Jump to content

Starfighters...


Recommended Posts

Hi!

 

I had the old but nice Esci/Italeri 1/72 scale F-104G laying in the box for some years painted and for most much of the parts assembled. When I got the Hasegawa kit at "Svedino's Car and Aircraft Museum" here in Sweden I thought it was time to dust of the box and start an "comparizon build". As the local shop also had the Revell F-104G I put my hands on that one to as what I knew these three kits are the best when it comes to 1/72 scale Starfighter kits. I built some Airfix kits since 1974 and the Airfix kit i still an favourit kit by "nostalia". I have also built the Matchbox kit some 30 years ago. I never seen the Academy kit nor the Frog. And the old Revell F-104 was in 1/64 scale wasn't it?

 

But for now, here is what I found in the dusted box with the Esci/Italeri kit...

 

spacer.png

 

Cheers / André

 

 

Edited by Andre B
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I like with the Hasegawa kit is that it came with two large decalsheets.

One for no more less than four different German Starfighters. Two from the Luftwaffe units JBG 31 and 34 and two "Marineflieger" units, MFG 1 and MFG 2.

And one for three different Italian Air Force units - Gruppo 5, 9 and 12.

 

spacer.png

 

The Revell decals looked rather small and spartan compared to the possibillities Hasegawa gives...

 

/André

 

 

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

Hi Andre,

 

The Hasegawa is THE way to go for sure. The Escu/Italeri has an oversize canopy. It does, however, have a more detailed wing than the Hase.

 

@Giorgio N will have a view, too. 

 

Martin

Edited by RidgeRunner
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, RidgeRunner said:

Hi Andre,

 

The Hasegawa is THE way to go for sure. The Escu/Italeri has an oversize canopy. It does, however, have a more detailed wing than the Hase.

 

@Giorgio N will have a view, too. 

 

Martin

Hi Martin,

 

Yes, the windshield on the Esci/Italeri clear part is one or two mm to long. But in other aspects it is more or less the same size as the Hasegawa and Revell kits. If I build an NMT Starfighter the one and only kit I would build is the Hasegawa kit. The details on the tail is fantastic compared to the two other kits.

 

spacer.png

 

Cheers / André

Edited by Andre B
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some moore comparisons between the three kits...

 

As can bee seen the Revell fuselage has more parts (loose tail and noose) and the posibility to be built with open airbrakes.

The wheelbays for the Esci/Italeri kit is rather sparten compared to the other two kits...

 

spacer.png

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting comparison.  I have an example of the Esci ‘G in 421 Squadron RCAF colours unbuilt in the Loft of Doom, having previously built their Marineflieger version and enjoyed it.  Previously I’d built the Matchbox single seater, also in RCAF colours, and the Airfix kit.  I think for pure nostalgia you can’t beat either of the latter.

 

Looking at the image of the Hasegawa rear fuselage in post 4 I can’t help but think that there’s no way that the rivet detail can’t be overscale: I don’t know what the diameter of the visible rivet heads on the full-size jet is, but I suspect that Hasegawa’s renditions if scaled up would be at least an inch across.  Please don’t get me wrong; I won’t deny that models do need surface detailing and that there are limits to what can be tooled, but in this case I think less could well have been more.

 

On the other hand I wouldn’t be too worried about a lack of detail in the main wheel wells: the forward doors are almost always closed, even with the wheels down and the jet has such a low ground clearance that you’re not going to see a lot anyway unless you pick the model up and turn it over.

 

Completely off-topic but even though I’m not a Starfighter fan (give me the Lightning, any day!) I think I fancy the look of the new Kinetic 1/48th kit.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Some work done with the cockpits.

 

When dryfitting the Revell cockpit parts with the fuselage parts I notices that the cockpit was to wide to fit between the fuselage parts. I had to do some fine adjustment with the cockpit sides with an knife and an nailfile to get it fit. To make the dryfitting simplier I also had to use some "sprueparts" glued to the inside of the fuselage. When dryfitting the same parts to the Hasegawa kit I noticed that the cockpit for that kit also was to wide for the fuselage. Strange, maybe not? ;)

 

 

spacer.png

 

Concerning the bangseats the Hasegawa and Revell look alike but the Revell seat has belts moulded like the Esci/Italeri seat. With the Hasegawa kit comes also an second bangseat for an earlier F-104. The instrumentpanel for the Hasegawa kit is moulded with the clear parts which make room for some improvement. I painted the backside gren, used a dot of "Micro Mask" on the big screen in the centrum of the instrumentpanel and painted the backside grey. It looked nice when I scraped of the "Mikro Mask".

 

The interior colour is usually painted in FS 36231. For most of us this calls for Humbrol 140. I used Tamiya AS-7 which slightly lighter. But I wonder if I should used Hu 165 Medium Sea Grey instead. Concerning the bang seats Hasegawa calls for blue, not olive green. I havn't checked what is correct yet for an German Starfighter. But there are more painting to do and some decalling as well...

 

Cheers / André

 

 

Concerning the Martin-Baker Mk. GQ-7(A): http://www.ejectionsite.com/f104seat.htm

 

 

Edited by Andre B
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Parts on the Hasegawa and Revell kit that I don't like.

 

spacer.png

 

The solution to mould the "gunplate" as an part to be glued to the fuselage is not one of the best.
It's rather difficult to glue it in place without gaps...

 

Edited by Andre B
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Andre B said:

Parts on the Hasegawa and Revell kit that I don't like.

The solution to mould the "gunplate" as an part to be glued to the fuselage is not one of the best.
It's rather difficult to glue it in place without gaps...

Very true! I added 0.1 mm plastic card to the upper side to improve the fit. Note that on the top side, the glue joint doubles as a panel line (a combination that I don't like) but on the lower side there's a panel line just below the glue joint. You can see the result in the corner of the second photo.

 

f104c-04.jpg

 

f104c-10.jpg

 

Rob

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Ok, some progress with the Starfighter builds albeit slow... ;)

 

 

spacer.png

 

The Revell and Hasegawa "cockpit fuselages". The Revell parts fits after some work on the cockpit. Concerning the Hasegawa fuselage there is for sure some work to get the cockpit narrow enough to fit inside the fuselage parts.

 

Checking the Hasegawa instructions "Step 1" they tells you to change the angle of the side panels of the cockpit tube to get an more narrow cockpit tube with correct angles of the side panels as on the real aircraft. But nothing of this is said in the Revell instructions. The Esci/Italer kit has the cockpit tube moulded with the side panels in the correct angles (albeit with decals as "instrument panels).

 

 

spacer.png

 

The aft fuselage parts with the afterburner and nozzle. I am not that pleased with the Hasegawa solution that neds an bulkhead and had to be glued to the fuselage parts before painting. The Revell kit albeit more fuselage parts allows to fit the afterburner with nozzle from behind after painting (as do the Esci/Italeri kit).

 

Concerning those airbrakes... ...what was normal procedure? Where they opened or closed on parked aircrafts?

 

spacer.png

 

The Hasegawa (upper) and Revell (below) landing gear and intake cone parts. The Hasegawa parts have som finer details but the Revell kit has more detail. Concerning the intake cones the painting instructions are rather unclear. The Hasegawa instructions says flat black and the Revell instructions says flat black cones but matt blue grey (Revell 79) plates. I would say "aluminium" whit black cones but I don't knew whats accurate...

 

Cheers / André

Edited by Andre B
  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My starfighter builds goes forward. For the moment most job are done painting the cockpits an ejector seats. After som dryfitting I can se some problems coming up. The Revell cockpit sits much deeper into the fuselage compared to the Hasegawa cockpit. The ejector seats are more or less the same size. Maybe the Hasegawa seat half a mm higher. But in the end this means short of place for the canopy when it comes to the Hasegawa kit. As I havn't heard anything of this its maybe not a problem and more of an notice.

 

 

I also discovered some other things concerning the Revell kit...

 

spacer.png

 

There are four holes behind the nosewheel gearbay on the Revell kit that are suposed to be opened/drilled (step 4 and 5 in the instructions). Are these vents of some sort or... ? Well maybe not. Probably holes for hardpoints for two AIM-9 sidewinder missiles that comes within the kit. But the instructions doesn't say anything about the hardpoints and missiles within the kit.

 

 

spacer.png

 

There is also an strange "fin" to fit on the same spot under the fuselage (part 56 in step 25).  I havn't seen that fin on any German Starfighters...

 

Cheers / André

Edited by Andre B
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The holes to be opened up are obviously locating holes for those ventral fins which must be optional.  As my knowledge of Starfighters is limited I can’t comment on which aircraft were fitted with these fins.  If the jet you are modelling does not have the fins, don’t drill out the holes.

 

AW

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Andwil said:

The holes to be opened up are obviously locating holes for those ventral fins which must be optional.  As my knowledge of Starfighters is limited I can’t comment on which aircraft were fitted with these fins.  If the jet you are modelling does not have the fins, don’t drill out the holes.

 

AW

 

Well, it seems more likely that the holes are intended for a pair of Sidewinder hardpoints. The mentioned ventral fin goes in between them.

 

Cheers / André

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Andwil said:

Yes that makes sense, I can see after a second look that the holes are off centre.

 

AW

 

I took a second look at the Revell instructions and the sprues. Both Sidewinder missiles and hardpoints are within the sprue parts. But the Sidewinders and rails (but not the hardpoints) are "blackened" out of the instructions as "Parts not used". And they are not mentioned further on in the instructions.

 

The ventral fin is on the aircraft 7304 (26+44) pictured on the box but not in the painting instructions concerning the same aircraft or F-104G 8102 (23+92).

 

 

Thera are hardpoints and rails within the Hasegawa kit. But as usually concerning Hasegawa kits no missiles. The mentioned ventral fin is not provided with the Hasegawa kit.

 

Cheers / André

Edited by Andre B
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Andre B said:

There is also an strange "fin" to fit on the same spot under the fuselage (part 56 in step 25).  I havn't seen that fin on any German Starfighters...

Andre, that part 56 is the centreline weapons pylon. 

 

Martin

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5 September 2019 at 11:48 PM, Andre B said:

Parts on the Hasegawa and Revell kit that I don't like.

 

spacer.png

 

The solution to mould the "gunplate" as an part to be glued to the fuselage is not one of the best.
It's rather difficult to glue it in place without gaps...

 

Very true, Andre. However, unless it is done this way you dont have the options for a blanking cover for versions without a gun.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/14/2019 at 8:32 PM, Andre B said:

Ok, some progress with the Starfighter builds albeit slow... ;)

 

 

 

 

The Revell and Hasegawa "cockpit fuselages". The Revell parts fits after some work on the cockpit. Concerning the Hasegawa fuselage there is for sure some work to get the cockpit narrow enough to fit inside the fuselage parts.

 

Checking the Hasegawa instructions "Step 1" they tells you to change the angle of the side panels of the cockpit tube to get an more narrow cockpit tube with correct angles of the side panels as on the real aircraft. But nothing of this is said in the Revell instructions. The Esci/Italer kit has the cockpit tube moulded with the side panels in the correct angles (albeit with decals as "instrument panels).

 

 

 

 

The aft fuselage parts with the afterburner and nozzle. I am not that pleased with the Hasegawa solution that neds an bulkhead and had to be glued to the fuselage parts before painting. The Revell kit albeit more fuselage parts allows to fit the afterburner with nozzle from behind after painting (as do the Esci/Italeri kit).

 

Concerning those airbrakes... ...what was normal procedure? Where they opened or closed on parked aircrafts?

 

 

 

The Hasegawa (upper) and Revell (below) landing gear and intake cone parts. The Revell parts are som more finer detailed but the Revell kit has more detail. Concerning the intake cones the painting instructions are rather unclear. The Hasegawa instructions says flat black and the Revell instructions says flat black cones but matt blue grey (Revell 79) plates. I would say "aluminium" whit black cones but I don't knew whats accurate...

 

Cheers / André

 

Sorry, I'm a bit late to the party...

standard procedure for the airbrakes was to keep them closed. It's relatively rare to see them open on a Starfighter unless they are being used.

The intakes are in aluminum with the exception of the area closer to the lip, that was often painted in black, Some users however painted this in the camo colour. The cones are also black up to the boundary layer inlet ring and silver after this

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Giorgio N said:

 

Sorry, I'm a bit late to the party...

standard procedure for the airbrakes was to keep them closed. It's relatively rare to see them open on a Starfighter unless they are being used.

The intakes are in aluminum with the exception of the area closer to the lip, that was often painted in black, Some users however painted this in the camo colour. The cones are also black up to the boundary layer inlet ring and silver after this

Hi Giorgio,

 

Yes, that's what I remember to. But it was that long time since I was in Germany that I had to get it confirmed...

 

Cheers / André

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Andre B said:

Hi Giorgio,

 

Yes, that's what I remember to. But it was that long time since I was in Germany that I had to get it confirmed...

 

Cheers / André

It is also true, Andre, that the Starfighter generally sat in a clean condition on the ramp. i.e. no flap of LE slat droops, no airbrakes extended.....

 

Martin

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...

Some work done now when the sun comes back with ligth. Dayglow painted wingtanks, skypainted radome and blackpainted intakes. Canopy dipped in future...

 

spacer.png

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As the work on my Starfighter's goes on with slow pace I found lots of nice builds on other places here at BM concerning building Hasegawa Starfighter's...

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've built all three at the same time too - it's an interesting comparison. Even If somewhat similar in quality, they are all bit different too. But all in all, I prefer the Hasegawa. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, reini said:

I've built all three at the same time too - it's an interesting comparison. Even If somewhat similar in quality, they are all bit different too. But all in all, I prefer the Hasegawa. 

 

If we only talk about the kits I think I prefer the Esci kit. It is simplier to build coming right out of the box. But in the end the Hasegawa probably will come up as the winner when it comes to shape and details. Revell could have done something good. But today the price of the Revell kit is much to high compared to both Hasegawa and Esci...

 

Cheers / André 

 

  • Like 1
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...