Convert 1/72 F-104A/C kit from Hasegawa or Revell "G' - is it possible?

[Rabbit Leader]

All,

 

Just wondering if anyone has successfully attempted to convert either Hasegawa or Revell F-104G kits into an earlier F-104A/C model?

I have both Revell and Hasegawa kits and do not really want to add the Esci/Italeri kit to my ever growing stash.

I've also read that this Italeri F-104A/C model suffers from inaccuracies to the tip tanks (can be replaced) and a slightly oversized canopy (a little harder to correct).

 

So, can the larger G type fin be cut back to successfully make an earlier version? or should I just forget about it altogether and either source the Revell 'C' or accept the Italeri kit's issues?

 

All comments appreciated.

 

Cheers... Dave

         

[Hook]

The RoG C is really your best bet. You'd need the A/C style wheels and thin gear covers.

 

Cheers,

 

Andre

[Rabbit Leader]

8 minutes ago, Hook said:

The RoG C is really your best bet. You'd need the A/C style wheels and thin gear covers.

 

Cheers,

 

Andre

 

Not quite as easy to find these days, Andre.

I do believe you're probably right however I've got a feeling one of my kits does come with additional smaller wheels and doors - can't quite remember which one.

 

Cheers.. Dave.

[Giorgio N]

I have not tried this but I've looked at the kits with this in mind (have several Hase Gs and the Revell/Monogram C and G in the stash) and my personal view is that it is very doable. I'd go with Hasegawa as the Hasegawa G already has the thinner wheel well doors as shares the sprues with the J and CF kit that have these doors. The A/C wheels are not present but I've sorted this by making a rubber mould to copy the Revell ones in resin (and if you're going to try this conversion I'm happy to send you a pair). BTW, the Italeri kit also lacks the proper wheels.The Hasegawa kit is IMHO also superior to the Revell one and is easily available. The J box can also be used and this can be found from Japanese dealers at very good prices.

There are then a number of smaller details to sort, like different panel lines and smaller intakes, my go-to reference is this webpage from Taiwan that explains these differences from a modeller's perspective:

 

http://rexkuang.tian.yam.com/posts/38281637

 

Ok, everything is in Chinese language but pictures are very clear and the differences well illustrated.

Speaking of Cs, when deployed to Vietnam they sported bulges for an RWR system. These are included in the Revell box, however the one under the nosecone is the wrong shape (those unde the tail are fine). I've been slowly scratchbuilding one of these to add to my Esci kit (started building this before finding the Revell one and decided to finish it anyway). Again, once it's done I'll make resin copies.

If you're doing an aircraft without these bulges then you have one less problem

 

The Revell/Monogram kit may be the easiest option for an A or a C, however it is indeed not that easy to find and IMHO the canopy is also not as accurate as the Hasegawa one. It is of course a pity that the Japanese company didn't add a C to their 1/72 line of Starfighters as they did in 1/48 scale, would have made things so much easier.

I should add that I'm pretty sure I've seen such a conversion on the web, however I can't remember where and I can't find it

Edited June 14, 2017 by Giorgio N

[Rabbit Leader]

That's a wonderful post Giorgio and an excellent link. As you say it's all in Chinese, however a photograph tells a thousand words in many languages.

I was sure one of these kits came with two sets of wheels, however I've not retrieved my kits yet so believe you on that one - perhaps I'm confusing this with the two ejector seats?

It's probably why your making replacement wheels anyway - which, as you've kindly offered, I would be most grateful if you could send me a set of your resin replacements (RWR bulges would be handy as well - however no rush).

Hopefully there is something else that you may be after so that I can repay you back in some other modelling way.  

 

I totally agree that Hasegawa could/should have offered F-104A/C parts to extend their G/S range and help generate greater kit sales worldwide.

Perhaps there are still remote possibilities with this, however I've never come across a consumer 'kit suggestions' website for future Hasegawa kits.

 

Cheers and once again, many thanks.. Dave.

 

 

 

   

[Rabbit Leader]

http://rexkuang.tian.yam.com/posts/38281637

Actually, you can copy and paste this text to an online translator and believe or not - it works!!

There's obvious differences in overall context, however the body of the article is all there.

What is the Chinese-English equivalent of "Spanglish" anyway?

 

Cheers.. Dave

[Giorgio N]

Dave,

you are indeed correct that one kit came with two sets of wheels and this is the Hasegawa G. The wheels in this kit however don't include those used on the C but are the narrow wheels used on the J, CF and early Gs and the later thicker wheels used on most G and the S (and most TF-104Gs... but twin seater are a story for another day).

Part 2 of the Chinese article has a picture of the wheels, they mention part U13 but this IIRC has nothing to do with the 1/72 kit... and using your suggestion I got the page translated and the part is indeed from the Hasegawa 1/48 kit (thanks for the tip!). The article here makes a small mistake, the C wheels are not the same used on the J, they are both narrow but have different rims.

The same Hase 1/72 F-104G also has 2 ejection seats, the Lockheed C2 and the MB Mk.GQ7 (or IQ7 Italian aircrafts), of course the A and C never used the MB seat. The A used several variants of the Stanley seat before the C2 became the standard, for more info check this page:

 

http://www.ejectionsite.com/f104seat.htm

 

Really the differences in 1/72 scale on these seats would be pretty small and you may just not bother. The Hasegawa seat is IMHO a pretty good base.

 

Will PM you re. wheels !

[John R]

There was a lot of discussion about this sort of thing in my post

http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235018210-italeri-f-104ac-172/

which might be of help. It was not all about the Italeri version

John

 

[Hook]

1 minute ago, Giorgio N said:

Speaking of Cs, when deployed to Vietnam they sported bulges for an RWR system.

 

A small addendum - there were two seperate F-104C's deployments to Vietnam, one from 1965-66 and the second from 1966-67. During the first one, they were still in bare metal with gloss white / ADC gray wings, and had no RWR; during the second deployment they were painted in SEA camo and were gradually fitted with the RWR.

 

Cheers,

 

Andre

[Thud4444]

47 minutes ago, Rabbit Leader said:

http://rexkuang.tian.yam.com/posts/38281637

Actually, you can copy and paste this text to an online translator and believe or not - it works!!

There's obvious differences in overall context, however the body of the article is all there.

What is the Chinese-English equivalent of "Spanglish" anyway?

 

Cheers.. Dave

 

 

We call it Engrish here in the States. 

 

Edited June 14, 2017 by Thud4444

[Rabbit Leader]

5 minutes ago, Hook said:

 

A small addendum - there were two seperate F-104C's deployments to Vietnam, one from 1965-66 and the second from 1966-67. During the first one, they were still in bare metal with gloss white / ADC gray wings, and had no RWR; during the second deployment they were painted in SEA camo and were gradually fitted with the RWR.

 

Cheers,

 

Andre

Roget that!

I've just been reading Osprey's "F-104 Units in Combat" and this great book has peaked my Starfighter interest once again - hence the Starfighter enthusiasm.

 

Cheers.. Dave   

[Giorgio N]

23 minutes ago, John R said:

There was a lot of discussion about this sort of thing in my post

http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235018210-italeri-f-104ac-172/

which might be of help. It was not all about the Italeri version

John

 

 

Totally forgot that thread, I must be getting old

 

16 minutes ago, Hook said:

 

A small addendum - there were two seperate F-104C's deployments to Vietnam, one from 1965-66 and the second from 1966-67. During the first one, they were still in bare metal with gloss white / ADC gray wings, and had no RWR; during the second deployment they were painted in SEA camo and were gradually fitted with the RWR.

 

Cheers,

 

Andre

 

Of course you're right, the RWR only appeared shortly after the camouflage (and the equipment was later removed)

[Rabbit Leader]

42 minutes ago, John R said:

There was a lot of discussion about this sort of thing in my post

http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235018210-italeri-f-104ac-172/

which might be of help. It was not all about the Italeri version

John

 

Apologies John,

I missed this post and got side tracked with some of the later ones. Thanks for the link, the photographs within do show the differences in canopies "awfully" well. 

I quite like the Italeri / Hasegawa kit bash. I might try converting my Hasegawa into a C first and if this goes wrong can then go down this kit bash route, although knowing me I'll probably give up and start something else! 

 

Cheers.. Dave.

[Rabbit Leader]

I've taken a closer look at my Hasegawa 'G' and it would appear that chopping off the Rudder which is moulded on the port side of the kit could be used as a good guide to represent the earlier short tailed Starfighters. The profile that remains is almost an exact shape of the early A/C model. Now I haven't measured it or compared it to any reliable scale plans, however to my calibrated eye this would work. The longer rear fillet would need to be cut and shaped, however I think the exhaust nozzle aperture can be virtually left as is. 

 

Frustratingly, my version of this kit only includes the blown gear doors and not the flush type as Giorgio has mentioned that come with other boxings of this rather nice kit! 

 

My kit also comes with the two types of wheels (thick/thin), two bang seats and two exhausts. There's no refuelling probe however that's understandable as this was not used on the 'G's as far as I know. 

 

This conversion has now gone from possible to probable. 

Thanks for all the tips guys. 

 

Cheers.. Dave  

[Hook]

17 hours ago, Rabbit Leader said:

Frustratingly, my version of this kit only includes the blown gear doors and not the flush type as Giorgio has mentioned that come with other boxings of this rather nice kit! 

 

Would a spare set of flat Hasegawa MLG covers be helpful? 

 

(I might even have a spare refuelling probe somewhere... might...)

 

Cheers,

 

Andre 

[Rabbit Leader]

4 minutes ago, Hook said:

 

Would a spare set of flat Hasegawa MLG covers be helpful? 

 

(I might even have a spare refuelling probe somewhere... might...)

 

Cheers,

 

Andre 

 

Andre - most definitely!

I was contemplating on buying an Italeri kit just for the probe, so would most gratefully accept this (if you've got one) as well as the doors.

The Hasegawa blown doors (unlike the Revell ones) are properly made, so I would need to fill the inside cavity first and then sand the outer parts to hopefully achieve a smooth finish.

Having the correct doors however, would mean that I can save a bit of time plus no doubt they will look better under a NMF.

 

As always, I'd be more than happy to pay for the postage cost for these parts to be sent to Australia.

 

Cheers and many thanks... Dave   

[Rabbit Leader]

Question - Can the underfuse Sidewinder rocket rails in the Hasegawa kit be used without modification for wingtip rocket rails? I've just checked the sprue shots of the 1/72 Italeri kit and these rails appear to be similar in both size and length. Is it just a case of glueing these as is? 

 

I've not decided how this kit will be completed or whether I'll do an 'A' of 'C', however confirmation of these rails may determine how I fit this thing out. 

 

Cheers.. Dave 

[Rob de Bie]

23 hours ago, Rabbit Leader said:

Apologies John,

I missed this post and got side tracked with some of the later ones. Thanks for the link, the photographs within do show the differences in canopies "awfully" well. 

I quite like the Italeri / Hasegawa kit bash. I might try converting my Hasegawa into a C first and if this goes wrong can then go down this kit bash route, although knowing me I'll probably give up and start something else!

 

Dave, here's a photo of my Hasegawa plus Esci/Italeri kitbash. In the mean time I added the RWR antennas from the Revell kit, so officially it's now a kitbash of three kits :-)

 

 

Rob

[RidgeRunner]

On 14/06/2017 at 10:23 AM, Rabbit Leader said:

Actually, you can copy and paste this text to an online translator and believe or not - it works!!

 

Fantastic! I'll give that a try! I have a Chino machine in the queue!

 

Martin

 

Edited June 15, 2017 by RidgeRunner

[Rabbit Leader]

1 hour ago, Rob de Bie said:

 

Dave, here's a photo of my Hasegawa plus Esci/Italeri kitbash. In the mean time I added the RWR antennas from the Revell kit, so officially it's now a kitbash of three kits :-)

 

 

Rob

 

Nice job there Rob... wherever the join is, you've blended it in just nicely. Looking forward to the rest of the build.

 

Cheers.. Dave.

[Rabbit Leader]

3 hours ago, Rabbit Leader said:

Question - Can the underfuse Sidewinder rocket rails in the Hasegawa kit be used without modification for wingtip rocket rails? I've just checked the sprue shots of the 1/72 Italeri kit and these rails appear to be similar in both size and length. Is it just a case of glueing these as is? 

 

I've not decided how this kit will be completed or whether I'll do an 'A' of 'C', however confirmation of these rails may determine how I fit this thing out. 

 

Cheers.. Dave 

 

Strike that.... I've just taken a second look at the Hasegawa kit instructions and what I 'thought' where underfuse rocket pylons are actually the wingtip pylons,

The underfuse ones are quite small in comparison to the wingtip rails. Looks like I'm OK should I elect to arm my model with wingtip sidewinders.

 

Cheers.. Dave.

[Giorgio N]

The wingtip rails were slightly different as had the position lights at the rear.

Keep in mind that there were two types of ventral Sidewinder rails on the ventral position: the early "Red Dog" type and the later one used on the G. The Hasegawa box includes both

[Rabbit Leader]

Thanks Giorgio, 

So in your opinion do you think that the longer thin rails as supplied in the Hasegawa kit are suitable for wingtip rails as well? I've tried to look at other Hasegawa box instructions and on at least one example (possibility RCAF) there is a diagram that suggests to apply these rails on the wing tips - then add the wing tanks to these rails? This seemed quite strange to me. Appreciate your thoughts. 

 

Cheers.. Dave

[72modeler]

6 hours ago, Rabbit Leader said:

Thanks Giorgio, 

So in your opinion do you think that the longer thin rails as supplied in the Hasegawa kit are suitable for wingtip rails as well? I've tried to look at other Hasegawa box instructions and on at least one example (possibility RCAF) there is a diagram that suggests to apply these rails on the wing tips - then add the wing tanks to these rails? This seemed quite strange to me. Appreciate your thoughts. 

 

Cheers.. Dave

The wingtip fuel tanks were bolted directly to the wingtips; the rails were only used to mount the AIM-9's, so on the wingtips you could have rails and Sidewinders, or fuel tanks but no rails. On the F-104A/C, the underwing pylons were perpendicular to the wing, so looking from the front, they were angled in, due to the anhedral of the wings- however, the tanks themselves were aligned so that their fins were perpendicular to the ground. On the later F-104G/S variants, the pylons were perpendicular to the ground, when viewed from the front.

Mike

[Rabbit Leader]

Thanks for the clarification Mike, I'll take a look at as many photographs as I can to match these to the above text. I'm sure I've seen at least one Hasegawa instruction sheet that shows rails and tanks to be mounted on the wingtips which I thought was quite odd. 

 

Cheers.. Dave