Dave Roof

It's just on hold until after Christmas. I'll have another update by the end of the New Years break. Dave

Greg, The tail booms of both helicopters are completely different on the real aircraft, so doing that surgery would only make things worse on the AH-1W kit. Once I'm done with the drawings and confirm that all of the dimensions are as close as they can possibly be, I'm going to chop up a kit to determine the best way to correct it. Of course at this point I think the best way is for a company to grace us with a new tool kit! Dave

Legends Productions of Korea currently have the most accurate SJU-17 NACES seats available in 1/32 scale. You'll need to add the canopy piercers though.

Some progress on the AH-1W profile. I spent 7 hours at MCAS New River on Saturday measuring almost every panel and rivet line on the Whiskey. I'll go back over the New Years holiday break to get anything I might have missed, as well as to measure the UH-1N. Hopefully I'll have the drawings done by the middle of January. Let me know what you think. Also, I have a 1/35 decal sheet in work covering a number of Whiskey's and Huey's (AH-1W / UH-1N) during their tours in both OIF and OEF from various squadrons. Hope to release it in the spring of 2010. Dave

Thank you. I haven't been able to build anything for months, so at least I can do something positive and provide information to help those that have been building! The short answer is no. The primary reasons are a lack of adequate references on the aircraft you listed and to a certain degree, a lack of interest. Sorry, just being honest with that last point. If I had measurements of the real aircraft and similar type drawings for each to compare, I might consider it. However, as I simply do not have any interest in any of them other than the Cobra (The Marine Corps flew that model), I really won't go out of my way to find the needed references. The secondary reason is what I'll be working on over the next several weeks. I received authorization today to receive Basic Data Line Drawings from Bell Textron for the AH-1Z, UH-1Y and MV-22. I'll be devoting all of my drawing time to those airframes, as well as the UH-1N and AH-1W. Dave

OK, here is where I am after a few hours at the work bench (last night from about 2300 to 0100 this morning). Using the Bell drawings, a 1/35 scale rule, technical pencil, french curves and drafting vellum, I've managed to draw the basic airframe profile. I'll make multiple copies and take them with me when I re-measure the Cobra on Saturday. Once all of the panel line dimensions are confirmed, I'll scan the final drawing into Corel and then start adding all of the additional details (rivets, access doors, interior, rotors, stub wings, etc.) Port and Starboard side profiles will be drawn with the correct details on both sides. The nose and exhaust areas will be drawn as separate parts so I can do both non-NTS and NTS equipped birds, as well as standard and turned exhaust configured aircraft. Top, bottom and front profiles will be drawn after the holidays. I'll also be doing the UH-1N in the same manner. Anyway, here is part 1 of the drawing: More to come later!

Some of you don't care, some of you do. This is for those that do. Both kits are good as is, but again, some like to go all out. Here you go....... Gentlemen, Back to the Academy 1/35 AH-1W profile.......and bring in the Panda 1/35 UH-1N. Here is what transpired today. I spent a couple of hours with the Bell Tech Reps at New River and was able to borrow Basic Lines Data drawings for both the AH-1W and UH-1N. These drawings have all measurements in inches for the Helos from specific points on the airframe. The drawings were taken to a blue print shop here in Jacksonville and using calculations based on known measurements of the aircraft that matched those in the drawings, we determined the scale of the drawings, then reduced/enlarged appropriately to 1/35 scale. After measuring the finished drawings with a 1/35 ruler from 'The Scale Card', I now have drawings of both aircraft that are accurate within half (.5) a scale inch (+/- due to possible distortion during copying). As it's been discussed before, the Academy AH-1W is FUBAR! To be quite honest, adding a plug (as some have done) and/or correcting the canopy profile (as planned by a third party) really will not fully fix the problems. The aircraft is too tall, the boom is too short, the tail is too long and the nose is out of proportion. The "doghouse" up top is also out of proportion. A new canopy and plug will get you just a little closer, but the aircraft will still be off. The UH-1N........With the exception of the nose and vertical tail, it is much more accurate in outline/profile than the Whiskey. On Saturday, I get to go back to HMLA-269 and get all new photos and more measurements of their aircraft. I'll take plenty of copies of the drawings with me to check and double check the measurements. As time permits, I'll use this information and work on drawing new scale plans in Corel. I will also point out the various problems using photos of the real aircraft and kits, just as I did with the AV-8B. For those interested in such things, hopefully they will be of use to you should you choose to go all out on your next build. Dave

Rob, Here's the photo you asked for:

The CE seats were the most accurate (still are technically). However, as they are no longer in production the 'crown' goes to Legend.

If he is getting aftermarkets seats, steer him toward the offerings from Legend Productions. To be quite honest, the Avionix cockpit for the F/A-18D is not that much of an upgrade to what comes in the box. Ask him what aircraft he's building (squadron / BuNo) as I probably have photos of it! Either of you can drop me an email at the address below: orionmodels@aol.com Dave

No, I will not be getting the kit at all. I simply have no interest in the F/A-18E. I might get the F/A-18F when it is released though.........still undecided as I'm trying to stick to USMC subjects. I have limited knowledge of the E/F, but will help as much as I can with a review as I have a few hundred photos of the aircraft to share. Dave

Yes, the F/A-18E/F use the SJU-17 NACES seat, which is also fitted to the F/A-18C and D. At the moment, the most accurate seats that are currently available are from Legend Productions. Set LF3212 includes 2 seats without belts and harnesses Set LF3213 includes 2 seats with belts and harnesses Both are available from Squadron

That is simply not true. There was a build on Hyperscale where the modeler filled and sanded most of the 'rivets' and it came out great. I chose not to do fill them on my build simply because I didn't want to..........it wasn't because I couldn't do it or that it couldn't be done.

There is nothing so wrong that a few basic modeling skills can't correct. I built this one shortly after the kit was released: http://forum.largescaleplanes.com/index.ph...hl=dragon+p-51d While the kit does have issues when compared to the real aircraft, they can all be fixed. Do a search in the "works in progress" forum and you will find many more builds of this kit. What's really cool are all of the different techniques each modeler used to overcome the kits problems. Dave

Sir, As it's been pointed out, I know what I'm doing. I've been in the Marine Corps for close to 22 years and I retire in 4 months. I am not going to jeopardize my career over a plastic model, and for anyone to believe I would is simply absurd. I am aware of what I can and can't share and clear everything through the proper chain of command before doing so. Respectfully, Dave

Bingo! And that right there Gentlemen, is it in a nutshell. I was ignorant of this fact until my recent conversations with Mr. Mason. I am willing to help with subjects I know, and they are willing to accept that help. A win/win situation for all. If and when I receive word of a potential subject that I have no knowledge of, you can bet your a$$ I'll be contacting the modelers that do know that subject well to help! Also, if they keep with the pro-active approach of seeking help on-line (Jaguar on ARC as an example), things can only get better. Dave

1. Thank you, it is very much appreciated. 2. After the email exchanges I've had over the past few days, I have a better understanding of the 'why can't Trumpeter' part. While some modelers may not understand, their (Trumpeter) circumstances are somewhat unique and play a big part in the 'why can't they'. For what it's worth, they are in fact listening and I have the pleasure of being involved in one project for now, however small that involvement is. With regard to the A-6E Intruder..........I have access to two of them and if I understood the message correctly, I'll be able to make sure the kit is correct before it gets released. Dave

Sprue descriptions: Sprue A: Left and right main fuselage halves. - Fit is very good after cleanup and overall shape is pretty good. - Panel lines range from very light to moderate, with some missing and others mistakingly added. - Most of the vents and scoops are either the wrong size and shape, or are in the wrong location. Sprue B: Upper and lower wing halves and aft exhaust shields (also includes upper fuselage chaff/flare bucket fairings for Night Attack [NA] and II Plus versions) - Fit of the wings is also very good after cleanup and again, the overall shape is pretty good. - Panel lines are pretty consistant throughout, but again, suffer from not being accurate. - Mold break lines for the 100% LERX (NA and II Plus) and different wing tips (British version?) are very visible, but easily removed with light sanding. - Wing tip navigation lights needs to be sanded flush - Wing tip formation lights represented by depressions in plastic, should also be flush with surrounding plastic. - Wing suffers from pinch at center of wing that may prove difficult to fix. - Fire Access holes at LERX leading edge should go from front to back, instead of top to bottom as molded - Square GPS dome needs to be removed for Day Attack version - Do NOT use parts D24 and D25 shown in step 10 of the instructions. The Day Attack Harrier does not have these vents. - Aft Exhaust shields are represented rather well, but would look better in photo-etch in this scale - Upper fuselage chaff/flare bucket fairings (NOT USED) on this version. However, if the same parts are used in the NA and II Plus kits, they are way off and need to be replaced. Sprue C: Vertical, Horizontal tails and trailing edge flaps - Fit is good for all parts. - Panel lines are consistant, but like the wings and fuselage, some are missing and some should not be where they are molded. - Inboard trailing edge flaps unnecessarily molded in three pieces. - Attachment pin for horizontal tail is small for this scale, but holds the part well to the fuselage. Sprue D: Cockpit, seat, IFR probe, intake parts, lower part of canopy and some vents and scoops. - Cockpit fit is good, but suffers from some inaccuracies. - Kit includes instrument panel for NA and II Plus versions. - Intake blow in doors are a little too big (they are 9 x 8 inches, but scale out to 10 x 9 inches) throwing off the look of the intakes from the outside. - Detail on lower canopy part is very basic for the scale. Sprue E: Wheel well, landing gear, LIDS fence and speed brake details - Accuracy of parts is pretty good throughout when compared to photos. - Main wheels suffer as described previously. - LIDS fence is accurately shaped, but there are no provisions to add the small extensions used when the strakes are installed in place of the gun pods. Sprues F and G: Engine and variable exhaust parts - Variable exhaust parts are incorrectly shaped, but not that noticeable to those unfamiliar with the aircraft. - Engine is too small and doesn't quite capture the look of the real item. Sprue H: MK-82, M-117 and AGM-65 - Not very well done. See notes at beginning of review Sprue M: Ordnance pylons and strakes - See previous notes Sprue N: Fuel tanks - See previous notes Sprue Q: Gun Pak - See previous notes Sprue R: Canopy and Windscreen - The windscreen is accurate within a scale inch of the real item when compared to measurements. - Canopy is also accurate and captures the look well. - Canopy Detonation Cord is depicted by being molded into the canopy, which is unfortunate as it is incorrectly shaped. Sprue S: Fuselage nose section - See previous notes Sprues WC, WN and WY: Ordnance - See previous notes Decal Sheets A and B - Printing looks good with fairly thin carrier film and good registration. - VMA-231 option compares well to known photos of subject aircraft. - Lighter gray in VMA-223 option is too tranluscent with darker gray visible underneath. - Stencils are very basic and in most cases inaccurate. Photo-Etch - Seatbelts are very basic and not accurate. - HUD and rear view mirrors are passable. - Deck area that is behind the seat is represented by PE. It is not very accurate and not convincing enough in this scale. Rubber Tires - Fairly accurate, but missing all details (text for brand name, etc.) In this scale, plastic tires with molded on detail would have been better Instruction sheets - Straight forward and easy to follow. No major omissions noted - Ordnance load chart not entirely accurate though Overall, my personal opinion of the kit is that it is OK. On a scale of 1 to 10, I rate it about a 5. It is great that we finally have a Harrier in 1/32 scale, but as this is by no means an obscure aircraft, the mistakes made are inexcuseable. While many of the mistakes can easily be fixed with some basic modeling skills and the necessary references, some will be more difficult to fix or simply not worth the trouble to some modelers. As can be read in an earlier post, I have been told the discrepencies noted have been passed on to Trumpeter. It has been suggested that they want to get the details right and may incorporate the changes into the next three releases. We can only hope they are sincere and do in fact make the corrections. Perhaps they will be a little more pro-active in the future and seek the help of modelers knowledgeable on subjects they are going to cover. This would be a positive move for both the modeler and Trumpeter. If you have any comments, questions or concerns about this review, please do not hesitate to email me at the following address: orionmodels@aol.com Dave

1. An overall shot of the lower wing halves. 2. The wing tip has some detail that is simply not found on the real aircraft. First, the wing tip light is depicted in a way that make it stand out from the wing. It is actually flush and will need to be sanded down, then rescribed if necessary. Also, the raised portion around the vent should be sanded away. 3. The vertical tail is pretty accurate shape wise, but it is missing a few panel lines. Also, the small square panel with the oval inside should only be on the left side of the tail. 4. The main wheels are also in need of some help. As you can see in the photo, they are too concave and just do not capture the look of the real wheel very well.

Due to a request by Mr. Mason on behalf of Trumpeter, I am going to finish up the review in the next two posts. As time permits, I'll edit these replies with more detailed photos and descriptions. 1. An overall shot of the starboard main fuselage half. With the exception of a few minor errors, it is pretty accurate in outline. There is a mold break line approximately 3 inches from the end (at a panel line), suggesting another variant. All US Harriers (Day Attack, Night Attack, and II Plus) have the same tail, so it is possible this is for a British GR version. I apologize, but I have no knowledge of other Harriers, so don't know for sure. 2. This close up shows the aft end of the tail. The small oval vent, the U shaped fairing toward the bottom, the antenna's at the very aft end, and the mesh screens are all the wrong shape and size. The location point for the horizontal tails are also very small for 1/32 scale. 3. This photo shows the forward end of the main fuselage. The fairing marked with the measurements is slightly undersized and sits too far aft. There is a scribed line for the IFR probe on this side as well as the left side, but it should only be on the left side of the fuselage. 4. On both sides of the fuselage, there is a mold flaw. This area should blend more smoothly. However, a little bit of work with a sanding stick or pad should fix it. 5. An overall shot of the upper wing. 6. The small hole on the LERX is the Fire Access opening. Trumpeter has it going down, but it should go back (opening facing forward). 7. There is a GPS antenna (the square on the aft edge) on the kit, which is understandable as the wing may be used on other variants. However, it was not on the Day Attack Harrier and there is no mention in the instructions to remove it. Simply sand it off for this version. 8. The AV-8B has a peculiar 'kink' in its wing. Unfortunately, Trumpeter not only missed the kink, but added a strange 'pinch' to the wing. You can see in the shadows how the wing pinches at the small fence on the leading edge of the wing.

One more shot of the cockpit before I call it a night for updates. I imported the cockpit layout for the Day Attack Harrier into CorelDraw from the Natops Flight Manual, then resized it to match the measurements I took. The instrument panel is 25 inches across at its widest point. I scaled Corel to 1/32 scale (3/8" = 1 foot), drew a 25 inch wide box (actually 25/32nds) and reduced the NFM layout until the instrument panel fit in the box. To my surprise again, the side consoles scaled down to the correct size! As you can see in the image, they are a perfect fit. Now I'll use them as templates to add the details. The instrument panel will be built up in layers, again using the reduced drawing as a template. I'm getting my joy back!

I got the modeling bug and decided to put it to good use before it went away...........'review' is on hold for a few hours while I work on a new cockpit. All measurements taken from the 1/1 cockpit . Due to the width of the fuselage halves, the tub had to be narrowed by a scale half inch and each of the side consoles narrowed by one scale inch. Tonight I'm just going to get the rough shape done. I'll add details a little bit at a time over the next couple of weeks. The cockpit will also include a correct instrument panel for the Day Attack Harrier. So far what I've done fits almost perfectly.......now to hope the rest of it does! Here is my started master with the kit cockpit for comparison: Installed in the kit: Here is the template for the port side wall with the details drawn in with pencil:

Gentlemen, Just a quick update to further cover the nose area, which is what really throws the look of the kit off. I'll try to describe the notes in the photo as best I can. OK, the distance from where the windscreen meets the fuselage to the nose cone hinge line on the real aircraft measures 13.5 inches. The angle of this small area should also run evenly with the windscreen itself. I used a small metal ruler and laid it on its edge along the centerline of the windsreen until it touched the nose of the kit (C in the photo). As luck would have it, the distance from where it touched the nose, to the forward edge of the windscreen measured 27/64ths of an inch.........that is 13.5 scale inches! This means the nose cone hinge line needs to move forward 3/32nds of an inch (which is obviously 3 scale inches). This works out perfectly as the aft end of the nose fuselage piece extends too far back, and the forward end of the nose fuselage piece is too short in relation to the cockpit/canopy area. The back portion of the fuselage piece, where it meets the compressor blades, should end where the Red line is placed. However, I am not 100% sure how this would affect the placement of the compressor blade piece (part G10) if it was changed. The nose wheel well also sits too far aft, and the panels along the bottom don't match up to the real aircrafts measurements. Once the nose cone hinge line is moved forward, everything lines up when measured from that point moving back. Does that make sense or have I lost you yet? For lack of the known term to describe the detail marked as 'A' in the photo, I'll simply call them 'slits' for now. First, the slits should be flush with the fuselage. They are also too far back. The Red lines show where they are on the kit and the Blue lines show where they should be. I have some Renshape back at the house and will be home for Thanksgiving. I'll bring it back with me and make an attempt at a new nose piece to correct the profile forward of the windscreen. This coupled with repositioning of the panel lines will make the kit look much, much better. If I can't do it, I'll provide all necessary photos and measurements to someone else more skilled than I Unless of course Trumpeter takes me up on my offer to help and corrects the plastic.......like they did on their F4F. If you have any questions, or if I need to clarify anything, please let me know.

Barry, When the LAU-7 is attached, the BRU-36 bomb rack (the same rack used on the middle and inboard pylons) is replaced with what's called a BRRU (Bomb Rack Replacement Unit). With the LAU-7 removed, the BRU-36 can be installed and single stores can be carried there. Dave

The outboard pylon is too short, too tall and has the wrong profile overall. In fact, after taking a closer look at all three pylons, they all have the wrong profile. There are three possible solutions: 1. Hopefully, with the assistance of Mr. Mason, I'm going to attempt to persuade Trumpeter to retool them (unlikely due to cost, but you never know). 2. I'm going to master new parts for a resin update set (either released through Orion after I retire, or sold to another company that may be interested). 3. The modeler can leave them as is, as they don't take that much away from the overall appearance of the finished model. The nose is the only major item that throws the look off. Dave