HK B-17 Accuracy issues?

[Juggernut]

I tried; I really tried to keep an open mind and find everything that is good and redeeming about this kit. There are some positives that make the kit buildable but it's just not for me.   The sheer size of the thing will impress most people who see it and the inaccuracies won't amount to a hill of beans with those who build it for that purpose.  The kit, by all reports, goes together well and does superficially resemble a B-17G but I have too much history with the lady to accept a sow's ear as anything but.  My apologies to the community if I've sounded out with more than a hearty raspberry. 

[LSP_Kevin]

I have no issue with your perspective on the kit Tim, nor do I have any qualms about your expressing it. But I'd hate to see HK do 'an Eduard' and decide the LSP market is too hard. This is only their second-ever kit release (I'm lumping all the B-25 variations into one here), and one of the most ambitious aircraft models ever attempted. As a kit design team they just need time to mature, adjust to market expectations, and get a bit of experience under their belt. I'm not saying we excuse or ignore obvious errors, but I think it's important that we deal with them constructively (and Nige is doing exactly that), rather than allow it to degenerate into incessant bleating about how wrong it all is. It's not their yet (this thread I mean), but a gentle reminder never hurts.

 

For what it's worth, I'm attempting to establish a dialogue with HK Models, and perhaps we can eventually forge a loose but useful partnership - and possibly even help prevent these kinds of errors from appearing in future releases.

 

Kev

[phantom]

I really appreciate all of the input to this kit. I for one am going to build it. I will buy some AM for it to improve it. The thing is, if you like it than build it if you don't like it than don't build it, it is just that simple......

 

Happy Modeling

Mike

[Juggernut]

I like that positive attitude Kev.  I should remember why I joined this community all those years ago.  I will offer my help again to HK if they are bound and determined to produce the B-17F.  They have to realize that they'll sell far more if the kit is done correctly than not.  If you do get a dialogue going, you are free to offer my help to them by proxy.  I'm sure Nigel would lend his experience and knowledge but I won't speak for him.  I have some very experienced contacts (B-17 experts I would say and these guys are the real deal) that I might be able to bring on board as well.  At least one of these people has an entire set of Boeing B-17 blueprints.  The development team needs several knowledgeable people to evaluate the product if for no other reason than what I may miss, the next guy may find (i.e. Nigel and the different sized windows in the nose of the B-17G...I missed those by light years).

[scvrobeson]

As much as could be fixed, I think Kevin brings up a pretty valid point. This is just HK's second project in their existence. Yes, with all of the technology available, kits should be accurate. But there is a certain maturation process involved with just trying to get projects out the door to bring in income, before you can sink thousands upon thousands of dollars into making sure every rivet is in the correct place.  Tamiya took decades to start producing world-beating kits, and now they're pretty much the standard bearers of kit production.  I thank you all for your dedication to the B-17, and fixing everything that is out there, as hopefully it will help them continue to improve in the future. I don't think this kit is a complete disappointment though, since the option is either this or the Combat kit.  If the Combat kit is a baseline, then this one has to be miles above that at least.  I still might get one of these, since my grandfather was a navigator right before the end of the war, and he's the one who got me into model building with a 1/72 Monogram one when I was a little kid. As much as I went all out with my B-25, most of my work was wasted in the long term, so I probably wouldn't do that with a B-17. Still a great canvas for painting and weathering techniques.

 

 

 

Matt 

[scvrobeson]

 

If we're a bit too harsh...I think thats too bad,....WE are the ones sinking ALL the money...i would think you would have to be pretty serious about building models if you were going to sink $300-$900 on model kits. WE are your target market.

 

 

 

Not really all of the money. Kit developers spend probably tens of thousands of dollars developing and producing a kit, so one person's purchase is more of a drop in the bucket. Although I'm sure they appreciate every time we buy kits.

 

I don't think this kit is at a 5 out of 10, I'd put it around a 7. If you're not an expert on the B-17, most of the problems will be missed. I know I didn't know about them until this thread came around. Then again, everyone's opinion is different. Hyperbole isn't really my game either.

 

 

 

Matt 

[Derek B]

Very interesting thread (great work Nige). I think that I would appreciate a Thierry Luarent 'tweak list' style format of the major noticeable issues with this kit.

 

For me personally, this will help me decide if I should produce correction sets for it or not? (I am not constrained to the physical restraints of injection moulding considerations, so I could probably engineer something that would satisfy modellers in this respect for the majority of the kit issues).

 

Let me know if you would like me to look into this?

 

Cheers

 

Derek

Edited October 17, 2013 by Derek B

[richdlc]

Having spent 18 months 'building' the combat models vac, I can tell you the HK kit is a definite 7 out of 10..

[Guest Nigelr32]

I'd give it a strong 7-8 out of 10 myself, after all it's really the only game in town unless you're into vac form?

 

Sometime in the near future I will compose a Thierry style tweak list if you like. It will be quite long.

[Silver Dollar]

There's another way to look at this kit which will make things seem better, sort of a glass half full situation.  I belong to another website that caters to large scale cars of 1/12 scale and bigger.  One of the biggest challenges to our skills is the Pocher brand of model kits made in Italy a number of years ago.  The kits were made by individuals who were given the task of making just one or two assemblies many times in their homes.  They never communicated between each other and as a result, most of the assemblies did not go together very well.  Even with all the inaccuracies and fit problems you find with these kits (and they're way more than this kit will ever have), these kits are highly sought after because they present a certain challenge to the builder which you can sort of say separates the men from the boys.  Besides that, the prices many times run into the 4 figure level.  By having to correct all of these problems, you become that much more of a skilled builder.  It's similar to a builder who buys let's say a B-17g kit and converts it through scratchbuilding and whatever into an accurate and superdetailed E model.  Said builder literally become a master modeler.  Now this kind of philoaophy doesn't appeal to every builder, but hopefully there are enough to support a model company who produces something a bit out of the norm.  Heck, I wouldn't mind of they came out with a B-17 in 1/24 scale but my work bench would be too small.  

[ssculptor]

Yes and no! Don't you just love the thought about all that detail and paintwork that YOU know is in there?

That question seems to point out the crux of the matter. The question is why put in interior detail that will not be seen once the model is completed?

The answer is that the model builder will know it. Since we build these models for ourselves, for our own amusement and pleasure issues like this are important. It does not have to make sense for anyone else. It has to make sense for the individual modeler who builds it that way. Keep in mind that there is no absolute right or wrong in model buildings. We build models to satisfy some emotional/subconscious/unconscious need in ourselves. We are certainly not building models for the betterment of mankind or any lofty ideal like that.

So, if one guy puts all the correct details he can in a model, 90% of which cannot be seen after the model is completed, he is as correct as the guy who puts in only the details that can be seen by looking through the canopy who is as correct as the guy who paints the canopies a solid sky blue or black so he does not have to put in any interior. All ways are correct because they are meant to satisfy only one person, the builder himself.

The best interior detail I heard about is a decal company in Germany (where else?) who issued decals of the markings that are printed on the bare sheets of aluminum by the metal foundry that produced the sheets. Now that is really pushing it! Take a look at a sheet of aluminum as it comes from the metals dealer - it is covered with stencil markings all over it listing the type of metal and the manufacturer. 

Personally, if  I were to put in the interior details in a model like a B-17 I would slice the fuselage in such a way that I could take 1/2 of it off the model for display and for entry into IPMS contests. But I am not a kid anymore with an unlimited lifetime before me. I am an old codger and I try to make efficient use of the time I have left making a living and making sculpture (using some of the models I have left in my stash). Who knows, I may drop dead twenty years from now, hopefully at the hands of a husband whom I have just cuckolded (yeah, dream on you old coot ).

Stephen 

[Juggernut]

HK is currently working on the B-17F.  They are aware of the issued with the nose of the G.  The F will incorporate changes.

 

That's a good start.  Are they aware of the other issues with the airframe/interior of the kit?

[Juggernut]

Such as (keeping in mind that this is a 32 page thread)??

 

 

Well Ok, you asked for it:

 

Exterior (From the nose aft):

 

• Windscreen needs reshaping to match an "accurate" nose.
• Radio room hatch and fuselage in that area needs to be redesigned to reflect the prototype.
• Fuselage from bulkhead 6 aft is noticeably convex along the top edge and should be straight
• Rear entry door is misshapen

Interior (from nose aft)

 

• Bulkhead 3 is in the wrong position and should be moved aft.
• Nose windows are incorrect (may be corrected with the nose modification if they redo it)
• Instrument panel needs serious reshaping (most definitely needs to be done if HK corrects the nose)
• Control columns need reshaping to more resemble the prototype.
• Bomb Bay needs the gaps between parts eliminated.
• Bomb bay needs structural details corrected (the webs in the walkway are slanted the wrong way)
• Bulkhead 5 needs to have the "step" in the radio room eliminated
• Bulkhead 5 needs the Tokyo tank transfer valves added in the bomb bay. (B-17F and G)
• Radio room floor needs to have an accurate strike camera access door (there is none now)
• Radio room needs upper structure between bulkhead 6 and bulkhead 5.
• Radio room needs early style gun for B-17F and most of the G run.
• Radio room needs to have the radio operators chair/stool added (and possibly the aux. crew seating).
• Bulkhead 6 needs to be solid on the aft side and the external ammo cans removed (specifically for the B-17F; the jury is still out whether these were fitted to B-17G's or not and even if they were, they weren't installed on the bulkhead)
• Waist gunner stations need correct equipment added/molded. 
• Tail wheel is missing the vast majority of its strut/actuating arm and the area should be redesigned to better reflect the original

 

Nigel, myself and others have discovered the previous "oopsies" and I'm sure there are others that will be discovered as Nigel builds the beast.

Edited October 17, 2013 by TimC

[Jack]

sometimes.....sometimes i hate this hobby, i hate the way it developed into nitpicking, i'm sorry to say, no disrespect to the AMS modellers, but like some in this thread indicated:  IT IS A HOBBY, in other words it should be relaxing and enjoyable to do and not having the psycological effect of having to be on a certain level, but that is what some of us are driving others to, to have a particular kit built, and have it done in the way it should be done according to their interpretations, or else.............(just fill in the rest to your likings.....)

[Juggernut]

Let's not get this thread locked fellas....  Let's keep discussion on topic and lets drop the personal attacks.  32 pages is mostly beneficial information and I for one, would like to keep it that way.  I'm sure there are many others who feel the same.  If you feel the need to sling personal insults, please reconsider.