Hobby Boss 1/48 F-111 questions

[dfqweofekwpeweiop4]

This kit looks quite nice but is there any major accuracy issues with it?

Is there any other kits out there that are better?

thanks

Mike

[Dads203]

From memory the cockpit canopy is slightly off , apart from that i'm not sure, i bougthe the squadron signal

Vac set for the academy set. I'm sure others who have researched the F-111 will be able to chip in and help you out

BR

Dan

[mungo1974]

Whats wrong with it?

Ummm.......

#1 The nose radome is off shape wise

#2 The open nose panels don't fit when closed.

#3 Cockpit doesnt match any F-111 variant.

#4 Windscreen/Canopy messed up.

#5 Bombbay doors wrong for both early and Pave Tack versions.

#6 Pave Tack pod/cradle is not accurate (if used)

#7 No intake detail,plus shockcone too short.

#8 Main gear bay walls incorrectly shaped.

#9 Leading Slats do not taper correctly at wing tip

#10 Flaps missing 'hump' on trailing edge.

#11 Sweep of tail fin LE is off,as is the shape of the 'bullet' fairing on top.

#12 Engines Afterburner cans are both incorrectly moulded and lack details.

#13 Weapons depend on the boxing,but there are errors here too

The nice bits....the undercarrige,although i've read it is weak once built and best replaced with aftermarket metal gear......oh the beavertail/fuel dump is nice.

[dfqweofekwpeweiop4]

So we could say, accuracy-wise, it's not one of Hobby Boss' best kits then?

thanks

Mike

Edited February 26, 2012 by Mikemx

[Mike V]

From memory the cockpit canopy is slightly off ,

BR

Dan

That's quite an understatement as the canopy is hosed up something bad!

[Jennings Heilig]

So we could say, accuracy-wise, it's not one of Hobby Boss' best kits then?

That would be a fair statement, in extremis...

[Tedfellows]

Still the best 'Fitting' kit out there!! :-)

Adam

[Tonka]

So we could say, accuracy-wise, it's not one of Hobby Boss' best kits then?

thanks

Mike

Eheheh... like so many other HB kits , just speaking aircraft kits (Tornado, Corsair II ) ,

Tonka

[Jennings Heilig]

This kit looks quite nice but is there any major accuracy issues with it?

[Jens]

Whats wrong with it?

Ummm.......

#1 The nose radome is off shape wise

#2 The open nose panels don't fit when closed.

#3 Cockpit doesnt match any F-111 variant.

#4 Windscreen/Canopy messed up.

#5 Bombbay doors wrong for both early and Pave Tack versions.

#6 Pave Tack pod/cradle is not accurate (if used)

#7 No intake detail,plus shockcone too short.

#8 Main gear bay walls incorrectly shaped.

#9 Leading Slats do not taper correctly at wing tip

#10 Flaps missing 'hump' on trailing edge.

#11 Sweep of tail fin LE is off,as is the shape of the 'bullet' fairing on top.

#12 Engines Afterburner cans are both incorrectly moulded and lack details.

#13 Weapons depend on the boxing,but there are errors here too

The nice bits....the undercarrige,although i've read it is weak once built and best replaced with aftermarket metal gear......oh the beavertail/fuel dump is nice.

Well, it's Chinese so of course it's messed up (isn't that what some people think about all the HB kits?)...

Thanks for the list Mungo. It's much better than those just bashing the kit because it's from HB instead of actually mentioning some of the issues it has.

I think you will have to compare it to what else is on the market (Aurora/Monogram and Academy/Zhengdefu), and compared to those kits the HB is the best overall.

I have a few comments to the quoted list:

#2 I had no problems fitting the nose panels in place on my F-111.

#3 The cockpit is more detailed overall than in other kits. Instrumentation could be better though.

#4 The windscreen has a rounded profile which is incorrect (it should be flat). The can be corrected with e.g. a Squadron canopy. If you believe what is written in the D&S book about the Academy kit it too has canopy shape issues.

#6 Is there even an accurate Pave Tack pod on the market? I believe the Paragon one is close, but still off.

#7 The kit lacks intake trunking but it does have full depth and compressor blade details. Overall I believe it is better than in other kits.

#8 The main gear bay has full depth (unlike the shallow Academy kit bay) but the sides should bulge inwards in order to make room for the intake trunking. Of the two I prefer the HB solution, but a correct bay would be better of course.

#9 The HB kit is the only one to have deployed flaps and slats. I remember a demand for that when the Academy kit came out, but now some prefer the 'clean' wings.

#11 I have seen a picture comparing the Academy and HB kit parts, and the tail fins looked almost identical in shape. Either way you won't get the correct sweep.

#12 The exhaust should have six bulges (what are they called?) instead of the five HB moulded. Not a easy thing to correct, unless you replace the whole thing.

#13 Some of the weapons included are incorrect for and F-111 but they make nice additions to your stores spare box. More importantly though, the fuel tanks are too small and need replacing.

The fit of the HB parts are very good as long as you dry-fit and adjust accordingly. So far I have assemled the fuselage sans escape capsule and upper fuselage. I wish the wings had been made like the Hasegawa ones, i.e. where you can slide in the wings after assembly. That would have made painting and transportation much easier.

Also, the FB-111A is lacking a correctly shaped astro tracker panel in front of the cockpit, and the EF-111A is lacking the end plate above the fuel dump. This can be found as a spare in other HB kits though.

Jens

[mungo1974]

I still find the HB kits a major disappointment after wait so many years for a state of the art new tool kit. For me i'll stick with upgrading the Academy kit for all my future Vark builds.

I also have to say there been talk about just how off the canopy area is in the HB kit using various scale plans,shiming on a Vacform canopy desigined for the Acd kit doesnt solve the core problems.

Having been allowed by the wonderful people at Duxford to measure and photograph every inch of their complete F-111E and F-111F ejection capsule i stand by all my comments i made earlier in the thread

[Jens]

Each to his own.

As for the canopy I think you misunderstood me. I am not saying the HB canopy is wrong. It is, and it is quite obvious. However, the Academy canopy is - AFAIK - wrong too, but perhaps you can shed some light on that?

Jens

[Mike V]

I still find the HB kits a major disappointment after wait so many years for a state of the art new tool kit. For me i'll stick with upgrading the Academy kit for all my future Vark builds.

I also have to say there been talk about just how off the canopy area is in the HB kit using various scale plans,shiming on a Vacform canopy desigined for the Acd kit doesnt solve the core problems.

Having been allowed by the wonderful people at Duxford to measure and photograph every inch of their complete F-111E and F-111F ejection capsule i stand by all my comments i made earlier in the thread

I agree as the main point in all this is that for the asking price, HB could have at least got the nose and canopy right and not hosed it up to the degree that they did. Not only that, but it's the same "MO" with HobbyBoss and Trumpeter; over-engineering by including useless and/or unnecessary parts/options like full engines and open avionics bays, only to omit more practical options such as full run intakes.

Seriously, include full engines that you won’t see and forfeit on making full run intakes??? That’s a lousy approach to making modern jet kits!

It's real similar to the 48th Tornado; such potential, only to fall way short.

[kpc7676]

Guys, please don't let this forum turn into a Chinese company bashing. Yep, they have didn't do a very good job on a number of kits (F-111, A-7), but have done some damn fine jobs with the Me-262s, Ta-152s and Forgers. So long as they keep having a crack at new moulds I'll be happy, even if a small proportion of them are best left alone.

Edited March 24, 2012 by kpc7676

[Muzz]

The last two posts speak a lot of sense to me, on the one hand it is insane to produce a kit and include good detail that's never going to be seen (ie F-111 engines and A-10 cannon, (I realise some will wish to detail these items and have them sitting next to their finished kit!) when they could have worked on perfecting other areas of the kit instead. But, I won't ignore a company that keeps producing new tool kits of aircraft that appeal to me. The fact I have their Tornado , A-10 and F-111 kits in the stash kinda give the game away!

[general melchett]

Well having got 3/4 the way through building one of these as a proposed RAF F-111k, I've got to agree with Mungo and Jens . The whole cockpit /canopy issue has ground the build to a halt, (which is frustrating as the finished article was destined for the new Aerofax book to be released this summer). The canopy is just plain wrong in several ways and it takes a lot of work to get the thing to look anything near right as the whole cockpit is too wide. I've ended up cutting up a couple of Squadron vac ones intended for the Academy kit, fettling them into shape and asking Ali of AlleyCats to see if he can cast one in clear resin, which hopefully he'll be doing. There are, as pointed out several other problems with the kit, mainly concerning the undercarriage bay, exhaust nozzle ejector strakes, (5 instead of 6, I replaced with Oz Mods ones) and intakes, but I managed to get round most of them........the canopy was another matter though...

Out of interest something else that's wrong are the wheels, incorrect diameter, (easily remedied with Resin Arts) and the long range tanks, again replace with Lock Ons superb resin ones. The point is though, should you be spending all this extra cash on an already expensive model that should be right in the first place......!!

Saying that their F3 Demon and Yak 38 Forgers are a delight..it seems to be down to the research material with HB and Trumpy.

[Jon Bryon]

I agree with much of the above, but again it comes down to what you want from the kit. My completed models sit on a shelf and are never picked up. Neither do I hang ordnance on them. Thus errors in wheel bays and armament are irrelevant to me. However, the following are significant problems, all of which are solvable given my choice is between the Academy or HB kits and there's no better one on the market (and where I live the HB kit is cheaper than the Academy anyway):

*The canopy shape. I've got the Squadron vac forms from Oz Mods; it may not be perfect but it will be better.

*The exhausts. Again, I've got resin replacements from Oz Mods.

The beauty of the above is each set comes with two of everything that needs to be replaced, so I can correct two HB kits with what I've got.

*The lack of intake trunking. Again, no worse than Academy; not sure how I will solve this one ;-)

All of the other errors are below my threshold of significance and so I won't know about them anyway :-)

I have built the Academy F-111C (with a Flightpath Pave Tack pod, which is obviously overscale anyway) and it wasn't a pleasant experience.

Jon

[pigsty]

*The canopy shape. I've got the Squadron vac forms from Oz Mods; it may not be perfect but it will be better.

*The exhausts. Again, I've got resin replacements from Oz Mods.

The beauty of the above is each set comes with two of everything that needs to be replaced, so I can correct two HB kits with what I've got.

That's interesting, Jon. Are you actually intending to do two Hobby Boss F-111s, then, or ... ?

[Jon Bryon]

I intend to do many things Sean, but given I'm down to building one kit a year, it's far from certain even one F-111 will ever get built...

[the MDman]

Intresting topic. The bird is on my wishlist.

Continue guys...