Dmanton300 Posted January 2, 2015 Share Posted January 2, 2015 Let me just say that whilst it's not awful, if, say, Airfix or Hasegawa decided a new 72nd Gripen was something they really needed to do, Revell have certainly left the door wide open! Like I say, it's not awful (save for the airbrakes which, if you desire them closed ARE decidedly awful!) but everything Revell do these days seems so f*****g average! They were on a quality upswing in the late 90's and produced some gems, but are actually moving backwards in terms of moulding quality, accuracy and overall execution. It just feels rushed and subject to a "that'll do" mindset. Compare to Airfix resurgent, who's pace of innovation and improvement seems to be accelerating at the moment. Signed Annoyed (of Somerset) Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mrvark Posted January 2, 2015 Share Posted January 2, 2015 I really wish someone would do markings for all the Czech Gripens in special markings (any scale). I'd especially like to do what I call the Picasso Tiger that they did for this year's Tiger Meet. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
niki4703 Posted January 2, 2015 Share Posted January 2, 2015 (edited) D., Thanks for the heads up! I have to agree with you on everything said about Revell. I imagine they try to keep prices down [although not really happening in every part of the world] by keeping costs down. A shame things turned out this way... Edited January 2, 2015 by niki4703 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Thadeus Posted January 2, 2015 Share Posted January 2, 2015 I'd love a nice Grippen, and I guess I'll go for the Revell offering. I like the extended IFR probe and the recce pod. I wonder about the fit of the parts. I do have a feeling that there will be a lot of flash on the sprues... and a lot of sinkmarks... It's a shame really, since from what I hear the sprues are being made in Poland. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
spejic Posted January 2, 2015 Share Posted January 2, 2015 I'd especially like to do what I call the Picasso Tiger that they did for this year's Tiger Meet. It's actually artist Veronika Manukjan who deserves the credit. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ST0RM Posted January 2, 2015 Share Posted January 2, 2015 Over engineered is what keeps coming to mind. I was very unimpressed with their Typhoon. All three scales shared many of the same fit issues, in areas where it shouldn't have. Their Super Hornets also have issues that with today's technology, shouldn't exist. We'll see what happens. Jeff Quote Link to post Share on other sites
erik_g Posted January 5, 2015 Share Posted January 5, 2015 Apart from the not so realistic interior and lack of detail on the landing gears it looks quite nice. The fit is, according to friends who have built it, pretty nice. While a bit over engineered, it does go together well. I'll have to get me one of these some day. I have a 39C resin cockpit made for the Italeri kit that might fit. On the absolute up side is the inclusion of not only one but two drop tanks and the SPK 39 recce pod, used during the air operations above Libya. Unfortunately, Revell, did not include the various flare/chaff launchers that is mounted on pylons, missile adapters and on the rear fuselage when needed. So far none of the Gripen kits includes these, and no after market company have yet picked up the glove. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Dmanton300 Posted January 5, 2015 Author Share Posted January 5, 2015 Your friends have clearly not tried to do the airbrakes in the closed position! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
erik_g Posted January 5, 2015 Share Posted January 5, 2015 Well, I, and them, was referring to the other parts.. Apparently it is impossible to do well fitting air brakes on a Gripen model. None have succeeded so far. (well, maybe the Top Gun resin kit of the 39B, I believe the brakes were molded shut on that kit) God knows hos SAAB manages to do it, because the fit is pretty good on the real thing. But according to my friends the fuselage goes together pretty well, which is good, since it is split in some interesting ways. Probably to accommodate a future 39D. Have you built it yet? As I said, I have only second hand info and the close look of a built but not painted example to go by. But it is frustrating that none of the Gripen kits that show up are really impressive. The KH kit was a real let down. Many parts were quite good, only to be let down by real poor quality, research and fit.. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TobHol Posted January 5, 2015 Share Posted January 5, 2015 I have built the model and for the airbrakes fitted nice in close position. You need to dryfit and trim the brakes a little, then it lookes really good. Tobias Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Dmanton300 Posted January 5, 2015 Author Share Posted January 5, 2015 (edited) They're was no need to trim my airbrakes, they dropped right into the recess with huge gaps all around. Erik, I'm building one right now, although I have put it quickly on the back burner such is my disappointment. As I said , it's not awful, it's just so. . . Average. Pretty much what revell settle for these days. They no longer seem to have any ambition to compete with the best, near enough is good enough it would seem. Edited January 5, 2015 by Dmanton300 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
zkalos Posted January 5, 2015 Share Posted January 5, 2015 Hi Folks! It's one big mistake, which about nobody has been announced. Several bottom-fuselage details (holes, vents) after the main landing gear (behind the center pilon) are mirrored with the longitudinal axis, and the long lump in the left wing root is in the wrong (port) side too. In reality these are in the other side of the fuselage. See inflight pictures, because I can't upload it now. Other: The instrument panel is absolute awfull (in fact this is simple looking in real life). and the stick is too long. The main wheels are badly molded with a hole on the back side, and it has bad and poor details on back (brake disk) side too. The engine exhaust in the closed position is too small in diameter I think. In open position this diameter is too small too as I see, but it's only important if You make the plane with running engine. The afterburner pipe's diameter too big and the spray ring's detail is absolute wrong. The pilons are very simple in details, and the bulges on the sides are only good for HUAF Nato (Hungary) version, and we need remove it, as Revell notes in the description as well. I'm glad that I did not need to be removed, because I'm Hungarian :) Many small parts are stout and thick. The inflight refueling pipe (IFR) is too simplistic with no steps on the long pipe. This is so at first sight. Thank You for your attention and sorry for my bad english ! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
cvrle Posted January 5, 2015 Share Posted January 5, 2015 Yeah, unfortunately Revell missed with this one... I picked up my example today, and these are my observations: For a new-tool kit, there is a pretty large amount of flash. Overall, the whole impression is one of softness. My example has sinkmarks on the airbrakes, for example. I would say that my impression is of holding a final test-shot before the moulds are corrected and refined for the production run. That aside, it's better and somewhat more detailed than the Italeri example IMHO. I'm not sorry I bought it, nor will I bin it or think it's not any good, but if they only delayed it for a quarter or half-year to refine it, it would've been a kit worthy of RoG's reputation... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
erik_g Posted January 6, 2015 Share Posted January 6, 2015 The pylon with bulges are the so called NATO-pylons and they are used by all Gripen users, including the Swedish Airforce, who also uses the older pylons without bulges. Durng the operations in Libya you could see both kinds of pylons being used on the aircraft at the same time. NATO pylons outboard, with a BOP countermeasures launcher, holding a Chobham MML missile rail with a BOL chaff dispenser. Depending on if it was early in the campaign or not this MML could have an AIM-120B hanging from it, or not. The inboard pylons were of the older non-bulged variety and held fuel tanks. I think Sweden is the only Gripen user who have the non-NATO kind of pylons, so HuAF, CzAF, SAAF and RTAF aircraft shouls all have the bulged NATO-pylons. So if you build a SwAF bird, check references. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Thadeus Posted January 6, 2015 Share Posted January 6, 2015 Correct me if I'm wrong, wasn't the Grippen kit due to be released in 2014? Flash and Sinkholes... sounds like a new TV show, doesn't it? ;) Whatever the case, I just ordered mine. Hope the clear parts are clear enough :) Quote Link to post Share on other sites
cvrle Posted January 6, 2015 Share Posted January 6, 2015 On my example they're great. ;) 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.