Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Jennings Heilig

What the world needs is a good 1/32 U-2...

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Jennings Heilig said:

The fuselage is essentially an F-104 sized unit.  Not that big.

 

Yeah, but the U-2 is all about the wing. 

Radu 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And?  So is the Gotha.  And the Lancaster.  Why are you so dead set against the idea of a U-2?  I don't understand.  Would you boycott the manufacturer who decided to do it, or are you just being argumentative?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Dave Williams said:

We’re still waiting for a decent one in 1/48 scale too.

I thought the latest AFV release corrected the errors of their first kit, at least with the horrible windscreen dimensions?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jennings Heilig said:

And?  So is the Gotha.  And the Lancaster.  Why are you so dead set against the idea of a U-2?  I don't understand.  Would you boycott the manufacturer who decided to do it, or are you just being argumentative?

 

Sheesh, that is a lot of anger. 

Please tell me where did I even hint that I was "against" it and how did "that" turn into "dead set against it"? Then it turned into "boycott"?  

If you think that this is the same as the Gotha and  the Lancaster, then all you have to  do is wait and WNW will do it. 

I am staying out of this. :rolleyes:

Radu 

Edited by Radub

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Vividly remember seeing these low in the sky in Cambridgeshire on a daily basis in the 70's as I was growing up. Also remember one painted in white going over as well.

 

Regards Andy 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, John1 said:

I thought the latest AFV release corrected the errors of their first kit, at least with the horrible windscreen dimensions?

 

 

I was hoping the AFV version was much better than the old Testors version.  I guess that is not correct?  What are the issues with the AFV kit?  Is there a thread that has already discussed this?

Thanks,

Greg

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, 32scalelover said:

I was hoping the AFV version was much better than the old Testors version.  I guess that is not correct?  What are the issues with the AFV kit?  Is there a thread that has already discussed this?

Thanks,

Greg

 

 

There is a good thread over on ARC, in the Jet Forum.   I forget all the details but on the initial AFV release (U-2A), the windscreen shape was horribly botched.    Not something that can be easily corrected.  Thought there might be a few smaller issues as well.   I believe that with their second release (U-2C), the windscreen issue was addressed.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, John1 said:

There is a good thread over on ARC, in the Jet Forum.   I forget all the details but on the initial AFV release (U-2A), the windscreen shape was horribly botched.    Not something that can be easily corrected.  Thought there might be a few smaller issues as well.   I believe that with their second release (U-2C), the windscreen issue was addressed.  


I remember the canopy/windscreen issue being the big one everyone talked about, but there were some issues with the tail also mentioned.  Some issues I saw, that hardly anyone mentioned, was the strange S-curve shape of the inner intake lip, and the weird and very prominent wing roots molded into the fuselage that looks like nothing that I’ve seen in pictures.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just my 2 cents, but a large, single color, glider looking aircraft that carried no weapons and was only used by the US doesn't strike me as a real popular subject. Yes the SR-71 fits the same bill in many ways, but its absolutely bad a$$ and looks like a space ship. Its the same reason in many respects that German armor and figures are more popular than allies. They are more colorful, have many more interesting schemes, and seem more menacing. The U2 seems anything but menacing. The SR-71 on the other hand...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd love a TR-1/U-2R with the full agricultural-looking SIGINT antennae arrays.

Crawled around one of those courtesy of Maj Bob Ubelacker at Alconbury in July 1987: that iron ball black finish was like blackboard paint. 

It's a natural for the ceiling.

 

Of the originals, a glossy white two seat U-2CT trainer would be groovy. If AFV do that in 1/48 it will be irresistible — just need to grind off those weird upper wing roots. 

 

Tony 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, 30 inch wing span? Do able in today's modeling world. I get that the plane has a niche historically, but so does the Jenny, and I think that has more widespread appeal. The U2 is a good looking plane, but all the cool stuff is hidden. A vac would be the fastest way to scratch that itch I think.

What I do see, is some pretty explosive retorts that are not warranted. Knock it off. Talk about the plane, or the potential for a kit, but leave the rest somewhere else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had the pleasure of waking around one of these at the Scott AFB open house a few years back; very impressive indeed, and what a wing span. At least the outriggers would help a model with stability.

Share this post


Link to post
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
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...