Academy Hunter

[stringbag]

To me, the Academy kit looks fine with the following additions.

Aeroclub tail pipe correction set and vac-formed canopy. together with the Aires or KMC cockpit set.

These are I feel the most defective areas in the kit.

As far as the tailplane is concerned, I shortened the locating tabs at the front to move it forward by 3mm.

The intakes can be improved by extending their outer corners again by only 3mm towards the break line. This results in a sharper radius at the outer edge which I think solves the problem.

I have the Aires wheel wells which are the dog's doo-dahs, tough not absolutely necessary, and the kit wheels look fine to me.

As far as decals are concerned, I don't think you can beat the Xtradecal sets from Hannants.

Just my impressions.

Chris.

ps. No special reason for the emoticon, I just love it.

[Smiffy]

To me, the Academy kit looks fine with the following additions.

Aeroclub tail pipe correction set and vac-formed canopy. together with the Aires or KMC cockpit set.

These are I feel the most defective areas in the kit.

As far as the tailplane is concerned, I shortened the locating tabs at the front to move it forward by 3mm.

Yep, I agree. Thats exactly how I'll be building mine (+ Aeroclub wheels).

Chris.

ps. No special reason for the emoticon, I just love it.

No, it's very appropriate.

Sabrinas!.

[AnonymousAA72]

To me, the Academy kit looks fine with the following additions.

Aeroclub tail pipe correction set and vac-formed canopy. together with the Aires or KMC cockpit set.

These are I feel the most defective areas in the kit.

As far as the tailplane is concerned, I shortened the locating tabs at the front to move it forward by 3mm.The intakes can be improved by extending their outer corners again by only 3mm towards the break line. This results in a sharper radius at the outer edge which I think solves the problem.

I have the Aires wheel wells which are the dog's doo-dahs, tough not absolutely necessary, and the kit wheels look fine to me.

As far as decals are concerned, I don't think you can beat the Xtradecal sets from Hannants.

Just my impressions.

Chris.

ps. No special reason for the emoticon, I just love it.

Sabrina's!! Yummeeee! Anyway I digress - totally agree with you here. Though you should move the Tail bullet forward as well....... And as Tim suggests the misplaced (if it is) wheel well's aren't really that much of an issue - I've certainly never moved them on my fleet of Hunters.

On my next Hunter I'll certainly "sharpen" up the nose cone though.......

[stringbag]

On my next Hunter I'll certainly "sharpen" up the nose cone though.......

Hi Bill,

Just had a look at the Hunter again and yes, now that it has been mentioned, the nose could do with a little sharpening up.

Chris. I love posting here LOL

PS Slightly off topic (well way off really) talking about sabrinas, do you remember the Spanish pop singer in the early eighties by that name?

[Gary C]

In my best Blue Peter voice .... ahem "here's one I made earlier"

I guess the question is what the most glaring errors are which really couldn't be overlooked? Any thoughts?

Wellll.... the only modifications I made were as follows;

The addition of the Aires pit (partly because it's so undersized it's laughable and partly because I'm a cockpit guy and I love resin pits)

Removal of the rear part of the canopy frame

Backdated to a F.5 by removing the dogtooth

And that was it, if I do it again and I will, I'll probably add the Aeroclub wheels as they are the only other area that really jumps out. All the other things such as the bullet fairing, location of wheel wells, wing l/e, tailpipe etc. are rather minor quibbles to me and if they hadn't been pointed out I'd never have noticed. Correct them by all means but when you get down to a level of 2-3mm here and there the ratio of effort required to resulting benefit becomes rather distorted and I'd rather spend the time on more tangible area's such as paintwork, weathering, seams and so on.

[stringbag]

In my best Blue Peter voice .... ahem "here's one I made earlier"

Wellll.... the only modifications I made were as follows;

Hi Gary.

Hells teeth!!!! Remember Christopher Trace and Val Singleton with her sticky backed plastic fetish? - Or was that me? Hmmmm.

I suppose its how each of us view a particular subject when it comes down to it. I must admit, your Hunter looks as good here as any other i've seen and I particularly like the intake covers, might have a go at those on the next one.

Had there not been any after-market bits and pieces available, I would have put up with most of the errors and I agree with you that the end result does not always justify the extra work involved.

What paint did you use for the high speed silver? looks great.

Chris.

[Gary C]

Remember Christopher Trace and Val Singleton with her sticky backed plastic fetish? - Or was that me? Hmmmm.

Chris,

Bit before my time (just) , twas Janet Ellis-Bextor and Andy Duncan, I think although the fetishes were the same.....

The underside of the Hunter was done with plain Alclad aluminium followed with Humbrol matt coat, not to get the metallic effect but because it was the only paint I've found with a fine enough grain that looks right scalewise. I've tried numerous silvers to represent silver laquer but the size of the silver flake in the paint just looks wrong to me and more like glitter. And we're back on Blue Peter again ...

On the subject of accuracy I'll always modify things if it bothers me, but more and more these days I find I look at the finished build a month or two down the road and wonder whether it was really worth it. The Hasegawa Spitfire IX is a good one, I always thought it was a beautiful kit and I still can't tell the difference between an OOB build and a corrected one unless you park them together , but maybe that's just me...

[Smiffy]

Now that is purrdy

Where did the markings come from?.

P.S. love the sig.

[stringbag]

The underside of the Hunter was done with plain Alclad aluminium followed with Humbrol matt coat, not to get the metallic effect but because it was the only paint I've found with a fine enough grain that looks right scalewise. I've tried numerous silvers to represent silver laquer but the size of the silver flake in the paint just looks wrong to me and more like glitter. And we're back on Blue Peter again ...

Now whose being a rivet counter----- SCALE FLAKES?????? LOL.

Seriously though, when I consider what you have said, you're right. Six months down the road and the project that consumed so much time and enthusiasm is just a six month old model.

I meant to ask about the top colours as well.

I see from your avtarthat maybe you are a Van Halen fan?

More of a Genesis and Yes fan myself, which probably explains my reference to Val Singleton and your Janet Ellis-Bextor.

[Gary C]

Now that is purrdy

Where did the markings come from?.

P.S. love the sig.

Cheers Smiffy. Decals came from Aeromaster 48-345, 263 squadron co's aircraft at RAF Wattisham

circa 1956.

If you like Cheers theres hundreds more quotes here

Imdb

Kept me smiling for a long time

Now whose being a rivet counter----- SCALE FLAKES?????? LOL.

Seriously though, when I consider what you have said, you're right. Six months down the road and the project that consumed so much time and enthusiasm is just a six month old model.

I meant to ask about the top colours as well.

I see from your avtarthat maybe you are a Van Halen fan?

More of a Genesis and Yes fan myself, which probably explains my reference to Val Singleton and your Janet Ellis-Bextor.

Scale flakes, yeah I know . Different strokes for different folks I guess, I'm fussy about my paint. The top colours, I think , were ordinary Humbrol enamels and that was the second to last kit I built before switching to acrylics.

Yes, massive VH fan since I was a kid and hoping the world tour is just that and comes to the UK (assuming Ed and Dave haven't fallen out yet again ). Funny how stuff like music and telly can show up your age eh?

[StephenMG]

I tend to agree with a lot of the comments here - when the model is finished and it captures the spirit of a Hunter then it's fine by me. Having said that there is enough wrong with the Academy Hunters that I do hope Revell (or Airfix?) release a decent 1/48th kit.

Besides the obvious wrong stuff (cockpit, tail cone etc.) there's a lot of detail wrong with these kits - trim tabs on both ailerons, total lack of hood rails, tailplane position etc. which is a shame.

As for the intakes, well they are one of the Hunter's most obvious features I feel, so they must be right otherwise the whole things looks a little 'odd'. As has already been said they need to be extended and the 'roundness' made more 'pointy' at the outer ends! The other problem are the dreadful boundary layer splitter plates in the intakes. Just horrible great lumps of things which must be thrown away completely and remade. The best thing is to do what Gary C has done and stick intake blanks over the whole 'orrible affair!

BTW Gary C - nice job! Although if you've converted to an F.5 then you shouldn't have the ERU bumps on the outer wings. Otherwise, it's very lovely indeed!

[AnonymousAA72]

The more I look at it - the worse it appears...the nose cone that is!

Here's anorther pic of my FGA9 - and you can see the bluntness of the nose cone....AND (please bear in mind I did build it 6 or 7 years ago....happy days - when I actually managed to finish a model now and again!!) you can see the incorrect shape of the intakes - though I may of tried to rectify this.....

Its a matter of preference I guess - but I really dislike Academy's tail-pipes! They really spoil the model. You can't really see here, but on my 74Sqn F4 I've made all of the modifications listed above (including removal of the dogtooth LE to backdate the F6 to an F4). The Academy tail pipe on the F6 appears tp be a cross between a 100 series small bore Avon and a 200 series large bore Avon!! Aeroclub's set corrects this error rather nicely - and has the added benefit of providing parts for an FGA9/FR10 and the F6.

One way of dealing with the blunt nose is to bung an FR nose cone on!! Heres my 4 Sqn FR10 (nose cone is PJ resin)

Edited November 22, 2007 by Bill Clark

[Tim]

I'm with Bill on the hope that Revell will complete the missing element in their Hunter series, and produce a 48th kit too... and get the 32nd kit re-tooled with a T7 nose.

Oh well, I guess I'll have to grit my teeth and get started on my Academy Hunter, and the Aeroclub T7 conversion. I'm up to my ears trying to sort-out my big Hunter book at the moment so life seems to be revolving around Hunters at the moment, aaaargh!

[AnonymousAA72]

I'm up to my ears trying to sort-out my big Hunter book at the moment so life seems to be revolving around Hunters at the moment, aaaargh!

You can't have enough big Hunter books Tim! I shall be looking forward to that with great anticipation!!

[Paul Bradley]

Very interesting stuff, guys; although I shaln't be starting the kit in the next few weeks, I will keep you informed of progress when I do!

[dahut]

Very interesting stuff, guys; although I shaln't be starting the kit in the next few weeks, I will keep you informed of progress when I do!

Very interesting, indeed. Being a Yank, I dont have so much to go on in terms of criticism and so far, everything Ive seen looks fine to me. I think I should stop listening.

Once again, a resin pit, some tail cone replacements and proper sized wheels is what Ive heard being needed.

Thanks, guys.

Edited November 23, 2007 by dahut

[StephenMG]

The more I look at it - the worse it appears...the nose cone that is!

Bill,

Solution - stop looking at your nose cone!

I personally don't think the Academy nose cone is a problem. Maybe if you were to measure it precisely it may not be 100% perfect but it certainly doesn't stand out as 'odd' in the way the intakes do. Compare the photo of your 45 Sqn. FGA.9 with the photo HERE which is taken from a similar angle, and you'll see there's nothing much to worry about.

As I said, I think the bigger issue are the intakes. Yes, it's possible to improve them by removing the roundness from their outer corners, but they're still the wrong shape because the upper and lower edges are curved rather than almost straight. I still think correctly shaped intake blanks are the way to go - if anyone would like accurate measurements of real ones then let me know.

Cheers.

Edited November 23, 2007 by StephenMG

[AnonymousAA72]

Bill,

Solution - stop looking at your nose cone!I personally don't think the Academy nose cone is a problem. Maybe if you were to measure it precisely it may not be 100% perfect but it certainly doesn't stand out as 'odd' in the way the intakes do. Compare the photo of your 45 Sqn. FGA.9 with the photo HERE which is taken from a similar angle, and you'll see there's nothing much to worry about.

As I said, I think the bigger issue are the intakes. Yes, it's possible to improve them by removing the roundness from their outer corners, but they're still the wrong shape because the upper and lower edges are curved rather than almost straight. I still think correctly shaped intake blanks are the way to go - if anyone would like accurate measurements of real ones then let me know.

Cheers.

But I like looking at my model's! Thats one of the reasons I build them - to look at them, and when I look at my Hunters now, I can't help but look at the nose cone! It's like having a big zit on the end of your nose! You try to ignore it, but the more you try to avoid it the worse it appears! In fact the WHOLE nose shape looks far too fat(!!), certainly comparing it to Revell's 1/32nd and 1/72nd scale kit's - maybe it is just a matter of scale.....maybe its the shape of the canopy/windscreen as well......maybe a combination of them all? Maybe I should stick to 1/72nd or 1/32nd!

And once you know its wrong then its just as big an issue as the tailpipe, the canopy, the cockpit, the, the, the...........not sure how you can rate one issue as being bigger than the other...if its wrong, its wrong, and once you know its wrong....

Agreed about the intakes though - intake blanks are indeed the way to go but would accurately measured intakes fit inaccurately shaped intakes though, particularly at the outer corners?

Maybe we need our resident Resin manufacturer to sort summink out!!

EDIT: Thought I'd better add this caveat....the question was, whats wrong with the Academy Hunter? These are my thought's. I'm not dictating to anyone what they should do when building their Hunter. I've seen some nice models built OOB....I've seen some nice models with a few corrections.

After all Accuracy,or the perception of accuracy is down to the eye of the beholder (or summink lke that!!), and I behold that the nose is too fat!!

Edited November 23, 2007 by Bill Clark

[Paul Bradley]

I think this is a fine discussion. Modelling is an individual thing and many will say that the Academy Hunter is a fine kit - it is nicely moulded - and leave it at that, while others will want to find out every minute flaw or error. That's modelling! I'd like to find out all I can and make my own decisions as to what to correct, so the more input the better.

Thanks to all for their help!

[Caleb]

Maybe you need a good walkaround?? Where can two adventureous Arizona residents find a Hunter now??

Mike

Mike I don't know if it helps, but there was a Hunter at Valle Airport. Think its attached to PoF but isn't normally on display - could be worth a quick call? Its a full working one!

Caleb

[Paul Bradley]

Mike I don't know if it helps, but there was a Hunter at Valle Airport. Think its attached to PoF but isn't normally on display - could be worth a quick call? Its a full working one!

Caleb

That's the one that's at Pima now - and he was joking! I used to work at the Valle museum.

[Caleb]

That's the one that's at Pima now - and he was joking! I used to work at the Valle museum.

Ahhh yes, I see now its lurking in the background on one of my photos on what look like pallets with no wings on!

BTW - top marks for whoever restored the Skyraider at Valle, it really is a work of art.

[dahut]

I think this is a fine discussion. Modelling is an individual thing and many will say that the Academy Hunter is a fine kit - it is nicely moulded - and leave it at that, while others will want to find out every minute flaw or error. That's modelling! I'd like to find out all I can and make my own decisions as to what to correct, so the more input the better.

Thanks to all for their help!

Yessir, I like that sort of thing, right there. I second that.

[Tim]

It is a matter of personal taste, that's true. The frustrating thing is that (as has been said) the kit is very nicely moulded, and it's a shame that it's let down by so many errors. I have to agree entirely with Bill that the nose is the most obvious fault which, no matter how you look at the model, inevitably stands out as being wrong. It just doesn't look like a Hunter's nose. The intakes are possibly less of a worry as they don't catch your eye as much, but as ever, once you realise they're wrong, it's hard to resist the temptation to put them right. However, both faults can be fixed fairly easily, whereas the tail is more of a problem and I guess you have to decide whether it's worth the effort involved in fixing that. The thing that amazes me is how much fuss was made (when the kit was first released) about the wheel wells being wrongly positioned, when they're really not all that bad!

I suppose we will just have to hope that the long-rumoured Airfix kit eventually appears, and also hope that they get it right! Failing that, there must be a possibility that Revell will produce one at some stage, when they've successfully tackled the aircraft in all the other popular scales. Maybe that decision will depend on just how popular their 72nd FGA9 kit is when it appears next year?

[Paul Bradley]

I suppose we will just have to hope that the long-rumoured Airfix kit eventually appears, and also hope that they get it right! Failing that, there must be a possibility that Revell will produce one at some stage, when they've successfully tackled the aircraft in all the other popular scales. Maybe that decision will depend on just how popular their 72nd FGA9 kit is when it appears next year?

Either way, I expect one of them to announce one about 2 weeks after I finish my model complete with all these corrections.........don't all thank me at once!