Jump to content

Great Wall Hobby G.W.H L4827 1/48 Su-27UB “Flanker C” Heavy Fighter


Recommended Posts

I think I should explain more accurate what is my point.
I know there are narrow and wide panel lines on real aircrafts.
I also know that those lines are very narrow, we can talk about 1-2 mm at all, maybe less - if I am wrong please correct me.
It is easy to understand that it is almos impossible to perform such narrow lines in scale - for 1:48 those line should be 0,01 - 0,02mm wide, maybe even less. That can be technological barrier.
So now I see very few panel lines on Su-35 GWH which are very narrow and fine, maybe 0,04, mayby 0,05 mm wide. They look very fine and crispy.
If GWH wants to perform narrow and wide lines on the same plane, and additionally they are able to make very thin line, why they can't do it?
They could make 2 kinds of panel lines, for example, 0,04 and 0,08 mm wide. But no, they make few lines 0,04 mm and many lines 0,2mm wide or so.
That is what I don't like in their kits. Thay have know-how to make very nice, fine lines, but they make mostly wide ones.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its fantastic to see GWH going full steal ahead with the Flanker family! 
The SU-35 is a fabulous kit and cannot wait for the UB and single seater.

Beautiful kits that 5 or 6 will find there way into my large Flanker family.

Great stuff!

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

I think I should explain more accurate what is my point.
I know there are narrow and wide panel lines on real aircrafts.
I also know that those lines are very narrow, we can talk about 1-2 mm at all, maybe less - if I am wrong please correct me.
It is easy to understand that it is almos impossible to perform such narrow lines in scale - for 1:48 those line should be 0,01 - 0,02mm wide, maybe even less. That can be technological barrier.
So now I see very few panel lines on Su-35 GWH which are very narrow and fine, maybe 0,04, mayby 0,05 mm wide. They look very fine and crispy.
If GWH wants to perform narrow and wide lines on the same plane, and additionally they are able to make very thin line, why they can't do it?
They could make 2 kinds of panel lines, for example, 0,04 and 0,08 mm wide. But no, they make few lines 0,04 mm and many lines 0,2mm wide or so.
That is what I don't like in their kits. Thay have know-how to make very nice, fine lines, but they make mostly wide ones.

 

Solo:  Do you even build? No one is forcing you, or even forcing you to buy the kit. Your ideas on manufacturing lead me to believe you may be associated with a competitor or maybe you're just whining too much.

 

There, I said all I'm going to say about it. Now...where are we with the AMK Tomcat thread?

 

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

As long as they keep the shape right there is no risk of war.

 

Exactly!

 

For those of us, who over the years built the Academy Su-27, we are now getting kits that we could only dream of 25-30 years ago. GWH has put us on a different playing field as far as accurate shape and details. Make us a Su-27SM & and a Su-30SM/MKI/MKM/MKA with canards please.

 

Edited by Mr Matt Foley
Edit
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Mr Matt Foley said:

 

Exactly!

 

For those of us, who over the years built the Academy Su-27, we are now getting kits that we could only dream of 25-30 years ago. GWH has put us on a different playing field as far as accurate shape and details. Make us a Su-27SM & and a Su-30SM/MKK/MK2 with canards please.

 

👍👍

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Mr Matt Foley said:

Make us a Su-27SM & and a Su-30SM/MKK/MK2 with canards please.

 

MKK variant has no canards as well as MK2.

Canarded twin-seaters are  - SM (RF)/MKI (India)/MKA (Algeria)/MKM (Malaysia)

 

Cy30-1.png

 

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

 

MKK variant has no canards as well as MK2.

Canarded twin-seaters are  - SM (RF)/MKI (India)/MKA (Algeria)/MKM (Malaysia)

 

Cy30-1.png

 

 

Well, I'll "Tap out" of that Tapchan. Thanks for the correction(s) I do get confused by the number of variants.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/21/2020 at 5:38 AM, haneto said:

Mold pictures received from factory.

Enjoy the details...

dD8u4zi.jpg

 

Wow, it would appear to me that you guys have made the cockpit of the single seat version narrower compared to the Su-35 kit?? When I compared the cockpit/canopy of GWH's Su-35 with Kinetic's Su-33, the difference in width is rather large, Kinetic is noticeably narrower. I thought that the truth is somewhere in between, if not closer to Kinetic to be honest. Of course both kits are great, I'm just interested to know the truth.    

 

Edited by delide
Link to post
Share on other sites

Please remember that this is a mould tool photo with lots of distortion. To make exact size estimates and comparisons from it is not really wise. 

 

While I have the Kinetic Su-33 kit and have to say it is a nice one, I dont really like to make comparisons or measure other people's work be it Kinetic or any other maker. I prefer to deal with the work in front of me and try to do my best in it.

 

In case of Su-35 or here with the Su-27 family there were fairly simple things like working from the K-36 ejection seat. "Unfortunately" I have one original seat in my collection and even if it is a version used on another Su type, the seat dimensions down to a millimetre are the same. For the Su-35 which was a fairly different version of the seat (brand new infact) in many ways I used factory documentation, dimensions from the seat designer Zvezda company.

 

Based on this, how authentic in size is the seat and the cockpit around it I have to leave to everyone imagination.

 

Best regards

Gabor

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ya-gabor said:

Please remember that this is a mould tool photo with lots of distortion. To make exact size estimates and comparisons from it is not really wise. 

 

While I have the Kinetic Su-33 kit and have to say it is a nice one, I dont really like to make comparisons or measure other people's work be it Kinetic or any other maker. I prefer to deal with the work in front of me and try to do my best in it.

 

In case of Su-35 or here with the Su-27 family there were fairly simple things like working from the K-36 ejection seat. "Unfortunately" I have one original seat in my collection and even if it is a version used on another Su type, the seat dimensions down to a millimetre are the same. For the Su-35 which was a fairly different version of the seat (brand new infact) in many ways I used factory documentation, dimensions from the seat designer Zvezda company.

 

Based on this, how authentic in size is the seat and the cockpit around it I have to leave to everyone imagination.

 

Best regards

Gabor

 

Yes, it's just my first impression, it could be just distortions. I thought you guys might got hands on the real thing, as Su-27 is much older, I have zero idea if it's possible or not.

 

Anyway, thanks for your information. For me those 2 kits are just different kits from different people/designers, so I was curious to see how the shape of canopies from different designers compare, as shape of canopies is rather important for me and it basically can not be worked on by me, unlike other things.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also it is important to add that I am just one member of a team who designed this kit and have to admit that others had different access to information and data. I could not speak for them. 

 

Yes, the Flanker has been around for some time, on my side I used a lot of material from the past decades of research and tones of photos I taken going back to that very first Western premiere of the Su-27 in Paris.

 

If you ask if we did a LIDAR scan of an airframe then I can say we did not, but looking at some "success" of other kit producers with this technology I think we are better off with not scanning. : )  : )

 

Best regards

Gabor

Edited by ya-gabor
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...