Jump to content

Recommended Posts

MV-22 Osprey (81769)

Hobby Boss via Creative Models Ltd

 

boxtop.jpg

 

The Osprey can trace its roots back a long way into the 1970s, while the tilt-rotor concept goes back even further to the time of very early aviation between the wars.  In the 70s Bell began constructing a prototype that bears a family resemblance to the Osprey, complete with twin engines and a very similar overall shape.  After the disaster that was the US raid in Iran to free their embassy staff, a gap in their inventory was identified for a large vertical and short take-off and landing aircraft that could also fly at similar speeds to fixed-wing aircraft with a comparable range.  This led to the development of the V-22 Osprey that took the basics of the Bell design and enlarged it sufficiently to carry a number of fully-loaded troops or a vehicle the size of a HUMVEE externally, in partnership with the Boeing Helicopter division.  It first flew in 1989, and had a relatively troubled gestation that wasn’t yet over when it first went into service in early 2000, although it wasn’t actually used as a true service aircraft until 2007 with the Marines and 2009 for the USAF.  A number of test airframes were lost with fatalities, and the Marines lost two airframes early on, which caused some delays to the programme, allowing time for the software that allows the transition between hover and forward flight and assists the pilots to catch up and become the stable, capable platform it is today.

 

Its capabilities have been questioned over the years by some, but a single airframe type can’t be all things to all people, and its ability to land and take-off vertically then transition to forward flight at a similar speed and range to a traditional fixed wing aircraft is an excellent capability for any army.  It has seen extensive use in supply and casualty evacuation roles in the recent conflicts and policing actions, and is scheduled to become a carrier communications aircraft this year (at time of writing) to replace the ageing C-2 Greyhound, which it outclasses comprehensively.  It came very close to being cancelled at least twice, as the budget and unit cost spiralled higher as the project proceeded, but it has evolved into a very safe method of transport for the Marines, having an accident rate of half that of the traditional rotary aircraft they deploy.  Bell Boeing are developing the V-280 Valor(sic) for the US Army, which builds upon the technology pioneered by the Osprey, but changing the tilting mechanism so that only the props move, while the engine stays fixed in the “forward” orientation.

 

 

The Kit

This is a brand-new tooling from Hobby Boss, and it depicts the Marine version of the Osprey that is in common use today.  For many a year we’ve been somewhat lacking in choice of kits in this scale, having only the comparatively ancient Italeri kit, which more represents an early prototype without the lumps and bumps or fuselage hump that the in-service aircraft has.  Maybe the wait was a blessing in disguise, as we now have a kit that depicts the actual resulting aircraft, rather than having to hack and bang the old kit into shape.  The hissing sound you can hear is thousands of Italeri kits being pushed to the back of the stash, although some might baulk at the list price until they see inside.  Hobby Boss and their parent company have a habit of pulling back the curtains to reveal kits that are ready to go, so the first most of us heard about it was when it was announced a few months back.

 

It’s a big box, but then it’s also quite a large aircraft, and the detail has been packed into the interior in the shape of a complete internal skin that fills the fuselage from nose to tail (almost).  The box is a large one as previously mentioned, and the model is large too, measuring 371mm long by 496mm wide, which I’m assuming goes from tip-to-tip of the massive props.  If that width figure scares you and your cabinet space, you’ll likely be pleased to hear that there is a folded option included in the kit, allowing you to pose the wings parallel to the fuselage and all the blades pointing at each other.  In the voluminous box but well-packed box you will find eight large sprues of various sizes in grey styrene, a single clear sprue and a small Photo-Etch (PE) sheet containing seatbelts and a few grilles.  Detail seems to be excellent, and the airframe is covered in restrained panel lines, raised areas as befits an aircraft with substantial portions made from composites, and a nicely appointed cockpit, with load area similarly well-decked out.  The instruction booklet is typical of Hobby Boss fare, and the separate A3 colour painting guide is mute on the subject matter, as usual.

 

sprue1.jpg

 

sprue2.jpg

 

sprue3.jpg

 

sprue4.jpg

 

sprue5.jpg

 

sprue6.jpg

 

sprue7.jpg

 

clear.jpg

 

Construction begins with the crew seats, which are of the wrap-around type, and have separate cushions and three-part PE belts, but lack lap belts, as seems to be the way with quite a few kits of late.  The cockpit is provided as a tub with the rear bulkhead moulded-in, and you place the two seats, control column, throttle and other controls added over decals for the side consoles, after which the main instrument panel with its MFDs and rudder pedals are fitted to the front of the tub, with decals for this also included.  The bulkhead is a little bland, but check your references and add some interest there if you feel the urge, or wait for the aftermarket companies to catch up.  There is a corridor between the two areas, where lots of avionics will be found in the real thing, with a ribbed insert and a crew door with moulded-in jump seat included along with a fire extinguisher that has a PE bracket securing it to the wall.  The nose gear bay is situated below the cockpit, and is made up along with the main bays next, adding gear and wheels, plus retraction jacks along the way.  The bays are well-detailed, but little will be seen of them on the deck due to the short legs and low ground clearance, so don’t stress over the building of these parts.  You should also be able to leave off the gear legs until after painting, which is nice.  The main bays slot into the separate side nacelles that keep the bays and other stuff such as fuel and avionics from encroaching into the load space at 1:1, then these are put to the side while the load area is made up.  The load area resembles a slightly smaller fuselage, being made up of two halves, but with the detail being on the inside, consisting of ribs, stringers and the mounts for the many seats that go along the walls.  Lots of little details are added first, then thirteen seats on one side, with 12 on the other, all provided as separate parts, a full-width floor that sits on the raised supports projecting from the lower side of the interior, plus another fire extinguisher for good luck.  The rear load ramp needs to be made up too, as this is also trapped between the interior halves before closing the fuselage.  The lower section folds down, while the upper half folds up in a similar style to the old Hercules ramp.  If you plan on posing the cargo doors open, you’re going to have to make your own jacks and as surface detail to the ramp floor, as these aren’t included on the sprues, but the open door option isn’t shown as an option.  Before inserting the newly minted interior, a few portholes and other windows are glued into the fuselage sides from within, then the nose bay is added along with the cockpit and corridor, after which you can close up the fuselage, remembering to add the FLIR turret under the nose (minus glue) before you do.  There is an overhead console supplied for the inside of the large canopy, which is crystal clear and full of detailed framing and rivets, then the two side sponsons are slotted into the gaps… on the sides.

 

detail-wheels.jpg

 

detail-cockpit.jpg

 

detail-interior.jpg

 

detail-fuselage.jpg

 

The H-tail is next, and includes a section of the underside at the very rear of the fuselage to make for a strong join.  It is made up from top and bottom halves, then joined by the two-piece verticals and a clear light on each of the tips.  It is slipped over the rear of the fuselage during fitting of a profusion of aerials, of the blade and towel-rail type, plus the gear bay doors and a number of other sensors, not forgetting the refuelling probe stub in the nose.  This is repeated on the top and sides of the fuselage, and includes the some of the PE vents and styrene strakes.

 

detail-wings.jpg

 

The props need power, which is provided by the Rolls-Royce turboprop engines in the nacelles that rotate to provide vectored thrust via the massive three-bladed props.  The nacelle is formed from a pair of basic halves, with two baffles trapped inside the rear, a couple of intakes grafted to the exterior, and another in the lower rear of the nacelle, capped off with a curved smiley-face intake and prop boss rear plate, which is held in position and allowed to rotate by a collar.  The blades can be made up folded or deployed, and a full set of separate blade parts are included for this, although only one set of bulbous bosses are supplied, so you can’t easily swap them at will, which is a shame.  From here on in the instructions focus solely on the folded version, but it’s not rocket science to figure out the unfolded method.  The bosses each have three inserts added, and are then joined to the back-plates at the front of the nacelles, to be put to one side while the wings are made.  The wings are full-span, and comprise top and bottom sections, the bottom having a flat centre and large hole moulded-in for the pivot.  The bulkheads with large axles for the engines are inserted into the end fairings, and a set of flaps are placed into T-shaped recesses in the trailing edge of the wings, with the whole lot closed in by the upper wing, which has many vortex generators moulded along the leading edges.  There is another PE grille inserted into the central “hump”, then your engine nacelles can be slid over the axles and joined by a strake on the top surface of the wing.  The wing assembly clips onto flexible tabs on the top of the fuselage, so can be left to rotate freely if you wish, and if you have selected the deployed option, it’s as simple as turning the wings to the perpendicular and pointing the props to the sky if you’re going for VTOL, or forward if you’re doing a flying model, but don’t forget the ground clearance for the props.

 

 

Markings

As I alluded earlier, there is only one decal option in the box, and HB tell you precious little about it, other than what colours to use, and where to put the decals.  The sides of the aircraft tell you a lot if you know the nomenclature however, and a quick Google reveals that it is from Marine Medium Tiltrotor Training Squadron 204, which is based at MCAS New River, North Carolina.  The serial 166483 is assigned there, so that’s nice.

 

profiles.jpg

 

decals.jpg

 

The decals are printed anonymously in China, but have good registration, colour density and sharpness, with most of them being lo-viz grey or white.  The instrument decals have black MFD screens and white buttons and should stand up to all but the most intent of observers.  A Quinta Studios set would be most welcome though.

 

Conclusion

This appears to be a nice kit of an interesting (to some of us at least) and novel aircraft.  Modelling an In-service airframe has been a labour of love up to now, so it’s good to see a new tool pop out of the Hobby Boss/Trumpeter warehouses.  Its weakest point is the rear ramp with simplified floor and lack of struts, but if you’re portraying it with the ramp up it’s not a problem!  How long it is before we see a flying model with motorised props remains to be seen.  Soon, I hope.

 

Highly recommended.

 

bin.jpg

 

Review sample courtesy of

logo.gif

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Mike said:

MV-22 Osprey (81769)

Hobby Boss via Creative Models Ltd

 

 How long it is before we see a flying model with motorised props remains to be seen.  Soon, I hope.

 

Highly recommended.

 

bin.jpg

 

Review sample courtesy of

logo.gif

Nah Mike, someone will only try to do a low flypast 😀

Link to post
Share on other sites

great review - thank you for putting this together.

 

Frightening to see what these are currently selling for (pre-order?) on Evilbay..... perhaps buying a real life one might be cheaper? I hope Hannants re=release their excellent sheets to cover these. 

 

Here's the Britmodeller Walk Around that Julian kindly uploaded for me a couple of years ago. Yur review suggests that ful fold or just blade fold seem to be options, so this kit gets a big tick from me, perhaps I could sell/trade one of my children's organs as a down payment? 

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the review, Mike.

 

I remember reading several years ago that the Osprey was considered and rejected as the principle vertical transport asset for the President. It was OK'ed as transport for the White House staff and members of the media. I thought that spoke volumes about its perceived safety rating.  

 

Chris. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, spruecutter96 said:

I remember reading several years ago that the Osprey was considered and rejected as the principle vertical transport asset for the President. It was OK'ed as transport for the White House staff and members of the media. I thought that spoke volumes about its perceived safety rating.

 

I think the safety of this novel method of transport has moved on quite a degree now, in just the same way that traditional rotary winged aircraft did when they were first unleashed on the military.  My dad has a story from his RAF National Service days about guarding an early American chopper that had "landed" in a ditch in Germany in the early 50s, and they had to wait until a new radial engine could be brought out and fitted the next day.  New things have their teething troubles, and those get solved eventually.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, spruecutter96 said:

Thanks for the review, Mike.

 

I remember reading several years ago that the Osprey was considered and rejected as the principle vertical transport asset for the President. It was OK'ed as transport for the White House staff and members of the media. I thought that spoke volumes about its perceived safety rating.  

 

Chris. 

This is consistent with the abundance of caution with which the Secret Service assures the safety of the President. The life-limited parts on the helicopters (white tops) he flies are removed at 50% of life and transferred to other units or installed on green tops to be flown to limit carrying staff and members of the media. In any event, his trips by helicopter are so short that the speed of the tilt rotor would not significantly reduce the overall travel time. At this point, the tilt rotor is no more unsafe than other aircraft, if it ever was. As far as I know, all the accidents were the result of pilot or maintenance error or involvement in high-risk operations.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

forgive the thread drift (should really be in another chat thread). But "yes" there were all sorts of issues when the MV-22 entered service, I believe it was proved NOT to be design or mechanical, but rather new pilots getting into Vortex Ring issues when landing (i.e. your rate of decent and blades "cutting" thru your own downdraft = significant drop in lift at a very bad moment!). The down draft from these beasts is huge (plus with the jet efflux pointing down ) create additional issues when operating on decks/ grass etc.

 

But USMC doctrine has been modified to reflect the capability. Osprey offers a massive increase in speed/distance (although is slightly more cramped inside than the CH-46 phrogs it has replaced). The USN even made USS America & one other LHA (?) without the docking area on the assumption that these ospreys would be dropping off troops much, much further inland from the beach (i.e a mis match with the traditional Landing craft) - however I believe, that this decision has been reversed with more recent LHAs being built. 

 

With the USN about to adopt these as replacements for the C-2A Greyhound CODs it's such a shame that the UK (which was offered a bargin offer, limited time offer!) didn't grab some for the QE. The modelling options would have been wider than the USAF, USMC, USN & Japan........849NAS or Admiral's Barge with White over Green?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/19/2021 at 7:49 AM, spruecutter96 said:

Thanks for the review, Mike.

 

I remember reading several years ago that the Osprey was considered and rejected as the principle vertical transport asset for the President. It was OK'ed as transport for the White House staff and members of the media. I thought that spoke volumes about its perceived safety rating.  

 

Chris. 

Another report was the fact that the MV-22 was a lot heavier than conventional helicopters and could sink into the lawn of the Whitehouse.... Which would not be a good look in front of the worlds press!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I live down the coast from MCAS New River, North Carolina, and their Ospreys train at the local airport a mile from my house. It's very cool to see them flying around, transitioning from airplane to helo mode. Although Hobbyboss' instructions and color drawing show them, the USMC's MV-22B Ospreys do not have refueling probes or radar. So if you're building a USMC bird, omit parts E40 and E41. The boxtop art is correct in this respect. Those parts are used for the USAF's CV-22B Special Ops aircraft.

 

My kit should arrive tomorrow. Being an Air Force vet, I'll have to decide whether I want a local USMC bird, or a USAF SOC bird. Fortunately Caracal's decals have the USAF scheme. Decisions, decisions 🤔. I also have the 1/72 Hasegawa kit in both versions, so whichever I choose in 1/48, I'll build the other in 1/72.

 

Peter

Edited by Peter O
Marine Ospreys do have refueling probes. I shouldn't rely on memory at my age!
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Always liked and fancied building one of these kites, but the cost is getting in the realms of a Italeri1/32 Tornado. I would have bought the two if I was not retired.........one can wish. 😪

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 23/02/2021 at 11:01, harrygt40 said:

Always liked and fancied building one of these kites, but the cost is getting in the realms of a Italeri1/32 Tornado. I would have bought the two if I was not retired.........one can wish. 😪

oh i don't know - not quite 100GBP on E-bay!  Extra for decals if you want to build a USAF version!!!!  Way too much for me, sadly.

Is that a pre-release price or 'real' price - Anyone know?

 

Jonny

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Whitewolf said:

So the box includes the bits for a CV-22?

To a point. It includes the radar thimble for the nose, which is the biggest external difference between the two, but there are other minor differences not included in the kit. The CV has a different electronic countermeasures fit, so the rear fuselage ECM bumps next to the cargo ramp hinges are different, as are the sensors on the vertical fins. Those are minor differences which should be easy to rectify with some simple scratch building. The CV also has a removable machine gun mount for the cargo door, which is only fitted when the mission requires it, so it can be omitted (or the cargo doors left closed).

 

I assume Hobbyboss will release a CV boxing at some point. There are spaces on the A and E sprues that could accommodate the door gun and/or a more detailed cargo door ramp.

 

Peter

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Peter O said:

To a point. It includes the radar thimble for the nose, which is the biggest external difference between the two, but there are other minor differences not included in the kit. The CV has a different electronic countermeasures fit, so the rear fuselage ECM bumps next to the cargo ramp hinges are different, as are the sensors on the vertical fins. Those are minor differences which should be easy to rectify with some simple scratch building. The CV also has a removable machine gun mount for the cargo door, which is only fitted when the mission requires it, so it can be omitted (or the cargo doors left closed).

 

I assume Hobbyboss will release a CV boxing at some point. There are spaces on the A and E sprues that could accommodate the door gun and/or a more detailed cargo door ramp.

 

Peter

Ok, thanks. I would like to build the Special Ops CV-22 which I see on flights out of RAF Mildenhall.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Black Dog do a CV22 conversion set for the1/48 Italeri kit including the gun for the cargo ramp, but it doesn't appear to include all the additional sensor bumps/lumps.

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Whitewolf said:

Black Dog do a CV22 conversion set for the1/48 Italeri kit including the gun for the cargo ramp, but it doesn't appear to include all the additional sensor bumps/lumps.

They lumps and bumps on the CV-22 have changed over the years.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Julien said:

They lumps and bumps on the CV-22 have changed over the years.

Yes they have, and that was the point i was making. I hope Hobbyboss do opt for a CV22, or that another aftermarket supplier produces an accurate update set.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...

This year was going to be the year that I 'stopped' buying kits save a rare few that I had anticipated and planned for - namely the Revell 1/48 SR-71A, HKM 1/48 B-17F and Airfix 1/72 Vulcan.

 

In part, because one set of health conditions was making it difficult to put the time in to the kits I had started which this was then compounded by the development of an eye condition that was making fine detail work harder and harder.

 

It was also in part because aside for the above mentioned kits I had not really expected many more to appear that would tick the boxes, either as a brand-new never before tooled subject or as an amazing new tool of an existing subject, especially one for a kit that I might already have bought from another manufacturer but which presented too many challenges to build as I would like or one that simply blew the competition away in terms of detail.

 

This kit is one such instance that is about to lead to a reverse in my home-insulation reduction policy.

 

I had the Italeri kit a couple of years back and studied long and hard about how to re-scribe the lines and add the rivet details and also how to pose it with the wings pivoted inwards, but when I thought about the time and effort alongside that planned for other kits I decided to abandon the idea and let the kit go. But now this has popped up and changed that.

 

Even 'worse' I now have to 'accommodate' amazing new tools of:

 

1/48 HKM Lancaster

1/48 MiniBase Su-33

1/48 Tamiya F-4B

1/48 Airfix Chipmunk

1/48 Zoukei Mura F-4G

1/48 HB Chinook

 

If Round2 release a 1/72 Eagle Freighter or LabPod and someone else releases 1/48 Buccaneer, a 1/350 injection molded Type 42 Destroyer, R09 Ark Royal or R08 QE I think my head will explode!

  • Like 2
  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/19/2021 at 10:39 AM, FIGHTS ON said:

forgive the thread drift (should really be in another chat thread). But "yes" there were all sorts of issues when the MV-22 entered service, I believe it was proved NOT to be design or mechanical, but rather new pilots getting into Vortex Ring issues when landing (i.e. your rate of decent and blades "cutting" thru your own downdraft = significant drop in lift at a very bad moment!). The down draft from these beasts is huge (plus with the jet efflux pointing down ) create additional issues when operating on decks/ grass etc.

 

But USMC doctrine has been modified to reflect the capability. Osprey offers a massive increase in speed/distance (although is slightly more cramped inside than the CH-46 phrogs it has replaced). The USN even made USS America & one other LHA (?) without the docking area on the assumption that these ospreys would be dropping off troops much, much further inland from the beach (i.e a mis match with the traditional Landing craft) - however I believe, that this decision has been reversed with more recent LHAs being built. 

 

With the USN about to adopt these as replacements for the C-2A Greyhound CODs it's such a shame that the UK (which was offered a bargin offer, limited time offer!) didn't grab some for the QE. The modelling options would have been wider than the USAF, USMC, USN & Japan........849NAS or Admiral's Barge with White over Green?


Agree, it was not a design issue as it entered service. I was in training at Bell Helicopters in Fort Worth when the first Ospreys were coming off the production line. My instructor was a lead designer in the avionics systems on the airframe. He made sure we were all aware that the crashes during development were all Boeing crews who normally flew fixed wing. No Bell crews lost an airframe.

 

At least this is how it was described to my course. We toured the production line and it was a most impressive airframe.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I have my 'display idea' already formed for this kit thanks to having a Tamiya 1/48 Humvee in the stash, so this will initially be displayed in the flight/hover mode with a Humvee strung from beneath.

 

It may be some time before we see this though given that my current 'diorama' build (F-14 on Skunkworks Carrier Deck) is still... er.. on the deck and undergoing 'surgery', but at least I have all the parts I need to get cracking (save for the - prays :pray: - hopefully to be released cockpit from Quinta which would really take it up a few notches). Unlike My Sea King HAR.3 idea that never got off the ground due to the lack of a Severn-class lifeboat in the same scale :(

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I've just taken the plunge and ordered one from Black Mikes Models along with a pre-order for the B-17F. With the Su-33 incoming that's a 'lot' of super detail and temporary loft insulation on its way and mostly due to Mike's amazing reviews! 👍

  • Like 1
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
×
×
  • Create New...