crackerjazz Posted May 14, 2018 Share Posted May 14, 2018 (edited) I've been trying to figure out why I like the nose of the Hasegawa better and why the Tamiya nose looks too pointed. It could be just that I've gotten so used to the Hasegawa but then I look at photos and compare them to the Tamiya and something really seems off to me. I've seriously considered grafting the Hasegawa nose onto the Tamiya but it's not possible as there's a 2mm difference in diameter (radome base). I did try to match the Tamiya nose to a 1/48-scale drawing I found in a japanese F-14 book and the Tamiya nose does seem too thin, but I couldn't trust the drawing too much. Even that dimension of 15 ft between the sill and canopy edge is already incorrect. Has anyone done a similar comparison to better drawings? The mystery of the Tamiya nose really intrigues me. Edited May 14, 2018 by crackerjazz Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Janissary Posted May 14, 2018 Author Share Posted May 14, 2018 (edited) Thank you for brining this up. I first picked up on this when the first pictures of the built Tamiya A started to appear. I had commented at that time but cannot bothered to dig that up right now. To me, it is the 'never ending' feeling of the tip. It seems to continue for too long rather than dipping at the tip and ending somewhat bulbously. It almost gives me the feeling that the tip area has an S-like 'double curvature'. I don't think this is physically there, but the drawn out tip gives me that illusion. The best analogy I can give is the difference between a Ferrari vs Honda Civic hood. Ferrari's keeps on going. In reference to your pic, my issue is the section between the radome tip and the crease in the paper. The fact that the whole radome seems overall thinner might be contributing to this, but I am not sure if those gross dimensions are really off (or the plan you have may not be 100% accurate like you noted earlier). I checked out many real Tomcat pics just for this issue, and I am 97% connived that something is off. Yes, the Tamiya rep here I think had mentioned that the real thing was accurately measured (laser?) but still.... Edited May 14, 2018 by Janissary Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Whiskey Posted May 15, 2018 Share Posted May 15, 2018 I hope that no one takes this personally, but does it really matter about the nose? I mean that seems like really nitpicking something that I feel is a non issue given the extraordinary marvel that is the Tamiya kit over other manufacturers renditions of the Tomcat. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
seawinder Posted May 15, 2018 Share Posted May 15, 2018 2 hours ago, Whiskey said: I hope that no one takes this personally, but does it really matter about the nose? I mean that seems like really nitpicking something that I feel is a non issue given the extraordinary marvel that is the Tamiya kit over other manufacturers renditions of the Tomcat. Well, if one is really passionate about Tomcats, it probably would matter. Can't blame people for being passionate. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Fighting Eighty-Four Posted May 15, 2018 Share Posted May 15, 2018 I also agree that it is nitpicking, and I usually never do so (I am a good-enough kind of builder, for better or worse). However, the Tomcat is the one aircraft I do notice if something is off shape-wise, even if I can't quite pinpoint exactly why. I agree with CJ and Janissary that the shape of the nose is off just enough to bug me. Now don't get me wrong, the shape of the nose on the Tamiya is not enough to keep me from building many more one of those beauties, but I would be lying if I said it did not bother me a little. I didn't mention it in my previous post in this thread, but that is another reason why I will build the Hasegawa kits I already have and will consider buying more in the future for the right price. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
habu2 Posted May 15, 2018 Share Posted May 15, 2018 4 hours ago, Janissary said: To me, it is the 'never ending' feeling of the tip. It seems to continue for too long rather than dipping at the tip and ending somewhat bulbously. Why does this remind me of an old girlfriend... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Whiskey Posted May 15, 2018 Share Posted May 15, 2018 10 hours ago, habu2 said: Why does this remind me of an old girlfriend... Perfect note to end this story lmao!!! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Manuel J. Armas S. Posted May 15, 2018 Share Posted May 15, 2018 At first time, tamiya looks so narrow, but after a while it looks great, and hasegawa looks to wide. Maybe a final test with some real pics. For me, F-14 Tamiya have the perfect shape... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
airmechaja Posted May 16, 2018 Share Posted May 16, 2018 Thank God they Both look better than the Academy! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Anders_Isaksson Posted May 16, 2018 Share Posted May 16, 2018 Tamiya has the better shape in the forward area, but that is my purely personal opinion. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
crackerjazz Posted May 16, 2018 Share Posted May 16, 2018 21 hours ago, Manuel J. Armas S. said: At first time, tamiya looks so narrow, but after a while it looks great, and hasegawa looks to wide. Maybe a final test with some real pics. For me, F-14 Tamiya have the perfect shape... You may be right, Manuel/Anders. I've been studying reference photos again lately and I'm really very close to being converted. What I loved about the Hasegawa was its nose. What I liked less are the hand-scribed panel lines, the guesswork on the angles of the horizontal and vertical fins, the thick wing gloves (and large wing openings), and all the puttying required for the forward fuselage, intakes, etc.). Tamiya has taken care of all of these and the fuselage is wonderfully detailed. So my only complaints are the cockpit's simplified details (RIO IP coaming, bare gauges, simplified circuit breakers, among others) which is readily resolved by using AM parts -- and the nose, really -- and now I'm beginning to see the light about that : ) I used to base my judgment about the nose on photos like these, where I indicated the curvature that I don't see on the Tamiya: I thought the Hasegawa is able to capture those nose curves better. But the F-14 photos might have just been shot at an angle or distance that exagerrates those curves, because I see the photos below and they look more like Tamiya's spindly nose. I did a quick visual -- overlaying the Tamiya onto a sideview photo and it looks promising. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
gtypecanare Posted May 16, 2018 Share Posted May 16, 2018 Tamiya had access to the original blueprints. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Swordsman422 Posted May 16, 2018 Share Posted May 16, 2018 The Hasegawa F-14 was top of the pile for so long that it had something of a coconut effect on the hobby. I remember folks questioning the Tamiya kit tail for a while because it didn't match the Hasegawa tail and it turned out the Hase kit was wrong, being too tall and too narrow. But it was telling that the Tam kit came under fire briefly for not matching the Hase shape even when that shape was incorrect. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Brian P: Fightertown Decals Posted May 16, 2018 Share Posted May 16, 2018 I trust Tamiya in 2016 far greater than any line drawings created by anyone, and greater than Hasegawa in 1989. And if you look at the Hasegawa nose, it's too wide to fit the fuselage without slight modification. I think Tamiya got it right in pretty much every way. That being said, I have plans to do an open nose model and had planned to use a spare Hasegawa nosecone in the up position. Not for the shape, but because it's 1 piece 😉 -brian 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.