Trumpeter 1:72 Lightning

[Skii]

Superb work Drewe.

[AnonymousDFB1]

Nice work Drewe.

[Stebos]

Much better. I can't think of an easier solution to this one.

[avro683]

The fairing 'twixt pipes. Simply a piece of 80 thou plastic card cut to height and then filed and sanded to a triangular cross section:-

Then cut off and glued into place. To be shaped when dry. It's bloody difficult this isn't it? (or maybe not. . . )

It would be for me!! Carry on the good work, Drewe.

Tony

[avro683]

Brings a whole new meaning to the word "Lightning" - ducks rapdily.

Edited October 17, 2008 by avro683

[DamienB]

Appreciate it may be a bit late but the real fairing is a more acute angle and much thinner in the middle - it isn't actually the same triangular section all the way through, and has a much thinner bit in the middle to give the pipes clearance. The wider outside of the fairing has the same dip as the side of the fuselage:

[Scarlet]

The kit jet pipes look very poor next to your modded ones. Impressive work, simple but very effective.

P.S. 4 gun fit = no missiles.

[AnonymousER99]

Drewe that looks splendid mate!! Looks like the fix isnt all that hard now is it??

[Nev]

Excellent work Drewe, but I gotta be honest - for 17 quid, this model assembler can't be bothered to put all that work into a new-tool kit. I think I'll wait for the Academy kit, or just stick with my Airfix 1/48 jobbies.

Interesting about that join thing tho - I recently noticed a fine seam appearing on my Tamiya Silver Mossie - I could've sworn it wasn't there when I built it!

[DamienB]

Still no help on F.2A vents and intakes?

Sorry, missed that one!

I've had a quick look at some photos and don't see any real differences - that's not to say there aren't any, but the major vents/intakes/panels etc. in the open areas not hidden by shadow or the wing on the photos all look to be pretty much identical? I've had a look at some scale drawings and they don't show anything obvious either.

[Gary C]

Good work Drewe, looks a good deal better.

It's bloody difficult this isn't it? (or maybe not. . . )

Looks like the fix isnt all that hard now is it??

At no point anywhere has anyone suggested it is an impossible or difficult fix, nobody has said it is unbuildable. In fact my exact words in the other thread were...

It's not unbuildable, it's not unfixable, it's just wrong and I'm afraid there's no getting away from it.

... and I stand by that. The issue at hand here is that it shouldn't require this level of remedial work just to get back to a shape that should have been there in the first place had Trumpeter bothered to do even the most cursory bit of research. For 17 quid I don't expect to need brass pipe and bits from a Revell or Hasegawa Tornado and certainly not when for around the same price I can pick up a 48th scale Hasegawa Skyhawk or F-104 and spend the time and effort adding extra detail instead.

As a teen I spent a week on annual camp with the ATC at Binbrook the year before the Lightning retired and so it is a huge favourite with me. As a result I'm going to want to build not just one but many and the thought of having to perform this sort of tedious surgery everytime is painful to say the least...on the other hand the Academy kit isn't very far away and if other releases are anything to go by it may be the best bet. If it does turn out to have similar or other problems then at the very least we will have a choice but at the moment, to me at least, the Trumpeter kit looks rather poor for the money.

Edited October 17, 2008 by Gary C

[Enzo the Magnificent]

I've left the kit pipes in place in the shots to show how different mine looks. Is it dead accurate? Hardly. . it's all been eyeballed and the fairing between the pipes is an approximation based on my limitations as a modeller

"Limitations as a modeller"? Yeh! Riiiiight!

Excellent work there, Drewe. I'm watching this with interest. I was going to build straight from the box and see how I felt about the tail end, but I think now that I'll try it your way.

[AnonymousER99]

Good work Drewe, looks a good deal better.

At no point anywhere has anyone suggested it is an impossible or difficult fix, nobody has said it is unbuildable. In fact my exact words in the other thread were...

... and I stand by that. The issue at hand here is that it shouldn't require this level of remedial work just to get back to a shape that should have been there in the first place had Trumpeter bothered to do even the most cursory bit of research. For 17 quid I don't expect to need brass pipe and bits from a Revell or Hasegawa Tornado and certainly not when for around the same price I can pick up a 48th scale Hasegawa Skyhawk or F-104 and spend the time and effort adding extra detail instead.

As a teen I spent a week on annual camp with the ATC at Binbrook the year before the Lightning retired and so it is a huge favourite with me. As a result I'm going to want to build not just one but many and the thought of having to perform this sort of tedious surgery everytime is painful to say the least...on the other hand the Academy kit isn't very far away and if other releases are anything to go by it may be the best bet. If it does turn out to have similar or other problems then at the very least we will have a choice but at the moment, to me at least, the Trumpeter kit looks rather poor for the money.

Gary

At no point was I directing my comments to Drewe at you. I think you are taking this far too personal. All I said was that the fix didnt appear all that hard. I happen to just appreciate seeing the work Drewe is putting into this. For some people the fun of building a kit with issues is the challenge of fixing them. We all get different satisfaction out of this hobby. I also appreciate your comments on the price and what it takes to fix it. Drewe is just taking up the challenge and is doing it with the skills and tools at his disposal. I think its fun to watch people make the most of things, the whole when life hands you lemons, make lemonade thing.

I don't personally know enough about the Lightning to have noticed the issue until I looked at pics in my own refs. It is pretty bad in the engine area. I just think its neat to see how it can be fixed if one chooses to do so.

All the best

Mike

[keefr22]

Gary

At no point was I directing my comments to Drewe at you. I think you are taking this far too personal. All I said was that the fix didnt appear all that hard. I happen to just appreciate seeing the work Drewe is putting into this. For some people the fun of building a kit with issues is the challenge of fixing them. We all get different satisfaction out of this hobby. I also appreciate your comments on the price and what it takes to fix it. Drewe is just taking up the challenge and is doing it with the skills and tools at his disposal. I think its fun to watch people make the most of things, the whole when life hands you lemons, make lemonade thing.

I don't personally know enough about the Lightning to have noticed the issue until I looked at pics in my own refs. It is pretty bad in the engine area. I just think its neat to see how it can be fixed if one chooses to do so.

All the best

Mike

I agree exactly with what you say about Drewe's work here Mike, and that it is entertaining to watch, and is first class modelling. But I agree more with Gary's comment .... "The issue at hand here is that it shouldn't require this level of remedial work just to get back to a shape that should have been there in the first place had Trumpeter bothered to do even the most cursory bit of research." I know it's but that surely is the crux of the matter?

Were Drewe doing this work to the 30 year old Airfix Lightning kit there'd be no argument - but he's not, is he?

Keef

[Gary C]

No problem Mike, it wasn't directed back at anyone in particular, just trying to clarify my reasons for passing on this one before it starts heading down the 'shake and bake modellers' and the whole daft 'dumbing down' topic as seen elsewhere. Of course people enjoy different aspects of building and FWIW Drewe has done a great job of turning it around, I'm just much more of a colours and markings enthusiast and can't help baulking at that kind of work especially if it's going to need doing a dozen times over.

[AnonymousER99]

No problem Mike, it wasn't directed back at anyone in particular, just trying to clarify my reasons for passing on this one before it starts heading down the 'shake and bake modellers' and the whole daft 'dumbing down' topic as seen elsewhere. Of course people enjoy different aspects of building and FWIW Drewe has done a great job of turning it around, I'm just much more of a colours and markings enthusiast and can't help baulking at that kind of work especially if it's going to need doing a dozen times over.

I hear ya Gary and I do agree with the points that for a new tool kit, especially with existing airframes to tool from, we should not have to make this drastic of a fix.

Just wanting to make sure that Drewes hard work in fixing it wasn't lost in the matter that HB/Trumpeter should have gotten right to begin with.

Cheers Mate!!

Mike

Oh and the ONE thing that surprises me is that we are 5 pages in and the building machine that is Drewe manton hasnt posted this in the completed forums!!

[AnonymousAA72]

Still no help on F.2A vents and intakes?

Coming along very nicely - love the way the rear rings were formed - don't forget that there's a triangular wedge to take out on the top and bottom though......... Now, my understanding on the vents and intakes is this...on all marks they were in the same position, however on the earlier marks..The F1, F1a and F2 (and T4?) they were flush or more accurately they were "V" shaped NACA ducts. On later marks (F3, F3a, F2a, F6 and T5 - don't know about the F53) some - not all though of the NACA ducts had forward facing scoops fitted over them - no doubt to force air down into the ducts more effectively. Take a look at photo's of the intakes either side of the fin on the F6...In this respect Airfix's 1/48th kits seem to be spot on (apart from solid NACA ducts which aren't that easy to ream out......

So if my understanding is correct the F2a and F6 (and F3a/F6 interim) SHOULD be identical.......(he said waiting for someone to find some pic's to prove this wrong!!!!)

Edited October 17, 2008 by Bill Clark

[AnonymousA667]

"The issue at hand here is that it shouldn't require this level of remedial work just to get back to a shape that should have been there in the first place had Trumpeter bothered to do even the most cursory bit of research." I know it's but that surely is the crux of the matter?

But is it? Out of all the kits that are likely to be sold how many buyers will actually give shoite about the jet pipes? Making a conservative guesstimate I would say 75% won't give a shoite. Of the rest 15% might suck on their teeth but build it in any case without alteration. That leaves 10% who might give a shoite. I can see the execs at Trumpeter quaking in their boots at the prospect. Not.

Fact is that clearly Trumpeter must have done rather more than cursory research, because it seems the rest of the kit is rather good. Mind, there's still plenty of time to find other stuff that is hideously wrong - there's already been some rumblings elsewhere.

peebeep

[AnonymousAA72]

But is it? Out of all the kits that are likely to be sold how many buyers will actually give shoite about the jet pipes? Making a conservative guesstimate I would say 75% won't give a shoite. Of the rest 15% might suck on their teeth but build it in any case without alteration. That leaves 10% who might give a shoite. I can see the execs at Trumpeter quaking in their boots at the prospect. Not.

Fact is that clearly Trumpeter must have done rather more than cursory research, because it seems the rest of the kit is rather good. Mind, there's still plenty of time to find other stuff that is hideously wrong - there's already been some rumblings elsewhere.

peebeep

I have to say Paul that I'm bitterly disappointed that Trumpeter managed to get this so wrong! The kits tailpipe is pure fiction - horrible! Would that put me off building a few? No!! Using a version of Drewe's fix (with plastic rod instead of brass to save weight!) But I had hoped that the days of bashing (literally) inaccurate, poor and old Lightning kits to within a half inch of their life to get something semi accurate and realistic were over! At least the work on Trumpy's kit will be a lot less than required on them poor old Airfix/Hasegawa and Matchbox kits....

Revell managed it with the Hunter, its just a shame that Trumpeter couldn't reach that standard! And I have heard a rumbling that the belly tank is too deep........

Oh dear!!

[Rob M.]

I can see the execs at Trumpeter quaking in their boots at the prospect. Not.

Perhaps they should be, considering that 52.7% of China's 3,631 companies making toys for export went out of business between January and July 2008!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7675552.stm

If they get a bad reputation...

Rob M.

[keefr22]

But is it? Out of all the kits that are likely to be sold how many buyers will actually give shoite about the jet pipes? Making a conservative guesstimate I would say 75% won't give a shoite. Of the rest 15% might suck on their teeth but build it in any case without alteration. That leaves 10% who might give a shoite. I can see the execs at Trumpeter quaking in their boots at the prospect. Not.

Fact is that clearly Trumpeter must have done rather more than cursory research, because it seems the rest of the kit is rather good. Mind, there's still plenty of time to find other stuff that is hideously wrong - there's already been some rumblings elsewhere.

peebeep

Fair point Paul, but if as you think they did do more than cursory research it makes the error even worse - in my opinion!

I was quite happy to part with close on £40 for two Xtrakit Sea Vixens, given the nature of the kits I was expecting to have to put a fair amount of work into them (although maybe I wasn't expecting quite such a bad shape issue with the nose!) but as has already been said in this thread I don't really want to put the sort of effort Drewe is putting into his, into multiple builds of a brand new mainstream kit. So I've cancelled the three I had on pre-order for the Nats & will build my 48th Airfix ones instead!

Anyway, this is getting perilously close to a thread hijack, so I'll say no more other than that's a tremendous difference you've made to the kits rear end Drewe!!

Keef

[AnonymousA667]

If they get a bad reputation...

Rob, we enthusiasts might care a lot, but we are but a small sample of those who are buying. I believe we have an over-inflated idea of how important we are to the manufacturers' whose plastic we buy. I feel the pain for those who are disappointed, but there is a lot of wasted heat and light on forums like this.

peebeep

[Gary C]

I believe we have an over-inflated idea of how important we are to the manufacturers' whose plastic we buy. I feel the pain for those who are disappointed, but there is a lot of wasted heat and light on forums like this.

Sorry, but I don't buy that. If it was the case then why, after specific criticism was made on a couple of forums, did Trumpeter bother to retool the 1/32 Wildcat and the 1/32 SU-27UB? Surely it wasn't for the benefit of Mr Average modeler who couldn't care less and doesn't know the difference? Same goes for Kinetic and the forthcoming Vipers, they've made a huge play for the online audience and have acted on specific feedback and modified the tools. Granted most of the time the criticism is too late to make any difference but I don't think they are foolish enough to ignore forums with worldwide memberships running into the thousands and in some cases tens of thousands.

[keefr22]

Rob, we enthusiasts might care a lot, but we are but a small sample of those who are buying. I believe we have an over-inflated idea of how important we are to the manufacturers' whose plastic we buy. I feel the pain for those who are disappointed, but there is a lot of wasted heat and light on forums like this.

peebeep

And, even though I said I'd shut up , who actually buys most from Hannants website? Judging from number 2 in that list I'd say a fair few of us enthusiasts? Possibly rather more than your casual buyer?? I obviously don't actually know, just wondering??

Keef

[Guest Cop]

Ok guys,

you have all had your say about the kit now and the rest of Trumpeters releases. Please keep it on topic, remember, it's about Drewe's build and the cracking job he's doing on it.

Theres other threads in which you can discuss Trumpys cock ups.

If not I'm gonna start pruning.

Nige.