Jump to content

Revell F-14


LSP_Mike

Recommended Posts

  • 1 month later...

Being a total Tomcat nutt myself and extremely anal in regards to accuracy considering the Tomcat and having both, Tamiya and the Trumpet on the table I can tell you that if you are going for accuracy then Tamiya will turn by far .... really by FAR!!! into the more accurate rendition of a Tomcat. However, you get a lot of plastic for your hard earned dough with the Revell kit.

Starfighter is right about the hickups in comparing a model to drawings and in many ways also the comparison with pictures of the real thing. The focal distortions ou have when photographing a 60 feet behemoth and then taking shots of the 1/32 rendition make it enormously hard for overlays to give a profound comparison. Alas, what else do we actually have to work with other than our gut feeling and at least such comparisons might help making a point.

 

For Starfighter and Luca my input is basically just a bazillionth repetition of what I stated elsewhere but for information sake I hope it is alright if I repeat myself and put in some overlays for others?! It's always a nice thing if you got as many as possible different opinions and point of views comprised in one source I would assume rather than having to sort it all out again from different threads.

 

I really do like the Revell Tomcat. It can turn into something really really nice. While it may have some proper shape issues it in fact has some spots way better met than the other two more expensive options. It does need a lot of attention and treatment if you are serious about a "correct" Tomcat but if you consider that you will also need most of the expensive resin stuff also for the Tanmiya and the Trumpet, going the road of buying a relatively cheap Revell and then enhance it with a ton of aftermarket and some decent scratchwork may be a good way to go. You might not end up with a rendition as close to the original as a Tamiya but in the end you can achieve some great and authentic result for max. half the money you would have to spend on the other two.

 

I know I've posted my two cents about the darned 1/32 Kitty now a bazillion times, hence it won't matter if I nagg the communitiy a bazzilionth-and-one times all over hihi :D

We've already tried to run this darned Revell kit and it's shortcomings down over at the German flugzeugforum.de - webpage. It always seems that Starfighter and me disagree which is absolutely not the case!!! He is dead right on basically all aspects regarding the "off"-front fuselage of the Revell kit. It's still just the thing on which aspect it is easier and more "effective" to tweak in order to mitigate the (percieved?!) flaws of the Revell kit.

 

I would be very careful about the so-called smaller nose of the Tamiya kit. Starfighter is actually quite right not to try and just put it on a drawing. Just like Hasegawa in 1/48 the Japanese kit is just that tad smaller than what the meassurements for a 1/32 kit should be .... and btw. Revell is just that tad bigger than what the meassurements for a 1/32 rendition should be.

 

However I would still favor Tamiya and Revell by far over the Trumpeter kit. It just needs a significant amount of time, effort and money to make the Trumpet right, if at all possible in some aspects. if you can get a trumpet for 60 or 70 bugs, by all means go for it but for the price that is usually asked for that thing? ..... at least in my eyes a clear NOPE! There are just so many wrong details and most of all hardly correctable shape issues on the Trumpeter, the only reason I haven't resold the two I have is that I got them for a lousy 50 Euros in an action sale a few years back and they do seem to be predestined for launch or trap dios. But they need really SERIOUS rework and tweaking in many aspects against which the certainly bugging rescribe work on the Tamiya seems like a piece of cake. And even the extended spoilers are way to thick and have shape issues which actually means you will have just as much work correcting them as having to scratch them right away on a Tamiya kit. The shape of the front fuselage may be more to the point than Revell's but the inner dimensions and the shape of the panels, steps and panel lines is just so far off the real thing that one would simply have to close whatever panel is open, erase every panel line and completely redo it. There are so many more buggers on the Trumpeter, I don't know where to start. The prominent Phoenix pallets are in my eyes beyond any chance for proper correction. Many panels are wrongly shaped, it's hopelessly overdetailed with rivets that are hardly or not at all visible on the original. The back end is wrongly shaped albeit not too hefty but still less correct then Tamiyas. The tailfins sit about a third of an inch too far back, the avionics bulge stretches too thin and too short behind the canopy, crew steps and panels around the canopy are wrongly shaped, nose pods have the wrong shape, the drop tanks are too long front of the pylon and too short aft of the pylon hence making them sit inaccurately on the wrongly shaped intake trunks.

Yes, i know it always reads itself like a selfrightous rant about the Chinacat but it just sadly is what it is .... sorry.

 

Tamiya is old and lacks detail but at least it's in many respects almost spot on in comparison to the original. Even the nose (at least in terms of dimensions (again: NOTE the slightly smaller the 1/32 scale which is most probably responsible for the effect that LUCA found))

 

BTW the old Revell kit is the only one of the three options that has the avionics bulge with the correct length and has not forgotten the ECM blisters on the rear main gear door. Tamiyas avionics bulge is a tad too long but that can at least be shortened. I don't know yet how to lengthen Trumpeters too short and narrow bulge. The cockpit tub of the Trumpeter is too deep making a potential crew look just over the cockpit rail with their noses like kids and some details in the cockpit are misshaped too.

 

Again, I'm well aware that such a method is flawed but yet again as well, it might still help making a case. Oh and I'M IN NO WAY AFFILIATED WITH REVELL OR AM ADVOCATING FOR THEM!!! Just trying to work with what I have.

But I just want to make one thing clear regarding my rant about the Trumpet and my fondness of the old Revell kitty:

Of course everyone is free to do and choose as he pleases! I know I can be quite ........  renitent in stating my point of view. :sorry:  If one simply LIKES the Trumpet kit then nobody by all means should try and "force" another opinion on the modeller. It's a hobby and supposed to be joy. I sometimes get the feeling that we modellers who frequently post WIPs and presentations tend to be lured into that pitfall of building kits rather for others then ourselves. The worst is if a modeller is judged by the kit he chooses instead of the quality he delivers (btw primarily for himself and his enjoyment). That is just bad attitude. Each and everyone has different ambitions and priorities constantly changing from project to project and that should be valued and taken into consideration.

 

For me it's the same with Revell. I am most aware of it's shortcomings but I just really really LIKE the kit.

 

I am just always a friend of being honest and simply frank about pros and most of all cons of the several options that are out there. There is nothing worse for me as a modeller than investing into a kit and then being disappointed about things that I feel I should have known beforehand. Sometimes I just love deliberately choosing a minor kit and making it a fun project spending time correcting all the shortcomings. Sometimes I just want the best kit that is outthere as a basis for a project simply because I want to build a jet that has been near and dear to me or the like.

 

I would never dare judging a modeller by the kit he chooses or by his priorities considering the hobby. That is just not my right and I generally think it is bad behaviour.

 

Having said that, a big "ENJOY YOUR KITTIES! regardless which one it's gonna be!" to every Tomcat modeller out there.

Edited by bushande
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is just a copied post from another buried thread on the same subject, so hence just for completion's sake (other posters might do the same?!):

Here is what I mean regarding the avionics bulge behind the canopy:

The bulge should stretch just about short of the middle line between the bleed air openings way behind the end of the climate control vents (please excuse the bad quality; it's just a quick cell phone snapshot of an analoge image but you should get what I mean):

24849388hl.jpg

 

While Revell my not be perfect, they got that just about right. Tamiya is somewhat too long but with some filling and sanding and proper scratchwork you can correct that. Trumpeters bulge is just too short, too flat and too narrow. The only  way I see to correct that is gradually building it up with some putty or the like?!

24849389pq.jpg

 

Don't get me wrong. Trumpeter is a nice kit but for that amount of money I don't want to spend eons scratching my head about necessary corrections and just about the same amount of money I spent for the kit once again for extra resin and still have a lot of work to do.

Tamiya needs a ton of love and attention but in the end, all three options need that. There is a ton of things more to do but just for example here is my take on the turtle back of Tamiya:

24849390xy.jpg

24849391go.jpg

 

You need to do a lot, and I really mean A LOT!!! but in the end you get a really neat result that is quite close to the original shapewise.

(I intend to build a Delta version with the extra GPS dome at the end of the avionics bulge which has not yet been done here and that is the reason why my bulge apparently runs out a little before the middle line of the bleed air openings but that is just optical in order to place the GPS dome on that place later on, hence it will fit again in the end but if you want to present a middle aged Alpha version you wont be needing that and can orient yourself on that middle line for the correct length right away)

 

I'm far far far from done and it may be a lot of small things that most people won't even recognice but for the real Tomcat aficionado I would claim that Tamiya is still the one that would eventually turn into the most authentic rendition of a Tomcat:

24849392cc.jpg

27373072pm.jpg

 

Here is another example:

Above is Tamiya, below the Trumpet:

24849557ln.jpg

You will need to rescripe a lot of panels on the Tamiya but at least 90 percent of the inner dimensions are properly met, while Trumpeters panels and details either have the wrong shape or are just misplaced in comparison to other elements like the canopy frame or the exhaust grids of the gun and the climate control.

 

Before anyone is saying something about assumptions; No assumptions here, but the result from a thorough comparison to the original. Trumpeter is not just different from Tamiya which wouldn't be the problem but it is different from the original! The red lines are there for the reader. You can see the inaccuracies quite well with your own eyes right away if you look at the kit yourself. It is just what it is. The inaccuracies on prominent parts of the jet just like the avionics bulge, the phoenix pallets, the misshapen intakes, the inaccurately sitting tanks are VERY noticible for those that are fond of the jet. And that's just the prominent stuff. If you don't care about such things but just want a model that somehow looks like a Tomcat, that is absolutely fine but why then dish out so much money for an in my eyes overpriced kit and not rather buy a Revell for not even half the price?!

 

I also want to build more than one 1/32 Tomcat but for me modelling is having fun by calmly thriving for a most authentical representation of an original and not rushing together as many kits as possible that stuff my room. For me the biggest fun is not just having them on the shelf but actually the building process. But fun is just spoiled when inaccuracies become too prominent and most of all almost impossible to erase without having to dish out a crap load of money for extras after I had to spend a ton of money on the kit itself.

 

There's just a lot more but I think you get the picture.

If you don't care too much about the little things and just want a nice interpretation of the Tomcat without too much work then by all means go for the Trumpeter. It will turn into something really nice. But honestly, with that attitude, why spend that much money on the kit? Then rather try to get a nice Revell kit. A lot of decent bang for a lot less money.

Edited by bushande
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know my posts are overkill now, please excuse but I'm not too often online for lack of time so I hope it is o.k. if I ask you to bear with me a little longer:

This is just a topic that has me going for quite a while now and apparantly not just me. Many argue in favor of the Trumpet stating the over abundant detail.

What good is all the detail, the tons of rivets and open panels if they are just mostly wrong and I have to invest time and work to erase them? The other kits lack detail in comparison to the Trumpeter but honestly, I don't care if I have to spend a month adding detail or two months first erasing it in order to then redo it. Again, this is only an aspect to consider if you are as anal about the Tomcat as ... say Martin is about the Fulcrum (sorry Martin  :innocent: :D  )  Extra effort and time stay extra effort and time regardless what for.

 

So building a Tamiya will cost you a proper amount for the kit itself, some decent rescribing effort. If you are serious about the Tomcat you will also have to rework some details like little grids that are wrongly positioned (BTW on all three kits!), and some other little bits that are not quite where they should be, and some extra money for resin pits and in case you want a Bravo or Delta for the engines, antenae and the cockpit but in the end all "necessary" correction work is at least manageble and you will get a quite authentic representation of the original.

 

Building the Trumpeter with the attitude to achieve a most authentic interpretation will require at least as much money for the kit as you pay for a Tamiya but then some in my eyes serious extra cash for mandatory intakes and other stuff. Yes, the base kit comes in all three versions but the kit parts are not of a quality that would let the serious builder stay away from resin replacements. For instance is the Delta cockpit of the Trumpeter faulty and many displays are just way too big and stretched out of proportion, which in turn lead to a too low tub. The engines are nice but need work as well. Many at least in my eyes mandatory corrections are hardly feasable. For instance positioning the tailfins correctly would require some serious cuts in the pieces in the tailfins themselves, the aft end would need to be reworked, the crew steps have the wrong shape and I already lost too much on the too short avionics bulge and the hideous Phoenix pallets. Many of the nice surface details like all those rivets are just not visible on the original so what good are they if I have to erase them again?! In the end you end up having to spend more money for extras and more time and sweat for corrections and might still not be able to correct everything in a way that it would match the Tamiya in terms of correct shape. Yes, one can display flaps/slats/spoilers extended but again, the time and work you save here will be required working on other parts of the kit.

 

Yes, you can say: "I just want a nice looking Tomcat and don't care about the "little things"!" That is all good and fine and totally o.k. but then why spend all that money for an expensive kit if you can get a cheap Revell?! That kit will then serve your needs just fine for less then half the money and you can still dish out money for extras if you like without hurting the wallet and will get just the result of a neat looking Tomcat, not as "perfect" as a Tamiya but really neat and it looks just like a Tomcat.

 

I don't want to rant too much on the Trumpeter or want to talk it worse than it actually is. I just don't see any real advantage over the other two options, neither pricewise nor regarding authenticity. If you are an easygoing modeller, safe your hard earned bugs and buy Revell. If you are a nitpicking afficionado who doesn't care about money and work as long as the result will be as close to the original as possible, then why spend potentially more money and effort on a kit that will present you in the end with a more flawed result than the old Tamiya?!

 

i just don't get it but again: Each as he or she pleases.

Edited by bushande
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another thing about the Revell that might be of value (opposite to all my babbling above.)

 

Revell is considered the least of them all but I still mandate for the kit as a LOT! of plastic for what little money you pay for it compared to the other two. 

 

Starfighter already remarked the too flat canopy and too thick nose. This is usually a point where we seem to disagree but actually that is not the case. He is absolutely right about these features being off we merely divert in boiling down the actual detail that ultimatelly creates the impression. If you line the features up with the original the diversion in shape is actually not that big. My personal impression for instance is that the circumstance that the canopy rail is just too thick has a far bigger impact on the impression of a too flat canopy but that actually CAN be corrected. I also think that the impression of the overly too thick nose is rather an "optical result" of the flaw in the canopy. Once the canopy rail is flattened a bit the nose already appears thinner one would think. If you hold them against a Tamiya or Trumpeter part  you can see that a lot can be additionally achieved by just sending the bottom a little thiner.

 

In quite some areas Revell has caught the shape of the original way better than Trumpeter and added some detail the other two kits lack. The money you save can be invested in some proper resin (which I would recommend for the other two kits as well anyways) which tremendously enhances the overal appeareance of the Revell kit.

 

As some have stated, the Revell kit has recessed lines BUT they are not as delicate and fine as the Trumpet's or as you fin on Tamiya's front fuselage and there are next to no rivets and screws. I personally don't think its a very big set off but what usually helps and is rather quickly done is either sanding very bluntly over the panellines until they turn fine enough for you or you fill them up a little with future.

 

I used a spare Tamiya pit for my early Revell Alpha and then used an Aires pit for the Tamiya so I would suppose that Aires should fit without bigger problems into the Revell kit, especially since the Revell kit is a tiny notch bigger and wider than the other two kits. If you sand down the engine covers on the Revell kit untill the plastic becomes so thin that you need stiffeners on the inside, you can conveniently put Aires and Trumpeter/ Tamiya engines on the Revell as well. I would recommend Wolfpack drop tanks for Revell! However, they are about 2.5 mm too short anyways!

Edited by bushande
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another copy / past from an older thread as some have asked about the fit of Aires exhausts on both, the Tamiya and the Revell:

The Aires cans are a terrible fit on ANY kit but the Wolfpack GE110 covers and shrouds just don't look like the real deal. Aires has the better shape but suffer from their typical shrinkage issues, hence you are forced to sand off some material from either one of the kits in order to make everything allign itself and of course you'll need plenty of putty. Revell will definitely require more sanding and filling to make Aires fit.

 

Aires on the Tamiya Kit: Note the amount of putty - the belly side is even worse! (same for the Trumpet and the Revell) The good thing is that there is a slight step between the shrouds and the covers anyway, i.e. sanding off on the kit is not just mandatory in order to make the Aires pieces fit but also for accuracy in regards to the original.)

27633390op.jpg

 

I seriously don't reccomend the Wolfpack GE110 burner cans! Decent fit but just dead wrong shape and they'll end up being a tad too long:

(Left is WP, right is Aires)

27633433xo.jpg

 

Original:

27633434qc.jpg

 

You just gotta hate these things right. :-D :-D

 

 

Aires Burnercans and Delta cockpit on a Revell kit. A lot of sanding but possible:

18531830gt.jpg

18531831ep.jpg
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's the "novel" I wrote in German over on the Flugzeugforum.de site in the thread. (Starfighter: You already read this hihi. :-D )

 

Since this thread is actually not about the Trumpeter but about the Revell kit - What I think that needs to be invested in a Revell kit to resemble the original as far as possible ....

I've built two of the Revell kits so far (and confess to my shame, that today I would do about 90 percent different) and Revell is pretty much what I would think is a neat 2nd class model kit, i.e. spend only little money on the kit itself and rather invest some more of your modelling time, brainpower and sweat and of course some juicy resin and etch stuff. I wouldn't spend more than 50 bugs on a Revell kit because it just isn't worth any more than this.


One of the most prominent aspects that has already been discussed is the canopy and windshield section. Far as I know the kit has been conceived in the early 80s or even 70s?!

 

Here's a little background story regarding the canopy that many modellers don't seem to know:

Until about mid of the 80s many parts of the fuselage had not been manufactured by Grumman but by a provider called Rohr Aerostructures Industries. Untill a law suit with the Navy and Grumman that company manufactured large pieces like the intake trunks and also the canopy. What many people don't know, similar to other areas such as the rear end of the tanks or the overwing faring for example also the canopy was reworked a little after it became obvious that the longitude bow was a tad too flat for the RIOS to turn their heads freely and grab the ejection seat handles and the broader bow in diameter caused some albeit minor aerodynamic interferences. Originally the glas was just bend about 80 degress rather than later on 81 degrees. Already during the first trials with the prototypes that had been detected. Already at that time in the early / mid 70s that lead to a legal argument between Grumman and Rohr but that got settled when grumman achieved a general settlement with the Navy and congress on the then disastrous fixed-price procurement conditions which almost led Grumman into bankgruptcy loosing about a million on each manufactured plane. A big share in settling that argument can be attributed to the sale of the 80 (eventually just 79) machines to Iran. in fact the Iranian ships were the first machines that had the new canopy and also the PW TF30 version 414 engines (which were more reliable than the stall prone version 412 cans) right away as they rolled off the asembly line. As the US NAvy desperately need the Tomcat in the fleet and fleet integration was already behind schedule due to the lawsuit, the early US Navy ships received their modifications, ie. canopy, tanks, beaver tails, 414 motors just successively over the following months and years until the early 80s. 

 

Back to the revell kit:

If ou look at profiles of early F-14As will notice that the discrepancies to the, note EARLY!!! Tomcats are not that far off all the way. What I still am convinced makes the canopy look "funny" is rather the somewhat to broad canopy rail rather than the bow itself. However I think this is not a too big issue to correct, although not an all too easy task nonetheless. I would seal the clear parts with Tamiya tape to avoid scratches and then would carefully sand the too strong bow making the canopy rail so broad down to what I think would be more apropriate with a 800 or even 1000 sanding stick. Yes it will take up a lot of time but I think it is well worth the effort. You just rescripe the new narrower frame and polish what has been set free. Basically it's the same as if you send off and polish the seams in the middle of the canopy of the Asian kits.

 

Something I haven't tried but which might work as well and might come along as a cheap replacement is using the canopy parts of that sad and sorry matal Hachette kit which is a rip off of the Trumpeter kit. You will have some serious fitting work to do but it might be possible too and mitigate the canopy and windshield problem altogether.

 

The windshield itself is indeed too short as Starfighter already stated. What might help easing the impression as well is thickening the somewhat too thin frames around the greenish tinted windshield glass in the middle. Seal the clear parts with Tamiya tape leave a tad for the thicker frames, put some putty on it, sand it flat, remove the tape, done!

The panellines are often called trenches but at least these trenches are in many parts more accurate than what Trumpeter delivers and are recessed. I would just fill them with future and sand them properly down to ease that problem. The panellines side of the tailfins are missing, also the panellines that depict the sealbags but the Asian kits got their panellines in that area wrong anyways which means you are left with the scribing work in any case. Regarding the sealbags I would suggest the work of making selfmade flexible sealbags rather than the scribing work ( I'd do that with any of the three alternatives though) You have to press in the rivet lines (also on the Tamiya kit). Have fun erasing the plethoria of silly (because actually invisible) rivets on the trumpet.

The inner edge of the flaps on the wings is quite coars. While the original has a slight curve into the wing, the area is just flat on the Revell kit. The Asians have that aspect covered quite nicely though. However I think it's an easy fix. Take a thin knive and carfully go along the panel line a few times and remove some of the plastic in order to get a nixe narrow recess, carefully sand it smooth, done.

There is a slight deviation in the angle of the overwingfairing above the wingroot, more precisely where the turning pivot for the wings is set. You can change that angle by sanding the outer edge a little flat but it won't get "perfect". However even I would say that 99.99 percent of all folks looking at your bird won't even realize, even the most pescy ones.

The forward Phoenix pallets have to be elongated by about 0.7cm (how much of an inch is that?). The pedantic modeller glues a piece of plastic at the back, sands it down to the right form, ie. aligns it with the trapeze form of the pallet and the easy going modeller just tells himself that the thing disappears in the tunnel between the intake trunks anyways so why bother?! In general, the bulge at the tip of the forward Phoenix pallets that contains the link between the guidance system and the seaker head of the older AIM-54A missiles are the most accurately shaped of all the three kits. Tamiya's pieces are really nice as well but miss a small yet quite prominent little dent which can be carved in however. I don't wanna talk about the abominations provided by Trumpeter. Just beyond good and bad for the worse. If you want to turn them into something that remotely resembles the Phoenix pallettes you should get a huge pot of putty and plastic sheet and might also attend a course in figurative arts or something like that :-P ... Or you just leave them off.

 

The Revell intakes are not the best part either I have to state but are three leages above what Trumpeter expects you to live with. Tamiya is still providing the most accurately shaped trunks but you also have to further detail them as well. There are discrepancies to the original in the Revell trunks, of course. They are about 1.5 mm to flat if you look at them head on but to realize that you really have to use an inch rule. You can make yourself that effort and add some sheet to the upper edges before glueing them to the airframe, sand them into shape and adjust the forward edges of the intakes in order to make them flush with the upper intake edge again - should take you about a Sunday morning or so - but if you really consider that necessary is really your thing to decide. There is no mechanisme for the intake ramps but that is also missing on the other kits. Either build it yourself, ignore it altogether or just take plastik sheet and depict the ramps in lowered mode (i.e. super sonic config in the air or occassionally also seen when parket on the ramp)

In regards to Trumpeter I personally think there is no way arround the Zacto pieces or you dare a pretty circumstantial scratch rework. A member already depicted a "cheap and easy" fix but it won't do the trick completely I would assume as a lot more is wrong with the Trumpeter parts then just the missaligning of the angels of the intake lips.

You really can't use the drop tanks provided by Revell. Just discard them, they are beyond any attempt of saving them. Buy the Wolfpack resin tanks for what little money they cost. The Wolfpack pieces are based on the Tamiya tanks but a note to all pedantics like me. They strangely sit way better on the Revell than on the Tamiya. If you use the Resin on the Tamiya (maybe becose of correctly raised welding lines on the resin parts ...) you have to cut them and stretch them by about a rich 2mm in length front of the pylon and shorten them by about 1mm aft of the pylon to make them spot on. The pylon itself needs to be stretched by about a mm at the aft end to properly be aligned with the panel lines of the intake trunks in order to resemble the original.

Trumpeters tanks are really neat shapewise, however the dimesnions are just not right. Most people won't even reckognize but the pylons are too far to the rear of the trunks and the tanks themselves are a tad too long. Just resetting the pylons won't help because that would make the tanks stretch beyond the intake lips too far, i.e you woudl ahve to shorten the Trumpeter tanks front of the pylons and stretch them aft of the pylon by the same length. Most people would say it is sane to just dismiss that.

 

Revell's ass end is really nice (pun intended!) Contrary to both Asians they didn't forgett about the little bulge that covers the mounting of the stabilizers. You have to build that up when using one of the Asian kits. Revell is the only one that though of the little ECM antennae on the rear main gear doors. A little coars but at least present. Just sand over them and flatten them a little ... done! Building one of the two Asians, you have to scratch them.

Trumpy's back end is a little to square for my taste and I would soften the corners somewhat.

Revell definitely requires resin engines. You can't really use the kit pieces if you are serious about your build unless you are a modelling masochist and want to rework them. If you don't need to work and got a few weeks of time - knock yourself out. As stated, the Revell kit is a tine wee pit bigger than the Asians, hence making resin cans fit is tricky. Revell's plastic is just so horrendously thick that there is enough material to generously sand the engine housings "lean" enough to properly fit the resin engines. It just takes time is all. As the bow of the engine channels is somewhat too flat on the Revell kit anyways, you just kill two birds with one stone sanding the aft edge down to size and with that generate the required bow there.
 

Revell's cockpit is really not the big uber hit but depsite the wrong dimensions at least there is a base for some scratch work for those who want to go cheap about it. (Note: Tamiya provides a clean cockpit decals - pffff!, The Trumpet has modern detailed cockpits but just too deep tubes (about 1cm (roughly a third of an inch) that would make a crew look just above the canopy rails like little kids) . Regarding Revell it is not just the cockpit itself, you will also have to scratch the area behind the tub containing the hydraulics and cables for the canopy, ie.e drill up the airframe behin the tub, stretch that area into the fuselage and detail it. But theoretically one actually could get away without resin entirely if you invest enough of effort and creativity. The good thing ... the aftermarket stuff actually fits pretty nicely into the broad Revell fuselage.
If you want to do anything else but an Alpha you are set on a resin pit anyways.

Photoetch parts actually fit mostly quite nicely on the Revell. For instance Eduards crew steps included in the exterior set for the Tamiya fit quite nicely on the Revell too just as other pieces.

 

.............. I think that is about all that I can come up with regarding revell for the moment. You will never achieve the same result with a Revell that what Tamiya would enable you to do ( o.k. and even the Trumpeter in some aspects - granted). But the thing is that you just won't get around some serious extra effort and money in any case regardless which kit you use if you want a high degree of accuracy. Trumpeter CAN be turned into a great interpretation of the Tomcat but if I just think of the cost for the kit, the in my eyes mandatory extra expenses for resin and the horrendous amount of correction work that still needs to be invested .... I just don't know.

If I invest the same amount of time, sweat and money in a Revell as I invest in one of the Asians (which I am willing to do as I have already saved properly on the kit itself if I am not too unlucky) it is my opinion I might even get a model that might as well even outdo a Trumpeter in the one or other case.

 

O.k., who's still there? .... :P

 

Edited by bushande
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Btw: Starfighter emphasized on the impact of optics in that regard and I can only concurr. A good example I mentioned over at the German forum was for instance JSIs 1/18 Tomcat which is a clean upscale of the 1/32 Tamiya. While the angle of the windscreen looks more or less pretty accurate in 1/32 it just looks way to steep when you look at the 1/18 version.

 

As stated already, overlay comparisons with drawings or original shots are always quite tricky and have to be taken with a grain of salt due to either inaccuracy of most drawings (might as awell try NATOPS) or the perspective and focal issue in regards to photos. However for lack of a better method appart from our personal "gut feelings" I allowed myself to insert the overlays I put in the German forum here as well, just for information sake if you will:

 

(maaaaaaaaan, I really need to rework those old Revell models!)

 

The canopy, windscreen and nose issue has been a matter of discussion over there as well. This is a comparison of the canopy shape with one of the very early production lots. The somewhat flat rear canopy section might be visible here. What also might become apparent is the mentioned too broad canopy frame and the divergence in the angel of the radome:

(Again: I am well aware of the delicatess of such comparisons, but it might help some to get a better impression before they commit to the kit)

30156069yj.jpg

30156071wx.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, those overlays have to be taken in perspective and have to be considered under the remarks that Starfighter mentioned but my personal approah is that a revell is actually a pretty decent base of work if you want to depict an early Tomcat. For a late Bravo or Delta you might as well go with one of the Asians .... or you give it a try fitting a Hachette or Asian canopy to the kit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I have found a very interesting pic which seems to prove my guess that the fuselage cross section is almost circular behind the radome, which means the Revell radome is clearly wrong. Note that the pic has been taken almost perfectly from front and there is almost no distortion.

 

1395491d1437851776-defender-fleet-grumma

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
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...