Jump to content

If you're one of the gradually reducing number of folks that aren't currently receiving notifications to topics you've subscribed to, or PMs you're receiving, first check you've got the correct address in your profile, then drop in and post your experience in this thread, remembering to tell us your email provider's details, which is the part after the @ in your email address.

This site uses cookies! Learn More

This site uses cookies!

You can find a list of those cookies here: mysite.com/cookies

By continuing to use this site, you agree to allow us to store cookies on your computer. :)


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

31 Good

About DarrenH

  • Rank
    New Member
  1. Sounds like these guys are trying to turn a large fortune into a small one. A new version with repositioned rivets and tail section? I really dont see many people buying another SU-33 over the Kinetic ones in there stash because they are converned the section of the tail is the wrong NACA aerofoil. Anyone who was waiting for a great SU-33 has already bought Kinetic's so the maket is very limited to people who become new fans of the naval Flanker. Good luck to them but i wouldnt be investing in it.
  2. ICM 1/48 MiG-25RBT

    Glad i ordered the CWS noses looking at thst photo comparison. The Revell revised lower panel looks pinched not smooth curves like on the big Mig. No complaints on engineering here as without it tooled this way there "would be no 1/48 Mig-25". big aeroplane, big tooling costs and a seperate tool for each model is fantasy land stuff. Cant wait for the big Wild Weasel...
  3. Great looking 25 mate thanks for doing the groundwork on these Soviet birds operating over Israel..
  4. Have both now and its going to come to choices. If have a slightly squashed ie vertically undersized front windscreen canopy that does look a little small compared to KH but more accurate finer details that have no "impact" visually on the look of the kit id go Kittyhawk. if you some how want finer accurate details yet can live with an undersize canopy/windscreen which may throw off the look of the aeroplane more than incorrect panels etc then HB. If you used the KH clear parts on the HB kit might keep an accuracy guy happy at a price ie expensive and spine not fixed but you "could graft the akH spine parts. If you dont care about minutae and can live with the multi part fuse assembling them in there seperate halves oob the KH kit. If you can live with the slightly squashed canopy/windscreen and want ease of build HB. Overall for me the KH kit as i dont know nor care about minute accuracy issues and the overall look/shape is better. Line ball though and if an easy canopy solution appears i might go HB.. Both have faults. Might have to check if my old KP kit canopies fit the HB kit not sure if they will work but might be a solution to at leadt the clear parts.
  5. Best 1/48 A-4

    Looking at pics if you want to do one in flight with slats retracted the new Hobbyboss kit will be excellent. Far less work than blending those Hasegawa slats into the leading edge. For parked id still go Hasegawa...all the kits you listed need work of some shape ie rescribing etc. Accuracy it really depends how serious you are about it...seen some nice looking Hobbycraft builds but really ifyou can save yiurself the work and grab a Hasegawa kit.
  6. Kitty Hawk1/48 SU-17

    Agree Dave the kit is not perfect and could be improved. However its fsr better than his review rated it and completely superior in every way to the old OEZ kit. its just a pity modelling has now descended to having reviews put together not to asses the kit but to garner attention in the worst possible style. And then people believe the garbage...
  7. Kitty Hawk1/48 SU-17

    If you build the kit using a small portion of your brain it goes together quite well. Anyone basing an opinion on the way the kit was built in that video which was clearly to gather clicks and stir up controversey would be better off drinking paint thinner. Does anyone anywhere build any model exactly according to instructions? Rule 1 of modelling is instructions are a guide not a straightjacket. Hence reviewer A builds kit according to instructions not common sense and standard modelling practice. Hence it doesnt fit so of course its all Kittyhawks fault. If he had simply done a build assembling the fuselage halves from there seperate pieces as "anyone" with a modicum of modelling experience would do he would of found it goes together quite well...geez what a surprise... Instead he ripped KH a new one because he checked in any semblence of intelligence/common sense/modelling experience in prior to building it. Looked to me like he was out to score cheap points and clicks not build the kit as he would if he where building it for himself. Poor reviewing at best and an opportunity lost to show people a great technique that saves plenty of heartache in MANY kits including many Hasegawa kits. instead he just took the cheap shot.
  8. Messerschmitt Me-262 B1a/U1 Nightfighter. 1:32

    Did you test fit any of the parts? There have been significant fit issues reported with Revell aparrantly tweaking the molds after the last test shot. The tweaking meant none of the fuselage bulkheads fit that well leaving a gap top and bottom on fuselage join.
  9. Sukhoi Su-17 M3/M4 Fitter-K 1:48

    Yes exactly..as per the way you build almost any multi part fuselage kit. Assemble the three left fuse pieces to make a single left fuselage. Assemble the three right fuse pieces to make a single right fuse piece. Then close her up with all assicated bits and its fits quite nicely other than needing tabs on the aft most piece on each fuse.
  10. Kitty Hawk's 1/48th Scale Su-22M-3 & M-4

    Differences there are so insignificant to my eye as to simply say which one builds better? having gotten the 6 part KH fuse together by putting them together in halves its still work I coukdclive without doing again. Next SU-17 will be HB for me.
  11. Sukhoi Su-17 M3/M4 Fitter-K 1:48

    Just building mine. When building the fuselage do not follow the instructions. Assemble the left and right fuselages as seperate halves all joined prior to putting them together. If you assemble them per the instructions you will have significant fit issue on rear to mid fuse fit. However some styrene tabs fixes all that in 2 seconds and you assemble in complete halves. Detail is excellent and if built in halves builds really ok so far.
  12. No complaints from here...sold!
  13. Looking at the flat profile if the HB kit the KP one looks far better being quite a bit taller in profile. As for them being pinched i can live with that as you cannot see it from any angle the kit will be viewed from normally. The height of the front windscreen frame however stands out clearly and flattens the canopy profile and can be seen from almost every view you will look at it from. An easy fix for an obvious problem with luck that will immediately make it look much better to my eye. Im not interested in fixing issues i cant clearly see anymore, to much effort for to little reward.
  14. Given Kittyhawks engineering record i think my old KP windscreens might find a new home on the Trumpyboss kit. Interested to see a head to head comparison...