Jump to content

1/48 - Industria Aeronautică Română IAR-80 by HobbyBoss - released


Homebee

Recommended Posts

Tbolt, I am sorry that you took my words to heart, I can only admire your dedication to the cause. Admittedly although only a 1/72nd scale modeller, the A model kit, of which I have built several, suits my needs well enough although I would most likely have bought this kit if not forewarned.

 

 

  All the best,   Trev.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Morning - had a chance to scale up plans to 1/48 from Radu's book ( the earlier one - I know, I know...) and shape of the kit seems good. My initial thoughts on the UC bays are that they are actually a little too long too, as well as too close in the middle of course.  Whether the amount work required to really fix them is justified given they are, well, underneath, is a philosophical point I shall argue out with myself LOL,  but I think I can't live with the closeness in the centre section so that will be what I concentrate on trying to fix.

 

The cockpit rear opening will need to be corrected as the kit has it shaped and recessed to match the canopy outline - but that's pretty simple I think.  The air intake under the cowl looks to be easy to back date to the shorter version too.

 

More thought and pics after a good long ponder ( and I finish the SHAR, and did I start the Wingsy Claude too - oops I did...)

 

Jonners

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Jon Kunac-Tabinor said:

Morning - had a chance to scale up plans to 1/48 from Radu's book ( the earlier one - I know, I know...) and shape of the kit seems good. My initial thoughts on the UC bays are that they are actually a little too long too, as well as too close in the middle of course.  Whether the amount work required to really fix them is justified given they are, well, underneath, is a philosophical point I shall argue out with myself LOL,  but I think I can't live with the closeness in the centre section so that will be what I concentrate on trying to fix.

 

The cockpit rear opening will need to be corrected as the kit has it shaped and recessed to match the canopy outline - but that's pretty simple I think.  The air intake under the cowl looks to be easy to back date to the shorter version too.

 

More thought and pics after a good long ponder ( and I finish the SHAR, and did I start the Wingsy Claude too - oops I did...)

 

Jonners

 

 

 

Do the gear legs need shortening to match the bays? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Tbolt said:

 

Do the gear legs need shortening to match the bays? 

Hi T-bolt - looking at them with the plans I'd say they were a fraction long - perhaps 1 to 2mm. 

I 'd also say the rear cockpit bulkhead is a little too far back too- again maybe 2mm at the most? But as this area will be filled in to eliminate the canopy recess its easy to fix/ ignore ( the canopy will fit open over this anyway )  other than that the main parts all match Radu's plans pretty well so, though I need to see how the cowling fits as it appears to anchor just a tad low ( but like a really,really little tad! LOL )

 

3 hours ago, pruteanucristian said:

For those that are interested, a video in-box review is available at https://youtu.be/HPTdqhcnd8Y

 

Nice review Cristian - I enjoyed the presentation.  Will you be building the kit too?

 

 

Cheers

 

Jonners

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Jonners or anybody else

 

guy's I have one on order, but I will not get it until next week sometime, so can somebody give me the actual kit size in mm between the two wheel wells. From the drawings and the 1/32 Azur kit I calculate that it should be between 3.5 and 4 mm. I / we know that the kit is less than that but what is the dimension........it is driving me crazy.

 

thanks Ali

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Ali62 said:

Hi Jonners or anybody else

 

guy's I have one on order, but I will not get it until next week sometime, so can somebody give me the actual kit size in mm between the two wheel wells. From the drawings and the 1/32 Azur kit I calculate that it should be between 3.5 and 4 mm. I / we know that the kit is less than that but what is the dimension........it is driving me crazy.

 

thanks Ali

Hi Ali - it should be 4mm as you say - its actually just under 2mm on the kit (say1.8mm - but my ruler isnt calibrated finely enough to be that exact!)

 

Jonners

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sounds like the easiest fix might be to just add 1mm or so of plastic card to the inboard interior face of the wheel well and fair it into the kit plastic so it covers approx. one third of the circumference.  The wheel well will appear slightly ovoid but given that may be hard to detect given the underfuselage shape.  Clearly not a 100% accurate solution but it probably would resolve the most glaring issue of the wheel wells being too close together on the fuselage centre-line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Jon Kunac-Tabinor said:

Hi Ali - it should be 4mm as you say - its actually just under 2mm on the kit (say1.8mm - but my ruler isnt calibrated finely enough to be that exact!)

 

Jonners

Thanks Jonners, that sounds good but bad, it is amazing that we are all having a niggle over about 2mm, but when 2mm is half of what it should be then it just does not look or feel right. I have notification that mine is on the way along with the new 1/48 Airfix Stuka from MJW Models, so I may have them on Saturday OR Monday, so then I will have a closer look.

3 hours ago, mhaselden said:

Sounds like the easiest fix might be to just add 1mm or so of plastic card to the inboard interior face of the wheel well and fair it into the kit plastic so it covers approx. one third of the circumference.  The wheel well will appear slightly ovoid but given that may be hard to detect given the underfuselage shape.  Clearly not a 100% accurate solution but it probably would resolve the most glaring issue of the wheel wells being too close together on the fuselage centre-line.

That is kind of my thoughts as well, however I will be looking at a few other ideas for this kit as well.

Strange as it is this is one of those aircraft that I really do like. I have two in 1/32 to build, along with the decals and the limited conversion that Radu did, but I can see that I will be purchasing the decals in 1/48 that he does as I can see me building possibly 6 or so in 1/48, there are just so many interesting schemes and variations.

With that being the case, I will not be wanting to do the same corrections so many times so I will make some parts and or some solutions and then get them cast up.

If I am happy with what I do then I may offer them to others.

 

cheers Ali

 

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Well I have had a chance to look at the kit over the last few days, one point that I have not seen raised as yet the decals look really horrible, colours, print well just about everything so I think that the solution is out there get the decals from RB Productions http://www.radubstore.com/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=1_66

Ok with that quite a lot cannot be used accurately with what is in the box, but at least you can get some decals of the correct colour and will look a whole lot better.

 

On to the structural parts, I think I have a solution for the wheel well area, I will play with that and see if it will work, but hope that will work without causing major work for the modeller. I have a few ideas to make variations on wing configurations, that will allow more versions to be built, as well as a few other areas where small changes will make a more accurate model, based on Radu Brinzan drawings (RB Productions). 

 

Overall it seems as Jonners and others have said to be a very workable start  for a good looking little model, a little attention is a few areas will certainly improve it though, add to that if each modeller is prepared to add some riveting / panel details and a few details it will develop into a great model. 

 

I will see what I can do in the next little while and keep you all posted. I just have a feeling I will need to invest in another few kits, firstly to make the parts and secondly and more importantly for me build a range of IAR 80/81's, so many cool marking variations to be done.

 

Ali

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see Loon Models are releasing separate ailerons and flaps, but the flaps are still design to be in the up position -  a waste of £7.20 if you ask me, as all they have done is what can be done in about two minutes with a saw and a sanding stick! But hey some people just seem to like buying resin.

 

Now if they had designed them to be down with the tracks and cutouts in the flaps it would be worth buying some. It would obviously cost more but would be worth it. All they have done here is copy what in the kit and split them.

 

LO48243.jpg

 

Edited by Tbolt
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know that details and changes can be maddening and I would not blame HB for getting details wrong. I tried to make sense of them in the books, but they still require a lot of attention from the modeller. I think that the most important thing to do when you build the model is to find photos of the actual machine you want to build. As improvements and changes were made, some of these were also retrofitted to earlier machines. So that is why you can see early-series machines featuring late-series details, such as carburetor intakes/filters, second oil cooler and the associated "cooling gills" behind exhausts, head armour, gun sights, etc. One such example is the type of seat belts - during the summer of 1943, ALL early-type seat belts were removed and replaced with the final type. I know this may be confusing, but to help make things clearer, please look at the aircraft by time-frame rather than by serial number. For example, a machine from the first series photographed in 1944 may contain late-series retrofitted features. Also use the photos to identify the type of cross worn, which, again, was time frame-related rather than type-related. 

The camouflage schemes and colours proposed in the HB kit are pure fantasy. 

HTH 

Radu 

Edited by radub
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, radub said:

I know that details and changes can be maddening and I would not blame HB for getting details wrong. I tried to make sense of them in the books, but they still require a lot of attention from the modeller. I think that the most important thing to do when you build the model is to find photos of the actual machine you want to build. As improvements and changes were made, some of these were also retrofitted to earlier machines. So that is why you can see early-series machines featuring late-series details, such as carburetor intakes/filters, second oil cooler and the associated "cooling gills" behind exhausts, head armour, gun sights, etc. One such example is the type of seat belts - during the summer of 1943, ALL early-type seat belts were removed and replaced with the final type. I know this may be confusing, but to help make things clearer, please look at the aircraft by time-frame rather than by serial number. For example, a machine from the first series photographed in 1944 may contain late-series retrofitted features. Also use the photos to identify the type of cross worn, which, again, was time frame-related rather than type-related. 

The camouflage schemes and colours proposed in the HB kit are pure fantasy. 

HTH 

Radu 

Quite amazing that they had time to fly and fight the things Radu - they must have been busy making improvements all the time! :)
Any idea why the total replacement of seat belts occurred too?

 

Cheers

 

Jonners

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Jon Kunac-Tabinor said:

Quite amazing that they had time to fly and fight the things Radu - they must have been busy making improvements all the time! :)
Any idea why the total replacement of seat belts occurred too?

 

Cheers

 

Jonners

 

In the book "Vanator" I mentioned the circumstances in  the "seatbets" sub-chapter. In the summer of 1943, an I.A.R.80 flown by a German officer belly-landed on Galati airfield. The harness on early aircraft had no lap-belts and the shoulder straps were held back by a lockable cable connected to a bungee that, when unlocked, allowed the pilot a certain degree of movement forward. This "bungee-cable" idea was not unique to the I.A.R., for example the Sutton Harness featured a similar system, although the "early" I.A.R. and the Sutton harnesses were quite different in every other aspect. The "early" I.A.R. harness had a  lot in common with the Italian system (but not identical) and I suspect there may be a link there. Anyway, in this belly-landing incident, the cable snapped, the pilot struck his head against the gun sight and was knocked unconscious. The plane caught fire and by the time the firefighting teams arrived, the pilot could not escape or be rescued. This pilot was a valuable instructor and had "connections" going to "very high levels", and that caused a serious row, which led to an urgent order to find a safer seat harness. A number of seat harnesses were tested and then the "winning type" was replaced on all aircraft in a great hurry. This "safe" type of harness is easy to identify in photos because the shoulder straps were bolted to the head armour. 

HTH 

Radu 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...