1/48 F-86A: it's almost here...

[Sabrejet]

5 hours ago, BWDenver said:

Correct, the history from WADC was dated March 1958, so it would not cover the MB seas as they went into the airframes in the early to mid 60's.  Very possible they are referring to the manual vs auto seats.  It also covers the first pilot to "voluntarily" eject out of an F-86, one Lt Robert Farley, 29 August 1949.

 

I say voluntarily because there was an involuntary ejection on crash landing.  On 18 July 1949 one Lt O'Leary had attempted to eject, but the canopy failed to clear the airframe.  On crash landing the canopy was released, firing the catapult as the aircraft disintegrated and burned.  It did not go well for the Lt...

 

The early systems in the F-86 had more than a few "issues", as did the other early ejection seats...

 

Farley's ejection was covered in Flying Safety magazine at the time; it was quite an ordeal for him.

[dai phan]

Hello all,

 

I am building this kit and you can see my thread on ARC. I notice the gun panel backing plates prevent the outer plates from sitting flush with the fuse. I had to remove these back plates in order for the outside panels to be flushed with the fuse. I know some had built the kit and I wonder if I did something wrong? Unless I do massive trimmings of the outside panels there is no way they could fit with the back plates in place? Dai 

 

CLEAR PROP! F-86A 1/48 - In-Progress Pics - ARC Discussion Forums

Edited November 16, 2024 by dai phan

[CF104]

16 hours ago, dai phan said:

Hello all,

 

I am building this kit and you can see my thread on ARC. I notice the gun panel backing plates prevent the outer plates from sitting flush with the fuse. I had to remove these back plates in order for the outside panels to be flushed with the fuse. I know some had built the kit and I wonder if I did something wrong? Unless I do massive trimmings of the outside panels there is no way they could fit with the back plates in place? Dai 

 

CLEAR PROP! F-86A 1/48 - In-Progress Pics - ARC Discussion Forums

 

As nice as the kit is, I feel it's over engineered in some places. I'm a firm believer of test fitting before gluing and found the gun port panel will not fit with the backing piece if  installed per the instructions. Therefore I omitted the backing piece and only installed the gun port panel. The backing piece looks like it's meant for the later open gun port panel. Weird placement of the gun port panel and its associated panel lines as well. Lots of close seam line filling and rescribing to get the gun port area to look correct.

 

Cheers,

 

John

[dai phan]

On 11/17/2024 at 11:43 AM, CF104 said:

 

As nice as the kit is, I feel it's over engineered in some places. I'm a firm believer of test fitting before gluing and found the gun port panel will not fit with the backing piece if  installed per the instructions. Therefore I omitted the backing piece and only installed the gun port panel. The backing piece looks like it's meant for the later open gun port panel. Weird placement of the gun port panel and its associated panel lines as well. Lots of close seam line filling and rescribing to get the gun port area to look correct.

 

Cheers,

 

John

Hi all,

 

Here are my thoughts so far. The kit is way over engineered. More parts does not equal more details. The speed brake comes with 3 parts per halve and this can be easily molded into the fuselage. With 3 parts you have to clean up the seams and that does not add any additional details to the kit. The upper wings you have to glue in the slat bases and this requires cleaning up the seams resulting loss of fine surface details. Again this could be easily molded in one piece like on the lower surface. Why on earth the seam line on the dorsal fin ends on the SURFACE on the right side? This mean seam clean up and loss of details. The appalling thing is the 2 piece flaps and airelons. The seams are on the SURFACE rather than at the trailing edges. This means seams clean up and detail loss. The fuselage halves are comprised of 2 haves and 2 inserts. This means there are 8 additional seams to clean up rather than one single seam if the halves are joined together in 2 pieces. I think the rationale is prevent detail loss of the center section but this in my opinion is way more work than needed be. I am just an average modeler and I just want to provide my perspective on this kit. I do not understand the rationales in engineering of this kit. Dai

Edited December 27, 2024 by dai phan

[brahio]

I hope the info is useful for those wishing to build the model. 

Quinta Studio will start selling two sets next week. One set will be the regular one with decals only and the second will be an extended one with additional 3D-printed resin part for the dashboard and Mark 18 gunsight.

Regular

Extended

[ya-gabor]

One more extra for the Clear Prop! 48th scale F-86A Sabre.

One of the benefits of the Plastiková Zima 2024 show last Saturday was that the December releases were already available.

 

The fact that the Czech company did do a photoetch, and is planning some other aftermarkets for the Clear Prop! F-86A Sabre was a bit of a surprise. Months ago the company boss was telling everyone that Clear Prop! is not a manufacturer for whom they would consider doing aftermarkets. At the time I think this was in response for Czech modellers asking for photoetch (or anything else) for the Clear Prop! MiG-23 kits. Well something surely changed in the Obrnice HQ and so the first photoetch was available last Saturday.  

 

I was looking forward to it, but in the end it is a mixed bag.   : (  : (   : (

 

The overenthusiastic designer based the instrument panel on the original found in the Smithsonian Museum. The only problem is that in the past 60 or so years some of the paints degraded. So the museum a/c on display has all the instrument dials with strong yellow instead of white markings. Originally in the 1950’s they were white! On the etching they are yellow.   : (  : (  The instrument faces are glossed over as a very bulbous lens. They should be of course a completely flat glass surface. But anyway overall the instrument panel is given as a very flat two dimensional photoetch panel. In comparison to this there is already available true 3D instrument panel from Quinta (see above).

From what I can see the period ejection canopy/seat firing handle was yellow. On the etching it is given as red. (No problem repainting them in any colour we want) Elbow rest should be black. The rear view mirror is of wrong shape. A considerable area of the second etching is taken up with the inner surface details of the moving slats. How much of it is visible in reality? While some obvious details which would have been a perfect candidate for photoetch are simply completely ignored. Oh well. The list of mistakes is unfortunately fairly long.

 

Doing the intricate shape of the air brakes from photoetch is, in my opinion is past its time, by about 20 or so years. Even the plastic parts would be better and easier to use, but there are some 3D printed versions available by now with far superior details.

 

But on the plus side I did get few parts for which I was looking for and they on their own were worth the set. To scratch build them would have been not so easy and very time consuming!

 

Best regards

Gabor

[Jetdog]

Check out the upcoming decals for the Clear Prop kit from Fundekals!  An All Weather Flying Division F-86A!!!   Note that the F-86A was flown out of Wright Patterson, not Clinton County.  The All Weather Flying Center was transferred from Clinton County back to WPAFB in late 1948, and operations for all weather flying test were returned to Wright Patterson at that time.  In addition to the F-86, the All Weather Flying Division operated the T-33A, F-94, F-89, B-45 (briefly until that plane crashed) and other aircraft in similar markings out of Wright Pat.  I am doing further research into these aircraft and units- if anybody has info to share,please do!

 

 

[Motty]

On 12/7/2024 at 1:58 AM, Jetdog said:

Check out the upcoming decals for the Clear Prop kit from Fundekals!  An All Weather Flying Division F-86A!!!   Note that the F-86A was flown out of Wright Patterson, not Clinton County.  The All Weather Flying Center was transferred from Clinton County back to WPAFB in late 1948, and operations for all weather flying test were returned to Wright Patterson at that time.  In addition to the F-86, the All Weather Flying Division operated the T-33A, F-94, F-89, B-45 (briefly until that plane crashed) and other aircraft in similar markings out of Wright Pat.  I am doing further research into these aircraft and units- if anybody has info to share,please do!

 

 

 

Wow, that AWFC one has me hooked.

 

Do you have any info or pics on which version of A-model it might be? i.e. Can the Clear Prop kit be used as-is, or would I need to wait for another boxing?

Edit: Where did you find the sheet? I can't see it mentioned or shown on the Fundekals site.

 

Many thanks.

 

Cheers,

Motty.

Edited December 7, 2024 by Motty

[Jetdog]

Sheet hasn't been released yet.  Hopefully soon!   49-1014 is a F-86A-5-NA, so the first release of the clear prop F-86A kit is the one to use. 

 

 

[Motty]

26 minutes ago, Jetdog said:

Sheet hasn't been released yet.  Hopefully soon!   49-1014 is a F-86A-5-NA, so the first release of the clear prop F-86A kit is the one to use. 

 

 

 

Awesome. Thanks very much for the info and image.

Cheers,

Motty.

[Sabrejet]

5 hours ago, Jetdog said:

Sheet hasn't been released yet.  Hopefully soon!   49-1014 is a F-86A-5-NA, so the first release of the clear prop F-86A kit is the one to use. 

 

 

 

It gets better, in terms of options: 49-1014 was delivered to the AWFC as an F-86A-5 but by the time of the photo above it had been modified to F-86A-6/7 spec. So in fact you can do either version. It was at Wright Patterson until June 1956.

[Motty]

15 minutes ago, Sabrejet said:

It gets better, in terms of options: 49-1014 was delivered to the AWFC as an F-86A-5 but by the time of the photo above it had been modified to F-86A-6/7 spec. So in fact you can do either version. It was at Wright Patterson until June 1956.

Nice thanks for the added info.

I don't suppose you might know if Clear Prop might inclue these markings in one of their releases would you? 😉

Cheers,

Motty.

[Sabrejet]

29 minutes ago, Motty said:

Nice thanks for the added info.

I don't suppose you might know if Clear Prop might inclue these markings in one of their releases would you? 😉

Cheers,

Motty.

 

I don't think it will. 

[Motty]

18 minutes ago, Sabrejet said:

 

I don't think it will. 

No worries. Thanks again.

 

Cheers,

Motty.

[serendip]

On 11/24/2024 at 1:52 PM, brahio said:

I hope the info is useful for those wishing to build the model. 

Quinta Studio will start selling two sets next week. One set will be the regular one with decals only and the second will be an extended one with additional 3D-printed resin part for the dashboard and Mark 18 gunsight.

Regular

Extended

 Hi,

Are you affiliated with Quinta?

[brahio]

22 hours ago, serendip said:

Are you affiliated with Quinta?

Hi,

I'm one of Quinta's designer.

[serendip]

1 hour ago, brahio said:

Hi,

I'm one of Quinta's designer.

OK, thanks for the feedback - Marc.

[dai phan]

On 12/6/2024 at 9:15 AM, ya-gabor said:

One more extra for the Clear Prop! 48th scale F-86A Sabre.

One of the benefits of the Plastiková Zima 2024 show last Saturday was that the December releases were already available.

 

The fact that the Czech company did do a photoetch, and is planning some other aftermarkets for the Clear Prop! F-86A Sabre was a bit of a surprise. Months ago the company boss was telling everyone that Clear Prop! is not a manufacturer for whom they would consider doing aftermarkets. At the time I think this was in response for Czech modellers asking for photoetch (or anything else) for the Clear Prop! MiG-23 kits. Well something surely changed in the Obrnice HQ and so the first photoetch was available last Saturday.  

 

I was looking forward to it, but in the end it is a mixed bag.   : (  : (   : (

 

The overenthusiastic designer based the instrument panel on the original found in the Smithsonian Museum. The only problem is that in the past 60 or so years some of the paints degraded. So the museum a/c on display has all the instrument dials with strong yellow instead of white markings. Originally in the 1950’s they were white! On the etching they are yellow.   : (  : (  The instrument faces are glossed over as a very bulbous lens. They should be of course a completely flat glass surface. But anyway overall the instrument panel is given as a very flat two dimensional photoetch panel. In comparison to this there is already available true 3D instrument panel from Quinta (see above).

From what I can see the period ejection canopy/seat firing handle was yellow. On the etching it is given as red. (No problem repainting them in any colour we want) Elbow rest should be black. The rear view mirror is of wrong shape. A considerable area of the second etching is taken up with the inner surface details of the moving slats. How much of it is visible in reality? While some obvious details which would have been a perfect candidate for photoetch are simply completely ignored. Oh well. The list of mistakes is unfortunately fairly long.

 

Doing the intricate shape of the air brakes from photoetch is, in my opinion is past its time, by about 20 or so years. Even the plastic parts would be better and easier to use, but there are some 3D printed versions available by now with far superior details.

 

But on the plus side I did get few parts for which I was looking for and they on their own were worth the set. To scratch build them would have been not so easy and very time consuming!

 

Best regards

Gabor

I bought this set just for the underside of the slats. Wonder if that will make a big difference at all. Dai 

[Scooby]

On 12/6/2024 at 7:15 AM, ya-gabor said:

One more extra for the Clear Prop! 48th scale F-86A Sabre.

One of the benefits of the Plastiková Zima 2024 show last Saturday was that the December releases were already available.

 

The fact that the Czech company did do a photoetch, and is planning some other aftermarkets for the Clear Prop! F-86A Sabre was a bit of a surprise. Months ago the company boss was telling everyone that Clear Prop! is not a manufacturer for whom they would consider doing aftermarkets. At the time I think this was in response for Czech modellers asking for photoetch (or anything else) for the Clear Prop! MiG-23 kits. Well something surely changed in the Obrnice HQ and so the first photoetch was available last Saturday.  

 

I was looking forward to it, but in the end it is a mixed bag.   : (  : (   : (

 

The overenthusiastic designer based the instrument panel on the original found in the Smithsonian Museum. The only problem is that in the past 60 or so years some of the paints degraded. So the museum a/c on display has all the instrument dials with strong yellow instead of white markings. Originally in the 1950’s they were white! On the etching they are yellow.   : (  : (  The instrument faces are glossed over as a very bulbous lens. They should be of course a completely flat glass surface. But anyway overall the instrument panel is given as a very flat two dimensional photoetch panel. In comparison to this there is already available true 3D instrument panel from Quinta (see above).

From what I can see the period ejection canopy/seat firing handle was yellow. On the etching it is given as red. (No problem repainting them in any colour we want) Elbow rest should be black. The rear view mirror is of wrong shape. A considerable area of the second etching is taken up with the inner surface details of the moving slats. How much of it is visible in reality? While some obvious details which would have been a perfect candidate for photoetch are simply completely ignored. Oh well. The list of mistakes is unfortunately fairly long.

 

Doing the intricate shape of the air brakes from photoetch is, in my opinion is past its time, by about 20 or so years. Even the plastic parts would be better and easier to use, but there are some 3D printed versions available by now with far superior details.

 

But on the plus side I did get few parts for which I was looking for and they on their own were worth the set. To scratch build them would have been not so easy and very time consuming!

 

Best regards

Gabor

Radium was used on instruments up to the 60s, although I know we still had it in the late 80s on military aircraft. So I’d debate the instrument dials could have yellow markings.

[ya-gabor]

As mentioned before the radioactive „glowing” paint used for instrument dials with time (decades) changes to distinct yellowish colour. While initially they were perfectly white. So for a period cockpit white dials would be needed.

Here is a close up of the Edu painted instrument panel for the Clear Prop! F-86A kit in 48 th scale. It has yellow dials and that strange bulging drop of gloss over the instruments.

In February next year another photoetch will be released, this time for the AirBrick Sabre. The instrument panel colours were changed to white, just as the firing handle to yellow. Have to add that on very few period images there are red firing handles can be seen just as yellow.

 

Best wishes for Xmas to everyone around the worlds! And in hope for a peaceful new year, or should I say peace in new year?

 

Best regards

Gabor

[dai phan]

Hi all,

 

After much thoughts I am going to ask Duncan who has direct connection in designing this kit. But others who have built this kit can chime in also. My project is almost completed and I look forward in having this fine kit on my shelves. However I am rather very disappointed in the engineering of the kit. I find it to be very unconventional and defies logical thinking. These are some issues I have encountered on my build:

 

1. The gun panel inserts do not follow the actual panel lines. It makes sense to have them match the panel lines so there are no seams to clean up resulting loss of fine details. Rather they are away and after cleaning up the seams, all the beautiful details like fine rivets are lost. 

 

2. The slat bases need to be glued to the wings. Why can't they be molded in as by installing the slat bases you have to clean up the seams resulting in loss of fine details that I think the best of all the kits I have built. 

 

3. The vertical tail, flaps, ailerons are joined together with seam lines end on the surface rather than at leading/trailing edges. Again this requires clean up and loss of fine details. The fuselage at the tail pipe ends on the surface and it is impossible to clean up the seams without ruining the tiny raised details near the tail pipe. 

 

4. The bottom of the fuse has 2 inserts (front and back). Why can't the fuselage end with both complete halves to minimize clean up? With 2 inserts you have 8 additional seams to clean. 

 

5. The intake tip and the nose piece join away from the actual panel line. The gap because of the curve does not go together well. These pieces can be easily designed to mate at the correct straight circular panel line that minimizes clean up. 

 

There are more but these are the main ones. This kit has the most beautiful fine details I have ever seen. I find it really painful to wipe away these fine details when the seams are right in the center :(. I really hate to complain because I have been waiting for the A for ages. Thank you CP/Duncan for making my wish come true. But I do not understand why the kit is engineered this way. I am sorry if I offended any one. Dai 

Edited December 31, 2024 by dai phan

[Jetdog]

Duncan did not design the kit itself.  He contributed all the research to Clear Prop that went into making the kit accurate based on the real thing. 

[dai phan]

39 minutes ago, Jetdog said:

Duncan did not design the kit itself.  He contributed all the research to Clear Prop that went into making the kit accurate based on the real thing. 

Now that makes more sense. As Ducan an expert modeler (I have seen his projects) I simply cannot see how Duncan can design an anti-logic kit this way. Dai 

[Dr. Jones]

On 9/30/2024 at 7:09 AM, BWDenver said:

A model release is an interesting study in human nature.

 

A company fills a void with something that is actually new, and not another P-51 or Me-109.  There is an initial blush of excitement, then acrimony because they missed a detail or in this case offer aftermarket choices.

 

The complaining about lack of detail in a kit is similar to our choice of movies.  We want more action.  In the 60’s a little action and good dialog would suffice.  Today the option is a John Wick movie with an absurd amount of action and bad language. 

 

In the 60’s people were happy to get a Monogram Me-109 or F4F.  Now something approaching a Model Factory Hiro kit is the desired standard.   But people would pale at the price of $150 USD for a 1/43 kit, if you’re lucky to get one before they sell out.

 

Detail in a kit costs money.  The manufacturer has to figure out the amount of detail VS expected sales.  Get it wrong and you lose money.  Adding multiple holes in the kit for parts adds to the cost.  At the end of the day these guys are doing it to make a living.  Be they large like Revell, or small like CP, the goal it to make money to fund the next project.

 

I’ll probably never build a 1/48 F-86A.  I have way too many other “want to build” projects.  But I’m happy to see they did one, and even happier to see they made the extra effort to do multiple seats.

 

One of the reasons I started a seat thread in the jet Modeling forum was to give those who want to go the extra mile an opportunity to do a jewel box of a cockpit.  Most folks will build the kit right out of the box, and have fun doing it.  A few will make the extra effort to really do the cockpit.  But thanks to CP, you get the opportunity to do an A…

This is undoubtedly the best post that I've read on this thread.  Hobbyists have for years begged, pleaded, prayed and offer to sell their first borns to have an F-86A in any scale (the Matchbox 1/72 offering excluded).  The Clear Props F-86A is a fine plastic model kit and I'm grateful to have the opportunity to finally build one.  The model is not perfect; its imperfections are minor and easy to work around.  Many thanks to Clear Props for an outstanding piece of work.

[GeneK]

On 1/1/2025 at 10:26 PM, Dr. Jones said:

[BWDenver's post] s undoubtedly the best post that I've read on this thread.  

Good post, of course, but his study of human nature in this case is limited to a very small sample. The yeas greatly outweigh the nay.

 

Gene K

Edited January 8 by GeneK