Hobby Boss A7 Corsair 1/48th

[-james-]

Hi guys, I'm getting a Hobby Boss A7 K 1/48th scale kit as part of my christmas present, It was the review on here that made me want it But after doing some searching couldnt find any build threads or rfi's of any of the A7's in the range. Can anybody who has built one please tell me their opinions and tips on making the most of this kit? Any help would be appreciated as I want to make this one a true keeper

Regards,

James

[Matt Roberts]

http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=58304

It is not a bad build, and especially if you want something OTHER than a D/E it is still the easiest path to it.

There are some accuracy niggles with them, the intake is squashed so that it looks more like an oval than The 'D' shape (a curved outline on the bottom) the other gripe is that the cockpit area is about a millimetre on each side too wide, it makes it look 'wrong' head on - especially if you have a Hasegawa kit built up near it.

I still have a 'B' in the stash and one of these days will probably grab The two seaters, especially when someone does the ECM pods and markings for The EA-7L 'electronic aggressor'.

The line is not the unbuildable pile of %$!* that others have made it out to be and as I mentioned if you want a version other than the USAF 'D' and USN 'E' it is either kitbashing/scratchbuilding the changes for The A/B SLUFs or find a conversion for the two seaters

Here is a thread that is active on Zone Five right now concerning A-7Ks and specifically the ejector seats found on The A-7K. They are another rather weak spot on the kit for me - however looking at pics of The A-7A seat they were not too far off, just rather bland.

http://zone-five.net/showthread.php?t=12188

[Mike V]

Hi guys, I'm getting a Hobby Boss A7 K 1/48th scale kit as part of my christmas present, It was the review on here that made me want it But after doing some searching couldnt find any build threads or rfi's of any of the A7's in the range. Can anybody who has built one please tell me their opinions and tips on making the most of this kit? Any help would be appreciated as I want to make this one a true keeper

Regards,

James

Here're a couple reviews on the Hobby Boss A-7s that don’t downplay its obvious discrepancies; most of which are hardly “niggles” and are carry over to the rest of the 48th and 72nd scale variants.

http://www.hyperscale.com/2010/reviews/kit...3reviewsb_1.htm

http://www.zone-five.net/showthread.php?t=4834

In a nutshell; Hobby Boss Hosed up yet another decent subject.

Mike V

Edited December 22, 2010 by Mike V

[the MDman]

http://www.hyperscale.com/2010/reviews/kit...wsb_1.htm"]http://www.hyperscale.com/2010/reviews/kit...3reviewsb_1.htm[/url]

Well, that takes it off list then...

[denstore]

Well, that takes it off list then...

Not defending the kit, it might be crap, but I feel that the perspective of the review is a tad negative. The numbers for the lenght error might seem large, but they are off by less than 2%, if my calculations are right. Is that really making the kit worthless?

[Peter Marshall]

As a kit I think it's very nice having built one.

I won't comment on the accuracy as it didn't bother me.

It comes down to what you want, for a fully accurate A-7B then it's probably not for you, but a fun kit then yes it's a fun kit to build.

Edited December 22, 2010 by Peter Marshall

[Bandwagon 106]

I'm going to get the whole family, have a stack of D and Es to do from Hasegawa, built a stack from Hasegawa, but I will still get these, infact, when I pick up my Trumpy Tomcat on Tuesday, I'm going to order a couple. Issues aside, kudos to Hobbyboss for giving us virtually the whole family. There are some really nice decals out there for the A and B, and the E has Sidewinders markings, big orange snake on the tail

Joel

[Mike]

I reviewed it a while ago here, and mentioned the intake issue briefly in the link to an earlier review of the E - it's a bit off in shape, but how much that bothers you is down to you, and whether it puts you off completely is your choice.

I think it's important to get the information about inaccuracies out there, but some modellers seem to harp on and on about them at every opportunity, often ruining potentially informative threads by turning them into a row about "well it looks like a...." and "They didn't do a very good job - unbuildable"... not very informative or entertaining unless you're one of those dysfunctional people that likes to row

[Matt Roberts]

One thing to remember in my rather 'bleh' feeling about The kit probably arises from my...well....hatred of Gull Gray and White paint schemes. I had The build together quickly (a week more or less) and then it came time to paint it and that took over a month, because I am a brusher and white sucks as a color when brushing even with half inch camel hair brushes. Also it didn't help that nearly every pic I looked at seemed to have a differant demarcation line between The two colors...straight...wavy....higher...lower on The fuselage etc.

Another gripe I have had is The lack of appropriate Vietnam era schemes for the birds, most decals that were printed for The A/B were bicentenial (1976) schemes and I would have wanted an Argonaught airframe from 67-68 on it's first combat cruise. Some A-7E decals may be darned close but finding them today is a PITA, and somewhere in my thread is a discussion of my looking at VA-37 pics and the discrepancies between them regarding size of The squadron marking on the tail, the tail code styles and even the trim locations and styles. Working on an A-7K is probably easier in that they were asigned to most if not all Air Guard squadrons and will only need to make sure The airframe number is correct - if you are into it that far, as the markings should match any ANG A-7D other than those in The 'Vietnam' or Vietnam wrap around' schemes, they were prior to The delivery of The A-7K IIRC which was mid-80's when the green/gray and then The two tone gray wrap around was the main scheme.

[Giorgio N]

One thing to remember in my rather 'bleh' feeling about The kit probably arises from my...well....hatred of Gull Gray and White paint schemes. I had The build together quickly (a week more or less) and then it came time to paint it and that took over a month, because I am a brusher and white sucks as a color when brushing even with half inch camel hair brushes. Also it didn't help that nearly every pic I looked at seemed to have a differant demarcation line between The two colors...straight...wavy....higher...lower on The fuselage etc.

Painting the white on a USN plane is one of those situations when a good spray can helps a lot if you don't have an airbrush. Get a good quality can and you'll not be disappointed.

[Jennings Heilig]

I don't want to sound totally negative here, but the fact is, the Trumpeter 1/32 kits, and the HB 1/48 kits that came from the same set of CAD data are just flat wrong from the leading edge of the wing forward. The entire forward fuselage is flattened, which throws every single shape up there way out of whack. The canopy, windscreen, radome, and intake are all horribly mis-shapen.

Here is a thread on ARC showing all the work Chris had to do for his Zactomodels correction set for the 1/32 kit. The 1/48 kits share exactly the same problems, coming as they do from the same set of CAD work.

Like any airplane, some will say the kits look fine as-is. It's a matter of personal choice whether the inaccuracies in the kits bother you or not, but it's not a matter of opinion as to whether they exist. They do, that's a fact.

Here's a side-by-side comparison of the Trumpeter nose and Chris's corrected set (which is spectacular).

[Matt Roberts]

The canopy does have a wee bit of Intruder in its DNA

[denstore]

All kits have flaws. Problem isn't that people point them out. Problem is the that they exaggerate them, and condemn the kits because of them.

I'm sure Mr Battistoni is very knowledgeable on the A-7. Problem is that he's not exactly representative for the average buyer. To recommend against it, and instead recommend an out of production conversion (that he himself mastered), for the similar priced, older (and not flawless either) Hasegawa kit, feels a bit too much. I know that Trumpeter/Hobbyboss isn't exactly in vogue with the "experts", but it is starting to get a bit boring, IMHO.

[Mike V]

Not really in this case, as the degree of error is in FACT on point and not exaggerated. Of course all kits have shape and accuracy errors here and there; some minor, some major. It just so happens that the HB A-7 errors are quite significant; more than the average, outside of the HobbyBoss standard. The side by side pic tells all.

The real issue here is the "downplaying" of such major errors, not the so-called exaggeration.

We ran into the same issue with the Academy 48th F-14 nose, which is grossly over of proportion and shape.

If HB had error to a lot less of a degree, you wouldn't be hearing such negative feedback from those who've researched and or know the subject matter well.

BTW, Mr. Battistoni didn't recommend the kit to the "Serious Modelers", which would omit the "average" Joe or occasional builder who's just looking to build it no matter what. Then again, they'd probably find a kit of this subject for less than what HB is asking.

According to his assessment, he made the "right" recommendation.

Mike V

Edited December 22, 2010 by Mike V

[Matt Roberts]

Ok I am calling it on myself for starting the whole accuracy debacle, oops, debate again

[-james-]

Thank you everyone for your views

I am one of the true Sunday afternoon builders and I would never have noticed any innacuracies about this kit, It was more of the general fit and feel of the assembly of the kit which I wanted to know about Does it need a gallon of filler or just a smidgen?

I'm planning on brush painting this or asking a friend (f-111 fan) if i can go to his and use his airbrush with him for a few hours, but the main question is, how can one get the soft demarcation lines needed for the blue/grey wrap around shown on the box cover with a brush?

Furthermore what details can I either scratch build or buy after-market parts for the cockpit? (I really want a nice looking model, not bothered about inaccurate profile)

Peter Marshall- What colour is your avionics bay? Zinc chromate? and also how did you get that effect on it? Was it something like Promodeller wash? I only have dark dirt btw. Also how did you make your RBF tags and intake cover?

Sorry for all the questions, I just want to make the most of it, as it's the most expensive kit i've ever got

Regards and thanks,

James

[F111Fan]

You'll have to wait till it's warmer-my spray booth only goes outside, and it's WAAAAAY too cold ATM!

[-james-]

Wap it round to mine haha

[F111Fan]

Wap it round to mine haha

You try carrying a greenhouse up Bank Brow!

[-james-]

I can supply a booth

[F111Fan]

Hmmmm... Is this booth heated?

[-james-]

erm, how messy is an airbrush? I can put a little heater in the shed with a booth maybe

[F111Fan]

erm, how messy is an airbrush? I can put a little heater in the shed with a booth maybe

Can be very messy, but it shouldn't be too bad XD

[Matt Roberts]

The kit goes together as a kit fine. The biggest thing to watch for is how the parts attach to the sprues. The need careful cleaning up to make sure the mating surfaces are cleaned up and not damaging the surface of the parts. I had a problem with the attachment of the wing needing a bit of filling, and watch the trailing edge to the wing join - one side was good - one not so good, but not too bad. Add the flaps before attaching the wing. I didn't as they are white on a USN bird for it saved a bit of masking with the Gull Gray, it'll be easier to do prior to adding the wings and may help with the trailing edge join

The canopies may need a bit of clean up on a center line seam, future and sanding sticks.

One thing I'd look for is the aftermarket seats - follow the Z5 thread for the ones to look for.

The decals go on fine. I have never had technical problems with HB decals

If you want drop tanks, see if you have any from a Skyhawk in the spares box and add the third fin from the HB kit. USAF birds (including the ANG) carried tanks more often than USN birds off Vietnam. The tanks really bug me (almost as much as the outline problems do for Mike) and I have a ton of tanks left from Skyhawk builds.

You may want to try the 'pour' method for the intake. Tape off the back end (or tack glue the engine face) and pour in some thick white paint, let it set for a few minutes and pour it back into the bottle. Easier than trying to sand, prime and paint if the seams bother you.

The avionics bays and the area of the fuselage around the engine (on the inside) are Chromate Yellow - not interior green. The avionics bay doors are not too bad to fit, but decide early if you want them open of closed - it's easier to fix them closed before doing anything with the fuselage (like closing it up)

Just for me the wrap around gray is probably the easiest scheme the SLUF wore for me as a brusher, just ues a broad brush with a pointed one to 'cut in' and 'smooth out' the demarcations

[Mike]

The real issue here is the "downplaying" of such major errors, not the so-called exaggeration.

So... every modeller that thinks that the errors with this kit aren't critically important must be in the pay of the Chinese then... and stupid because they don't agree with you as to how important they are. Just so we're clear.

...and they're not allowed to buy or build anything that you see as having serious errors, and they must agree as to the seriousness of the errors. Perhaps you could help them out with a scale of erroneousness - The Valdez scale? Mark things 1-10 depending on your critique, which I assume you'll publish monthly, and have say the Tamiya F-16 at 1, being the paragon of virtue, Mach 2 Valiant at 6 (crap but European), and anything Chinese in origin at 7-10, and therefore unbuildable.

That should soon sort out them goddam commie upstarts!