Jump to content

1/48 - Sukhoi Su-17M-4 & Su-17UM-3 "Fitter-K & G" by HobbyBoss - Su-17M-4 & -UM-3 released - Su-17/-22M-3K conv. set by Vespa Models


Homebee

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, DarrenH said:

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...

I'm not sure I understand. The windscreen geometry is similar between KP and Trumpyboss (pinched when seen from the top, doesn't "go in the nose" when seen from the side) so putting one on the other won't improve anything AFAIK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The KP front windscreen is definitely one of the worse looking parts... hard to top that....CAD model of this kit at leadz shows a downward looking front windscreen which the KP one does not do.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, exdraken said:

The KP front windscreen is definitely one of the worse looking parts... hard to top that....CAD model of this kit at leadz shows a downward looking front windscreen which the KP one does not do.....

It doesn't go downward a lot to me but anyway it's the "placed of top of the nose" that bothers me. The windscreen looks like an afterthought, it's not "integrated" to the aircraft. Same as in the KP.

 

HB

hbSu17M4.jpg

 

KH

khSu17M4.jpg

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that those are based on the CAD data:

13047692_1108531309199154_22180513330951

hard to tell if integrated within the fuselage or not. your pic above shows the some painting instructions not necessarily representative of the plastic (that of course goes for the CAD images unfortunately!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, exdraken said:

your pic above shows the some painting instructions not necessarily representative of the plastic

Well in fact I believe the painting instructions are based on the latest CAD versions:

1) the KH Super Etendard doesn't have an option for raised flaps... in the painting directions, the flaps are lowered indeed

2) the KH Su-17 concave middle under fuselage visible in Mike's review also appears in the painting directions

3) the HB Su-17 almost straight windscreen base visible in the test build (Shanghai show) also appears on the HB painting instructions top view

4) the HB MiG-23BN nose, windscreen and canopy in side view... same thing also

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Laurent said:

Well in fact I believe the painting instructions are based on the latest CAD versions:

1) the KH Super Etendard doesn't have an option for raised flaps... in the painting directions, the flaps are lowered indeed

2) the KH Su-17 concave middle under fuselage visible in Mike's review also appears in the painting directions

3) the HB Su-17 almost straight windscreen base visible in the test build (Shanghai show) also appears on the HB painting instructions top view

4) the HB MiG-23BN nose, windscreen and canopy in side view... same thing also

That would be relative bad then...

kitbash anyone? KH& HB OF COURSE :devil:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Comparing these two pictures, there are more things than just the HB windscreen that looks off:

 

- HB underside of nose looks wrong, shape seems to be symmetric to the upper side. KH looks better. 

 

- HB spine seems to follow an almost straight line, which is wrong. 

 

- The HB underside fin has wrong shape (not the hardest thing to correct, though).

 

- The KH air intake on the fin looks off shape both on the CAD and the instructions. On the CAD it looks too integrated with the fin, but on the instruction it does not look integrated at all. HB looks much better here. 

 

- The underside of the front fuselage (apart from the nose) looks a little too straight on the KH kit. HB looks better, but I am not sure on this. 

 

So yes, a kitbash if these two seems to be the best option... :-S However, I am mostly interested in the two-seater, so I guess that I have to struggle with HB...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Bjorn said:

Comparing these two pictures, there are more things than just the HB windscreen that looks off:

Yes but I focus on the front fuselage as it's the "face" of the model.

 

- HB spine seems to follow an almost straight line, which is wrong. 

Reference: http://www.airliners.net/photo/Russia-Air-Force/Sukhoi-Su-17M4/2553728/L

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
On 07.03.2017 at 7:04 PM, exdraken said:

ok... lets please see us some box content then!!!!!

 

 --  please!

Very interesting!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh Nice!  Rubber tires. :unamused:

 

From the pictures of the sprues, it looks like the HB kit will be a quicker build.  Not quite the detail of the KH kit but you can clearly see the intake splitter and the way HB tackled that part.  To me, the biggest issue with the KH kit is the absence of the splitter on the shock cone. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, HB has a better fuselage cross-section, better lower fuselage shape and an intake splitter (though its shape is wrong), but they messed up the windscreen and canopy.

 

KH got the windscreen and canopy right, but they skipped the intake splitter, and messed up the fuselage cross section and lower fuselage shape.

 

Sigh... decisions, decisions. :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This could be edging it over the Kitty Hawk kit, the one piece fuselage half looks far more appealing to me than the KH multi part option.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, ICMF said:

So, HB has a better fuselage cross-section, better lower fuselage shape and an intake splitter (though its shape is wrong), but they messed up the windscreen and canopy.

 

KH got the windscreen and canopy right, but they skipped the intake splitter, and messed up the fuselage cross section and lower fuselage shape.

 

Sigh... decisions, decisions. :(

I wouldn't go as far as to say the the HB fuselage cross-section is better...I does look as though the forward section is wrong (lower taper too straight).   So it may very well come down to which is less wrong!  I'd say the edge may go to HB for the "one-piece" fuselage sides. I have the KH kit and the fuselage detail is fine, however, it will take considerably more time to assemble.  Once I get a copy of the HB kit, a side-by-side comparison will be in order.  Either way, it won't stop me from picking one up. :smirk:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Bravo52 said:

it will take considerably more time to assemble.

Less time than scratchbuilding windscreen and canopy patterns, vacuforming the parts and adapting the HB fuselage to the vacu parts :)

 

I still prefer what's on the right to what's on the left.

hbKhWs.jpg

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...