Jump to content

1/48 - G.D./L.M. F-16 Fighting Falcon/Viper family by Kinetic - F-16A/AM, KF-16U & F-16C/D block 25/30/42/52 released - next: RoCAF F-16A/B & F-16V; Polish F-16C; Danish F-16B; Thaï F-16AM


Homebee

Recommended Posts

On 11/17/2022 at 9:56 AM, Stephen said:

I've found an error in the instructions for the AM. In section 26 the instructions advise that Belgian and Dutch F-16s use the same tail extension parts which is incorrect. They should advise that the Norwegian and Dutch options use the same parts.

Parts D28 and D35 are the wrong way round too in the instructions. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Steve McArthur said:

I found a review that paged through the instructions and they also screwed up which parts to use for the Portuguese plane. They never mention the ADF tail base. The standard A tail base can be right for Portugal, but not for the serial number in the decals.

 

The more I think about the more this kit irritates me for the sloppy execution, I'm not buying either of these boxings, maybe if they fix things in a future release.. It's not any one thing, but the collection of glitches and missing details turn me off.  I would like to be able to buy a new release kit and build it without needing to go to aftermarket to add details that should be in the box.

  1. Problems noted on decals in the MLU kit requiring aftermarket for at least the Norse and Danish planes.
  2. No seatbelt or pilot (requires aftermarket seat or 3D decals), There is no excuse for this.
  3. No structural reinforcement plates that should be on every plane in BOTH boxings (except for the Portuguese plane) Aftermarket required that doesn't exist, unless an existing set fits this kit.  It looks like there are landing lights for the main gear legs (part G18) so early pre-MLU planes could be built but those probably need aftermarket decals.  Same with the Block25/42 kit. You can build planes close to when they were new, but not late career.
  4. Numerous errors in the instructions. Most of the errors seem to be about which parts apply to which variants.  This is the worst way to Kinetic could screw up instructions because these are subtle errors. If you swap part numbers for "left" and "right" a lot of times the builder will catch this because the parts don't fit right.  Errors like this requires the user to be a SME to know which parts are the right parts for the variant they are building.  
  5. Lack of EPAF unique pylons and pods. It would have been nice to include some of the gear that is unique to the air forces in the decals.
  6. ADF bird slicer shape errors and missing antenna for under the intake maybe this would be fixed with a new sprue for a dedicated ADF release along with Sparrow pylons and AIM-7s.

I was really excited for this kit, however I’m disappointed, at a price of £50.00 this should be better, and that’s the only reason I’m persevering with it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys, if you don't like what you see, don't buy the kit. It's that simple. Even Tamiya doesn't get everything right, so your expectance of 100% accuracy and perfection will leave you dissappointed at all times. The bashing of the kit, which you haven't even seen in real life, is bordering on ridiculous 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Boman said:

Guys, if you don't like what you see, don't buy the kit. It's that simple. Even Tamiya doesn't get everything right, so your expectance of 100% accuracy and perfection will leave you dissappointed at all times. The bashing of the kit, which you haven't even seen in real life, is bordering on ridiculous 

Most have already seen the kit,also unboxing video was made. Considering what Kinetic promised the kit would be,reality is quite different. Lots of errors related to each country variant possible to build. Advertised magfire tech for weapons not included, weapons broken down in several pieces,when several other brands already tool weapons as single pieces. Decals have errors and so do instructions etc etc. So far the only thing Kinetic got right is the greatly improved fit compared to their previous F-16 kits,according to a friend of mine who's already building the kit. Other than that,all the bashing from those who have already bought the kit,is justified. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Boman said:

Plenty of the new kits have the weapons in several pieces, just look at the Tamiya F-35A, F-14 series etc. so there you are clearly wrong. Most other things are correctable with little effort. 

You should try to restrict your comments to the kit and quit complaining about other modeler's opinions. Attack the kit, not the modeler. Do you really think we would have a new tooled F-16 from Kinetic if people hadn't complained about their original F-16 molding?  Or, that they would have fixed their F/A-18 windscreen and vertical tails without people complaining?

 

FYI, I'd trust Tamiya to make multipart weapons that fit with minimal cleanup.  Based on their track record, I don't have the same faith in Kinetic.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The complaints are derailing a serious discussion on the new kit. The arguments and complaints are in many cases taking it too far, that's why I react to the bashing. If someone attack a new kit for having the weapons in multiple pieces when many other kit manufacturer do the same, the argument falls to pieces. If you bash a kit for not including parts you thought or would have liked to see in the kit, the same applies. Manufacturers make their choices and whether we like them or not, our choice is to either buy the kit or refrain from it.. 

I konw the F-16 fairly well, and instructions that contain errors isn't putting me off. Yes, they should put out instructions that are correct, but this will come soon enough. If you have built a kit or two it shouldn't be a horrendous task to manage to assemble the kit even with the instruction errors. 


Kinetic's old F-16 was doo-doo, we can easily agree on that and no, I didn't buy those for that exact reason. Until proven otherwise when I see the new kit for myself I trust the reviewers who have the kit in hand and actually say this is a good kit. May be that I'll be dissappointed, but then it will be due to shape and fit issues, not for missing ALQ-131 ECM pods , IRIS-T missiles or similar. I can fix that with aftermarket items, and Kinetics kit prices are not  preventive in this regards. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Boman said:

Plenty of the new kits have the weapons in several pieces, just look at the Tamiya F-35A, F-14 series etc. so there you are clearly wrong. Most other things are correctable with little effort. 

From everything I wrote, your only argument was me being wrong about new kits still having multi-part weapons. What about the rest? Back to multi-part weapons, for you it may be a minor detail, nothing wrong with that. But for many modellers, it is. Because it doesn't make sense anymore. Even for Tamiya to still do it. But lets agree to disagree on that. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and taste. The thing is, "most other things are correctable with little effort" shouldn't apply to a kit that costs 50£ and was "sold" by Kinetic as state of the art, precise and accurately designed compared to the real thing, and to quote them: "the kit won't need a single drop of putty". One single look at the intake trunk and the "no need for putty" statement goes out the window. That's one. Then the wrong instructions,that many here have already described the errors on parts with wrong numbers or wrongly labelled as belonging to belgian,portuguese or danish F-16s. That's two. Magfire system for weapons loadout,advertised as included. Its not. That's three. Missing option of tinted canopy, not present. That's four. And this last one, Tamiya F-16s were released years ago and have it. And when you say that aftermarket can come to the rescue, it indeed can. But when its a 50£ kit, it should be to improve the detail that plastic can't achieve like resin or 3D printed parts can. To IMPROVE, not to CORRECT the kit.  And when you also say that it's ok if instructions are wrong,because eventually they will fix it, that's just wrong. You pay for the kit,you should have correct instructions in the box,not later when the brand decide to fix it. I don't know about you but,when I buy a kit,and specially one that costs 50£, although I don't expect to be all the wonders that the brand says it is,I at least expect that inside the box,I will find everything the brand said they would put in the box, to build all the included subjects. Period. Kit design evolves because new molding technology appears, but also because modellers complaint of poor quality. Instructions are fixed for the next releases,because modellers complaint about errors. Some brands listen,some don't. Tamiya, Great Wall Hobby, Eduard,and ok lets say even Kinetic,(although, as this discussion proves, keeps repeating some mistakes), they all listen so, they are still around. Kitty Hawk never listened,where are they now?

Bottom line is:  If a kit costs me 10£, I won't complaint about its flaws or missing stuff. But if it costs 50£,I most surely will. And this new Kinetic F-16 is not everything Kinetic said it would be. And I'm not talking about the kit without having looked at it. I have it,I have looked thoroughly at it. The "bashing" as you call it,its justified.

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

Temperatures are rising on the forum...

 

I think the decision to not have the strengthening plates molded from the start might be a sensible one (at least from a financial point of view).  They could have gone the 'Eduard route' and tooled several more different upper fuselage parts, with and without the various different strengthening plates and yes, this would have been extremely welcome.  But short of that, my preferred alternative would be some kind of self adhesive vinyl.  Photo etch is too stiff to conform to the curves nicely, and the superglue required makes it all harder to do without messing up. 

 

Would I get the kit as it is now?  I say yes. With some own research, there is plenty in the box to make a credible airframe. But I surely hope Kinetic will keep 'upgrading' their boxings in the future, and for that I'm hopeful considering their track record.  My 'Wishlist' would be the vinyl plates, tinted canopies and yes, those lacklustre ADF antennas on nose and intakes need redone (hopefully in a future dedicated ADF boxing)... 

 

G

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still see little if any comments on wether Kinetic managed to get the shape and profile correct this time around. That would be interesting to hear, not atleast from those of you who has been able to thoroughly review the kit? 

Then we can leave the dissappointment of missing stuff to hang on the jet for another time. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Boman said:

Guys, if you don't like what you see, don't buy the kit. It's that simple. Even Tamiya doesn't get everything right, so your expectance of 100% accuracy and perfection will leave you dissappointed at all times. The bashing of the kit, which you haven't even seen in real life, is bordering on ridiculous 

Not quite.

The comments the guys have made are objectively true.

No-one has commented on possible parts fit, but on pieces that are, again, objectively, wrong.

Manufacturer X has made a model that is supposed to represent XYZ, but does not do so because parts A, B, C are wrong is a valid criticism. I or others don't need to see this in plastic, if it can be seen on pictures already.

 

This is now Kinetic's second attempt at making an F-16 and still there are objective mistakes.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, SprueMan said:

Not quite.

The comments the guys have made are objectively true.

No-one has commented on possible parts fit, but on pieces that are, again, objectively, wrong.

Manufacturer X has made a model that is supposed to represent XYZ, but does not do so because parts A, B, C are wrong is a valid criticism. I or others don't need to see this in plastic, if it can be seen on pictures already.

 

This is now Kinetic's second attempt at making an F-16 and still there are objective mistakes.

 

A friend of mine for whom I bought the kit at Telford, is already building it. And so far,at least on the very good fit promise Kinetic made, it seems they got it right. The fit is indeed tons better than the previous Fi-16 kits.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I'm working on the kit, I can say unequivocally that the fit is excellent. So far, it's been as good as the Pucara. On the subject of the strengthening plates, I would like to point out that the Tamiya 1/48 kit F-16C/N does not include the plates which have to be purchased separately. If Kinetic had moulded these on to the kit, then they would have had to either tool fuselage/wing parts both with and without strengthening plates in different configurations as not all F-16 variants carried all the plates. This would have been cost prohibitive and would have run the risk of the moulding of the plates being decried as being too much! (eg the Tamiya F-35A RAM tape hoo-ha. 

 

Weapons/stores not included, again there has to be a limit to what can be included. to have every weapon/pod would have required a cost and there would have been complaints about too much or a waste of plastic. If you're a serious modeller of modern jets then you probably have spares you can dip into or there's always the aftermarket option.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, luis pacheco said:

Daco reinforcement plates. 

I don't have the DACO ones in my stash, but do have a couple others. Do you know for a fact that they align with the scribing on the Kinetic kit?  Many of these came out when the Hasegawa F-16 was still the best F-16 in 1:48. They could be fine, but until someone tests the DACO product on the Kinetic kit, no one really knows.

 

I do have a question for Kinetic, why are these kits labelled as Gold Series kits and have no photo-etch? 

 

I ran across a kit review this morning for the Cheetah D that pointed out one of the features the separate the Gold Series from the standard boxing is that EVERY 1/48th Gold Release include a PE fret with seat belts and other details. I went and checked the instructions of every Gold series kit (there are a lot) posted on Scalemates (Pucara, F-104, F/A-18, Harriers, M-346) and they all do have a PE fret.  If one were in this kit I wouldn't be complaining about this kit as much.  Why no PE in this one?  Based on Kinetic's release history with Gold Kits there should have been one included.

 

So what makes this a "Gold" kit? Was it supposed to be "MagFire"? 

 

Any kit is "Magfire Compatible" if the builder still has to source magnets and figure out how to mount them to the plane and stores. It's non-sense to print this on the box. This was a feature had been talked about in the press as launching with this kit. Based on what ended up in the box this feels like Kinetic rushed out a half baked release before Christmas. All Kinetic has managed to do is torch the reputation they had been building over the last several releases (at least for me anyway).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Steve McArthur said:

I don't have the DACO ones in my stash, but do have a couple others. Do you know for a fact that they align with the scribing on the Kinetic kit?  Many of these came out when the Hasegawa F-16 was still the best F-16 in 1:48. They could be fine, but until someone tests the DACO product on the Kinetic kit, no one really knows.

 

I do have a question for Kinetic, why are these kits labelled as Gold Series kits and have no photo-etch? 

 

I ran across a kit review this morning for the Cheetah D that pointed out one of the features the separate the Gold Series from the standard boxing is that EVERY 1/48th Gold Release include a PE fret with seat belts and other details. I went and checked the instructions of every Gold series kit (there are a lot) posted on Scalemates (Pucara, F-104, F/A-18, Harriers, M-346) and they all do have a PE fret.  If one were in this kit I wouldn't be complaining about this kit as much.  Why no PE in this one?  Based on Kinetic's release history with Gold Kits there should have been one included.

 

So what makes this a "Gold" kit? Was it supposed to be "MagFire"? 

 

Any kit is "Magfire Compatible" if the builder still has to source magnets and figure out how to mount them to the plane and stores. It's non-sense to print this on the box. This was a feature had been talked about in the press as launching with this kit. Based on what ended up in the box this feels like Kinetic rushed out a half baked release before Christmas. All Kinetic has managed to do is torch the reputation they had been building over the last several releases (at least for me anyway).

Their excuse,as given to me on FB, to justify not having the magnets on the box is the consumer laws on UK, US and Canada, that say kits can't be sold sealed and its illegal to include the magnets on unsealed boxes. Asked them if the magnets would be included on kits sold in EU shops and got no further reply. They only said they would consider offering the magnets as extra parts, making modellers spend even more money. So "considerate" of them...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By the way, here is a new 35 minutes You Tube review of the new Kinetic F-16A MLU kit by Vini Pompeo of Kitmaniac.com.

Vini Pompeo was at Telford UK and is a recent new Post Production Manager at Kinetic.

😎

SharkOwl

 

 

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

Having seen the review, I believe I can clarify one thing;
The "ADF antennas" in front of the cockpit that some was worked up about is really not ADF antennas at all, but rather the antennas you find on ROKAF Block 32/52's. In other words, there is no ADF antennas in the kit. 

Does this make the kit useless for building an ADF? Not necessarily. Early ANG ADF fighters didn't have the antennas, and for the Portugeese AF you can still correctly model an MLU modified block 15OCU with the ADF tail. 

There will likely be a dedicated ADF boxing in the future which captures the correct antennas in front of the cockpit and below the air intake. Unless you have one of the old boxings and have surplus ADF antennas from those kits. 

Otherwise the kit looks very nice! 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, SharkOwl said:

By the way, here is a new 35 minutes You Tube review of the new Kinetic F-16A MLU kit by Vini Pompeo of Kitmaniac.com.

Vini Pompeo was at Telford UK and is a recent new Post Production Manager at Kinetic.

😎

SharkOwl

 

 

I wouldn't trust that review too much. It's made by someone that works for Kinetic so, from the start its hard to be impartial while reviewing the kit. And from what I've gathered, he's also part of the team that is designing the future Kinetic Fiat G.91 1/48 kit, that had to be postponed and redesigned due to a serious of shape and detail errors that were pointed out once Kinetic released CAD drawings of the kit. For me the first video review that was made and already pointed out all the shortcomings of the kit,is enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, SharkOwl said:

By the way, here is a new 35 minutes You Tube review of the new Kinetic F-16A MLU kit by Vini Pompeo of Kitmaniac.com.

Vini Pompeo was at Telford UK and is a recent new Post Production Manager at Kinetic.

By a current Kinetic employee? It's a sales pitch not a review🙄  At least he explained why the weapons are broken down like they are. It was for Magfire. They needed precise holes for magnets, so all weapons get weird breakdowns to put through holes molded in the parts. Looking at pylons it looks like most have locating pins where magnets should be, so I'm wondering how "Magfire Compatible" this really is and I don't remember the video with instructions discussing Magfire. 

 

It would be nice if someone scanned the instructions and posted them to Scalemates.

Edited by Steve McArthur
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Steve McArthur said:

By a current Kinetic employee? It's a sales pitch not a review🙄  At least he explained why the weapons are broken down like they are. It was for Magfire. They needed precise holes for magnets, so all weapons get weird breakdowns to put through holes molded in the parts. Looking at pylons it looks like most have locating pins where magnets should be, so I'm wondering how "Magfire Compatible" this really is and I don't remember the video with instructions discussing Magfire. 

 

It would be nice if someone scanned the instructions and posted them to Scalemates.

They needed to brake down weapons into several parts because of Magfire,but then they don't put the Magfire magnets in the box. Funny!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Steve McArthur said:

By a current Kinetic employee? It's a sales pitch not a review🙄  At least he explained why the weapons are broken down like they are. It was for Magfire. They needed precise holes for magnets, so all weapons get weird breakdowns to put through holes molded in the parts. Looking at pylons it looks like most have locating pins where magnets should be, so I'm wondering how "Magfire Compatible" this really is and I don't remember the video with instructions discussing Magfire. 

 

It would be nice if someone scanned the instructions and posted them to Scalemates.

 

Since Kinetic have their instructions on their website, it would be nice if they would actually just get on and add these kits to their site.

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...