Jump to content
This site uses cookies! Learn More

This site uses cookies!

You can find a list of those cookies here: mysite.com/cookies

By continuing to use this site, you agree to allow us to store cookies on your computer. :)


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

97 Good

About LanceB

  • Rank
    Established Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

442 profile views
  1. https://www.hlj.com/1-48-scale-f-5a-cf-5a-nf-5a-freedom-fighter-kne16047 or if you want different markings: https://www.hlj.com/1-48-scale-f-5a-skoshi-tiger-wlf69830
  2. Apologies, I am a product of a Colonial education, still haven't worked out being able to read English... thanks for pointing that out!
  3. Ah yes, I had forgotten. So, this is the Minicraft kit it seems -the price is surprising, and I mean that in a good way. Why in heaven's name Minicraft cannot sell the same kit in their own boxing for a reasonable price is beyond me.
  4. Interesting - Mikromir toolings, as was the case with the Canberras? The only extant Hercules I know of in this scale is Minicraft, but the price seems much to reasonable to be their kit.
  5. Interesting that in their display of the parts, they show frames with short-shot engine pieces... Good that we now have an F-35B with weapons bays (Fujimi doesn't really count...), so one could display the bay doors open or build a correct VTOL mode F-35B with minimal tweaking, as the inner bay doors partially open to act as LIDS strakes in that mode. Unfortunate that, unlike the Hasegawa kit, there are two fixed exhaust options, so one can built CTOL or VTOL but not STOL (which one can with the Hasegawa kit). I like that this kit has full MLG bays, not the tiny recesses Hasegawa gave us. It is a minor niggle with the Hasegawa kit, but it bothered me... About the only thing I see "missing" is the gun pod - which is a very minor complaint as far as I am concerned.
  6. Well, it is reasonably easy. It is not quite as simple as a "cross kit": http://www.arcair.com/Gal13/12301-12400/gal12360-A-4-Braman/00.shtm The hump needs to be modified. The port intake needs a small inlet carved out. Neither is particularly difficult, the trick is figuring out the locations and dimensions. And, if you wanted to get fussy, the rear part of the OA-4M canopy where it meets the hump is a little different than that same bit on the TA-4. I didn't worry about it, just like I didn't worry about the fact there are some slightly different radio controls in the back seat. But yes, it can be done, and you can still build the M kit as an early version without any problems, provided you have decals for one. However if you want a TA-4KU/AF-1A, you'll need to rob the larger A-4M intakes as well, which makes building the rest of the A-4M kit "difficult".
  7. My personal opinion, and that is all I claim it to be, is that Tamiya has a focus on engineering for drop-dead perfect fit and easy assembly, which are worthy goals, however as a possible side effect of that the smaller parts lack finesse. Rudder pedals tend to have the heft of bricks, which is particularly noticable on their German types where the real things were thin stamped metal. Granted, you can't really be "prototypical" for those without going to PE, but Hasegawa for example manages to make decently thin plastic pedals, although you have to do a bit more work putting them into place and as they are small there is the risk your of tweezers launching one off to the carpet monster. Or the support rods for the open cowl option in the 109 - steel rebar! Again, they doubtless fit precisely and all that, but they are way overscale. And again, you can mold plastic a lot thinner than that, others do it, but it doesn't fit with Tamiya's style of engineering. The F-14 - when I saw it at Shizuoka I thought all the buttons and switches on the cockpit bits looked rounded and "mushy". The detail was just not crisp at all. I thought perhaps it was my glasses, but then one of the modeling mags ran photos taken with a macro lens, and while the photos were nice and crisp all they did was show how the detail on the parts was not. 1/72 Hasegawa and Fujimi kits have sharper detail (to my eyes). Again - my opinion, and I know that is all it is worth - Tamiya has a long history of producing "shake'n'bake" kits that fit beautifully. And they have gotten past their previous bad habit of making faithful reproductions of museum pieces and warbirds (Wildcat with one intercooler, cockpit floor and no fuel tank, 262 with completely unloaded gear, P-51 with reinforcement plate over the MLG struts, Corsair with no throttle quadrant, etc) so they are "accurate". They just lack finesse, for want of a better term. If I wanted a drop-dead-easy build for a markings bird, I would go with Tamiya. However, personally, I don't often want that, I like lots of dangly, fiddly bits. My build preferences just don't mesh with Tamiya's market perceptions. But that's just me, YMMV etc.
  8. Well if they cannot mold the bomb bay they aren't going to be able to mold the cockpits or gear bays, any of which are more complex than the bomb bay. Which would mean they are going to need resin (and I would bet they have already decided to use resin bits for the cockpit). So, it just comes down to cost. If there is no bomb bay, the only reason would be to keep the final price down - but leaving the bay out (if, indeed that is the plan) seems like such a waste considering the scale.
  9. It would be a lowdown dirty shame if there was no open bomb bay option - but the doors are obviously molded shut, as per that picture.
  10. In addition to the windows, which I don't think would be terribly difficult as the area in question is pretty flat and thus making clear panes would be fairly simple, note that the armor plating around the headrest was a different shape as well. It was scalloped on the sides to allow the pilot to be able to see out of those small windows.
  11. A note about KNE48014A: the main decal sheet is from the 50th anniversary scheme, aircraft #460, which had the 4-blade props. The kit includes the 8-blade props plus a small additional decal sheet with tail and nose codes for #459, which was fitted with the new props. All the other non-50th-anniversary-specific decals are used to complete the markings for this aircraft (so don't use the blue-and-yellow stripes and 50th anniversary logos). The 4-blade prop parts are NOT included, so #460 in 50th anniversary markings CANNOT be built from the box. However if one has the C-2 Greyhound kit, which should have included both props, and used the 8-blade props on that kit, they could use the leftover 4-blade props on this new E-2C kit and thus build #460 in full 50th anniversary markings. OR - buy the Quickboost props!
  12. As beautiful as the Airscale set appears to be, based on photos posted so far it is a -3 instrument panel, not a -5. It is missing the reflector panel that was added to the -5 to improve things for night flying, as well as the rocket selector switch and wing bomb rack manual release. This is a -5 panel, from the manual: And this is a -3 panel, again from the manual: The side consoles also appear to be -3 standard, not -5 (missing the IFF destruct switch, generator warning light and a couple of other niggles). https://www.cybermodeler.com/aircraft/f6f/f6f_pit.shtml
  13. You are quite right, those CADs do seem to show the wrong cross-section for the canopy. Here's a GR.3 taken from a similar angle to the CAD image, the canopy would be identical for GR.1/3/AV-8A/C/S: At least the CADs don't show SHAR pylons - so that is an improvement from the T-bird kit. But yes, the canopy design should be looked at again by Kinetic's designers, now, before molds are cut.
  14. RE-release. These are all old kits. Contents here: https://www.largescaleplanes.com/reviews/review.php?rid=654
  • Create New...