, comprising a pair of droop tanks, a pair of AIM-9Ls and the 30mm gun pod system. The Has kit marking options are also limited to a couple of all grey choices. The Kinetic kit in contrast has several more choices, some of which are quite colourful in additional to all grey workhorses.

 

So is it twice as good or twice as accurate?

 

That is for the buyer to decide, but it is at least twice as good as the Airfix kit which it well and truly leaves in the dust.  The Airfix kit is quite accurate in shape and can be had quite cheaply (especially 2nd hand at swap meets and model shows etc.) and can be  built into a very fine model -  I have seen plenty of examples of this, however, it took a not insignificant amount of hard work and modelling skill, not to mention some generous additions of aftermarket accessories. The kinetic kit makes building an accurate FA.2  a LOT easier without recourse to tons of accessories and hard work, and after all the hobby should be enjoyable right?

 

cheers,

 

Pappy

 

 

 

Excellent response! Thanks so much for detailed comparison. I'll look for the Kinetic kit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

G'day people,

 

It is with a heavy heart that today I must inform you that I have lost my little mate 'Spike"

 

DSCN4849_zpsdui0qczr.jpg

 

This little guy had stuck me with me from the start of this build but sadly today his journey has come to an end. After fighting on despite many blows from my clumsy fingers, Spike finally sustained a mortal blow and there was noting more I could do for him so I had to put him out of his misery,

 

DSCN4860_zpsaaxincht.jpg

 

RIP Spike

 

On a happier note, most of the seams are behaving well.

 

DSCN4857_zpspr9ge5tf.jpg

 

DSCN4858_zpsema3etra.jpg

 

DSCN4859_zpsjmm3kstk.jpg

 

Just the underside wing roots to go now

 

cheers,

 

Pappy

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Joel_W said:

Pappy,

  Those rescribed seams look really quite good. 

Joel

 

Thanks Joel, but there are some errors (now fixed!) which required some re-work. I just use a sewing pin inserted into a pin vise and a scribing template. It is pretty low tech compared to some of the dedicated scribing tools available, but in my experience the tool used is secondary to the oerator's skill, so no use wasting $$$ on a specialist tool when a cheap solution will work just as well.

 

G'day people,

 

Well, I am slowly bashing the underwing seams into submission, but in the meanwhile I have been keeping myself busy with the undercarriage.

 

Kinetic insists on molding the wheels as a single part hub and two separate tyre halves. Some people may like this approach as it makes painting the hubs easier  but I have always ended up with a gap around the wheel hub section and the tyre halves need sanding to take care of the resulting seam. This would mean that the tread pattern is also obliterated however as Kinetic did not bother with providing any, sanding the tyre seams is not an entire loss. This is one area where Kinetic needs to improve in general a this gimmick is sadly not limited to just the Harrier family of kits.

 

DSCN4865_zps4edjmzmo.jpg

 

This photo does not really illustrate the bead of filler required around the wheel hubs but it is there and would be a redundant step in Kinetic would actually learn to mould wheels with integral hubs.

 

Anyhoo, enough soap boxing. I busied up the nose gear unit first using all the usual scratch building materials,

 

DSCN4861_zpsfxcjymaq.jpg

 

DSCN4862_zpsmsbvkziw.jpg

 

DSCN4863_zpsd6kkgim1.jpg

 

Satisfied, I now turned my attention the the main undercarriage pogo stick

 

DSCN4864_zpsdrm5mvz4.jpg

 

I also started adding some of the airframe furniture

 

DSCN4870_zpsmbilu9zj.jpg

 

It is interesting to note that the GPS unit is located where one of the upper VHF aerials would normally be. The second VHD aerial seems to be re-located on the upper aft fuselage aft of the wing trailing edge. I would have thought that this is where teh GPS receiver would have been place but I guess it is just one of the quirks of the FA.2

 

cheers,

 

Pappy

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pappy,

  Outstanding detailing of the gear strut assemblies. I've also hated the separate wheel tire assembly that seems to becoming popular once again. that gap between the two can be a real issue if there is raised detail on the tire sidewalls. What I've found that works fantastically is Vallejo's White Acrylic putty.  A nice bead applied with enough pressure to get it into the gap. let dry, then using a damp Qtip rub off the excess. No sanding needed. the putty always shrinks some, but in this case it's perfect as that helps to define the separation. 

Joel

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

Pappy,

  Outstanding detailing of the gear strut assemblies. I've also hated the separate wheel tire assembly that seems to becoming popular once again. that gap between the two can be a real issue if there is raised detail on the tire sidewalls. What I've found that works fantastically is Vallejo's White Acrylic putty.  A nice bead applied with enough pressure to get it into the gap. let dry, then using a damp Qtip rub off the excess. No sanding needed. the putty always shrinks some, but in this case it's perfect as that helps to define the separation. 

Joel

 

 

Cheers mate. I did something very similar however I used some PVA (wood working glue) which i simply cleaned up with a wet finger, simple and cheap! It goes on white but dries clear. You can see if you have a good 'fillet ' in the gap before it dries but you don't get the cracking or shrinking and it is not grainy either.

 

G'day people,

 

Well, in between bouts of seam sanding i have been busy on other bits.

 

Kinetic stuffed up the rear RCV part E25. The part fits very well as per the kit instructions but the details have been transposed. The rectangular outlet should be at the back and the two circular grilles at the front, not the other way around as Kinetic have them moulded. The problem is more complicated as simply turning part E25 around so that the details are correctly orientated introduces another problem as the tail boom tapers in two planes and you will need to sand back the aft end and build up the front end with putty and restore the circular grille details.  It is not really that hard but I have already done it once in my FRS.1 build and didn't feel like doing it a second time. Hopefully Kinetic will correct this mistake when they eventually release their GR.3 kit.

 

Instead I decided to leave off part e25 altogether and scratchbuild the exposed RCV mechanism instead. I began by removing the side RCV panels from the tail boom and the top and back were then boxed in

 

DSCN4873_zpsfnxku956.jpg

 

DSCN4874_zpskagscyiz.jpg

 

Next up, i knocked up a representation of the RCV mechanism using bits of scrap styrene and sprue

 

DSCN4877_zpsybul03jt.jpg

 

After an enjoyable morning I was happy with my mech. It is not super accurate but will pass a cursory glance

 

After  a splash of paint I temp fitted the mech

 

DSCN4882_zpshslseu0i.jpg

 

DSCN4883_zpslpw5ngpl.jpg

 

Happy days! This will be put to one side and installed once all the main painting and weathering has been completed

 

Apart from a lack of tread, Kinetics main wheels are also devoid of any brake pack details. Not much can be seen in any case but I still wanted to busy my wheels a little bit so some scraps of styrene and a punch set were use to busy this area up

 

DSCN4875_zpsyqv0dmlw.jpg

 

cheers,

 

Pappy

Edited by Pappy121
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 25/11/2017 at 12:20 AM, Peterpools said:

Amazing work and the details are so beautifully done. Greatly appreciate the explanations and information with each update. Some mighty fine photograpy📷

Keep ‘em comin 😊

Petrr

 

On 25/11/2017 at 11:23 AM, Wolfgun33 said:

Very nice work!

'

Thanks very much fellas. unfortunatwely I am away from home for a little while and comms are a bit spotty at the mo' so there will not be any updats for a fe weeks , but thanks for following along,

 

Pappy

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...