Memphis Posted November 4, 2014 Share Posted November 4, 2014 Bought model CV-11 Intrepid. Now i'm exploring the kit and and collecting the information about this ship. If you're interested, I can make the review of this kit. Now I am looking for the fotos of hangar deck. Possibly manufacturer forgot to add some details. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Memphis Posted November 13, 2014 Author Share Posted November 13, 2014 Attention. Hereinafter will be presented materials which are available in internet. My goal is not to get any benefit, using these materials. My goal is to tell my colleagues about the differences between this plastic kit and real ship. I can't trace all Copyright Infringements. If you have found any infringements please contact with me. Peration 1. hangar deck. Plastic: Original: Foto from the ship of the same class as Hornet: Conclusions: 1 It's very good, that manufacturer imitated hangar plates and their fasteners. It's dificult to calculate theit measurements, but their performance is nice. 2 Joint of the plates of the deck isn't realized properly. In my opinion it would be better if they performed connection of theese plates in overlap. It's not to dificult to correct this mistake, but i think that manufacturer should perform this element properly, because kit is exepensive and it means, that modelers may place high demands to it. 3 There aren't cutout for the elevator. Without "surgery" you can perform elevator only in upper position: flight deck in this place was wooden If you want to perform the elevator in the lower position. Then you have to cut panel lines independently. Also you will have to apply the decal of the warning coloration. In intermediate position you will have to make a special window and add some details. You can close these windows and then you may not add anything. That's all. materials were taken from: navysite.de Vladimir Yakubov. SVSM Gallery. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Rich in name only Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 Interesting info. Thanks for sharing! Have you seen Trumpeter's Essex/Ticonderoga or Kuznetsov/Liaoning? I'm curious how this kit compares with them. Both seem an odd mix of good detail, even with small features, combined with "What were they thinking" cheapness. I hope other replies stay focused on Intrepid but comparison would help for those of us with the other kits and still saying "ouch" at the price of this one. Can you describe what may account for Intrepid costing so much more? Rich Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Memphis Posted November 17, 2014 Author Share Posted November 17, 2014 Interesting info. Thanks for sharing! Have you seen Trumpeter's Essex/Ticonderoga or Kuznetsov/Liaoning? I'm curious how this kit compares with them. Both seem an odd mix of good detail, even with small features, combined with "What were they thinking" cheapness. I hope other replies stay focused on Intrepid but comparison would help for those of us with the other kits and still saying "ouch" at the price of this one. Can you describe what may account for Intrepid costing so much more? Rich Thank you. I am glad that the information is useful for you. I don't have all these kits, but their images in the network give adequate representation to make proper conclusions. Unfortunately the increase of price does not correspond to the work which was done by the manufecturer. Trumpeter did a better job at a lower price. The lack of detail of hangar deck,mistakes in the elements of the flight deck and other parts (i'll explain later, when the materials will be ready). Also I would like to notice that there are few aircrafts and and air equipment in the box. It limits modeler's posibilities to perform some original scale compositions. For example if you want to build the model as it shown on the boxart you will not perform it without special modofications. The number of mistakes upset me. I think that this kit has bad ratio price/quality Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Rich in name only Posted November 17, 2014 Share Posted November 17, 2014 Interesting! I find the other kits need work too, including "the usual"---things like radar antennas and netting. Liaoning has the forward flight deck netting molded in solid (like usual radar antennas). I assume Kuznetsov also--the instructions show what to do to modify to Liaoning (example: shave off the AK-630s). Are you on any of the ship model sites? Might be interesting to have comparative builds-in-progress but I wonder if that would be better on a ship site? I have Ticonderoga also, a better choice for a comparative build. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Memphis Posted November 21, 2014 Author Share Posted November 21, 2014 (edited) Are you on any of the ship model sites? Might be interesting to have comparative builds-in-progress but I wonder if that would be better on a ship site? I have Ticonderoga also, a better choice for a comparative build. Greetings comrade. I am not registered on the site, which is dedicated to a ship models. It would be nice if you advise me such web-stie where i can get help. Also i'll be glad to perform comparative build-in-progress of Ticonderoga with you. i think it will be nice experience. but i must warn that i will not begin modelling of this kit not earlier than next year. I find the other kits need work too, including "the usual"---things like radar antennas and netting. Liaoning has the forward flight deck netting molded in solid (like usual radar antennas). I assume Kuznetsov also--the instructions show what to do to modify to Liaoning (example: shave off the AK-630s). Admiral Kuznetsov isn't included in my model shortlist. I have munimum information about it.Continue examining plastic. Step2 Plastic kit original Edited November 21, 2014 by Memphis Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Memphis Posted November 21, 2014 Author Share Posted November 21, 2014 Conclusions Here i can't criticize anything, because i have approximative schemes and drawings and i can't control their precision. I can take the decision only after full assemby of the model. The mistakes can exist, but all details have simple shape and not require difficult modifications. Traditionally screw does not look like itself, it represents "somerhing with wings". Complex helical shape of the blade propeller? Pfff... But Hasegawa performed it. And i can't replace these scerwes. G-Factor on the trumpeter's "Essex-class" has some problems with geometry: Materials were taken from: navysite.de Vladimir Yakubov. SVSM Gallery. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Rich in name only Posted November 26, 2014 Share Posted November 26, 2014 Sent PM. I mentioned Tico above but my kit is Hancock. Wanted a "long hull" and that's what I got. I've got Tico on the brain so find myself saying it when I mean other ships. Age, that's it, I'm aging! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Memphis Posted March 3, 2015 Author Share Posted March 3, 2015 Found one more manufacturer's mistake. There aren't 3 portholes on the left side: Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Memphis Posted April 28, 2015 Author Share Posted April 28, 2015 I'm ver angry. the kit even in small details has mistakes. Why manufacturer didn't find information which is on any web-site dedicated to the ships and didn't use it?is It a great chineese wall for them?! :bandhead2:/> Kit Real 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.