Which 1/48 SU-17 Fitter?

[harvy5]

For me is winner  HB model! 

The shape is the closest to the original. I worked on the overhaul and also on several contracts in Africa. Experience with the Su-22M-4 so I have.

I built all three models. The least work is with HB. For KH it is necessary to buy a repair set for fuselage, shock cone and two new hangers. Another option is just recon version with KKR-1.

[Laurent]

HB vs reality

http://scalemodels.ru/modules/forum/viewtopic_t_67409_start_40.html

Edited December 14, 2019 by Laurent

[Alex Matvey]

[harvy5]

3 hours ago, Laurent said:

HB vs reality

http://scalemodels.ru/modules/forum/viewtopic_t_67409_start_40.html

Photo is not always exactly when the angle is different. I believe drawing from 4+ and my experience  working on real aircraft.
KH model have more serious errors.

Bad shape fuselage, very small air brakes, bad shock cone.engine length .....

The KH model needs too much aftermarkets.

Edited December 14, 2019 by harvy5

[Laurent]

20 minutes ago, harvy5 said:

KH model have more serious errors.

For me the narrow windscreen with almost straight line base is a big problem. No aftermarket can fix that and it gives the the Su-17M3 & later a Su-17/M/M2 look (poor downward visibility).

[harvy5]

22 minutes ago, Laurent said:

For me the narrow windscreen with almost straight line base is a big problem. No aftermarket can fix that and it gives the the Su-17M3 & later a Su-17/M/M2 look (poor downward visibility).

OK,but HB is a better model than KH,less work and cheaper.

[Mr Matt Foley]

28 minutes ago, harvy5 said:

OK,but HB is a better model than KH,less work and cheaper.

 

Huh? Subjective.

[Mr Matt Foley]

1 hour ago, harvy5 said:

Photo is not always exactly when the angle is different. I believe drawing from 4+ and my experience  working on real aircraft.
KH model have more serious errors.

Bad shape fuselage, very small air brakes, bad shock cone.engine length .....

The KH model needs too much aftermarkets.

 

The HB sample is poor. Typical half baked aircraft design by Trumpy-Boss. Now, their Armor kits are by and large much better.

[harvy5]

1 hour ago, Mr Matt Foley said:

 

Huh? Subjective.

I built a model KH and HB. Details are on KH better, but  ... fictional. Here's a link to my build KH, but even I didn't finish and built HB model. https://www.modelforum.cz/viewtopic.php?f=57&t=110822&hilit=rok+suky

3 years was at my Su-25K 1027, Su-22M-4 or UM-3 from 1thSQ, 33ndFBW Slovak AF.... So I think I can judge which details are closer to reality. 😎

Edited December 14, 2019 by harvy5

[harvy5]

14 hours ago, Mr Matt Foley said:

 

The HB sample is poor. Typical half baked aircraft design by Trumpy-Boss. Now, their Armor kits are by and large much better.

Sry but KH model is realy shoot!Some mistakes have been described and others are..Small horizontal stabilizers, small and badly shaped drop tanks. Wrong wing angles and surface details from M-2 su OK?
And that's just the beginning. 😎

[musangpulut]

On 12/14/2019 at 7:27 PM, harvy5 said:

For me is winner  HB model! 

The shape is the closest to the original. I worked on the overhaul and also on several contracts in Africa. Experience with the Su-22M-4 so I have.

I built all three models. The least work is with HB. For KH it is necessary to buy a repair set for fuselage, shock cone and two new hangers. Another option is just recon version with KKR-1.

 

Hi Harvy, 

 

mind to share some of african fitters while youre on contract with them? I bet is was Angola? luv to see the african camos pattern. 

 

regards

Amzari

[ReccePhreak]

Do either of those two belly mods work (FIT?) on the Kitty Hawk Su-22M-3/M-4?

Larry

[Mstor]

1 hour ago, ReccePhreak said:

Do either of those two belly mods work (FIT?) on the Kitty Hawk Su-22M-3/M-4?

Larry

 

As far as the KH kits, I think the Su-17 and Su-22 boxings are the same kit. Just different decals and maybe different ordnance.

[Laurent]

9 hours ago, harvy5 said:

Small horizontal stabilizers

Smaller compared to what reference ? 4+ drawings ? 

 

I've overlayed the Modelsvit drawing to KH drawing. Geometrically the top views match pretty well.

 

I've also overlayed the Modelsvit drawing to HB drawing. Look at the horizontal stabilizers. Chord for HB seems much bigger.

 

 

[harvy5]

34 minutes ago, Laurent said:

Smaller compared to what reference ? 4+ drawings ? 

 

I've overlayed the Modelsvit drawing to KH drawing. Geometrically the top views match pretty well.

 

I've also overlayed the Modelsvit drawing to HB drawing. Look at the horizontal stabilizers. Chord for HB seems much bigger.

 

 

Yes 4+. I know how and who made them.  It was in Namest  over Oslava AB in Czechoslovakia. If it fits according to Modelsvit is clearly why there are so many details from the M-2 version.I was working on a real Su-22, so don't convince me that KH is more accurate than HB.The same view of it has more of my friends who served on the Su-22.

Another problem is the shock cone position. M-4 had  fixed in contrast to the moving on the early versions. But this KH has a bad position and with it is given the position of anti pupmpig doors

Edited December 15, 2019 by harvy5

[Hubbie Marsten]

I'm afraid I'm with Laurent in this one, Harvy. Having once struggled with the KoPro 1/48 Su-22 kit, I think the whole forward fuselage in the Hobby Boss kit looks exactly as the former kit looked like, windshield wrong shape and stance and all.

It's quite different with the Kitty Hawk kit that, in spite of all of the aftermarket needed, it still looks like the Sukhoi beauty from every point of view.

There was a good comparison picture of how both kits fuselages look like when viewed from the front that I couldn't find, so I did a side-by-side comparison with what I was able to find on the Intertubes.

 

Hobby Boss kit on the left, Kitty Hawk on the right. Something that I saw in the picture I wasn't able to find was that the shape on the Hobby Bosss fuselage looked awfully odd, like squared-off or something. Also, the transition of the windshield over the forward fuselage looks spot on in the Kitty Hawk kit, which is what I was never able to reproduce on my KoPro kit.

Then it's the shape of the windshild, which looks exactly as it looked on the KoPro kit; as opposed to the Kitty Hawk example.

One thing that I would like the expertise of your help with would be with fixing the size of the auxiliary tanks in the Kitty Hawk kit.

 

[Mr Matt Foley]

1 hour ago, Hubbie Marsten said:

I'm afraid I'm with Laurent in this one, Harvy. Having once struggled with the KoPro 1/48 Su-22 kit, I think the whole forward fuselage in the Hobby Boss kit looks exactly as the former kit looked like, windshield wrong shape and stance and all.

It's quite different with the Kitty Hawk kit that, in spite of all of the aftermarket needed, it still looks like the Sukhoi beauty from every point of view.

There was a good comparison picture of how both kits fuselages look like when viewed from the front that I couldn't find, so I did a side-by-side comparison with what I was able to find on the Intertubes.

 

Hobby Boss kit on the left, Kitty Hawk on the right. Something that I saw in the picture I wasn't able to find was that the shape on the Hobby Bosss fuselage looked awfully odd, like squared-off or something. Also, the transition of the windshield over the forward fuselage looks spot on in the Kitty Hawk kit, which is what I was never able to reproduce on my KoPro kit.

Then it's the shape of the windshild, which looks exactly as it looked on the KoPro kit; as opposed to the Kitty Hawk example.

One thing that I would like the expertise of your help with would be with fixing the size of the auxiliary tanks in the Kitty Hawk kit.

 

 

Nice photo...shows why I'll build Kitty Hawk.

[Mr Matt Foley]

13 hours ago, harvy5 said:

Sry but KH model is realy shoot!Some mistakes have been described and others are..Small horizontal stabilizers, small and badly shaped drop tanks. Wrong wing angles and surface details from M-2 su OK?
And that's just the beginning. 😎

 

Ok Harv, Can you post some good reference shots of the Su-22 for us? I'm sure there is much interest, certainly from myself.

[harvy5]

On 12/15/2019 at 11:59 PM, Mr Matt Foley said:

 

Ok Harv, Can you post some good reference shots of the Su-22 for us? I'm sure there is much interest, certainly from myself.

I'll try to find something. Fitter only marginally interested me, just to make some money for contracts. And models I made only for friends. Also for Slovak astronaut Ivan Bela. He was a Su-22 pilot.

 

On 12/15/2019 at 10:25 PM, Hubbie Marsten said:

I'm afraid I'm with Laurent in this one, Harvy. Having once struggled with the KoPro 1/48 Su-22 kit, I think the whole forward fuselage in the Hobby Boss kit looks exactly as the former kit looked like, windshield wrong shape and stance and all.

It's quite different with the Kitty Hawk kit that, in spite of all of the aftermarket needed, it still looks like the Sukhoi beauty from every point of view.

There was a good comparison picture of how both kits fuselages look like when viewed from the front that I couldn't find, so I did a side-by-side comparison with what I was able to find on the Intertubes.

 

Hobby Boss kit on the left, Kitty Hawk on the right. Something that I saw in the picture I wasn't able to find was that the shape on the Hobby Bosss fuselage looked awfully odd, like squared-off or something. Also, the transition of the windshield over the forward fuselage looks spot on in the Kitty Hawk kit, which is what I was never able to reproduce on my KoPro kit.

Then it's the shape of the windshild, which looks exactly as it looked on the KoPro kit; as opposed to the Kitty Hawk example.

One thing that I would like the expertise of your help with would be with fixing the size of the auxiliary tanks in the Kitty Hawk kit.

 

 

On 12/15/2019 at 10:25 PM, Hubbie Marsten said:

I'm afraid I'm with Laurent in this one, Harvy. Having once struggled with the KoPro 1/48 Su-22 kit, I think the whole forward fuselage in the Hobby Boss kit looks exactly as the former kit looked like, windshield wrong shape and stance and all.

It's quite different with the Kitty Hawk kit that, in spite of all of the aftermarket needed, it still looks like the Sukhoi beauty from every point of view.

There was a good comparison picture of how both kits fuselages look like when viewed from the front that I couldn't find, so I did a side-by-side comparison with what I was able to find on the Intertubes.

 

Hobby Boss kit on the left, Kitty Hawk on the right. Something that I saw in the picture I wasn't able to find was that the shape on the Hobby Bosss fuselage looked awfully odd, like squared-off or something. Also, the transition of the windshield over the forward fuselage looks spot on in the Kitty Hawk kit, which is what I was never able to reproduce on my KoPro kit.

Then it's the shape of the windshild, which looks exactly as it looked on the KoPro kit; as opposed to the Kitty Hawk example.

One thing that I would like the expertise of your help with would be with fixing the size of the auxiliary tanks in the Kitty Hawk kit.

 

OK your only problem is the bad shape of windshield on HB. The wrong dimensions, shape inaccuracy, wrong and fancy details on KH on KH are OK for you. And just because the model looks better and has more details. For me and people who know the real Su-22 is but more accurate model HB.

[harvy5]

On 12/15/2019 at 11:59 PM, Mr Matt Foley said:

 

Ok Harv, Can you post some good reference shots of the Su-22 for us? I'm sure there is much interest, certainly from myself.

I'll try to find something. Fitter only intrigued me, just to make some money for contracts. And models I made only for friends. Also for Slovak astronaut Ivan Bela. He was a Su-22 pilot.

[Mr Matt Foley]

6 hours ago, harvy5 said:

I'll try to find something. Fitter only intrigued me, just to make some money for contracts. And models I made only for friends. Also for Slovak astronaut Ivan Bela. He was a Su-22 pilot.

 

Excellent! Thanks.

[Hubbie Marsten]

6 hours ago, harvy5 said:

OK your only problem is the bad shape of windshield on HB. The wrong dimensions, shape inaccuracy, wrong and fancy details on KH on KH are OK for you. And just because the model looks better and has more details. For me and people who know the real Su-22 is but more accurate model HB.

 

No, my problem with the Hobby Boss kit is not only the bad shape of the windshield, it's also the wrong way it sits on the forward fuselage. That, and the wrong shape of the whole forward fuselage (it doesn't slope down as in the real deal, and also, as the picture shows above, the cross section is of a strange round-squarish mix; awful - it really strikes me as very odd that someone who has worked on the aircraft wouldn't see the difference).

I didn't work on the aircraft, but I'm still quite able to perceive that the Kitty Hawk kit looks the closest to photos I've seen of the real aircraft, as opposed to the Hobby Boss kit, which forward fuselage looks exactly as the old KoPro kit looked like.

The Su-17/22 is a beauty, and the Kitty Hawk kit resembles this beauty spot on, while from the side, the Hobby Boss kit looks more like an awful truck or something, just as the old KoPro kit did.

If the Kitty Hawk is inaccurate in shape then you just don't want to talk about the awful fictional shapes in the Hobby Boss kit, I'm sure.

[Tapchan]

On 12/15/2019 at 11:25 PM, Hubbie Marsten said:

I'm afraid I'm with Laurent in this one, Harvy. Having once struggled with the KoPro 1/48 Su-22 kit, I think the whole forward fuselage in the Hobby Boss kit looks exactly as the former kit looked like, windshield wrong shape and stance and all.

It's quite different with the Kitty Hawk kit that, in spite of all of the aftermarket needed, it still looks like the Sukhoi beauty from every point of view.

There was a good comparison picture of how both kits fuselages look like when viewed from the front that I couldn't find, so I did a side-by-side comparison with what I was able to find on the Intertubes.

 

Hobby Boss kit on the left, Kitty Hawk on the right. Something that I saw in the picture I wasn't able to find was that the shape on the Hobby Bosss fuselage looked awfully odd, like squared-off or something. Also, the transition of the windshield over the forward fuselage looks spot on in the Kitty Hawk kit, which is what I was never able to reproduce on my KoPro kit.

Then it's the shape of the windshild, which looks exactly as it looked on the KoPro kit; as opposed to the Kitty Hawk example.

One thing that I would like the expertise of your help with would be with fixing the size of the auxiliary tanks in the Kitty Hawk kit.

 

 

Thanks, I didn't realize that HB is so ugly.

[Hubbie Marsten]

Take a good look at how the fuselage in the real aircraft looks like, I mean; can't Harvy tell the difference after having manned them personally?

 

  

 

It's exactly as those defending the awful shape on the AMK Tomcat kit's rear hinds!

[Tapchan]

Harvy means fictional details, panels and rivets. Shape wise KH is smashing HB kit, maybe details are wrong but still from usual 2 meters first thing that matters for me is shape. 

I understand harvy a bit, he was working with the plane and seen those details closely for some time, seeing them wrong now hurts his senses.

 

I have also seen the real thing couple of times in polish museums, shape of HB on the comparison was obviously odd to me, even without last, definitive, photo.