Jump to content

1/72 RHVP RF-8 Conversion


Recommended Posts

Julien,

Yes, I have it, and it is BAD, very bad, do not waste time or money on it. The box will tell you can use it with the Academy kit, but it came out well over a year before that kit was released and it is not compatible with it. It was based on one of the Hasegawa clones (Ace, Revell/Kangnam, ESCI/Italeri) and suffers all of those kits problems, the major one being that they are all way too wide at the canopy rails, even more so than the Hasegawa kit. Another problem with those kits, as well as with the Hasegawa kit, is they are all slightly too short in fuselage height, but since the fuselage length is also slightly too short, they sort of cancel each other out and look reasonably OK in profile. RVHP made an attempt to correct the fuselage height problem (while ignoring the length problem) but did so by adding to the bottom of the fuselage. The result is that the RVHP fuselage sweeps up at both nose and tail in a flagrantly incorrect way. The vertical stab, which is a separate piece, is also incorrect: about a scale foot of height was added to the trailing edge of the stab, effectively raking it forward. If done out of the box, it will not, in my opinion pass the First Test: it will not look like an RF-8 Crusader, and overall, its problems are such that it would be easier to scratchbuild your own conversion of the kit of your choice than to try to correct all its problems.

You did a masterful job on your Hasegawa F-8C conversion, if you want to do an RF-8 based on that kit again, try to get hold of a Ventura RF-8 conversion, which was designed for it. It does not address the difference between the E and RF radome/nose cone, but is a much better starting point than RVHP.

Cheers,

Tom

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Stef,

Actually, RVHP does some very good stuff, for instance the two seater A-7 conversions are good in both 1/72 and 1/48 and the 1/72 FJ-3 full kit is also good. With the 1/72nd RF-8 conversion, though, it is a case of the old computer saying "GIGO": Garbage In, Garbage Out. If you base a conversion on a poor kit of a subject (ESCI/Italeri, Ace or Kangnam/Revell F-8), you are not going to get a good result. Mr Vele is not alone, almost everything in the way of conversions for the F-8 in 1/72nd scale was based on the Hasegawa kit on the assumption that it was the best available kit in the scale (prior to Academy), but it wasn't - the Heller kit was, and is still not all that far behind Academy (and ahead in some respects) in spite of its age.

Cheers

Tom

Edited by Superheat
Link to post
Share on other sites

Julien, I've not built the RVHP RF8 conversion, but have completed the Final Touch RF-8 at http://www.modelingmadness.com/reviews/viet/mansrf8.htm , which is closely related to the Ventura conversion that another poster mentions.

It's a lot of work - and I thought I was lucky to get it completed as well as I did.

Shame on Academy and Hasegawa for not producing kit RF-8s, it played an important role in Veitnam and Cuba.

See you at SMW 2006, Tim

Link to post
Share on other sites

Julien (and anyone else considering the RVHP RF-8 in 1/72)

I am going to answer your PM question here, since there might be one or two others interested. First, here is your question from the PM, for the benefit of others:

I have now got my hands on both the Falcon Vacform conversion and the RVHP one.You were right the resin one is not up to scratch at all.

What I was thinking about is grafting the resin forward fuselarge onto the hasegawa kit in the same way you do with the vac form, this would basically keep the rest of the airframe as per hasegawa.

Although feasible, that would take some work, since thre are two major problems with that approach: 1) the different depths of the fuselages, and 2) the difference in width between the Hasegawa canopy and the RVHP fuselage. Remember I said that Hasegawa's kit is slightly to small in height AND length, so they effectively cancel each other out visually and it looks OK. RVHP though, tried to correct the height problem but did so by adding on to the bottom of the fuselage and did not address the length at all. He also left the intake and tailpipe alone, so the bottom of his fuselage sweeps up at both nose and tail. Here are some photos that illustrate the problem.

First is a side shot of the RVHP fuselage:

DSCN3184sm.jpg

Note the curvature of the fuselage bottom.

Next, the Hasegawa fuselage above the RVHP:

DSCN4442sm.jpg

Compare the contours of the two fuselage bottoms: Hasegawa is correct. (This shot also illustrates the totally bogus shape of the vertical stabiliser supplied with the RVHP conversion)

Next, a close up of the wheel well area, note the difference in height of the wheel wells (the grey fuselage is actually the Kangnam/Revell kit here, but in this area it is a pretty close copy of Hasegawa).

DSCN3182sm.jpg

You would have to reduce the height of the RVHP forward fuselage to match the Hasegawa kit.

Next, a shot (not a great one, hand held in low light so depth of field is a problem) to further illustrate the height problem, the Hasegawa fuselage matched to the RVHP:

DSCN4454b.jpg

This again illustrates the scope of work necessary to mate the RVHP forward to the Hasgawa aft fuselage. Could it be done, yes. Is it worth it? Not in my opinion, especially in light of the next problem, the canopy area, which will be addressed in Part Two, this is the end of Part One.

Tom

Link to post
Share on other sites

On to the canopy problems. The width issue is illustrated in this head-on shot of the Hasegawa L and RVHP R fuselages joined.

DSCN4458b.jpg

Note the difference in width and shape of the aft canopy bulkhead

To illustrate what RVHP actually based their conversion on, here is a similar comparison of the Hasegawa R and Kangnam L fuselages, note the similarities to the above:

DSCN4459sm.jpg

Next, here is an overhead shot comparing the Hasegawa and Kangnam canopies:

CanopyWidth.jpg

Note they are not even close in width (and remember, the Hasegawa canopy was already too wide). But width is not the only canopy problem, so is length! Here is the canopy area of the Hasegawa and RVHP fusleages, with some notes:

DSCN4448sm.jpg

And here are the canopies themselves (note also the flat profile of the Kangnam canopy):

CanopyLength.jpg

The long and the short of it is, there is no way you will get the Hasegawa canopy to fit the RVHP fuselage.

You could, I suppose, cut out the canopy area of the RVHP fuselage and graft in the Hasegawa, but it just isn't worth it if you have either the Falcon or the Ventura conversions, both of which were designed for the Hasegawa kit. Neither addresses the different nose shape, but the RVHP really doesn't either, at least not correctly, and you have alrready shown that that is not a problem for you, anyway. The only other practical alternative is to purchase one of the Hasegawa clones (Kangnam/Revell, Ace, or ESCI/Italeri) and use that for the conversion, as did Mr Vele, but these kits each have issues over and above canopy width. Bottom line: my advice is use the Falcon conversion with parts from the RVHP, it will be less work and produce a better result.

HTH,

Tom

Edited by Superheat
Link to post
Share on other sites

Cheers Tom,

This has given me much food for thought. Basically the RHVP set looks to be worth not much at all. :(

Either way I think I have a great deal of cuttin. filling and sanding ahead.

Thanks

Julien

Edited by Julien (UK)
Link to post
Share on other sites

Superheat,

Thanks for sharing the clear analysis and pictures. Great stuff! :D

At the moment I do not plan to build an RF-8 through one of these conversions (I knew that before I'd seen this).

But Julien's F-8C has inspired me to attempt an F-8H. I'm impressed with what Julien achieved on that radome. I gather from his post on MM that you provided some reference material of a big nose overlaid on a small nose. Could you please send these to me also? Or post them on ARC?

Cheers, Stefan.

Link to post
Share on other sites

HI Stefan,

Always glad to hear that someone wants to do an H, the absolute Crusader version. The nose photos are here on ARC in the F-8/A-7 group build reference photos thread. If you need any more, ask here or PM me.

Break, break.......

Roy,

Nice build of the Falcon conversion, looks great! You are right, of course, they did not address the radome/nose cone, but it is still miles ahead of RVHP when done, and yours is VERY well done.

Break, break.......

Andre,

That is one of the few F-8 items that I do not yet have, so I cannot comment. Sorry.

Cheers all,

Tom

Link to post
Share on other sites
Always glad to hear that someone wants to do an H, the absolute Crusader version. The nose photos are here on ARC in the F-8/A-7 group build reference photos thread. If you need any more, ask here or PM me.

Thanks Superheat,

I found the photos there.

Without you, I would not have known that the "H" was the hotrod :blink:

I have decals for one of VF-111 during that 1970 cruise. I hope you got along with them :D

Cheers, Stefan.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I have decals for one of VF-111 during that 1970 cruise. I hope you got along with them

Hi Stefan,

In 1970 they were the second best F-8 squadron in the Navy. We (VF-162) were, of course, the best. Superheats rule!

Cheers,

Tom

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Julien,

You build in 1/72, right? There was a sheet with a VF-24 F-8E, a VF-111 F-8H (AJ 105 on the Shangri-La) and a VF-162 F-8H (AH 200 on the Oriskany). It was Microscale 72-085. I don't know if it could be found today, it would probably be called Superscale 72-085.

I'm sure Superheat could tell you if it was any good.

Otherwise, the Hasegawa 1/72 F-8E used to be sold with a VF-162 (AH-203 on the Oriskany) option.

Cheers, Stefan.

Link to post
Share on other sites

HI Julien,

As Stefan pointed out, Microscale's first F-8 sheet, 72-85, had a 162 E (not an H, Stefan!), and the Hasegawa kit originally came with 162 as an option, again an E from an Oriskany cruise. Eduard has recently branched out into decals and did an F-8 sheet, and it has a 162 aircraft, again an E, the Bellinger MiG killer, AH 210. You can find a photo of the sheet on the Eduard site (http://www.eduard.cz/), page two of the Aviprint decals. I have the sheet, it is nicely printed and looks to be accurate. It is designed for the Academy kit, but would probably fit reasonably well on the Heller kit as well, and maybe Hasegawa, I ahaven't checked.

The Microscale sheet, though, besides being tough to find, dates from a time when the only available "1/72nd" kits were the old 50's vintage Revell kit and the Hasegawa "F-8D". Neither kit was, in fact, 1/72nd, both were larger, and the Fujimi kit was not a D (and barely resembles an F-8 in any case). The upshot of all this, is that even if you found one, it is doubtful that it could be made to fit any of the more modern kits.

As to the F-8H, 162 only made one cruise in the H, the last in 1970 on Shangri-La, and no one has done decals for them, which is a shame, as they are the best markings we carried on the F-8. Here is a color shot on the outstanding Geta-O-Max site, there are two others there in B&W:

http://geta-o.maxs.jp/USMIL/F/F-8/F-8D/148...03)f-8h-sn4.jpg

HTH,

Tom

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Tom,

BuNo 149203 is indeed an F-8E when I look at my list of BuNo's, but it is called an F-8H on the Microscale instructions and the decal itself also says "F-8H" above "149203". Thanks for the warning.

I'm still amazed I found this sheet in mint condition in 1999. :banana:

Those markings in the Geta-O-Max photo are indeed pretty cool. It was a cruise with great markings: I think those of VF-111 were their best Crusader markings and VA-152 had, in my opinion, some of the neatest markings on Navy fleet Skyhawks.

Cheers, Stefan.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
That is one of the few F-8 items that I do not yet have, so I cannot comment. Sorry.

Well, last weekend I took the plunge and bought the Airmodell RF-8/TF-8 set... it looks workable, but I have't checked it with the Esci and Academy kits.

Cheers,

Andre

Link to post
Share on other sites
HI Julien,

As Stefan pointed out, Microscale's first F-8 sheet, 72-85, had a 162 E (not an H, Stefan!), ...

The Microscale sheet, though, besides being tough to find, dates from a time when the only available "1/72nd" kits were the old 50's vintage Revell kit and the Hasegawa "F-8D". Neither kit was, in fact, 1/72nd, both were larger, and the Fujimi kit was not a D (and barely resembles an F-8 in any case). The upshot of all this, is that even if you found one, it is doubtful that it could be made to fit any of the more modern kits.

There seems to be one on e-bay right now. But I'm not sure if it's the same Microscale/Superscale sheet that you're talking about:

http://cgi.ebay.com/Rare-SuperScale-Decal-...1QQcmdZViewItem

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...