Jump to content
ARC Discussion Forums
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
Curt B

Great Wall Hobby F-15C MSIP II (4817) Ordnance?

Recommended Posts

Can you adapt the Hasegawa canopy to the GWH kit?  If so, the only remaining problem is to get a spare Hasegawa canopy...  Falcon makes a vacform set in 1:48 that includes an F-15 single seat canopy designed for the Hasegawa kit.  That may be an alternative.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the Hasegawa 1/48 F-15C build by our friend Jon Bryon

 

f15c_021_fs.jpg

 

It looks as tho the Hasegawa canopy had the correct height/shape in the middle section, just as that in the Hobby-Fairy one. But if I recall correctly, didn't Yufei himself say that the whole nose was wrong in the Hasegawa kit? Anyone?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just looked at a side view of the Has and GWH kits to see if I could note a difference in the canopy.  On my tiny phone screen, hard to tell, but maybe the GWH canopy is not as tall as the Has, but again, hard to tell.  Does that make the GWH unacceptable?  Obviously, to some, the answer is yes.  To me, even if that is true, and the GWH canopy is not shaped correctly, it won’t stop me from building it.  We all have our tolerances, and what we find acceptable (or not).  As I have written before, it would be great if all models were perfect.  But they are not, just like we as people are not. I’m sure I will be happy with my airplane when she’s done, as long as I built and painted her to the best of my ability.

Edited by Curt B

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I went and took a look at the canopy. Firstly, turns out I have the Capt Hwang Special Edition as well. LOL Totally forgot that. That aside, I certainly can tell it is too flat. The canopy from the old Tamiya kit is better. And this one also has the freaking seam down the middle. Something else that should not be present in a 70.00 kit. I am seriously leaning towards selling it.

 

Oh, also, I full well understand people are not perfect. However, when you are charging this much and using supposed state of the art best ever equipment, getting the freaking shapes of basic parts of the plane correct should be a given.

Edited by smokeriderdon

Share this post


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

Oh, also, I full well understand people are not perfect. However, when you are charging this much and using supposed state of the art best ever equipment, getting the freaking shapes of basic parts of the plane correct should be a given.

 

I certainly cannot argue with you on that point!

Share this post


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

However, when you are charging this much and using supposed state of the art best ever equipment, getting the freaking shapes of basic parts of the plane correct should be a given.

 

I can clearly picture myself having thought of this when I opened my Trumpeter 1/48 Su-24M kit and saw that I needed to invest the same amount of quid I paid for the kit in the Komplekt Zip forward fuselage, intake and rear fuselage/nozzles correction sets! 

Share this post


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

 

I can clearly picture myself having thought of this when I opened my Trumpeter 1/48 Su-24M kit and saw that I needed to invest the same amount of quid I paid for the kit in the Komplekt Zip forward fuselage, intake and rear fuselage/nozzles correction sets! 

 

When I got that kit, I was just getting back into the hobby after a three year hiatus. So, I built it pretty much OOB except for the ejection seats and a few scratch details in the cockpit. I learned later how "bad" the kit was and what it would take to get it up to snuff. Now I'm glad I just built it OOB, otherwise I would have bought all those Zip sets. How many are there, three? Nose/Cockpit/Windscreen, Intakes and Tail end with exhausts?  Then God knows what else I would have wanted to add.

Well, it looks OK OOB if you don't know what's wrong with the kit :whistle:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I can clearly picture myself having thought of this when I opened my Trumpeter 1/48 Su-24M kit and saw that I needed to invest the same amount of quid I paid for the kit in the Komplekt Zip forward fuselage, intake and rear fuselage/nozzles correction sets!

 

 

But in the case of Russian planes, there is at least a bit of an excuse. Getting a good scan of one of those is likely a LOT more difficult than an American plane.

Share this post


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

How many are there, three? Nose/Cockpit/Windscreen, Intakes and Tail end with exhausts?  Then God knows what else I would have wanted to add.

 

Hi Mark!

There are four different sets by Komplekt Zip: forward fuselage (also comprises the radome, windshield and canopy), intakes, rear fuselage (also comprises engine shrowd and exhaust cans), and wheels. The cockpit set is by NeOmega. I believe there's also a main landing gear wheel wells by Aires (completely unnecessary IMHO, as little will be seen after attaching the doors).

 

10 hours ago, Mstor said:

Well, it looks OK OOB if you don't know what's wrong with the kit :whistle:

 

As with many other kits, which assembled pictures I saw on the Intertubes prior to even consider the purchasing of the Trumpy Fencer kit, I noticed that there was something that looked bogus with regard of the whole forward fuselage/radome on this kit.

At  least in this aspect, the kit is like night and day without and with the Komplekt Zip set addition.

 

iwcQ4DE.jpg

 

I think I could have done without the intake and wheel set. And those who'll get the KZ sets, you'd better get the directly from stores like Hannants, NeOmega and the likes, as there's a bloody crook selling awful copies on evilBay.

 

9 hours ago, smokeriderdon said:

But in the case of Russian planes, there is at least a bit of an excuse. Getting a good scan of one of those is likely a LOT more difficult than an American plane.

 

I don't concur; or else how do you explain the AMK Tomcat fail then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I don't concur; or else how do you explain the AMK Tomcat fail then?

 

Thats my point. There is NO excuse for not getting something like that wrong. There are a couple existing 14s that can be readily scanned. There is one sitting in Udvar Hazy right now. Not the case for Russian planes.

Share this post


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

I noticed that there was something that looked bogus with regard of the whole forward fuselage/radome on this kit.

 

Actually, with me, about halfway through the build I noticed that something was very wrong with the rear end. It was too late to do anything about it and the correction would have been beyond me anyway (this was before the Zip sets were out). In any case, like I said, I was just getting back into the hobby and wanted to do an OOB build to ease my way back into things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Mstor said:

Actually, with me, about halfway through the build I noticed that something was very wrong with the rear end.

 

 

Keen spotter you are, Mark; I wouldn't have noticed there was something wrong with the rear end in the Trumpy Su-24M kit hadn't I seen a comparison picture between the kit and the Komplekt Zip bits first.

Now, the one thing I still couldn't do about that kit is to decipher how the trunks go inside the intakes. Would like to endow some trunks to those Komplekt Zip resin intakes.

Also, if only I could hollow out the resin radome in the Komplekt Zip set so that it was possible to fit the kit radar to the forward bulkhead. And there's the need to modify the attachment of a Master Model brass/resin pitot tube to the Komplekt Zip radome as well. :bandhead2: 

Share this post


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

Now, the one thing I still couldn't do about that kit is to decipher how the trunks go inside the intakes. Would like to endow some trunks to those Komplekt Zip resin intakes.

 

I just scratched some covers. :thumbsup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Mstor said:

 

Actually, with me, about halfway through the build I noticed that something was very wrong with the rear end. It was too late to do anything about it and the correction would have been beyond me anyway (this was before the Zip sets were out). In any case, like I said, I was just getting back into the hobby and wanted to do an OOB build to ease my way back into things.

I believe you're no longer talking about the GWH F-15C? If not, it might be well to state what kit you are talking about so someone doesn't jump to the end of the thread and conclude, O dear, there's something very wrong with the rear end of the GWH F-15C.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking of the rear...I think the tail boom extensions are too long as they stick out too far behind the (amazingly thick) trailing edges of the horizontal stabs.  Why didn't GWH make the trailing edges as thin and sharp as the fin and rudders...?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I believe you're no longer talking about the GWH F-15C? If not, it might be well to state what kit you are talking about so someone doesn't jump to the end of the thread and conclude, O dear, there's something very wrong with the rear end of the GWH F-15C.

 

Which is why skipping to the end of a thread is not recommended. LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:thatfunny: Hahahaha... that's true.

 

3 hours ago, jenshb said:

Why didn't GWH make the trailing edges as thin and sharp as the fin and rudders...?

 

I wondered that as well, Jens. Why GWH moulded the trailing edges so thick? It'll be a pain in the neck to sand them down to scale.

Share this post


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

I believe you're no longer talking about the GWH F-15C? If not, it might be well to state what kit you are talking about so someone doesn't jump to the end of the thread and conclude, O dear, there's something very wrong with the rear end of the GWH F-15C.

 

Yea, time to bring this back on topic. Thanks for friendly smack on the side of the head :gr_eek2:

Share this post


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

:thatfunny: Hahahaha... that's true.

 

 

I wondered that as well, Jens. Why GWH moulded the trailing edges so thick? It'll be a pain in the neck to sand them down to scale.

 

Yea, that never made sense to me too. I makes it look toy-like and is a bunch of extra work to get it looking right. What were they thinking?

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...