Niels Posted December 2, 2022 Share Posted December 2, 2022 It is still time dependant. Many of the RNoAF Vipers received the MLU years before they got the strengtheners, hence you can correctly make a MLU A/B without them. The aftermarket strengtheners are not always kit specific. I have used many of those I refered to on different kits, and they do work you know. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jenshb Posted December 2, 2022 Share Posted December 2, 2022 As I mentioned in my first post - the plates behind the canopy hinge were added early on - early to mid-80s, and the plates on the upper wing root came during the latter half of the 80s, predating the MLU by several years. If any F-16AMs was devoid of strengthening plates, they must have been very rare. And definitely not representative of the subjects portrayed on the kit decal sheet... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
punder Posted December 2, 2022 Share Posted December 2, 2022 It is extremely difficult to please everyone, isn’t it? Stuff like this is why aftermarket detail vendors exist. I think it’s very kind of Kinetic to leave them a few little scraps, enabling them to put food on the table! 😀 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Crash Test Dummy Posted December 2, 2022 Share Posted December 2, 2022 1 hour ago, jenshb said: As I mentioned in my first post - the plates behind the canopy hinge were added early on - early to mid-80s, and the plates on the upper wing root came during the latter half of the 80s, predating the MLU by several years. If any F-16AMs was devoid of strengthening plates, they must have been very rare. And definitely not representative of the subjects portrayed on the kit decal sheet... I've looked at a lot of MLU photos lately. The plates near the canopy hinges don't seem universal on the MLU planes even within the same air force. Like in the photo below, I can see the reinforcement on the red plane (delivered 1981), but not on the plane in the foreground (delivered 1988), so I'm assuming the design was changed on the assembly line to make the reinforcement unnecessary. Do you know when they manufacturing changes made these obsolete? Both planes look like they have the full complement of other stiffener plates. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jenshb Posted December 2, 2022 Share Posted December 2, 2022 (edited) My source for the early modifications is the IPMS Norway no 1/1999, an article written by Nils Mathisrud and Dag Roger Stangeland - those guys tend to know their stuff. However, the article also mentions that other nations may not follow the same modifications as the Royal Norwegian Air Force, so that may explain differences between Norwegian and Danish F-16s for example. The plate behind the canopy hinge started appearing around 1985. This is easily added from Evergreen strip. The upper wing root plate were introduced from around 1989, and because of their shapes a bit more challenging to make from plastic sheet, but not impossible. I did that on a model I built back in 2006. In spite of individual differences between aircraft, I stand by my comments that a *representative* F-16AM should at least have these two plates included in the kit, and given the time period of many of the decal options (early 2000s), the other scab plates would be introduced as well. Thankfully, Kinetic provided early instrument panels, so a non-MLU aircraft can also be built. I paid £50 for my kit at Telford, which I think is fair for a new tool jet fighter kit with a decent amount of options, but I see on Hannants' website that the price has jumped to £71 (and temporarily out of stock), and for that price I would expect a kit that is complete to make what it says on the box... Edited December 2, 2022 by jenshb Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Niels Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 Here's a link to a MLU updated RNoAF jet however without strengtheners mounted. This photo is from 2002, the strengtheners started appearing on RNoAF jets a couple of years later from what I have seen. They were gradualy introduced, hence took time to go fleet wide. aeo.jpg photos | F-16.net #690 taken 3 years later by myself, no strengtheners aij.jpg photos | F-16.net Here is a pic of 680 which is one of the decal options - again without strengtheners, taken ~2004ish 680_001.jpg photos | F-16.net By time of retirement, the entire RNoAF fleet had the strengtheners, so again; depending on the timeframe of the aircraft you want to depict, strengtheners are not necessarily installed. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
DarkKnight Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 so its much better to have the model molded without the plates and add them based on references, I can't imagine what a pain if you had to remove a bunch, so lack of plates is a positive here Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Dave Roof Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 38 minutes ago, DarkKnight said: so its much better to have the model molded without the plates and add them based on references, I can't imagine what a pain if you had to remove a bunch, so lack of plates is a positive here It's the fact they're not included at all that's the issue. As an example, the Kinetic F/A-18 kits include the tail stiffening plates as PE parts. These were only found on A and A+ aircraft, and not even on all of them. However, if the Hornet a modeler was depicting had them, they were in the box. Reading the comments, no one is/was expecting them to be molded on, but they should have been included as an optional part for the F-16's that had them. As many above have said, most MLU aircraft had them and while they're available from aftermarket sources (to include my line), aftermarket shouldn't be necessary for these parts. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Dave Williams Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 (edited) What’s interesting is that Kinetic included PE plates in one of their previous MLU boxings, so they knew about them. https://www.scalemates.com/kits/kinetic-k48036-f-16a-block-20-mlu--130553 Edited December 3, 2022 by Dave Williams Quote Link to post Share on other sites
punder Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 (edited) What’s interesting is how spoiled and entitled you guys are, given an (apparently, I’m no expert, so rip me a new one) excellent base model from which to work. Of course you can say anything you like within site rules, and I would be the first to criticize a company that tried to bamboozle customers with an inferior product. Edited December 5, 2022 by punder Unnecessary poopiness Quote Link to post Share on other sites
habu2 Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 First World problems..... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Bsin Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 If they molded the reinforced panels in place, people would complain it was too thick! So matter what they do they can't win! As far as I'm concerned, it looks like Kinetic's gave us an amazing model kit! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ijozic Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 (edited) 3 hours ago, punder said: What’s interesting is how spoiled and entitled you guys are, given an (apparently, I’m no expert, so rip me a new one) excellent base model from which to work. Of course you can say anything you like within site rules, and I would be the first to criticize a company that tried to bamboozle customers with an inferior product. But, good grief, this is too much. The vendor didn’t fulfill your wildest dreams so you whine like children. It's a weird omission of a prominent feature that was probably present on the decal options included with the AM boxing, that's all. Especially puzzling, since the company included it in previous boxing so they could have just ordered some more of those PE sets to be included in this one, as well. As it is now, you'd have to get some aftermarket set, like e.g. a potential Eduard exterior PE set, which is not that cheap. If I do get one, I'd probably just make a Cold War Block 25 bird out of it, I think I have some decals somewhere. But, I'll wait to see how it compares to Tamiya (and probably Minibase) as the cockpit detail looks pretty soft, I expected more here. Edited December 3, 2022 by ijozic Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Bsin Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 3 hours ago, habu2 said: First World problems..... WORD! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jenshb Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 11 hours ago, Niels said: Here's a link to a MLU updated RNoAF jet however without strengtheners mounted. This photo is from 2002, the strengtheners started appearing on RNoAF jets a couple of years later from what I have seen. They were gradualy introduced, hence took time to go fleet wide. aeo.jpg photos | F-16.net #690 taken 3 years later by myself, no strengtheners aij.jpg photos | F-16.net Here is a pic of 680 which is one of the decal options - again without strengtheners, taken ~2004ish 680_001.jpg photos | F-16.net By time of retirement, the entire RNoAF fleet had the strengtheners, so again; depending on the timeframe of the aircraft you want to depict, strengtheners are not necessarily installed. None of those photos allow you to see the upper wing root - when I am referring to the strengthening plates, I am including the upper wingroot panel among them, not just the ones on the spine around the fuel cell panels. I am well aware that the additional strengthening plates on the spine aren't compulsory for the MLU, and time dependent, but the plates behind the canopy and the upper wing root should be there for a representative MLU (with some exceptions). And if they were to be included on a photoetched set or vinyl, why not also include the full number of plates? I'd much rather have those added to the kit than magnets so I can swap my weapons on a completed model - that is a pointless gimmick in my book. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jenshb Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 5 hours ago, Bsin said: If they molded the reinforced panels in place, people would complain it was too thick! So matter what they do they can't win! As far as I'm concerned, it looks like Kinetic's gave us an amazing model kit! The plates on the spine are actually quite thick, so photoetch might even be too thin:) Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Crash Test Dummy Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 13 hours ago, Dave Williams said: What’s interesting is that Kinetic included PE plates in one of their previous MLU boxings, so they knew about them. Kinetic also included a PIDS pylon in some of their boxings. So it's even more disappointing to me that Kinetic has tooled this in the past, but for their "new and improved" MLU they left out this out. A PIDS or PIDS+ pylon is not readily available aftermarket. Shawn Hull did a PIDS pylon a decade ago, but that's OOP, I don't know of another. The new boxings are very "generic" missing airframe details and operator specific components. Tamiya may not have included as many weapons in their boxings, but the sprues they did include were correct for the markings in the kits which can't be said about Kinetic. And, Tamiya did have their detail up PE available for those that wanted it and explained how to mount the PE in their kit instructions. 5 hours ago, jenshb said: The plates on the spine are actually quite thick, so photoetch might even be too thin:) The lawnmower blades just ahead of the vertical tail look thicker than the rest and to me they look like they taper to about half thickness at the ends. I know a couple of the aftermarket vinyl sets supply 2 pairs of stickers for these so you stack them to make them look thicker than the other plates. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Raymond Chung Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 Hi everyone, Nice to see all feedback on the new the F-16 kit. For the reinforcement plate, we are working with Cross Delta to provide an updated set for the plate from Block 15 to 32, the material will be in vinyl. The PE type material is not too easy to blend in some curve area, therefore, we gave up the PE concept. As for the reason why we don't offer PE inside the kit (something different from the past), let me take this chance to express our new approach in product development. We used to provide some PE in our kits to enhance or deliver some parts which is too thin to produce in plastic. So, we use PE when it is necessary to replicate the parts. For reinforcement plate type details, it is something like a progressive update on the airframe. So, it is not a fixed details on the subject. So, leave it out from the base kit to maintain the simple production arrangement. And with the Gold Series development, we trend to maintain a pure plastic kit under the Kinetic brand and provide optional accessories. For Kinetic current development policy, we aims to provide an ecosystem to the hobby industry by linking all aftermarket companies together. Unlike other brands, we don't intend to provide everything details in plastic form. We aim to provide the details meets the need of mass majority consumer demand and left the optional details to accessories or aftermarket companies. This will help the hobby industry with more diversify options, leaving more room to other players (decal, resin option, superdetails...etc). At the same time, we can reduce the cost on the tooling and providing better coverage and offering. Like this F-16 kit, we maintain the price at 39.99 at LuckyModel.com where the first 48002 also sell at 39.99 back in 2008. We are considering to create a new line "SkunkModel" to provide a "SuperKit" with resin/3D stuff as well as those option left out from the mainstream edition. We would like to listen more from you. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Raymond Chung Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 47 minutes ago, Crash Test Dummy said: Kinetic also included a PIDS pylon in some of their boxings. So it's even more disappointing to me that Kinetic has tooled this in the past, but for their "new and improved" MLU they left out this out. A PIDS or PIDS+ pylon is not readily available aftermarket. Shawn Hull did a PIDS pylon a decade ago, but that's OOP, I don't know of another. The new boxings are very "generic" missing airframe details and operator specific components. Tamiya may not have included as many weapons in their boxings, but the sprues they did include were correct for the markings in the kits which can't be said about Kinetic. And, Tamiya did have their detail up PE available for those that wanted it and explained how to mount the PE in their kit instructions. The lawnmower blades just ahead of the vertical tail look thicker than the rest and to me they look like they taper to about half thickness at the ends. I know a couple of the aftermarket vinyl sets supply 2 pairs of stickers for these so you stack them to make them look thicker than the other plates. We are considering to offer the parts from the old F-16 parts to meet the need. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Dave Williams Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 Are there any current sources for the FLO fin flash used on late Norwegian F-16s? Vingtor probably did some, but those sheets seem to be sold out. Think it may be on one of the Zotz Vivacious Vipers sheets, but don’t want to buy a whole OOP sheet for just some fin flashes. Want to do #680 during Odyssey Dawn as shown in this photo, but the kit only has the older 338 skv markings. https://www.f-16.net/g3/f-16-photos/album37/album09/680_004 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Mr.T Posted December 4, 2022 Share Posted December 4, 2022 17 hours ago, Raymond Chung said: We are considering to offer the parts from the old F-16 parts to meet the need. Excellent, there are many many decal options pre-MLU for Belgian and Dutch colourful tails as well! Will send the info soon! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
DarkKnight Posted December 4, 2022 Share Posted December 4, 2022 kit bashing, mixing or buying some aftermarket is not a problem. the only real question here is how does it compare to Tamiya re: shape and accuracy Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Crash Test Dummy Posted December 4, 2022 Share Posted December 4, 2022 4 hours ago, DarkKnight said: Spending more than the kit costs kit bashing, mixing or buying some aftermarket to add features Kinetic intentionally chose to exclude is not a problem for me. Fixed it for you, it is a problem for some of us. Aftermarket adds up quick. 3D cockpit decals or even just a PE seat belt set, stiffeners and correct stores & decals could easily pass the $39.99 sticker price Raymond is using. @Raymond Chung Kinetic's approach to the F-16 feels like a step backwards compared to many of Kinetics other recent releases. So far you have two boxing of identical parts that even with all the options in the box still end up being incomplete or wrong for the kit markings. I would trade the MagFire weapons sprue for a kit specific sprue tailored to features specific for the markings in the box. If you can't include magnets, please, just drop MagFire and go back to conventional weapons breakdown. The MagFire weapons assembly looks like enough of a headache, you've made me want to get aftermarket to replace kit components. MagFire is not a selling point, it's a strike against these kits to me. I'm surprised the MagFire sprues made it to release. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
GeneK Posted December 4, 2022 Share Posted December 4, 2022 6 hours ago, DarkKnight said: the only real question here is how does it compare to Tamiya re: shape and accuracy Agree, and since the Meng kit is now becoming more available, it will undoubtedly be be an interesting (hot?) topic. Gene K Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Dave Williams Posted December 4, 2022 Share Posted December 4, 2022 1 hour ago, Crash Test Dummy said: Fixed it for you, it is a problem for some of us. Aftermarket adds up quick. 3D cockpit decals or even just a PE seat belt set, stiffeners and correct stores & decals could easily pass the $39.99 sticker price Raymond is using. @Raymond Chung Kinetic's approach to the F-16 feels like a step backwards compared to many of Kinetics other recent releases. So far you have two boxing of identical parts that even with all the options in the box still end up being incomplete or wrong for the kit markings. I would trade the MagFire weapons sprue for a kit specific sprue tailored to features specific for the markings in the box. If you can't include magnets, please, just drop MagFire and go back to conventional weapons breakdown. The MagFire weapons assembly looks like enough of a headache, you've made me want to get aftermarket to replace kit components. MagFire is not a selling point, it's a strike against these kits to me. I'm surprised the MagFire sprues made it to release. How much does the Tamiya kit add up to? Forgetting the MLU specific stuff because Tamiya doesn’t do a MLU, compare the Kinetic Block 25/42 kit to Tamiya’s Block 25/32 kit. Want seat belts and scale plates for Tamiya? You have to buy a separate PE detail up set from Tamiya. I don’t remember everyone ripping up Tamiya over their kit being incomplete like we’re doing with Kinetic. And the price of the Tamiya kit is around $60 in US shops. As for weapons, what are we actually missing? ALQ-131? Buy the Eduard one. Not every MLU bird always carried ALQ-131 every time since the MLU program started. PIDS pylons? How long were MLU’d aircraft flying before PIDS pylons became a thing? And not everyone carries them. I’m looking at the Norwegian option in the new Kinetic kit, and the weapons options are correct of that aircraft. Even though they commonly carry ALQ-131, there is a photo of the kit marking aircraft taken In Afghanistan showing it carrying wingtip AIM-9L/M, underwing GBU-12s and wing tanks, and and empty centerline pylon. All of those things are in the box. So, the kit isn’t wrong or unbuildable, it may just not have every option for every MLU aircraft during every time period. Like most kits out there, it’s not perfect, but I’ll say it probably a better 1/48 MLU in a box than any other current 1/48 kits. 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.