Heller TF-104G 1/72

[Des]

Good to see that you have got your project sorted out and sorry that the news on the Heller twin-set option was less than encouraging , hope that they all work out well.

 

Some recent F-104 builds on the forum and a longer-planned multi-type project had already got me thinking about the same myself hence the Heller kit having previously been brought down from the loft so parts off sprues and some minor building already done on a Marinefliger RF-104G from the Hasegawa S kit and a Belgian F-104G from the mid-90s Revell G kit.      Some of the left over parts might even allow the best attempt possible at a TF-104 from the Heller F/TF kit but now that I know it is rather ill-proportioned keeping it well away from the others to avoid comparison and  probably in Danish or Canadian overall dark green or Norwegian dark green over grey to avoid having to make a camouflage scheme fit the disproportionately stretched fuselage.     Might even manage to resurrect the Bullpup carrying Greek Hasegawa G kit model that has been lying in a box partially decalled and with the various breakable bits broken off for the past decade while I am 'Starstruck'.

Edited March 22, 2017 by Des
add an and

[RidgeRunner]

I'm glad it is all positive and encouraging, Des. Good luck with all. 

 

Martin

[Deacon Bill]

I was under the impression that the only 1/72 kits of the "G" (or "S") that feature the larger undercarriage and bulged main-wheel doors were the Hasegawa and Revell kits   If I am correct then no other kit claiming to be a "G" can be accurate, right? -- regardless of whatever other merits the individual kits might have.  However the various other kits that claim to be "G"s should generally be OK to represent "J"s and CF-104s ... yes?

 

I'm blanking ... the TF-104G should have the same bulged doors etc. as the F-104G?  Or not?

 

As an aside, the FROG F-104 was not just the (old) Hasegawa kit in a new box.  They actually reworked the plastic -- the undercarriage parts are slightly different.  (Still not correct for a "G" though.)

 

[Giorgio N]

33 minutes ago, Deacon Bill said:

I was under the impression that the only 1/72 kits of the "G" (or "S") that feature the larger undercarriage and bulged main-wheel doors were the Hasegawa and Revell kits   If I am correct then no other kit claiming to be a "G" can be accurate, right? -- regardless of whatever other merits the individual kits might have.  However the various other kits that claim to be "G"s should generally be OK to represent "J"s and CF-104s ... yes?

 

 

Well, yes and no... early F-104Gs retained the thinner wheels and therefore the "flat" main wheel well doors, so it's possible to reproduce one of these using any of the kits that don't have the wider wheel and bulged doors. The vast majority of Gs however had the thicker wheels and the bulges, required because of the higher maximum weight of the G compared to other variants. This means that having a kit with the wider wheels allows a modeller interested in the accuracy of these details to build a way larger number of subjects

The wider wheels and the bulged doors were also retained on the S

 

A kit of a G with thin wheels can indeed be used to build a J or a CF. There are some differences in the smaller details (on top of my head for example the CF has a different coaming over the instrument panel), how much these matter is up to each modellers.

One bigger difference is the presence on Canadian aircrafts of 3 bulges (one under the chin and two under the rear fuselage) for an RWR system starting at some point in the '70s. These in 1/72 are included in the Hasegawa J/CF box and in one of the AMT reboxes of the Esci kit (may have been the only rebox, I'm not sure)

 

 

33 minutes ago, Deacon Bill said:

I'm blanking ... the TF-104G should have the same bulged doors etc. as the F-104G?  Or not?

 

 

 

Generally speaking yes, the TF-104G has the same "heavy weight" wheels and bulged doors of the single seater. Again, there may have been aircrafts with the thinner wheels and therefore no bulge

Edited March 23, 2017 by Giorgio N

[Deacon Bill]

OK, thanks Giorgio, that's pretty much what I had thought.  I've got a lot of "G" kits in my stash (I like to contrast and compare across various brands) and I came to the realisation a while back that unless I stock up on a lot of the Hasegawa and/or Revell kits then I was going to be building a lot of Japanese and Canadian examples.

 

I wish some third-party company would offer a proper "G" accuracy set to convert, say, the ESCI/Italeri kits ... CMK came so close with the various detail sets that they offer but apparently lost interest by the time they came to the undercarriage.   Those bulged doors are not an easy thing to scratch! -- at least not with my skills.

 

Until very recently you couldn't even get replacement wheel sets, but Armory and Reskit offer sets now for pretty much all sub-types.

 

[Giorgio N]

The best plan to add proper G doors to the Esci kit is to make resin copies of either the Hasegawa or Revell kit. At least that's my plan... I'm also planning some copies of the Hasegawa cockpit and instrument panel, the Esci parts are poor and inaccurate. I have yet to start with the plan though, I'd better put my acts together and start cloning

Unfortunately cloning the way more accurate Hasegawa canopy is a different story.. if only Pavla or Rob Taurus did a vacform replacement...

[Hook]

43 minutes ago, Giorgio N said:

The best plan to add proper G doors to the Esci kit is to make resin copies of either the Hasegawa or Revell kit. At least that's my plan...

 

I've tried that - the Hasegawa / RoG doors do not match the wheel wells of the Esci, unfortunately.

 

Cheers,

 

Andre

[Giorgio N]

Thanks Andre, sounds like I'll have to change my plan then...

[Deacon Bill]

On 3/24/2017 at 20:26, Hook said:

I've tried that - the Hasegawa / RoG doors do not match the wheel wells of the Esci, unfortunately.

 

How noticeable is the discrepancy if the doors are open, though?

 

I've tried some resin-cloning in the past and the results were ... poor.  Still, it's a good excuse to try again, I suppose ....

 

[Hook]

2 hours ago, Deacon Bill said:

 

How noticeable is the discrepancy if the doors are open, though?

 

Quite severe. It's almost if they were designed for a different kit altogether. 

 

Cheers,

 

Andre