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. :)

hsr

Anigrand's Vought XF8U-3 Crusader III 1/72

Recommended Posts

This is my rendition of Anigrand's Vought XF8U-3 Crusader III. This was a very good Anigrand kit, free of pinholes and with a surprisingly clear canopy. The only disappointment was the decals. These had yellowed and taping them to a sun facing window for a few weeks only slightly clear up the yellowing. They were also very glossy and thick. Other then that it was a pleasant 2 week OOB build. 

ff042259-04dc-48a4-9e16-635c4631a3e4.JPG

193d60fc-aed2-4eff-af24-920530173862.JPG

67fc0f26-9392-4df9-adf7-3c720bd879b9.JPG

5f2d1b6f-a1f6-4bae-bc5c-4d8f4e1485bb.JPG

f6f9e9af-a22f-4ffe-8cbd-3981a36358e8.JPG

a709f86b-794f-4abc-bddc-d6ed0a91d251.JPG

4df3cc93-d209-424b-88a5-c22bb3b36ced.JPG

 

What appears to be a second stabilizer would fold down in flight to augment the vertical fin.

 

Next up in the Hobby Boss UH-1B Huey.

 

Enjoy

 

Edited by hsr
F8U-3 not -1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

an aircraft I am not familiar with - for resin, looks like a nice kit and you have finished it very nicely

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The F8U competed against the F-4 Phantom II in the Navy's all weather fighter competition in the late '50s

 

Thanks

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I recall from the written references, it was the fastest accelerating aircraft NASA ever tested, and its top speed was limited only by the heat limitations of its canopy. Lost to the Phantom by nature of not being a two-seat, two-engine fleet interceptor. From all accounts it was an awesome performer. Maintrack also did a very nice 1/72 vacform in their Project X series. The two ventral fins were linked to the undercart and extended when the landing gear was retracted- they were for stability at high Mach numbers, IIRC/ I bet @Tailspin Turtle could tell us a lot more about it, or you could find the Naval Fighters monograph on it.

Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 72modeler said:

As I recall from the written references, it was the fastest accelerating aircraft NASA ever tested, and its top speed was limited only by the heat limitations of its canopy. Lost to the Phantom by nature of not being a two-seat, two-engine fleet interceptor. From all accounts it was an awesome performer. Maintrack also did a very nice 1/72 vacform in their Project X series. The two ventral fins were linked to the undercart and extended when the landing gear was retracted- they were for stability at high Mach numbers, IIRC/ I bet @Tailspin Turtle could tell us a lot more about it, or you could find the Naval Fighters monograph on it.

Mike

Ginter has a few of my F8U-3 monographs left and I have some available:

http://www.ginterbooks.com/NAVAL/NF87.htm

 

One question you might have is what happens when a ventral fin didn’t fold out of the way when the gear was lowered. It did happen at Edwards during the test program. The pilot landed on the lakebed and the fin broke off cleanly. I also described the competition and the result in my F4H-1 monograph just published by Ginter. The F8U-3 was superior in every way save one. Vought tried hard to prove that a pilot could successfully manage the intercept alone but the admirals decided that dedicating the radar search and detection to a second crew member was worth the additional cost and weight of having him along relative to the risk of losing an aircraft carrier because a threat was overlooked or just detected too late.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Tailspin Turtle said:

the admirals decided that dedicating the radar search and detection to a second crew member was worth the additional cost and weight of having him along relative to the risk of losing an aircraft carrier because a threat was overlooked or just detected too late.

If I recall correctly, F-4 pilots in Vietnam complained of information overload even with the additional crew member so it seems the admirals made the right decision. BTW I have your book and found it very helpful.

 

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lovely build and all enhanced by some great back story info.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great build of a seriously cool beast :clap2::clap2:

Definitely in my "WANT" list, I've even considered scratch building this beast and a WHIFF or two :coolio::cool:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very nice build! I have several Anigrand kits, although not that one, and they are quite well molded but don’t seem to have as clear a canopy as yours.  Again, very impressive work on the Crusader!

 

Cheers,

 

Mark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Mark Joyce said:

but don’t seem to have as clear a canopy as yours.

Usually they are translucent at best, but this one was nice

 

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ugly or not, it looks fast even when standing still

 

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There were rumors that the Vought was even better than the F-4 in Air to Air combat.

But the F-4 had two engines and a extra crew member for the weapons and that with

a bigger payload the NAVY was going for the F-4......

 

Gerhard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also they both relied on missiles, neither had a gun, and the F-4 carried 4 and the F8U-3 carried 3. Of course both could be made to carry more. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice work indeed!!

Looks like this type had a big influence on the carrier-based Corsair jet - or perhaps the other way round (I don't know which came first)?

:goodjob:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Both this and the A-7 Corsair II were derived from the F8U-1 Crusader. In this case it was a follow on next generation and in the case of the Corsair the Navy wanted something based on an existing design.

 

Thanks 

Share this post


Link to post
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

×