Is this p 39 n airacobra kit good?

[GalaxyTheCat]

https://www.scalehobbyist.com/catagories/Model_Aircraft/p-39n-aircobra-easy-assembly/HBB00080234/product.php?s=0&t=0&u=0&micr=323&pg=1&ppp=48&sb=stocknumber&so=a&era=0,6

[Gantt]

probably.  best thing to do, build a couple models to learn on. i like the 1/48 scale over 1/72, its a little bigger and i find it easier to work with.    each time you build one, you will find all sorts of things you are not happy with, and ways to improve.   i buy a lot on ebay, and Mercari.   i have one store local to me that sells models and the selection is not very large.  

[Graham Boak]

It's a good choice for a beginner.  Ignore the 1/48 enthusiasts - the larger the scale, the more parts, and the smallest one much the same size.  This is because it is dependent upon the limitation of the tooling not the requirements of the parts.  Not that there aren't 1/48 kits suitable for beginners, nor 1/72 ones totally unsuitable.  But this one is basically sound and fits together well (judging from others in the series, I haven't had that particular one), which is what you need at the start.  You can play with other scales and see what you prefer as you develop.

[Work In Progress]

2 hours ago, GalaxyTheCat said:

https://www.scalehobbyist.com/catagories/Model_Aircraft/p-39n-aircobra-easy-assembly/HBB00080234/product.php?s=0&t=0&u=0&micr=323&pg=1&ppp=48&sb=stocknumber&so=a&era=0,6

 

Some first-hand experience on this site

and results

 

[Jackson Duvalier]

1 hour ago, Gantt said:

you will find all sorts of things you are not happy with, and ways to improve. 

 

It'll look close enough to the casual observer.  The truly dedicated will do some surgery to the lumps and bumps in order to be truly convincing.  

 

As far as P-39 kits go, there's nothing really satisfying in 1/72.

[Gantt]

5 minutes ago, Jackson Duvalier said:

 

It'll look close enough to the casual observer.  The truly dedicated will do some surgery to the lumps and bumps in order to be truly convincing.  

 

As far as P-39 kits go, there's nothing really satisfying in 1/72.

i always find something i want to improve on next time.    i tend to be very critical of my own efforts.    and it rarely seems to make a difference in my work!!! but i do not let that take away the fun though. 

[Alex Gordon]

I built one earlier this year,the RFI thread is here.

 

 

You will need to be inventive putting in the noseweight,there's not a lot of spare room in there.Build and enjoy.

 

Edited December 10, 2020 by Alex Gordon

[GalaxyTheCat]

4 hours ago, Alex Gordon said:

I built one earlier this year,the RFI thread is here.

 

 

You will need to be inventive putting in the noseweight,there's not a lot of spare room in there.Build and enjoy.

 

what would be good to use as a nose weight? could i use some air dry clay?

[dnl42]

Clay isn't that dense.

 

You can use fishing sinkers/weights. A hobby shop that carries Pinewood Derby models would have weights that would work.Hobby shops could also have something called Liquid Gravity. Buckshot is also a good possibility Glue any of these in using PVA (white glue). I use buckshot and Liquid Gravity. Here's a thread showing nose weight in a another brand 1/72 P-39. 

 

Many models of tricycle-gear aircraft are tail heavy unless nose weight is added. Not hard to deal with, but something to search for whenever you build such a model if the instructions don't actually say anything about nose weight. BTW, whatever nose weight is needed to balance the model properly is carried by the main landing gear, not the nose gear. You usually need to add the weight to the nose before the fuselage is closed up. This can present a problem, as your model isn't built yet. You basically tape the fuselage, wings, and tail together, balance on the main landing gear mount points, then try weights until it's nose-heavy.

 

Take a look at this page on Scalemates; it describes the kit and has a link to the instructions.

 

Any interesting point of this aircraft is that it was designed and built for its 37mm cannon. Another such aircraft is the A-10, with its 30mm cannon.

 

Best of luck!

 

[Wulfman]

It’s a fun build, but the purists will say the profile of the cockpit is too low !

 

Wulfman

[Alex Gordon]

I used lots of little bits of lead,pressed flat with pliers and cut and shaped to fit into the recess around the propellor insert and the small spaces behind that.When I build another one I'll replace the instrument panel with a lead one and possibly relacement nosegear bay doors too which will save a lot of messing about.Hollowing out some of the plastic in the rear fuselage would help too,the wall thickness back there is decidedly chunky so there's plenty to go at.The beauty of this kit is that the upper and lower components don't have to be glued together until late in the build so there is room to experiment with weight and balance. 

The mainlegs are a bit too long and could be shortened to give the tail down stance of the real thing.

 

 

 

[Giorgio N]

Not built this one but I've built several other Hobbyboss kits of this type. They are sure suited to beginners and require less assembly compared to "standard" kits. At the same time they have their own "features" that some may or not like...

One that may sound strange is that fit of the main parts is not always good. I've seen more than once that the upper and lower fuselage halves need some filler. Nothing major but still if someone wants a kit where all the parts fall together without need for filler, a Tamiya kit is still a better option. Similar comments can be made on the presence of mould "ridges" over some parts, for example on the wing leading edges. These are almost inevitable when moulding such thick parts in one piece. A swipe with sanding paper will sort it of course.

Then there's the fact that things like gun barrels, antennas and pitot tubes are moulded together with main parts. Fine in a sense as it's one less step but having them attached all the time means there's a lot of chances to bend them or even knock them off. So better be careful.

One last thing to keep in mind: careful when dryfitting the main parts as the way the kits are designed to be assembled without glue means that it's possible to have the parts stuck together with little hope of separating them again. On mine I use glue so one of the first things I do is to remove the large pegs used to keep the main parts attached. This also allows me to move the relative position slightly to achieve a better fit.

With these caveats in mind, I'm a big fan of these kits, not all are particularly accurate but they are not only great for kids, they can also be turned into respectable models with some additions,

Edited December 11, 2020 by Giorgio N

[alt-92]

1 hour ago, Giorgio N said:

On mine I use glue so one of the first things I do is to remove the large pegs used to keep the main parts attached. This also allows me to move the relative position slightly to achieve a better fit.

And in the P-39 case, it leaves more room for lead pellets/fishing line weights.
 

[112 Squadron]

Looking at the assembly manual of the Hobby Boss kit in the post above  I presume it is quite tricky to add extra weight in the nose of that kit since there seems to be not much space left after the propeller is added.

 

I think the Academy P-39 is a viable alternative. It is quite easy to overcome the nose weight problem since Scale Aircraft Conversion even designed a special weight part for the nose together with the landing gear:

 

 https://www.hannants.co.uk/product/SAC72039?result-token=hJlSn

 

Another good option are the RS Models P-39s which may be the best in 1/72 scale. This company has even covered all the sub-variants including the P-400 and has even a boxing of the RAF Cobra. According to Scale Aircraft Conversion homepage the noseweight part for the Academy P-39 can also be used with the RS Models without any major modifications. 

Edited December 11, 2020 by 112 Squadron

[fishplanebeer]

On the overall subject of simple to build kits I'm currently building a 72nd scale Bf 109F-4 from AZ but also decided to build the Zvezda F-2 version along side it for comparison and I have to say that the 'snap together' Zvezda is turning out to be the better of the two by some distance.

 

Not only is it accurate in shape and well detailed but its overall construction and fit is so much better than the AZ kit which has a number of issues requiring considerable fettling, especially the fuselage to wing root join where there is a very obvious step. So providing the transparency is good and fits well, which sometimes can be an issue with some Hobby Boss kits, then I am more than happy to go this route and plan to buy their P38-L along with the Zvezda Fw190-A4 very soon.

 

Regards

Colin.

[Jazzie]

Having started on 70s and 80s Airfix and Matchbox kits way back, i think the Hobby Boss is not enough of a challenge for a beginner, although i am not discounting them. If i was starting out now, it would be something cheap from Airfix, Revell and Italeri and just build them warts and all.

 

If i made it to 5 with each one improving, i would then try and build the one i enjoyed the most again and try to improve on it. I followed this having had a several year break from building models, and each time i come back from modellers block, although this return from the block involves a GWH F-15E which i am finding a very easy build, but too expensive to be a beginners kit!

Arabest,

Geoff.

[fishplanebeer]

I too have been away from modelling for over 25 years and have only just finished my first 'come-back' kit, the SH Kittyhawk 1a and will post some pics soon to get some feedback. This kit is really nice but is by no means a beginners one as it took some fettling plus some head scratching in order to get it over the line.

 

However the Zvezda Bf 109F-2, whilst a 'snap together kit' and presumably aimed at those new to the hobby, is almost as good detail wise and still a challenge to get it right (as I'm discovering) , albeit less so than the AZ F-4.

 

As such I won't shy away from kits from HB or Zvezda, providing they are accurate in shape and fit well with good fitting canopies, as you can put as much or as little into them as you wish depending upon what you are hoping to achieve. Some pricier and supposedly more challenging and highly regarded kits fail in this regard, for example the fit issues with the Arma Hobby Hurricanes which have been well covered in this forum. I have both their Mk1 and Mk IIc but both are now definitely way down my to do list at the moment.

 

Of course if you are looking for a challenge then most Eduard kits (I have their Spitfire VIII to do very soon) will keep you busy for quite some time and they are bang on in terms of accuracy and fit IMHO.

 

Regards

Colin.