Wolfpack Posted January 12, 2013 Share Posted January 12, 2013 (edited) This is definately one of those 'urge' builds. The type where you see a kit and think ahhhhh, yes, that's for me. That was the effect the Kitty Hawk release had and not content with that, aquired examples of the earlier Hobbycraft releases. These are based on their T-33 kits, as evidenced by the RIOs position, just a duplicate of the flying controls. Nice scribed details though, so not too bad. The Kitty Hawk kit on the other hand, comes with etched detailing for the cockpit, including seat belts, yet the seats provided would waste them. I elected to replace these with seats from True Details and the Hobbycraft cockpit with the same company's T-33 cockpit set. Thanks to Silver Fox, I can model this particular aircraft: The photo's from Wikipedia and is public domain, so don't panic folks. It is an F-84C from the 27th Fighter Interceptor Sqn and one example from the Caracal decal sheet. Right, box art and sprue shots. The second set of decals, are from the B kit, the parts being exactly the same in both A and B kits. Differences between the aircraft themselves were internal. The C was a whole new beast, new engine, many external mods and of course, the deletion of gun armament for the unguided rockets. Real fun items these, as fired from the nose, they could cause an engine flame-out and it was virtualy impossible to re-start it. Thank the lord for ejector seats. Washing and priming the resin came next, F-94B resin. Using the RIOs details from the C kit, a scratch built rear console was made from a teplate from the Kitty Hawk etch and some resin offcuts (thanks for the tip Meltchie). Suitably painted I now have both cockpits ready. The B didn't have the hoop over the console, so that was removed. B model. C Model. The B aslo had the .50 cals barrels replaced with some steel tube. The green stuff on the nose was used to fill the gouge made by my dremmel. Over-enthusiastic grinding. Time now to get the fuselage halves together, after adding some suitable weight of course. Kitty Hawk supply a ball bearing for this and then totally ignore it in the instructions. Smashin'. W Edited January 12, 2013 by Wolfpack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silver Fox Posted January 12, 2013 Share Posted January 12, 2013 Watching with interest, I've just made a start on my C so I'm learning from your experience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfpack Posted January 12, 2013 Author Share Posted January 12, 2013 Guinea pig again huh? W Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silver Fox Posted January 12, 2013 Share Posted January 12, 2013 (edited) Lead on. Edited January 12, 2013 by Silver Fox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
general melchett Posted January 13, 2013 Share Posted January 13, 2013 Nice choice Ian, picked up a C at Telford to build some time and just been sent the new Caracal decals, also fancy a 27th FI sqdn mochine, (love that scheme)... To be honest I prefer the blunt look of the B model, but prefer the C's funky swept tailplanes and wing pods. Must get hold of the HC kit some time.......keep seeing it at shows but never get beyond promising to go back and get it .. Remember to extend the HB's main gear oleos as the kit parts are compressed for some reason, (SAC do them correctly but I think I'll do it myself and save a few quid.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfpack Posted January 13, 2013 Author Share Posted January 13, 2013 Ah, the Melchie returns! Sabatical? The question of the u/c legs has, I think, been sussed by yours truly. I measured both Hobbycraft and Kitty Hawk legs and they're both the same size. Where I think KH has gone wrong, is the rendition of the nosegear bay. There's a distict step or bracket where the oleo mounts and KH's kit is flat. I'm of the opinion (at the mo) that Hobbycraft got it right. http://data3.primeportal.net/hangar/howard_mason/f-94c_51-13575/images/f-94c_51-13575_18_of_21.jpg I'll have to compare them when mounted (ooer missus)! W Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
general melchett Posted January 13, 2013 Share Posted January 13, 2013 Cheers Ian, yes, I haven't touched a model for months now, ( honest constable !), mainly down to having no where to fiddle with the placcy until my new hobby den is finished and also due to having other absorbing hobbies taking up a lot of my spare time. As for the kits, yep sounds good and as you've got both of 'em I guess you're ideally placed to check accuracy, it'll be very useful for my build. Always a great idea to get someone else to do the leg work and suss it all out first, (mind you that's usually me..) Come on fella, get fettling, looking forward to seeing process.... Melchie.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfpack Posted January 15, 2013 Author Share Posted January 15, 2013 Real progress has been made. The fuselages went together with problems for the Hobbycraft kit, I think it was slightly warped and no problems with the Kitty Hawk kit. A lump of aluminium was used for the noseweight in the Hobbycraft kit. Fuselage halves showing filler application. Kitty Hawk supply a ball bearing, all very nice, except they do NOT refer to it in the instructions. Being clever, I decided to add it to the nosecone. Ha! The part behind the nosecone wouldn't fit beacause the bearing interferred. I therefore Dremeled out a hole for it to poke through. Adding this assembly to the rocket tube piece, resulted in that part forcing the nose section out of line. Another hole had to be Dremeled into the rocket tube part, along with trimming the plastic guides inside to enable a decent fit onto the fuselage. The nose pieces showing the holes reamed out to allow the bearing to fit. Next time, I'll add the bearing to the rear of the rocket tube section, avoiding all that heartache! Wings next. The Hobbycraft lower wing is a straight piece. This is unfortunate as it has to curve along the lower fuselage. Solved by cementing the forward edge and when dry, the trailing edge. Don't forget to add the u/c bays before you do this though! The top wing sections were cemented to the fuselage first, eliminating 99% of the join. A smidgin of filler was needed, but they are an excellent fit. The Kitty Hawk parts required a touch with the sanding stick before they fitted smoothly. When dry, another small sand at the intake edges and that's it. Wings with tanks fitted. The C model has pronounced dihedral and when the top wing sections were test fitted, they flattened the wing dihedral. In this case, the top wings are cemented to the bottom half, the masked to keep the dihedral whilst the wing to fuselage glue dries. Ensuring the wings keep the dihedral. The next photos highlight the difference between the A & B models and the C. Of note is the larger aft fuselage due to the engine change, wingplan, tail section and nose sections showing the armament variations. Back on with production. W Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tonka Posted January 18, 2013 Share Posted January 18, 2013 (edited) Uauuu !!! One of my very favorite aircrafts of all times . Congrats Wolfpack ! Is there some pic of the real F-94C showing the tail planes attachment to fuselage section , from above as in this picture You made ? Tonka Edited January 18, 2013 by Tonka Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfpack Posted January 18, 2013 Author Share Posted January 18, 2013 Tonka Try this....http://data3.primeportal.net/hangar/howard_mason/f-94c_51-13575/images/f-94c_51-13575_10_of_21.jpg Not many photos I admit, but that's life. W Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfpack Posted January 19, 2013 Author Share Posted January 19, 2013 Courting controversy, I've modified the mount for the Kitty Hawk kit's nosewheel, extending it down from the roof of the bay by about 4mm. The photos show both kits nosewheel legs test fitted. First up, Hobby Craft. Now Kitty Hawk. It's an improvement in the sit of the model at least. W Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
general melchett Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 Coming along nicely Ian, and the mod certainly improves the stance of the Kitty Hawk kit. Just out of interest are the main gear legs of both kits the same length or does the full compression of the KH ones make a difference? I only ask coz if it does then won't it over accentuate the nose high attitude of the model with the nose gear mod. Just a query from one old war horse to another..... Melchie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfpack Posted January 20, 2013 Author Share Posted January 20, 2013 Greetings, old horse. Both kit legs are the same length, which is what led me to look further at both kits, rather than accept the 'compression' theory. Hence the 'incorrect' nosegear bay. I may be talking total a not unknown phenomenon, but looking at photos of both, I reckon I'm on the right lines at least. F-94C. F-94A. Anyways, if it doesn't work, you heard it here first................. W Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfpack Posted February 5, 2013 Author Share Posted February 5, 2013 Blimey! Forgot to update. To rectify, both models are now waiting for me to aquire some satin varnish for one of the finishing touches. The addition of the extra 4mm section in the Kitty Hawk wheel bay seems to have done the trick. Of course, the Hobbycraft decals were absolute sh**e, so the colourful markings are now a mix of sprayed on paint and decal strip. The Carecal decal have real problems when it comes to curves, especially, the one covering the nose rocket bays. Like Monsieur le Fox's, my KH kit was a tail sitter and required extra weight at the front, supplied by small bearings white glued into the nose wheel bay and airbrake bays. Corrected nose sit for the Kitty Hawk C. Where it's at. Roll on the Huddersfield show. W Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silver Fox Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 Blimey I thought you'd given up on these. Looking good old chap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfpack Posted February 5, 2013 Author Share Posted February 5, 2013 BTW, you owe me two black strips of decal. Actually, they're on one side untill the varnish is procured. W Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
general melchett Posted February 6, 2013 Share Posted February 6, 2013 Looking good fella me lad ! , they really were nose high beasts weren't they.......looks set to launch off the deck of USS Kittyhawk...(see what I did there?). I guess they needed the angle to haul their fat a***es off the deck in them thar basic gas burner days. Really like her in the 27th sqdn markings but now that you've gorn and done one I'll have to think of something else, dammit !..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfpack Posted February 6, 2013 Author Share Posted February 6, 2013 (edited) see what I did there? Yes indeed. I hope you wipe it up and apologise! W Edited February 6, 2013 by Wolfpack 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