serendip Posted October 2, 2023 Share Posted October 2, 2023 Hi all, I've changed the title of the topic as I suspect this was not sufficiently clear. Hi all, I have the HPH 1/48 B-52H but the fit is absolutly awful, nose profile is off and I'm losing heart to finish it to be honest. So, plan B is giving up on the HPH kit and getting a couple of Modelcollect 1/72 BUFFs. I'd like to build a pre Phase VI (so no EVS etc.) 'H in SAC NMF and white anti-flash with four Skybolt missles, and a post Phase VI 'G as operated in South East Asia. What I am having difficulty with is which Modelcollect kits had serious fundamental issues and which later kits had these remedied, as I understand it nose profile, leading edge wing profile and a bunch of other issues. Hoping someone can advise which Modelcollect kits to avoid and which have the initial issues resolved. Thanks all, Marc. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Specter1075 Posted October 2, 2023 Share Posted October 2, 2023 I don't have answers for your questions unfortunately, but I am really disheartened to hear about your experience with the HpH. I have one awaiting my attention and given the price, I would have expected it to be better than awful. Disappointed. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Quixote74 Posted October 2, 2023 Share Posted October 2, 2023 Not sure when you refer to "post Phase VI G as operated in Southeast Asia" quite what you mean: Phase VI ECM mods weren't added until well after Vietnam (these include the lateral antennae on the nose and the tail "plug" extension). Technically EVS (the chin bulges) came first, but the programs were so close in timeframe that photos of EVS-only airframes are rare. AFAIK the only Modelcollect BUFFs that had any corrections made were the initial B-52H kit #UA72200 (which has EVS and Phase VI features), and possibly the B-52G #UA72202 (ALCM configuration, also with EVS/Phase VI). If I'm reading your target build list correctly neither of these fit the timeframe you want, so the later boxings of the "early" H (UA72208) and "Linebacker" G (72210) are what you have available. From all I've read even the "corrections" issued to address the major errors in the earliest of these kits did not fix all of their problems, so if your heart is set on an easy and accurate build out of the box you may have a long wait. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Dan Tinklepaugh Posted October 2, 2023 Share Posted October 2, 2023 With no way to sugarcoat, avoid MC at all costs. Big hype, very poor execution. Wrong shapes, sizes, seats, poor instructions/decals, thick but soft plastic. The only kits I’ve purchased over 50 years where I felt I’d been cheated. Italeri kits are challenging but you can get there with effort and the latest releases have awesome decals and instructions to build antennas. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
sigtau Posted October 2, 2023 Share Posted October 2, 2023 5 hours ago, serendip said: Hi all, I've changed the title of the topic as I suspect this was not sufficiently clear. Hi all, I have the HPH 1/48 B-52H but the fit is absolutly awful, nose profile is off and I'm losing heart to finish it to be honest. So, plan B is giving up on the HPH kit and getting a couple of Modelcollect 1/72 BUFFs. I'd like to build a pre Phase VI (so no EVS etc.) 'H in SAC NMF and white anti-flash with four Skybolt missles, and a post Phase VI 'G as operated in South East Asia. What I am having difficulty with is which Modelcollect kits had serious fundamental issues and which later kits had these remedied, as I understand it nose profile, leading edge wing profile and a bunch of other issues. Hoping someone can advise which Modelcollect kits to avoid and which have the initial issues resolved. Thanks all, Marc. The original G release is the kit with the nose issues. The H version was released later and included the corrected nose and tail parts. I have the G kit with the corrected parts, which included the wing root fillets and a new set of flaps. Be careful buying a G kit, there's a good chance it's not the corrected version. The tooling is very meh. MC didn't even bother to tool sniper/lighting pod pylons. And several of the external antennas are missing. Overall, not really a drastic improvement over the old AMT/ERTL/Italeri toolings. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
sigtau Posted October 2, 2023 Share Posted October 2, 2023 Just now, Dan Tinklepaugh said: With no way to sugarcoat, avoid MC at all costs. Big hype, very poor execution. Wrong shapes, sizes, seats, poor instructions/decals, thick but soft plastic. The only kits I’ve purchased over 50 years where I felt I’d been cheated. Italeri kits are challenging but you can get there with effort and the latest releases have awesome decals and instructions to build antennas. Concur, after I bought the MC G release, I was like nope. I decided to buy two Italeri kits + black dog flaps + black dog bomb bay sets. There's also a 3D printed replacement set of H nacelles that replace the undersized italeri (AMT) parts. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
VG 33 Posted October 3, 2023 Share Posted October 3, 2023 Hello I made this one with some level of correction on this Modelcollect B-52G but I am sure you can go further. Patrick http://www.arcforums.com/forums/air/index.php?/topic/310413-modelcollect-b-52g-in-progress/ Quote Link to post Share on other sites
serendip Posted October 3, 2023 Author Share Posted October 3, 2023 18 hours ago, Specter1075 said: I don't have answers for your questions unfortunately, but I am really disheartened to hear about your experience with the HpH. I have one awaiting my attention and given the price, I would have expected it to be better than awful. Disappointed. Hi Spector, I wasn't too happy myself especially considering the price and terrible service at HPH (it took forever to get mine delivered ang many, many e-mails) and moreover I anticipated that this would not be shake and bake. However lower and upper decks simply do not fit getting the U/C bays in place took an enormous amount of work and nose profile as I wrote is simply incorrect. Hopefully I did something completly stupid and this is a perfect kit too build but I doubt it. Sorry. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
serendip Posted October 3, 2023 Author Share Posted October 3, 2023 18 hours ago, Quixote74 said: Not sure when you refer to "post Phase VI G as operated in Southeast Asia" quite what you mean: Phase VI ECM mods weren't added until well after Vietnam (these include the lateral antennae on the nose and the tail "plug" extension). Technically EVS (the chin bulges) came first, but the programs were so close in timeframe that photos of EVS-only airframes are rare. AFAIK the only Modelcollect BUFFs that had any corrections made were the initial B-52H kit #UA72200 (which has EVS and Phase VI features), and possibly the B-52G #UA72202 (ALCM configuration, also with EVS/Phase VI). If I'm reading your target build list correctly neither of these fit the timeframe you want, so the later boxings of the "early" H (UA72208) and "Linebacker" G (72210) are what you have available. From all I've read even the "corrections" issued to address the major errors in the earliest of these kits did not fix all of their problems, so if your heart is set on an easy and accurate build out of the box you may have a long wait. Apologies for the confusion Quixote. I mean the 'G as operated with updated nose profile, EVS bulges, antennae on the nose etc. These AFAIK were operated in SEA and is the type I mean - am I wrong and were these introduced later? The SAC bird would be the early 'H with none of the bulges on the nose and original nose profile. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
serendip Posted October 3, 2023 Author Share Posted October 3, 2023 18 hours ago, sigtau said: The original G release is the kit with the nose issues. The H version was released later and included the corrected nose and tail parts. I have the G kit with the corrected parts, which included the wing root fillets and a new set of flaps. Be careful buying a G kit, there's a good chance it's not the corrected version. The tooling is very meh. MC didn't even bother to tool sniper/lighting pod pylons. And several of the external antennas are missing. Overall, not really a drastic improvement over the old AMT/ERTL/Italeri toolings. Thanks Sigtau, I bought the MAT / ERTL kit years ago - I do recall that one issue was the rear of the fuselage behind the tail was far too narrow (and a host of other issues). Marc. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
serendip Posted October 3, 2023 Author Share Posted October 3, 2023 4 hours ago, VG 33 said: Hello I made this one with some level of correction on this Modelcollect B-52G but I am sure you can go further. Patrick http://www.arcforums.com/forums/air/index.php?/topic/310413-modelcollect-b-52g-in-progress/ Thanks Patrick, I'll surely check out your article this weekend. Marc. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Quixote74 Posted October 4, 2023 Share Posted October 4, 2023 7 hours ago, serendip said: Apologies for the confusion Quixote. I mean the 'G as operated with updated nose profile, EVS bulges, antennae on the nose etc. These AFAIK were operated in SEA and is the type I mean - am I wrong and were these introduced later? The SAC bird would be the early 'H with none of the bulges on the nose and original nose profile. In very simple terms (and to the best of my knowledge), none of the "warts" added to the G were there until well after Vietnam. The EVS and Phase VI ECM were nearly concurrent updates implemented starting in the late 70s (I don't have access to my reference library at the moment or I'd try to give you a more precise date). The G did fly missions in SEA but before any of the airframe mods. If you want your G to have the updates and be a combat veteran, Desert Storm is the era to start. Both ALCM-modified and 'standard' B-52Gs were used in Iraq/Kuwait, starting with the "Secret Squirrel" C-ALCM mission on the first night of the war and with just about every variety of "dumb" ordnance dropped by the time hostilities ended. Virtually all wore the 3-color 'strategic' camouflage scheme (often erroneously called Euro I due to its general similarity), with a handful in overall 36081 gray and one of the Squirrels (El Lobo II) in the "late-SIOP" scheme - same upper colors as the SEA era, but a white belly and the nose (only) in 36081. Non-combat you could add the original SIOP scheme (white nose & belly with 3-color tan/green uppers), or the post-SAC overall 36118 gray (as still worn by the H fleet). The Gs did not last very long after Desert Storm, being retired en masse as part of the "peace dividend." Quote Link to post Share on other sites
serendip Posted October 8, 2023 Author Share Posted October 8, 2023 All, Seeing as opinion on the MC B-52's is unanimously (and I suspect accurately) negative on pretty much their entire range, I'm now thinking of the AMT/Italeri Early B-52G (kit number 1451). Finding reviews is challenging to say the least, what I have found is that the later bypass engines were out of scale (too small), not sure if this is valid for the earlier engines featured on this kit however and that the rear fuselage is too narrow. Again, any feedback would be much appreciated. Thanks, Marc. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Quixote74 Posted October 8, 2023 Share Posted October 8, 2023 4 minutes ago, serendip said: All, Seeing as opinion on the MC B-52's is unanimously (and I suspect accurately) negative on pretty much their entire range, I'm now thinking of the AMT/Italeri Early B-52G (kit number 1451). Finding reviews is challenging to say the least, what I have found is that the later bypass engines were out of scale (too small), not sure if this is valid for the earlier engines featured on this kit however and that the rear fuselage is too narrow. Again, any feedback would be much appreciated. Thanks, Marc. I don't have any of the Modelcollect kits, but based on build reviews I'm not sure it's really worse than the AMT, IMHO it's just a difference in what issues need correction/improvement. The TF-33s on AMT's H are indeed undersized, but AFAIK the J57s on the G kits are fine. The rear fuselage shape is somewhat "off" but it would take a major rebuild for minimal return to correct, so I think most leave well enough alone there (the pre-Phase VI "short tail" would also make this less noticeable). The "early G" also has the advantage of not having its nose contours marred by gaping trenches for EVS and (poorly done) Phase VI antennae. If an early G and an early H from AMT toolings are your goal, two of the early G is probably your best bet with replacement engines and tail gun for the H (I think some boxings of the G may include the H tail gun but can't keep track of which, with all the Italeri re-releases). You'll also need to make several minor changes to the airframe to backdate accurately, mostly removing various antennae. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
serendip Posted October 8, 2023 Author Share Posted October 8, 2023 Great and thanks Q! Reassuring to hear that the J57's on the G's are OK. I think your plan of action makes sense - get two G's, update one to an 'H. Any idea who produces aftermarket parts for the engines and tail area? Marc. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Quixote74 Posted October 8, 2023 Share Posted October 8, 2023 1 hour ago, serendip said: Any idea who produces aftermarket parts for the engines and tail area? No idea about current availability, likely a 3D print option will be your best bet for the TF-33s. As noted above, a spare AMT/Italeri H tail gun is likely to be available. Some kit contents research (or a want ad) may be needed - or I've seen ebay sellers part out the sprues so that's also a possibility (AMT and Italeri molds are identical and the tail parts are modular between G and H). I know DB Models (long OOB) made TF-33s and an H tail gun as part of their conversion for the Monogram D, but AFAIK it's never been reissued (the tail would not be usable for the AMT kit as it has a significantly different shape). I believe Airwaves ended up with most of the DB molds/masters - I know for sure they've at times released G/H wing tanks from the DB molds (accessories for the Monogram G/H conversions, now desirable as replacements for Modelcollect). Buffmaster (current status unknown) marketed several upgrade & conversion sets for both AMT and Monogram, which I know included up-sized TF-33s but not sure about tail gun parts. Generally their work was not the best quality with regard to fit/accuracy, as well as the owner reportedly having some reliability issues (the parts I have of theirs were picked up from a Sprue Brothers clearance). Quote Link to post Share on other sites
serendip Posted October 9, 2023 Author Share Posted October 9, 2023 Thanks again Q, A lot has been made of the tapered section aft of the tail on the AMT kits - to me it seems relatively accurate however - any thoughts on that? Indeed I also heard Buffmaster AM parts were absolutly atrocious - again any input much appreciated. I'll do some more searching coming weekend. Thanks for the feedback! Marc. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
serendip Posted October 9, 2023 Author Share Posted October 9, 2023 I'll better (try) to change the name of the topic to a comparison between AMT / Italeri and Modelcollect to keep things clear. Having a hard time finding a simple line up of pros and cons between the two and shared inaccuracies. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Quixote74 Posted October 9, 2023 Share Posted October 9, 2023 1 hour ago, serendip said: A lot has been made of the tapered section aft of the tail on the AMT kits - to me it seems relatively accurate however - any thoughts on that? Indeed I also heard Buffmaster AM parts were absolutly atrocious - again any input much appreciated. There is a significant difference between AMT's and Monogram's interpretations of the aft fuselage/tail gun area, but I'm not entirely convinced AMT is the one that got this wrong. Going from memory (and a couple of online photos) since I don't have access to my stash at the moment, I believe Monogram's tail gun section is wider and doesn't taper quite as much from the sides (top of fuselage being virtually straight, and both kits having similar up-sweep of the lower keel line). Keeping in mind Monogram's kit is for a D-model, it was designed for the manned tail gun position with quad .50s but no Phase VI "plug" (since that change was only on the G/H, and hadn't happened yet when the kit was designed). My suspicion is that since they had to accommodate space for a gunner figure & (basic) seat, glazing, and a multipart 'positionable' turret, they may have fattened up the width slightly at the gun end (part of the kitmaker's art from the first days of anything but solid models). Drawing a straight line from this slightly increased width to the forward point where the ventral and lateral taper begins mean the 'cheat' doesn't become obvious unless and until you want to add the Phase VI plug - which has a 40" constant cross section, between the point just forward of the gun (otherwise in the same position, just manned remotely in the G/H) and the trailing edge of the rudder. The only reason I noticed it at all is that I have DB's G conversion for the Monogram, which although otherwise excellent, missed the Phase VI plug. Comparing the AMT and DB parts made the width difference really apparent. AMT was always using the "late" G/H variants as their starting point, so their aft fuselage includes the Phase VI plug as a separate part and seems reasonably accurate compared to photos of the real thing. If anything it may be slightly too lean where Monogram is too fat, but if you aren't comparing the two directly then either one is acceptable for all but the Nth Degree Rivet Counters (IMHO). For general comparison in profile (though cross-section is what seems most critical): AMT/Italeri Monogram NB-52B (same overall profile as the D, just with the gun turret faired over) The Buffmaster parts I have are a mixed bag - generally, if there is an alternative elsewhere that would be preferred but there are some parts they offered that are otherwise Unobtanium. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
USAFsparkchaser Posted October 11, 2023 Share Posted October 11, 2023 (edited) Nigel in England made some updates for the Model Collect kits, check out his youtube Edited October 11, 2023 by USAFsparkchaser Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Rob de Bie Posted October 11, 2023 Share Posted October 11, 2023 On 10/8/2023 at 7:06 PM, serendip said: Any idea who produces aftermarket parts for the engines and tail area? Lone Star Models (Mike West) did a TF-33 engine set too: https://www.scalemates.com/kits/lone-star-models-lsm720580-b-52h-engine-upgrade-set--1189909 From memory it's visibly larger than the old DB Models TF-33 set. Rob Quote Link to post Share on other sites
serendip Posted October 11, 2023 Author Share Posted October 11, 2023 8 hours ago, Rob de Bie said: Lone Star Models (Mike West) did a TF-33 engine set too: https://www.scalemates.com/kits/lone-star-models-lsm720580-b-52h-engine-upgrade-set--1189909 From memory it's visibly larger than the old DB Models TF-33 set. Rob Bedankt Rob! I'll try to hunt down a review and share. Marc. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
serendip Posted October 11, 2023 Author Share Posted October 11, 2023 On 10/9/2023 at 9:56 PM, Quixote74 said: There is a significant difference between AMT's and Monogram's interpretations of the aft fuselage/tail gun area, but I'm not entirely convinced AMT is the one that got this wrong. Going from memory (and a couple of online photos) since I don't have access to my stash at the moment, I believe Monogram's tail gun section is wider and doesn't taper quite as much from the sides (top of fuselage being virtually straight, and both kits having similar up-sweep of the lower keel line). Keeping in mind Monogram's kit is for a D-model, it was designed for the manned tail gun position with quad .50s but no Phase VI "plug" (since that change was only on the G/H, and hadn't happened yet when the kit was designed). My suspicion is that since they had to accommodate space for a gunner figure & (basic) seat, glazing, and a multipart 'positionable' turret, they may have fattened up the width slightly at the gun end (part of the kitmaker's art from the first days of anything but solid models). Drawing a straight line from this slightly increased width to the forward point where the ventral and lateral taper begins mean the 'cheat' doesn't become obvious unless and until you want to add the Phase VI plug - which has a 40" constant cross section, between the point just forward of the gun (otherwise in the same position, just manned remotely in the G/H) and the trailing edge of the rudder. The only reason I noticed it at all is that I have DB's G conversion for the Monogram, which although otherwise excellent, missed the Phase VI plug. Comparing the AMT and DB parts made the width difference really apparent. AMT was always using the "late" G/H variants as their starting point, so their aft fuselage includes the Phase VI plug as a separate part and seems reasonably accurate compared to photos of the real thing. If anything it may be slightly too lean where Monogram is too fat, but if you aren't comparing the two directly then either one is acceptable for all but the Nth Degree Rivet Counters (IMHO). For general comparison in profile (though cross-section is what seems most critical): AMT/Italeri Monogram NB-52B (same overall profile as the D, just with the gun turret faired over) The Buffmaster parts I have are a mixed bag - generally, if there is an alternative elsewhere that would be preferred but there are some parts they offered that are otherwise Unobtanium. Thanks Q for explaining - reassuring that the AMT / Italeri kit may be reasonably accurate after all. Marc. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
serendip Posted October 11, 2023 Author Share Posted October 11, 2023 I'm also wondering if the Hound dog was used operationally by SAC on the B-52H. I've found one picture (below) of a Hound Dogs under an H and assuming that by definition would be SAc but suspect this would be a rarity: https://history.nasa.gov/SP-468/ch12-3.htm Thanks, Quote Link to post Share on other sites
serendip Posted October 11, 2023 Author Share Posted October 11, 2023 On 10/3/2023 at 1:17 AM, Quixote74 said: Not sure when you refer to "post Phase VI G as operated in Southeast Asia" quite what you mean: Phase VI ECM mods weren't added until well after Vietnam (these include the lateral antennae on the nose and the tail "plug" extension). Technically EVS (the chin bulges) came first, but the programs were so close in timeframe that photos of EVS-only airframes are rare. AFAIK the only Modelcollect BUFFs that had any corrections made were the initial B-52H kit #UA72200 (which has EVS and Phase VI features), and possibly the B-52G #UA72202 (ALCM configuration, also with EVS/Phase VI). If I'm reading your target build list correctly neither of these fit the timeframe you want, so the later boxings of the "early" H (UA72208) and "Linebacker" G (72210) are what you have available. From all I've read even the "corrections" issued to address the major errors in the earliest of these kits did not fix all of their problems, so if your heart is set on an easy and accurate build out of the box you may have a long wait. HI Q, And thanks again for the feedback. So if I understand correctly the initial B-52H kit #UA72200 and possibly the B-52G #UA72202 were the only two MC kit to have been corrected. I'll see if I can find the kit numbers of the corrected versions of these kits? I'm planning to build a G or H with Hound Dogs although I'm not sure the 'H was equipped with Hound Dogs operationally. The plan is a SAC jet in NMF with white anti flash undersides. Marc. 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.