jpk
-
Posts
280 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Events
Profiles
Forums
Media Demo
Posts posted by jpk
-
-
Beautiful job Harold on a not so accurate kit. I'm sure you are looking forward to the Kitty Hawk Fury. If you recall, we once had some communications going on surrounding the Collect Aire FJ-3 many years ago. You were considering an attempt to create a Fury kit yourself. I had sent you my beat up CA kit for you to examine.
-
The XFJ drop tanks had different fins than the latter production versions. I'm in the process of converting an old Monogram F-86 into 755 using parts from the old ESCI FJ-2 and Grand Phoenix FJ-4B kits. I understand from your post the Monogram kit is not exactly correct for 755 but it was the kit I had to do the mod. I didn't want bugger up an Academy or Hasegawa kit as the Monogram kit is cheap.
A subtle thing I noticed from your photos. Compare the empennage photos between 754 and 755. Specifically where the horizontal stab contour blends into the upper mid fuselage. I appears to me that 754 has a slightly beefier empennage that 755. The empennage of 755 more coincides with that of 756 than 754. Perhaps because it was used in actual carrier trials whereas possibly 755 was not. What say you? Maybe it's an optical illusion from the lighting.
-
On 6/23/2019 at 11:50 AM, Sabrejet said:
This isn't correct: the XFJ-2/2B series were a mix of F-86E and F-86F: see earlier post in this thread on that subject. Apologies - been on holiday.
My knowledge on which particular version F-86 was utilized for each of the three pre production "XFJ-2's" was perhaps not quite accurate, it is true that the three pre production XFJ-2's were pretty much just your garden variety F-86 Sabre, one converted to 4 x 20mm armament with a modified windscreen and the other two with the modded windscreen and carrier type landing gear, arresting gear installed and minus the armament of the XFJ-2B. For the potential modeler those are the external visual items of importance to consider when making a kit. Thanks for the correction though.
-
The Ginter book on the FJ-2, all three XFJ-2's were based on the F-86E. The first designated as XFJ-2B, 756, was pretty much a standard F-86 with a slightly modified windscreen and the addition of 4 x 20mm canon. So any F-86E w/slats can be made into 756 by modding the windscreen and adding the proper gun ports.
754 and 755 had no armament installed but both had the landing gear for carrier operation tests of the production aircraft. From what I understand you can make a model of either 754 and 755 by combining parts of the old ESCI F-86 and FJ-2 kits, 756 can also be made from just the F-86 kit however you would need the windscreen and 20mm canon ports from the FJ-2 kit. Markings will be hard to come by because of the particular font used for the nose numbers. A set of decals that included markings for 755 was issued at a US IPMS National several years ago.
-
1
-
-
Hopefully Kitty Hawk's revised release date for their 1/48 FJ-2 in August is solid. I'm looking forward to the series.
-
According to Steve Ginter's book on the FJ-2 the following Marine squadrons operated the FJ-2. They were; VMF-122, 232, 235, 312, 334 and 451.
-
On 5/9/2014 at 3:44 PM, Procopius said:
What? I buy/trade from overseas into the USA all the time, and I've never had US customs hit me for anything at all, ever.
Same for me as well.
OOOOOPS, didn't notice the original post is five years old.
-
The Kitty Hawk Fury series is now delayed until August per Mr. Song.
-
1
-
-
8 hours ago, Andre B said:
And what blue was used for the F11F-1 Tiger? Where the blue darker in the 50's and 60's?
Cheers / André
According to a gent over on HS, the color of the Blue Angels aircraft, F8F to the F11F were actually a lighter blue than the later aircraft starting with the F-4's. The color he says to use is Model Master True Blue FS15102. He says that he has seen and matched the color with a BA mechanic's tool box from when the Blues were flying the Tiger. It is also the color I believe he said the NMNA used on their BA Tiger.
-
1
-
-
Ok Kitty Hawk....why no photo of the kit? The box art is old news, we've seen it. Give us a picture of the contents. Sprue shots, anything. I'm not buying one until I see plastic.
-
1
-
-
Are there any decent photos of the parts for this conversion?
-
My 2 cents. The Monogram kit is quite a bit better overall than the Occidental kit. The Monogram kit is inexpensive, accurate and widely available. To me the Oxy kit is soft on the details. Sort of a mushy version of the Monogram kit.
-
You know of course I was just funning you. No need to apologize. Lol.
-
Went by the Kitty Hawk FB page and Song said the Fury will be released soon. Also on Cybermodeler in the new kit listing they now have the Fury as being released in April. Good news for Fury fans.
-
2
-
-
I would think they, KH, would release the -3 early and -3 late as separate kits. They would have to have two sets of wings in the kit to do either one. I don't think they will do that. It would depend on how they configure the wing between the two kits. I've speculated the wing essentially would be the same between the kit with the leading edge ahead of the front spar being the separation for the parts between the two wings. Other than that they would have to mold completely new wing for each. However the slatted wing would work for both the -2 and early -3. I think they will do like SWORD did with their 1/72 kits and just do three distinct kits.
-
Sabrejet, over on the KH FB page Song did answer a question re the two different noses and he confirmed there would be two. Just what that means, I don't know after all it is KH. I saw the nose gear door issue after another pointed it out. It does appear too long. I also saw the nose gear, while having a correct nose up stance for a pressurized oleo, the oleo appeared to be in a shorter compressed configuration. Almost the opposite of what the did with their Cougar. Anyway, something was not quite right with it. I have seen build ups showing both a correct slatted wing as well as cambered. Also have seen the two different fuselage scoop types as well. I still have not seen a build up without the ribbed horizontal stabs which were only seen, at least as far as my photographic resources show, only installed on later aircraft after fleet use and transferred to the reserves.
I know some folks have contributed to KH technical resources on the Fury. The Ginter book as well as D&S' book and online photos I'm sure must be available to Song. Add to that I know they imported a copy of the Collect Aire FJ-3 Fury and no doubt used it as a mule. I've had a few and it is pretty darned accurate. There's no reason the kit shouldn't be too far off the mark. Hopefully.
-
Did not say for how long or how extensive. Just that the revision will require new cads and cutting metal. My impression, mine only, is that they may have uncovered some inaccuracies and decided to correct the molds prior to release because of their previous experience with the Banshee. For me, from the photos that have been released prior to this, the molds looked pretty good. Perhaps the revisions are simple and may not delay too long the release.
-
1
-
-
For those that are awaiting this kit's release it has been delayed. According to Floyd Werner over on KH's FB page they doing some updates to the kit requiring new CADs and cutting of metal. Great to hear they noticed some issues that needed correction. Also, sounds like KH are paying closer attention to their reference materials or input from external voices because of the released photos.
-
3
-
1
-
-
Hans, Eduard "Millenium" Phantom? Which kit is that? I have the Eduard Bicentennial Phantom. I had not heard of the Millenium Phantom.
-
I think they (Vought volunteers) did well with what they had. If they could do a better repair of the canopy, acquire some tip tanks that resemble what was originally there it might look a little better. It is certainly an unusual example of a little known USN fighter that did not experience a successful career.
-
15 hours ago, Aardvark said:
What a strange camouflage scheme! 😁 Was the aircraft in this color scheme realy in USN? 😁😁
They ( restorers) are lucky that now is not the time of the Inquisition. 😉😁
Because for such a restoration 😲then they would at least be
anathematized...as minimal! 😉
I hope Kitty Hawk model F6U is a not 100% down scale of this restoration from Pensacola???
😲😁😁
B.R.
Serge
A little leeway should be giver to the restorers at Vought because what they were given to restore was pretty much a fuselage and one wing riddled with holes. There's a lot with the resto that is incorrect but there were just no parts available. The people at Vought had to create a wing. I forgot where they got the nose gear but it certainly isn't from a Pirate. Obviously the canopy is just a bent sheet of plex. There were some photos of the hulk they retrieved from the desert along with some of the shop work during the restoration. They didn't have much to work with including money.
-
I recall several years ago rumor had it that Eduard was going to produce a quarter scale F-4 series. They abandoned it when it became known to them someone else was going to do one as well. That second company was Academy. I don't know if Eduard knew who was going to do it or just knew someone was. So as it turns out after Academy's release and the discovery of its flaws, it has diminished the value of the kit with some. Now, flaws with the ZM release are being revealed. So we have the older Monogram, ESCI and Hasegawa series with their well known issues to add to the list of imperfect Phantoms. Perhaps Eduard, seeing all this discussion on all the currently available 1/48 Phantoms and their issues might see an opening to review their decision to abandon their Phantom series and start it back up. I think they may be able to grab a huge number of disappointed F-4 fans with their own F-4. I would assume they were well on their way with research material before pulling the plug. They certainly have garnered praise with their recent 1/48 scale WWII kits.
-
1
-
-
Just a little addendum to my post. I don't want to make it sound like I don't like the Hypersonic ZM correction set. I have several Hypersonic sets. I have them for the Academy F-4, the Hobby Boss A-6E and Trumpeter A3D and will no doubt buy more as ones become available that I want, like Jeffrey's future A3D main gear wheel well, (hint). I feel his sets offer great value as well as correcting the previous mentioned kit's errors. The correction set for the ZM fuselage is very nice and does correct the design issue with the ZM kit. Is it needed? That is a personal choice for the builder that wants to have an absolutely accurate model. For me I'm ok with the kit as it is out of the box. For those that want their kit to be as accurate as they can make it, the set will give them that and at a very reasonable price.
-
Regardless of the small, barely noticeable shape issue near the exhaust the kit is by far the best 1/48 F-4 Phantom out, period. If cost is an issue, then Academy. I was going to get the HS correction set for the ZM kit but decided to leave it as is.
-
2
-
USS Constitution
in Historic Vessels to 1914
Posted
Over on Fine Scale Modeler's ship forums there is a very good thread on the USS Constitution. It has been on going for several years. Lots of good info there.