Saab J 32B/E Lansen, Hobbyboss 1/48

[Bjorn]

Here is a first look at this exciting release, which also is a bit scaring after the Hobbyboss Tunnan. Let us start with the boxart:

Nice boxart, for once it is correct with the often shown mountains on Swedish subjects, since F4 wing is located in northern Sweden (although this looks more like the Alps than the Swedish mountains, but you can't win them all... )

First sprue with body halves:

First the most important question: Is it really 1/48 scale - the Tunnan wasn't. The answer is yes. At least almost. I have not measured it myself, but it is just a few millimeters longer than Tarangus' Lansen. The nose is thicker than Tarangus', and I think it is a bit too thick, but I have to check references first. The belly tank has correct shape - which Tarangus don't have.

The part behind the cockpit has wrong shape while Tarangus have captured it better. This will be pretty tricky to adjust. On the other hand, the gun openings are better than Tarangus'.

Surface detailing looks pretty good, although there seems to be a bit too much rivets since they are almost along every panel line. But panel lines look correct and are fine and crisp. The small air outlet needs to be opened, otherwise it will look weird, it is too big to just be painted black.

The rear part differs a lot from Tarangus J 32, but the truth is somewhere between the both. Hobbyboss has a better shape of the "cut" at the exhaust, but the part above it is far too long.

Cockpit looks like a Lansen cockpit, but almost nothing is spot on. But for most builders it is good enough. However it is larger than Tarangus - and i think that Tarangus is right. Lansen is a wide aircraft since it was designed for a Swedish-designed engine that never was used. The license-built RM 6A was not as wide as the one that was intended, which resulted in a very wide aircraft. Hobbyboss seems to have made a cockpit that fills the whole space - which the original one didn't.

Next sprue: Not much to say here. The engine part is very basic. but not much will be seen anyway.

Ejection seats are like the cockpit - at a first glance they look correct, but they aren't. They are far too large and shape is incorrect. But for most builders they are enough. Hobbyboss have included air brakes - Tarangus didn't - and this is really great since they always were extended on a parked aircraft. It is a pity that they are far too small, they are almost in 1/72...

Wings look great, size and shape is correct and it is a good idea to integrate the mail wheel well. However it is a bit more difficult for super-detailers, since the real thing had no "walls". But for most builders this is an excellent solution. Wingtip lights and elevons are separate parts (not on Tarangus).

Underwing stores are included for a J 32E, something that Tarangus have not.

Clear parts are fine and crisp and looks correct. The windscreen wiper is a separate part - well done!

A small photo-etch sheet is included with parts for the far-too-small air brakes.

Finally the joke of this box: The decals. Wrong typeface, wrong colours, "hand-written" stencils and more. These are completely useless and will destroy even a perfect built and painted model. The only place for these is the dustbin.

So what is the conclusion of this first impression? Well, it looks as if this model can be built into a decent model of a Lansen. It is probably much simpler to build than Tarangus release. However, the errors in shape and simplified construction makes it difficult to build into a perfect replica. If you just want a Lansen, this could be a good choice. But if you want to build a perfect Lansen, Tarangus is still the only one.

Price is lower than Tarangus, 43.99 GBP vs 64.99 GBP for Tarangus at Hannants. However, bear in mind that you have to find aftermarket decals (Tarangus release has absolutely brilliant decals), and - I also would recommend - aftermarket air brakes. Air brakes are necessary for Tarangus as well, but the difference in decal quality makes the price difference smaller.

And now: Let's start the build!

Edited April 1, 2016 by Bjorn

[exdraken]

thanks for the review!

decals is not understandable in my opinion... it costs the same printing good or incorrect ones.... some research can't be too hard!

I think that is all that is out there on specific decals:

http://www.maestromodels.com/saab-j32b-d-e-and-gamma-lansen-huge-sheet-almost-a4-size.html

http://www.maestromodels.com/saab-a32a-lansen-sharkmouth-decals.html

I guess i will buy the Hobby Boss ones as well. I have the Tarangus one, but not yet started...

can you help me on what external stores are included in the kit?

I can see tanks, pylons, and some strange "rods"

there is lots of aftermarket from Maestro Models, so external loads is just a question of price unfortunately...

http://www.maestromodels.com/catalogsearch/result/index/?q=lansen&scale=302

for additional info/ inspiration:

http://nordicairpower.com/books/nap%237.html

thanks, I am really looking forward to your build!

[Bjorn]

The loads are Petrus jamming pods (those that looks like tanks) and Boz 3 chaff dispensers. The third ones (the small ones) are - I think - laser reflector pods. All equipment is for the J 32E electronic warfare version.

Note that the decals supplied are only for a J 32B fighter. This individual also exist as a renovated J 32E - but it is re-painted and it never flew as a J 32E in these markings. So those who wants to use the loads have to buy aftermarket decals.

Edited April 2, 2016 by Bjorn

[Snitok1983]

Mmmmmmmmmmmm! Sweeeet! I wanna one!

[Rémi]

Many thanks for this very interessing review

[Antti_K]

Hello Bjorn!

Thank you for this review! It is interesting to see that a Chinese company produces a kit of a subject that is mostly known in Scandinavia.

Looking at the pictures my eye spotted the intake "recesses". They seem to be badly out of shape for J32B or E. They are far too short and curve too heavily downward. On the other hand surface detailing looks quite accurate; unlike in Tarangus kit.

I build a Tarangus A32A and converted it to an early J32E. I had to scratch build the Petrus which was easy but the resin/PE "remsfällare" was tough one... Here is my "Störlansen": http://www.pienoismallit.net/galleria/malli_12281/

Best Regards,

Antti

[Bjorn]

Looking at the pictures my eye spotted the intake "recesses". They seem to be badly out of shape for J32B or E. They are far too short and curve too heavily downward. On the other hand surface detailing looks quite accurate; unlike in Tarangus kit.

I build a Tarangus A32A and converted it to an early J32E. I had to scratch build the Petrus which was easy but the resin/PE "remsfällare" was tough one... Here is my "Störlansen": http://www.pienoismallit.net/galleria/malli_12281/

Best Regards,

Antti

A great build! Thanks for sharing! You are right that the curve of the intake is out of shape. However this will be pretty easy to fix. The rest of the intakes are about the same as Tarangus, they might look short on the pictures, but they are not.

[gingerbob]

Hi Bjorn, Thanks for the link on Jon's Meteor thread- I'd missed this. Looks moderately promising.

bob

[SpeedyGonzales]

Rather rare aircraft, definately a "must follow" build...

[Bjorn]

Looks moderately promising.

bob

Spot on!

[ReccePhreak]

Thanks for the good review. I will follow your build with interest, especially to see if you correct any of HobbyBoss's mistakes.

Now if someone would do a 1/48 S-32C conversion set.

Larry

[TobHol]

Thanks for the good review. I will follow your build with interest, especially to see if you correct any of HobbyBoss's mistakes.

Now if someone would do a 1/48 S-32C conversion set.

Larry

There is a S32C conversion to the Tarangus Lansen. http://www.rebell.com/s32c-lansen-conversion-se-info.html

/Tobias

[HOUSTON]

Bjorn,

Concise review of the kit etc...

Look forward to seeing this come alive here ..GO for it !

[ReccePhreak]

There is a S32C conversion to the Tarangus Lansen. http://www.rebell.com/s32c-lansen-conversion-se-info.html

/Tobias

Yes, I am aware of that. I wish I could afford both the Tarangus Lansen, and the Maestro S-32C conversion.

Being out of work doesn't really help my modelling budget.

Larry

[Bjorn]

Yes, I am aware of that. I wish I could afford both the Tarangus Lansen, and the Maestro S-32C conversion.

Being out of work doesn't really help my modelling budget.

Larry

From what I have seen so far, it is not likely that this conversion will fit Hobbyboss Lansen, since the front part looks thicker than Tarangus. Using the J 32 version for this conversion will also mean that you have to do some surgery. The best version to start with is Tarangus A 32.

[ReccePhreak]

From what I have seen so far, it is not likely that this conversion will fit Hobbyboss Lansen, since the front part looks thicker than Tarangus. Using the J 32 version for this conversion will also mean that you have to do some surgery. The best version to start with is Tarangus A 32.

I didn't really think that the Maestro S-32C conversion would fit the Hobby BooBoo kit, since it was designed for the accurate Tarangus kit.

Oh well, I just need to set aside some "spare" change, so I can get the Tarangus Lansen and the Maestro conversion. Of course I also need to save for the Pilot Replicas J-29 Tunnan and the Maestro recce conversion for it.

Larry

[Giorgio N]

Thanks for the review Bjorn, looks like HB has done a much better job with the Lansen compared to the Tunnan. Pity about the decals, unfortunately both HB and Trumpeter often include very badly researched decals (not to mention the sometimes ridicolous words used in their stencils...)

Edited April 11, 2016 by Giorgio N

[Bjorn]

OK, here we go! First a dry-fit:

Fit is really a dream. Not much filler will be necessary here! And it really looks like a Lansen which, I guess, is enough for most builders. But not for a Swedish rivet-counter. So let us compare it with my Tarangus A 32 that I built a few years ago:

As you can see, noses are different. Tarangus is more pointed (there is also a difference in the lower part of the air intakes, but this is a difference between the A 32 and J 32 versions). But which one is correct? Well, as far as I can see, the truth is somewhere between the both, but closer to Tarangus. Here is the original (the air intakes are different, but this is the prototype):

From a side angle, the difference is even more visible:

Tarangus is more pointed, Hobbyboss is more fat and the nose cone is bigger. However, I think that Hobbyboss have included part of the body in the nose cone. So a bit of sanding and a new line between body and nose will probably help. And here is the real thing:

As you can see, Tarangus is closer but not perfect. The rounded line is a bit similar to Hobbyboss, but the nose is not that fat. On the picture above this ons, you can also see the difference between the air intakes. Tarangus is far better, however, the top angle is a bit sharper.

Next picture is from above:

And the original:

The main difference is the part behind the canopy. Hobbyboss have made it too long and too drop-shaped. Tarangus have captured it far better. Apart from this, there are only small differences on the stabilizers where Tarangus is somewhat better in shapes.

OK. Let's start!

[Christer A]

Close but small nagging mistakes yes...

Also, the top of the stabilizer fairing looks very rounded on HB.

Maybe the aft fuselage it to fat too?

[Solo]

Bjorn, are you going to make flatter and more angular this part after canopy?

It could be difficult to flatten it because that it results of canopy's shape.

[Bjorn]

Close but small nagging mistakes yes...

Also, the top of the stabilizer fairing looks very rounded on HB.

Maybe the aft fuselage it to fat too?

I don't think it is too fat. At least not if Tarangus is right - both aft fuselages are about the same size. The top of the stabilizer looks more rounded on this picture, see the sprue shot above, there you can see that the shape is at least almost correct.

Bjorn, are you going to make flatter and more angular this part after canopy?

It could be difficult to flatten it because that it results of canopy's shape.

You are right, this is a difficult part. So I think that I will let it be as it is. As I mentioned in my first post, those who want to build a perfect Lansen should build Tarangus instead. As you can see, the part just in front of the fin has wrong shape too. No big deal, but pretty difficult to fix.

[exdraken]

thanks for showing!

for me a bigger difference lies fairing between fuselage and stabs/tail: in the top view Hobby Boss has a kind of ogival shape, whereas in the photo of the real plane and Tarangus this areas looks more pointed and straight ....

[Bjorn]

Yes, you are completely right. It is a bit strange that Hobbyboss have missed such obvious things, when they have captured lots of small details (I will show them in my next post).

[Christer A]

thanks for showing!

for me a bigger difference lies fairing between fuselage and stabs/tail: in the top view Hobby Boss has a kind of ogival shape, whereas in the photo of the real plane and Tarangus this areas looks more pointed and straight ....

Ogival! That's the word I was looking for. Thanks Exdraken, you highlighted just the spot I was trying to point out...

[gingerbob]

I think both the "blend" between "hips" and fuselage at the fin and the hump behind the canopy could be made more visually OK (which is different from 3D "accurate") with a little careful sanding (hump) or extending with filler (fin area).

That leaves the nose, which I'd have to study a lot more.

bob