jacksdad Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 I'm thinking of digging this out of the stash to do it in old school camo. But I have a couple of questions for the Harrier experts. Can I use the Heritage Gr.3 cockpit for the Gr.1 or does it require to many changes to back date it? What other Heritage stuff am I best getting? In other words, are the intakes, u/c and gun packs worth getting? Thanks in advance for the help. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loki Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 Are you sure you want to do the GR1? The GR3 is much nicer and there is a load of choice with aftermarket. Flightpath etc Just saying....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintsPhil Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 Only real difference is the instrument panel, no large round screen in the centre. You could probably convert it back fairly easily. Otherwise its fairly similar, I'm sure there are other subtle changes. Otherwise all the aftermarket bits are good to go for the GR1. Personally I disagree on the looks, I really like the old pointy nose! Phil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacksdad Posted October 22, 2012 Author Share Posted October 22, 2012 Thanks guys. As for looks. Sorry, but the Gr.1 is the classic Harrier in my opinion. And I much prefer the old school R.A.F. scheme. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loki Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 Post the build mate Good luck with it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacksdad Posted October 22, 2012 Author Share Posted October 22, 2012 Post the build mate Good luck with it Thanks. Having looked at the options I think I will get the Flightpath set along with their psp set for the base. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hawkkeeper Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 (edited) GR3 had the laser nose, but Ithe GR1 had a plain short pointed nose. Edited October 22, 2012 by Hawkkeeper Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Fleming Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 Need to check (not at home), but I'm sure the moving map display was in the GR1 as well. IIRC the differeces (initially) were limited to a few switches/panels concerned with the LRMTS and RWR systems. If some of the other SIG guys are about, they might be able to help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete in Lincs Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 First job, Fill in all those damned rivets! It will look a whole lot better. Good luck Pete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacksdad Posted October 23, 2012 Author Share Posted October 23, 2012 First job, Fill in all those damned rivets! It will look a whole lot better. Good luck Pete Thanks Pete. That's on my list of things to do. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NG899 Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 (edited) There were pointy nosed GR3s too! The engine upgrade to the Pegasus 103 that made it a GR3 preceded the LRMTS nose and RWR fitting that most people think made it a GR3. How to tell a pointy nosed GR3? Only one small aft facing vent on the engine covers just ahead of the mesh covered GTS/APU intake (note the GPS/APU exhaust has no mesh cover over it) rather than the two vents more forward located of the GR1/1A. Also, the tailcone had circular vent holes for the rear mounted RCVs. Early GR3s were also seen with pointy noses and in the wraparound scheme too. Now there's different! See the AlleyCat 233OCU Harrier decal sheets for more info. Steve, on your kit, if your up for it, personally I'd go for the scratch building approach rather then Flightpath P PE - inaccurate in many areas; or Heritage resin - also some errors. Drop me a PM for more info. Cheers, Nick Edited October 23, 2012 by NG899 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacksdad Posted October 24, 2012 Author Share Posted October 24, 2012 PM sent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacksdad Posted October 25, 2012 Author Share Posted October 25, 2012 So does anyone know whats wrong with the Flightpath set? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xffw45343tg Posted October 25, 2012 Share Posted October 25, 2012 (edited) It's not so much things wrong with it per se, but there are limitations in replicating 3D shapes with a 2D process. Much of what you'd need to scratchbuild is eminently doable in (cheap) styrene card. I'll not set out to criticise David's artwork, because clearly an awful lot of skill has gone into producing those kits. My personal view is that though there are quite a few bits that I'd use at the drop of a hat, there's also a large amount that I'd rather scratch - making it an expensive option. Bear in mind that ALL the modifications on Nick's FRS1 (shout if you haven't seen it and I'll point you to some publications) are scratched and you realise that (if you happen to be a genius and have enough time) ultimate detail can be built from very basic materials. Kirk Edited October 25, 2012 by Kirk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacksdad Posted October 25, 2012 Author Share Posted October 25, 2012 Thanks Kirk. Genius I am not. Just a wee bit daunted at the prospect of a lot of scratch building. All I want to do is a decent Gr.1. If I can get some decent Gr.1 reference material I will give scratching a go. I have ordered the Crowood 'Inside and Out' book, so hopefully that will help. Then I would just need to get some etch belts and instrument decals. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Fleming Posted October 25, 2012 Share Posted October 25, 2012 Steve, PM on it's way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NG899 Posted October 25, 2012 Share Posted October 25, 2012 (edited) Hi Steve et al, Steve, first e-mail on its way to you. What follows is my PERSONAL view regarding PE... Kirk's right about the 2D / 3d aspects of PE. Thanks for the 'genius' tag Kirk. I'm not a genius; I'll maybe accept 'inspired grafter'...! As to the FP set specifically... the cockpit and seat parts have inaccuracies, as have the FOD covers for the intakes. The canopy frames when applied look like 2-by-2 frames rather than those on the full-sized; the PE is too thick. Considering the amount you're paying for the FP set (£50-£60+ iirc) and the comparable cost of some plasticard, rod and fusewire plus a bit more time than you may spend bending PE, then IMHO the FP parts are very expensive; at least doubling the price of the model. If you have good reference photos, patience and good basic modelling skills, then you will improve your skills dramatically by scratch-building a lot of the detail. I did! As you'll be working mainly with 'styrene plastic there's no faffing around with superglued together fingers or other bits you didn't intend to stick to each other either - you can use your favourite liquid poly and be sure of getting what you want where you want it. If you get it wrong, it's easy to remove and redo, as you can make several bits from 'card, rod, etc. through trial and error on occasions. You get one chance with a piece of PE. You can also pitch the level of detailing at what YOU want it to be. So, if you want every button and switch, you can do it. If you want something that looks 90% there, you can do that. You're in control. While I'm here... As for resin, when resin's good it's very good and saves lots of time. When it's bad or inaccurate, then it MAY just be a help or accelerator. In this scale Heritage are the only game in town for resin. Their parts are an improvement of the kit parts, especially the wheels which I mastered (years ago now, though they've needed a facelift in the last year or so!). However, while being an improvement on the kit's parts, their GR3 cockpit set and MB Mk9 seat are not 100%. But, they will get you a long way down the road so are worth it. As for their intake sets - you're better of scratch building those. For why please study photos of the real intakes - while Heritage drop the doors, the doors and openings are not the right size and the openings do not enable you to see the front of the Pegasus through the open doors as you can on the full-sized Harrier. As I said at the outset, those are my personal views. I hope they help. Steve, what I send you will help you make some decisions about what you do and how. Whatever you decide I know you'll have a lot of fun with your Harrier! Cheers, Nick Edited October 25, 2012 by NG899 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacksdad Posted October 25, 2012 Author Share Posted October 25, 2012 (edited) Nick and Dave. Many thanks for your help. I think I probably will go down the scratch build route. Although I may cheat with some etch seat belts and decals for the intstruments. Steve Edited October 25, 2012 by jacksdad64 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xffw45343tg Posted October 25, 2012 Share Posted October 25, 2012 The intakes are not actually that hard to correct with the kit parts, a file and a small amount of styrene sheet and they transform the model. You have to slice the kit's inner intake walls about half way along their length then flare the aft bit to make the bellmouth. Easier to do than describe but i'll try harder if this is something you want to do. Kirk. PS/ I've seen Nick's FRS1 in the flesh and i'll stand by the genius bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnonymousAA72 Posted October 26, 2012 Share Posted October 26, 2012 I'm thinking of digging this out of the stash to do it in old school camo. But I have a couple of questions for the Harrier experts. Can I use the Heritage Gr.3 cockpit for the Gr.1 or does it require to many changes to back date it? What other Heritage stuff am I best getting? In other words, are the intakes, u/c and gun packs worth getting? Thanks in advance for the help. Steve I built a GR3 ten or so years ago (It really was that long ago!). Nick kindly provided photo's and drawings of the cockpit, and I managed to scratch-build a lot of the cockpit innards, and beefed the kits seat up. I had the Heritage Aviation cockpit, but didn't use all of it. As for the rest of the resin - Nick's tooled wheels are superb - certainly doing way with the rubber tyres helps! The Aden pods are also superb - highly recommended! As for the Flightpath set - thats a matter of choice. I've used some of their 1/48th sets and find them to be very useful. I guess it just depends on how deep your pocket is, and how good your scratchbuilding skills are! As for the kit itself, ALL of Airfix's 1/24th scale Harriers/Sea Harrier are the same basic kit - the 1973 issued AV8A/GR1. The GR3/AV8S kit has a new fin (With FWR pods) an LRMTS nose and additional stores (A pair of sidewinder's for 1417 Flight) . The Shar1 has a whole new nose section, in addition to the GR3 upgrade. These extra's come as 'conversion' sets within the individual kit. The decals on the original GR1/AV8A are quite old by now - the decal sheet for the GR3 is excellent and fills the whole of the bottom of the box - and was I believe designed by Richard Ward of Modeldecals. You can of course use the majority of this for a GR1. The rivet indentations are a pain, but easy enough to fill - if time consuming. I used a red Halfords car filler on mine - looked very colourful when sanded down! Nowadays I'd use Mr Surfacer or similar. Nothing wrong in building a GR1! In fact I may well do that in the future to sit next to "Red16". Another 1 Sqn machine in nice glossy paint! Don't forget the pic's! (And I'm also a fan of Nick's FRS1!!! I've seen it in the flesh AND when it was being re-built all of those years ago!) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJPFlightpath Posted October 26, 2012 Share Posted October 26, 2012 As to the FP set specifically... the cockpit and seat parts have inaccuracies, as have the FOD covers for the intakes. The canopy frames when applied look like 2-by-2 frames rather than those on the full-sized; the PE is too thick. Considering the amount you're paying for the FP set (£50-£60+ iirc) and the comparable cost of some plasticard, rod and fusewire plus a bit more time than you may spend bending PE, then IMHO the FP parts are very expensive; at least doubling the price of the model. If you have good reference photos, patience and good basic modelling skills, then you will improve your skills dramatically by scratch-building a lot of the detail. I did! As you'll be working mainly with 'styrene plastic there's no faffing around with superglued together fingers or other bits you didn't intend to stick to each other either - you can use your favourite liquid poly and be sure of getting what you want where you want it. If you get it wrong, it's easy to remove and redo, as you can make several bits from 'card, rod, etc. through trial and error on occasions. You get one chance with a piece of PE. I would make the point that there is a lot more to the set than photo-etched parts. But in the end there is no Detail Set or aftermarket produict available that is essential. It just provides choice for the customer, who can, as is pointed out on this thread, choose instead to scratchbuild added details. In a large set such as this no customer will ever agree with all the approaches taken. Its a bit like buying a CD - if you like 7-8 tracks out of 10 you might consider it a successful purchase but if you only like four tracks it was probably not for you. If you approach any of our sets with an attitude that photo-etchings are just add-ons rather than sub-kits in their own right you will be disappointed. In fairness to us, we do say on our web site that if you like working with metal as a preference then our sets are for you - if not there are usually plenty of other choices for the customer. In the end the product is just there as an option for the modeller but I would be the last to suggest that there are not equally valid ways of arriving at the same outcome. Regards To All, David Parkins, Flightpath, www.djparkins.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacksdad Posted October 26, 2012 Author Share Posted October 26, 2012 (edited) Excellent reply David and very well put. The only hurdle at the moment regarding your set is just finding the spare cash to buy it (along with the psp set:) ) Personally I think your sets are stunning and worth every penny having used them in the past. Steve Edited October 26, 2012 by jacksdad64 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loki Posted October 26, 2012 Share Posted October 26, 2012 I'm going to jump in and say that I do see both sides of this. Nick is quite correct in his assertions that the modeller can arrive at a similar outcome with a modest amount of scratchbuilding using card, tube and wire. Indeed some modellers achieve amazing results and in some cases more accurate results by doing so. Where the modeller is not as adept at scratchbuilding and where he / she can afford to, then PE comes into it's own. There is no doubting that not everyone can afford to buy the Flightpath sets, preferring instead to buy from other sources, however, the Flightpath items are kits in their own right. You makes yer choice you pays yer money. Each Flightpath kit really should be looked at as a model in itself and that way, once built, the modeller can say that he / she really has achieved something and be satisfied. Once added to a model, the Flightpath sets really do stand out and make a very big difference. Other PE and resin manufacturers are not quite in the same league. Perhaps Eduard Brassin range is approaching but still not quite on a par. The music CD analogy is a good one. I don't remember the last time that I used EVERY item on any PE set. I prefer to pick and choose, use card or tube for that 3D effect that PE can't give you and just use the PE that does the job I need. The Flightpath set for the Harrier is rather extensive and has been used to great effect by members here, Red Dog being just one of them. I am not sure though if even he used every item. It comes down to money, ability and confidence. I like to think of Flightpath products as the Rolls Royce of aftermarket. BUT I have and will continue to mix and match Flightpath with spares, card, wire, tube and other resin aftermarket to achieve what I want. I have recently bought David's (DJ Parkins Flightpath) CBLS-100 set, amongst others. What you get for your money is astounding, simply that, astounding. The level of detail in the product is incredible given the cost. I am sure that Eduard would produce a Brassin set with alot less detail and at considerably more cost. David gives you a choice of 2 types of practice bombs for each of the two carriers and the release mechanisms are faithfully reproduced in PE. For £8.16 (Herr Hannants) that represents great value. I will look at building these separately as individual kits. Once finished, I can introduce them to a couple of projects I have in mind (T4 Jaguar and T12 Harrier). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnonymousAA72 Posted October 26, 2012 Share Posted October 26, 2012 I have recently bought David's (DJ Parkins Flightpath) CBLS-100 set, amongst others. What you get for your money is astounding, simply that, astounding. The level of detail in the product is incredible given the cost. I am sure that Eduard would produce a Brassin set with alot less detail and at considerably more cost. David gives you a choice of 2 types of practice bombs for each of the two carriers and the release mechanisms are faithfully reproduced in PE. For £8.16 (Herr Hannants) that represents great value. I will look at building these separately as individual kits. Once finished, I can introduce them to a couple of projects I have in mind (T4 Jaguar and T12 Harrier). Agreed, also worth noting that they may be slightly cheaper directly from Flightpath, rather than from the Big "H"! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacksdad Posted October 26, 2012 Author Share Posted October 26, 2012 Agreed, also worth noting that they may be slightly cheaper directly from Flightpath, rather than from the Big "H"! They are indeed Bill. And I would always try and get direct from manufacturer when I can and have bought from David in the past and been very happy with the price/service. Just need to get some more pennies for the next sets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now