1/72 Harrier GR5

[Edge]

I'm thinking of adding a Harrier GR5 to the ever growing pile in the loft and was wondering which is the better option, Airfix kit or Hasegawa AV8-B with a Quickboost nose?

I'd also like a 1/48 version of the same but have given up hope of ever seeing a re-release of the Hasegawa kit!

 

Edge

 

[Aardvark]

14 hours ago, Edge said:

I'm thinking of adding a Harrier GR5 to the ever growing pile in the loft and was wondering which is the better option, Airfix kit or Hasegawa AV8-B with a Quickboost nose?

But Airfix have only old Harrier GR.5

https://modelingmadness.com/scott/mod/hgr5preview.htm

with raised panel line!

 

And why buy Hasegawa AV8-B with a Quickboost nose if Hasegawa made Harrier GR.5?

https://modelingmadness.com/scott/mod/harriergr5preview.htm

 

Yes, for Harrier G.R.5 Hasegawa need Quickboost nose, resin ejection seat because Hasegawa ejection seat not correct for GR.5, wheels bay from Aries, photoetced e.t.c, e.t.c....but Hasegawa have RAF version decals in box!

 

B.R.

Serge

[Dave Fleming]

New Airfix GR7/9 with replacement nose would be my way.

 

Second option would be the original Airfix issue - it's not a bad kit, but the later one is far better

Edited April 30, 2018 by Dave Fleming

[Aardvark]

7 hours ago, Dave Fleming said:

New Airfix GR7/9 with replacement nose would be my way.

If built from box, l agree.

 

If most serious built then work need and new Airfix*, and Hasegawa.

 

B.R.

Serge

 

____________

* - as You see from this built on Russian forum:

http://scalemodels.ru/modules/forum/viewtopic.php?t=56081&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

New Airfix have some problem and some work.

Built GR.5 or GR.7 from Hasegawa

on this level as on Russian site built Airfix,  I don't see in internet.

[Edge]

8 hours ago, Aardvark said:

But Airfix have only old Harrier GR.5

https://modelingmadness.com/scott/mod/hgr5preview.htm

with raised panel line!

 

And why buy Hasegawa AV8-B with a Quickboost nose if Hasegawa made Harrier GR.5?

https://modelingmadness.com/scott/mod/harriergr5preview.htm

 

Yes, for Harrier G.R.5 Hasegawa need Quickboost nose, resin ejection seat because Hasegawa ejection seat not correct for GR.5, wheels bay from Aries, photoetced e.t.c, e.t.c....but Hasegawa have RAF version decals in box!

 

B.R.

Serge

Thanks Serge

 

I'm aware of the Hasegawa kit but they are non existent these days so was looking at alternatives.  You are correct that markings could be a bit of a problem, but one bridge at a time!

 

Edge

[Edge]

8 hours ago, Dave Fleming said:

New Airfix GR7/9 with replacement nose would be my way.

 

Second option would be the original Airfix issue - it's not a bad kit, but the later one is far better

Thanks Dave. I think I'll give that a go. Plenty ok Airfix GR.7/9 kits around.

 

Edge

 

[robc]

Modeldecal set 100 has some 1/72 GR5 options and is available at Hannants.

 

https://www.hannants.co.uk/product/MD100

 

 

Isn't the Revell 1/48th Harrier just a reboxed Hasegawa?

 

Rob

 

[Aardvark]

37 minutes ago, Edge said:

I'm aware of the Hasegawa kit but they are non existent these days so was looking at alternatives

Yes, it's problem!

Then best way for you New Airfix+ nose cone Quickboost

or Revell/Hasegawa GR.7+ nose cone Quickboost

 

What a problem with Airfix and Hasegawa?

Quote Kelly Jonson from Russian forum:

However when comparing with a photo of the original it is possible to tell that at Airfix it is better: 
- Canopy. He convex on each side, in difference from Hasegawa. 
- air inlets. They are better worked out for Airfix inside, and outside have more correct contours, they more convex and the edge adjoins to the fuselage, from above and from below, under more right angle, than at a Hasegawa that looks more correct. 
- wing.Subjectively to be pleasant to me more Airfix, it reproduces curvature of the original better. 
What it is better at Hasegawa? 
- nozzles with fairings. At Airfix it is much told lies there. They and big (I not for nothing modified them, see ten posts above) and fairings not of absolutely correct form. 
- Panel line. No comments. 

Both models have enough small defects in geometry. For example, the top part of the fuselage over a wing (there where the antenna sticks out also a bulb) has the wrong form in the plan both at Airfix and at a Hasegawa.

 

And my research:

Wing, at first sight totally at Hasegawa is less by the sizes somewhere on 2.5-3 mm! 

Still a forward part of a motionless part of a canopy of the Airfix already than at Hasegawa, somewhere on 1-1.5mm.

 

As You see no ideals Harrier GR.5/7/9 in 1/72.

 

B.R.

Serge

 

 

 

 

[Edge]

2 hours ago, Aardvark said:

Yes, it's problem!

Then best way for you New Airfix+ nose cone Quickboost

or Revell/Hasegawa GR.7+ nose cone Quickboost

 

What a problem with Airfix and Hasegawa?

Quote Kelly Jonson from Russian forum:

However when comparing with a photo of the original it is possible to tell that at Airfix it is better: 
- Canopy. He convex on each side, in difference from Hasegawa. 
- air inlets. They are better worked out for Airfix inside, and outside have more correct contours, they more convex and the edge adjoins to the fuselage, from above and from below, under more right angle, than at a Hasegawa that looks more correct. 
- wing.Subjectively to be pleasant to me more Airfix, it reproduces curvature of the original better. 
What it is better at Hasegawa? 
- nozzles with fairings. At Airfix it is much told lies there. They and big (I not for nothing modified them, see ten posts above) and fairings not of absolutely correct form. 
- Panel line. No comments. 

Both models have enough small defects in geometry. For example, the top part of the fuselage over a wing (there where the antenna sticks out also a bulb) has the wrong form in the plan both at Airfix and at a Hasegawa.

 

And my research:

Wing, at first sight totally at Hasegawa is less by the sizes somewhere on 2.5-3 mm! 

Still a forward part of a motionless part of a canopy of the Airfix already than at Hasegawa, somewhere on 1-1.5mm.

 

As You see no ideals Harrier GR.5/7/9 in 1/72.

 

B.R.

Serge

 

 

 

 

 

3 hours ago, robc said:

Modeldecal set 100 has some 1/72 GR5 options and is available at Hannants.

 

https://www.hannants.co.uk/product/MD100

 

 

Isn't the Revell 1/48th Harrier just a reboxed Hasegawa?

 

Rob

 

Thanks for the heads up Rob. Perhaps  green GR5 isn't so far away after all!

2 hours ago, Aardvark said:

Yes, it's problem!

Then best way for you New Airfix+ nose cone Quickboost

or Revell/Hasegawa GR.7+ nose cone Quickboost

 

What a problem with Airfix and Hasegawa?

Quote Kelly Jonson from Russian forum:

However when comparing with a photo of the original it is possible to tell that at Airfix it is better: 
- Canopy. He convex on each side, in difference from Hasegawa. 
- air inlets. They are better worked out for Airfix inside, and outside have more correct contours, they more convex and the edge adjoins to the fuselage, from above and from below, under more right angle, than at a Hasegawa that looks more correct. 
- wing.Subjectively to be pleasant to me more Airfix, it reproduces curvature of the original better. 
What it is better at Hasegawa? 
- nozzles with fairings. At Airfix it is much told lies there. They and big (I not for nothing modified them, see ten posts above) and fairings not of absolutely correct form. 
- Panel line. No comments. 

Both models have enough small defects in geometry. For example, the top part of the fuselage over a wing (there where the antenna sticks out also a bulb) has the wrong form in the plan both at Airfix and at a Hasegawa.

 

And my research:

Wing, at first sight totally at Hasegawa is less by the sizes somewhere on 2.5-3 mm! 

Still a forward part of a motionless part of a canopy of the Airfix already than at Hasegawa, somewhere on 1-1.5mm.

 

As You see no ideals Harrier GR.5/7/9 in 1/72.

 

B.R.

Serge

 

 

 

 

Thanks Serge. Looks like Airfix is the better option, perhaps with some improved exhaust nozzles and the panel lines reduced somewhat.

 

Edge

[NealParkes]

I have got a new tool Airfix GR7/9 to use for the main part of the build, for the nose I got a second hand old tool Airfix GR5 (old tool GR7 works too) to get the GR5’s nose and for the decals I have bought the Model Decal sheet mentioned above. I did it this way as the extra kit is cheaper than the quick boost resin nose which is hard to find anyway.

 

Neal

[Aardvark]

1 hour ago, Edge said:

with some improved exhaust nozzles

But how this:

some improved??

Problem not only in diameter exhaust nozzles, problem biggest!!

Or Hasegawa wrong with size diameter exhaust nozzles, as with wingspan:

???

Understand, l no have real Harrier on my garage, I don't know real size  diameter exhaust nozzles.

 

B.R.

Serge

 

[Hook]

18 hours ago, NealParkes said:

I have got a new tool Airfix GR7/9 to use for the main part of the build, for the nose I got a second hand old tool Airfix GR5 (old tool GR7 works too) to get the GR5’s nose and for the decals I have bought the Model Decal sheet mentioned above. I did it this way as the extra kit is cheaper than the quick boost resin nose which is hard to find anyway

 

Plus, the old Airfix GR.5 comes with four noses,  AFAIK. So you can still build it as one of the other options.

 

Cheers,

 

Andre

 

[NealParkes]

49 minutes ago, Hook said:

 

Plus, the old Airfix GR.5 comes with four noses,  AFAIK. So you can still build it as one of the other options.

 

Cheers,

 

Andre

 

Yep the nose cones for the GR.5, GR.7, AV-8B and I’m unsure of the last one.

 

[Dave Fleming]

17 hours ago, NealParkes said:

Yep the nose cones for the GR.5, GR.7, AV-8B and I’m unsure of the last one.

 

 

AV-8B (NA) - best discarded as it is too long and inaccurate. Airfix assumed that the NA had the similarly lengthened nose that the GR7 has. It doesn't

[tempestfan]

20 hours ago, Hook said:

 

Plus, the old Airfix GR.5 comes with four noses,  AFAIK. So you can still build it as one of the other options.

 

Cheers,

 

Andre

 

IIRC the four noses are present across all four boxings of the old tool kit - there must be a lot of them floating about in spares boxes.

[Dave Fleming]

On 5/1/2018 at 1:15 AM, Aardvark said:

But how this:

 

 

 

I don't think either is totally accurate - Hasegawa looks too long and pointed, Airfix a bit short but I can live with either

[Jacarre]

On 4/30/2018 at 9:15 PM, Aardvark said:

But how this:

some improved??

Problem not only in diameter exhaust nozzles, problem biggest!!

Or Hasegawa wrong with size diameter exhaust nozzles, as with wingspan:

???

Understand, l no have real Harrier on my garage, I don't know real size  diameter exhaust nozzles.

 

B.R.

Serge

 

Interesting pics Serge, i don't have the Hasegawa one but i measured the wingspan in both the old tool 1/72 Airfix Harrier GR.5 and the new tool GR7/9, and here are the results:

 

Real wingspan: 9.25 meters

Downsized to 1/72: 128.47 mm

Old tool wingspan: 127.5 mm

New tool wingspan: 129.2 mm

 

The old tool one is 1 mm short and the new tool one is less of a mm long. We dont have a real Harrier II in the National Aeronautics Museum in Chile but we have an ex RAF  Harrier GR.3... The nozzles and fairings could be the same ones?

 

Regards,

Javier

[Aardvark]

6 hours ago, Jacarre said:

The old tool one is 1 mm short and the new tool one is less of a mm long. We dont have a real Harrier II in the National Aeronautics Museum in Chile but we have an ex RAF  Harrier GR.3... The nozzles and fairings could be the same ones?

So, let's doing analitic research!

 

Pegasus 11-21

(Mk.105 / Mk.106) The 11-21 was developed for the second generation Harriers, the USMC AV-8B Harrier II and the BAE Harrier IIs. The original model provided an extra 450 lbf (2.0 kN). The RAF Harriers entered service with the 11-21 Mk.105, the AV-8Bs with F402-RR-406. Depending on time constraints and water injection, between 14,450 lbf (64.3 kN) (max. continuous at 91% RPM) and 21,550 lbf (95.9 kN) (15 s wet at 107% RPM) of lift is available at sea level (including splay loss at 90°).[12] The Mk.106 development was produced for the Sea Harrier FA2 upgrade and generates 21,750 lbf (96.7 kN).

from :

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolls-Royce_Pegasus

 

Sea Harrier FA.2 as we know is Sea Harrier FRS.1 with new nose radar cone & the insertion of the section between the wing and the stabilizer, and some modifications of the wing, in general details differences.

Thus, the engine of the second generation Harrier had the same seats as the first-generation Harrier engine!

Then differences with second generation Harrier and first-generation Harrier engine only in  the form  nozzles, but not in their diameter !?

This is my guess. Whether I'm right or wrong, I can only say with the size of the nozzles second generation Harrier and first-generation Harrier.

 

B.R.

Serge

 

[Dave Fleming]

Nozzles are different.

[Jacarre]

On 5/9/2018 at 8:36 PM, Dave Fleming said:

Nozzles are different.

Do you have any measurements of a Harrier II? Would be very useful!

 

Forward nozzles are different in shape to the ones found in firts generacion harriers, but dimensionally? I don't know

Edited May 18, 2018 by Jacarre
Bad spelling